In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote
on Sat, 16 Dec 2006 20:43:22 +0000
<2419276.GR84JxqGA6@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> __/ [ Sinister Midget ] on Saturday 16 December 2006 20:06 \__
>
>> On 2006-12-16, Linonut <linonut@xxxxxxxx> posted something concerning:
>>>
> http://www.dailytechnobabble.com/2006/12/12/10-days-with-windows-vista-ultimate-edition/
>>
>>> Moving on to more advanced tasks I decided to upgrade the memory (and
>>> save my sanity) to 2GB using two matched DDR2 SODIMMS. This
>>> made a drastic improvement in overall performance and brought Vista
>>> up to a very tolerable level of performance. Most applications loaded
>>> just about instantly (Vista seems to learn what you like to use and
>>> preloads it post-boot for you)
Uh huh.
>>> and I found the new GUI to be
>>> snappy and smooth. Once in a while I would run something which would
>>> force the system to turn off all the eye candy but once the
>>> application was closed Vista would switch everything back to the way
>>> I had it.
>>
>> 2GB and it has to shut off the only thing new included with it?
>>
>> CRAP, with a capital SHIT!
>
> Sorry to be so repetitive, but let's just leave the following 'legacy' in
> this thread.
>
> Testing Vista's different memory configurations
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | You simply cannot play games on Vista with 512MB o memory, at least not the
> | games wen tested. You will sometimes get playable scores but even then the
> | experience and the load time will be ridiculous.
> |
> | Anything more than 512MB will help you a lot, with 2x1GB being the best
> | price performance buy.
> |
> | 4x1GB is the best choice for best raw performance. It is hard to prove it
> | ^^^^^
> | in every test, but if you have 2x1GB and you load as much in memory, the
> | ^^^^^
> | system will become endessly slow.
> | ^^^^
> `----
>
> http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36148
>
>
> Vista Runs Smooth Only on 2G Memory
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | However, Dell CEO Kevin Rollins suggested otherwise on Thursday, 26 Oct at
> | a speech at Shanghai's Jiaotong University. "I think they tell you maybe 1
> | gig of memory is OK. No, two gigs of memory would be great."
> |
> | This echoes with my own experience with Vista RC2. With only 1G of
> | RAM, there are many disk activities indicating heavy disk swap, a
> | symptom of lack of memory in the system.
> `----
>
> http://www.itechnote.com/2006/10/27/vista-runs-smooth-only-on-2g-memory/
Or a bad algorithm for writing dirty pages and flushing out
old pages or some such. One does wonder.
>
>
> Vista System Memory Concerns
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Vista: Facing a Slow Adoption. In the beginning, early adopters and
> | gamers who are looking to ready themselves for the DirectX 10 upgrade
> | will be best suited for those ready to make an investment in the
> | unknown.
> |
> | Considering how many software and game titles will likely need to
> | be run in "compatibility mode" until patches are released across
> | the board, I would suggest really looking at what Vista's advantages
> | are before taking the plunge.
> |
> | No matter how much we may wish to see the path Vista is about to
> | embark on, the fact remains that because of its hardware requirements,
> | Vista adoption may turn out to be rather slow.
> `----
>
> http://www.osweekly.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2395&Itemid=449
>
>
> Microsoft Windows Is A Greedy Memory Hog, The Cure Is To Feed It RAM
The cure is to *fix* it, not *feed* it. (Either that,
or replace it with something slightly less hoggish, like,
oh, maybe Linux. :-) )
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | For Windows 2000, XP, 512MB is the minimum and 1GB or more is recommended.
> | For Windows 98 any flavor, 256MB is the minimum and 1GB is recommended. If
> | you are an avid PC gamer or video editor, 1GB is the minimum
> | recommendation. Other operating systems such as Linux or Mac are similar.
> | Simply put: more is better.
> `----
>
> http://bytepowered.org/articles/Article/Microsoft-Windows-Is-A-Greedy-Memory-Hog--The-Cure-Is-To-Feed-It-RAM/539
> http://tinyurl.com/yn9ztx
>
>
> On Linux:
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | "I did install SuSE 7.3 on a Dyme 166 MHz machine with 32 MB installed and
> | I used KDE 2.2 from July 2003 to December 2004 to write my documents,
> | develop my compiler and browse the web."
> `----
>
> http://thebeez.vnunetblogs.com/the_beez_speaks/2006/10/the_unknown_sol.html
>
Time was when Linux/X ran in as little as 8 MB. It didn't
run all that well, and the most capable window manager at
the time might have been twm, but it did run.
Of course, so did Windows 3.1.
Wotthehell happened?!
--
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Useless C++ Programming Idea #1123133:
void f(FILE * fptr, char *p) { fgets(p, sizeof(p), fptr); }
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
|
|
