vista slower than xp, even on better computers

[Mateo]

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/134...UZRYBrx2MFLZA5

comments are pretty funny, some at least.

[loserboy]

V for Viruses I for Intrusion S for Spyware T for Trojans A for Adware

haha

[Polygon]

Memory is critical, with 2GB being the sweet spot for Vista.

that is completely unacceptable. What the hell is vista running in the background that requires you to have 2 gigs of memory for it to run smoothly?? 2 Gigs is more then most hardcore gamers have!

[Mega_slayer]

That is ridiculous, when I get my new laptop (which I will run Ubuntu on), I will most likely have a free copy of vista, or vista upgrade. Maybe I should get one of my friends to pay me to "leave" the OS at their house....

[The Noble]

At first, I thought vista was going to use the 2 gig of memory for some crazy swap scheme for really speeding up the system, but now I think it has something to do with the built in indexing. But, still, 2 gig is as much as both my swap partition _and_ my RAM. What the hell are they running, becuase it sure as hell doesn't seem important.

[Choad]

i've used it, and it takes up more than 512 when nothing is running, so really a gig should be sufficient for general needs. 512 is all you need with XP, and that uses up a good hundered by it's self

still, when im running all my usual apps (bittorrent, im, music, browser, maybe burning a dvd, beryl and so on) ubuntu uses just 300 mb... i dont know where they have gone wrong, but they HAVE gone wrong.

vista is the best news linux has had in ages. talk about irony.

[DrainBead]

i've used it, and it takes up more than 512 when nothing is running, so really a gig should be sufficient for general needs. 512 is all you need with XP, and that uses up a good hundered by it's self

still, when im running all my usual apps (bittorrent, im, music, browser, maybe burning a dvd, beryl and so on) ubuntu uses just 300 mb... i dont know where they have gone wrong, but they HAVE gone wrong.

vista is the best news linux has had in ages. talk about irony.

A good OS will pretty much occupy all available memory at all times, cache is a proven strategy and unused memory is wasted memory.

What HAS gone wrong if Ubuntu would only use 300MB while using the system for a while is Ubuntu, but of course it doesn't do that unless you force it and only a nimrod would even consider doing that.

[DrainBead]

http://tech.yahoo.com/blogs/null/134...UZRYBrx2MFLZA5

comments are pretty funny, some at least.

Vista will perform better than XP on a fast computer, that is pretty much an accepted reality, both will be faster than Ubuntu pretty much all of the time, neither has the potential of an Ubuntu system though.

[Polygon]

the gnome system monitor counts the amount of ram being used by applications, not cache. Using the system monitor applets and enabling the RAM one, i see that most of my ram is taken up by cache (especially when using bittorent)

and XP takes up 300 megs of memory on a first boot, how do people get it down so low? =/

[TheOtherLinuxFreak]

haha

lol