Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 3rd Jan 2009 12:58 UTC
Windows Even though the EULA accompanying the beta build of Windows 7 prohibits the publication of benchmark results (good luck enforcing that one, Redmond), everybody and their dog will still compare the Windows 7 beta to Vista and Windows XP. Adrian Kingsley-Hughes is one of those benchmarking the beta, and according to his results, the Windows 7 beta beats both Vista and XP in just about every scenario.
Thread beginning with comment 342278
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Almindor
Member since:
2006-01-16

Eh? Latest Ubuntu runs relatively fine on 256mb RAM old laptop. Even better with Xubuntu. I don't see why a desktop OS has to eat more and more ram. It's not logical considering that we're not really adding much functionality in the base system.

The only reason RAM requirements go up for these things is because programmers are lame and add layers upon layers of "frameworks" and other crap (and I'm a programmer so don't go haywire on me) instead of creating things properly. This is the same reason why things are still so buggy even with the new paradigms we use today.

Reply Parent Score: 4

Panajev Member since:
2008-01-09

I personally do no jump high with joy if I see that my system boots and shows me a HUUUUGGGGEEEE value for free/unused/uncached RAM, it is something a lot of people look at and feel bad if the number is not close to 90% of your system RAM as if by itself would be the best metric of all.

Resources are not there to be left unused. To keep the PS3 console analogy, I would be really pissed if the XMB felt incredibly sluggish, had a DOS style graphical interface, were under-featured, could not play music, videos decently, etc... because you were saving up RAM and processor cycles to run a game which was not running YET as if it somehow touching non game code would make them unclean and unworthy of being used again.

Up to a point, the OS should use all the resources it needs to provide the smoothest, richest, and most useful experience to its users and give back those temporary resources (we have virtual memory for a reason!) when an application demands it (example full-screen game).

Take and give back, take and give back...

We are running multi-tasking systems, not single-task punch-card based machines...

Edited 2009-01-04 09:54 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

bornagainenguin Member since:
2005-08-07

Panajev declared...

Up to a point, the OS should use all the resources it needs to provide the smoothest, richest, and most useful experience to its users and give back those temporary resources (we have virtual memory for a reason!) when an application demands it (example full-screen game).

Take and give back, take and give back...

We are running multi-tasking systems, not single-task punch-card based machines...


The problem is, to the experience of the average user Vista takes but doesn't give anything back...(or at least if it does, the system takes way too long to do so. Maybe its stuck playing with virtual memory, trying to decide what to swap out?)

In any case, if you need virtual memory on a system with over a gigabyte or more of RAM you're doing something wrong, and most machines running Vista have at least a gig coming right out of the gate!

--bornagainpenguin

Reply Parent Score: 2

tomcat Member since:
2006-01-06

Eh? Latest Ubuntu runs relatively fine on 256mb RAM old laptop. Even better with Xubuntu. I don't see why a desktop OS has to eat more and more ram. It's not logical considering that we're not really adding much functionality in the base system.


I agree that it's nice for software to be able to scale up and down, as needed, but your statement that it "runs relatively fine on 256mb RAM" is highly debatable. It depends on what you're doing with the software. Sure, if you simply boot the machine, and leave it idle, fine. Or run a simple document editor. But you're not going to be able to do any video-editing, for example, play Crysis, or use it to drive a HD home theatre. Even browsing the Web with Firefox can easily chew up a hundred megs of memory, and your poor little box is going to do nothing but page, page, page, page, page.

Reply Parent Score: 3