[Subscribe to Daily Digest] |
[Main General Bulletin Board | BBFAQ |
Prev by Date | Next by Date | Post Followup ]
Member Login / Signup - Members see fewer ads. - Latest Member Gallery Photos
Re: Close but no cigar Posted by AdamB [Email] (#3) [Profile/Gallery] (more from AdamB) on Mon, 19 Feb 2007 10:07:38 In Reply to: Close but no cigar, Ari [Profile/Gallery] , Mon, 19 Feb 2007 09:34:31 Members do not see ads below this line. - Help Keep This Site Online - Signup |
"one issue with Vista is that it is a memory and processing hog. "
Like I said, that's not really true. It's a lot better at using the RAM than XP (and OSX) is. You just have to get at least 1-2 GB (which is pretty much the standard anyway). I wouldn't want to run OSX with anything less than 2 GB RAM either. A friend just installed Vista Ultimate on his laptop, and CPU use is not up at all. The only extra processing power Vista uses is the graphics card's for the visual effects. Processing power that would just be idle anyway.
It might appear to be a memory hog, because it's at ~100% memory utilization all the time, but that's because whenever memory isn't used by a program, it's used for caching instead of just wasting it on doing nothing. Of course that doesn't mean that when you start another program it won't have enough RAM. It'll get all the RAM it needs and if necessary the cached data is flushed.
But I do agree that there's no need to get Vista if you have an older computer without a proper graphics card and don't use it for anything other than browsing and email. XP is still a fine OS. The only reason I would like to upgrade to Vista is the improved I/O and kernel stuff. Not to get increased stability or safety from malware, as I have no problems with that on either of my computers running XP pro.
No Site Registration is Required to Post - Site Membership is optional (Member Features List), but helps to keep the site online
for all Saabers. If the site helps you, please consider helping the site by becoming a member.