RAM needed on Vista

[Larry]

A friend purchased a Compaq laptop with Vista Home Basic with 512 MB RAM.
The salesman said this would be plenty of RAM for the kind of user my friend
is (nothing fancy). But things seem quite slow--the opening of folders and
programs, even the closing of application windows takes a while. Is this a
RAM issue or something else? How much RAM does Vista need to be snappy?

Thanks.
Larry

 

[Richard Urban]

Personally, I would never supply a customer of mine with less than 2 gig of
RAM. I would consider 1 gig to be the absolute minimum - if all he/she were
doing is typing and browsing the internet.

--


Regards,

Richard Urban MVP
Microsoft Windows Shell/User

 

[Larry]

Wow. I had no idea. I had not been shopping Vista for myself. I just
walked into a store with my friend and she liked this computer and I asked
the salesman all the questions I could think of, but not having done prior
researach on Vista I didn't know what you're telling me now about how much
RAM is needed.

It's like when I bought Windows 98. I got it with 64 MB Ram, which was what
Dell said was enough. It worked, but was really slow. When I finally got
more RAM it was like getting a new computer.

Computer companies are really not honest on these points.

Larry

 

[Stephan Rose]

Wow. I had no idea. I had not been shopping Vista for myself. I just
walked into a store with my friend and she liked this computer and I asked
the salesman all the questions I could think of, but not having done prior
researach on Vista I didn't know what you're telling me now about how much
RAM is needed.

It's like when I bought Windows 98. I got it with 64 MB Ram, which was
what
Dell said was enough. It worked, but was really slow. When I finally got
more RAM it was like getting a new computer.

Computer companies are really not honest on these points.

Well actually what he said was not really untrue.

The applications your friend is running are more than happy with 512 megs of
ram.

The thing is that Vista itself though appears to need more memory than some
of the high-end engineering apps I use...

It's really sad to see the OS require more resources than the applications
it runs.

--
Stephan Rose
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™ã²ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸæ™‚ãŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Ken Blake, MVP]

Wow. I had no idea. I had not been shopping Vista for myself. I
just walked into a store with my friend and she liked this computer
and I asked the salesman all the questions I could think of, but not
having done prior researach on Vista I didn't know what you're
telling me now about how much RAM is needed.

It's like when I bought Windows 98. I got it with 64 MB Ram, which
was what Dell said was enough. It worked, but was really slow. When
I finally got more RAM it was like getting a new computer.

Computer companies are really not honest on these points.

Rather than its being an issue of honesty, I think it's far more likely that
the clerk in the store know very little about what he was talking about.
Clerks in computer stores (especially the big chain stores) are usually
chosen, not for their computer skills, but for their willingness to accept
something close to minimum wage. Most people with real skills are capable of
getting much better jobs than selling in such stores.

 

[Larry]

Also, dumb question, but if Vista requires something like one GB minimum,
then that alone makes running Vista several hundred dollars more expensive,
doesn't it?

And if most of this RAM is needed because of Vista features that are mostly
cosmetic and kind of silly, like things moving on the Desktop, wouldn't it
be better to stay with XP?

However, if one is buying a new computer, then there's no choice but to get
Vista, right? There's this sense of being trapped on Microsoft's treadmill,
like Charlie Chaplin in the factory in "Modern Times."

 

[CJJE]

Well actually what he said was not really untrue.

The applications your friend is running are more than happy with 512 megs
of
ram.

The thing is that Vista itself though appears to need more memory than
some
of the high-end engineering apps I use...

It's really sad to see the OS require more resources than the applications
it runs.

--
Stephan Rose
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™ã²ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸæ™‚ãŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

My desktop PC (with Windows XP Home) has 1 GB of RAM and rarely needs it all
unless I'm editing photos (which was my driver for fitting it!)

My new Vista laptop came with 2GB of RAM, and I'm amazed to see on the
sidebar gadget that it regularly uses 45% of it even when I'm just browsing
the web via a WiFi network and using Word 2007. I've read that if you only
let it hibernate instead of turning it off, it fills the RAM with commonly
used programs to speed up access. Certainly I've found that turning it off
completely seems to reset the used RAM to 25% or so. Perhaps your friend
needs to do this to stop it paging for memory all the time?

Chris

 

[Larry]

Certainly I've found that turning it off
completely seems to reset the used RAM to 25% or so. Perhaps your friend
needs to do this to stop it paging for memory all the time?

You mean restarting the computer every couple of hours?

 

[Mark Rae]

And if most of this RAM is needed because of Vista features that are
mostly
cosmetic and kind of silly, like things moving on the Desktop, wouldn't it
be better to stay with XP?

Why not trash the hard disk completely and reinstall with Windows 98SE and
Office 97...? It'll run like the proverbial off a shovel...

However, if one is buying a new computer, then there's no choice but to
get
Vista, right?

Wrong. There's nothing whatever preventing you from reformatting and then
installing one of the many Linux distros and using OpenOffice...

- it won't cost you a penny...

- you won't have to worry about viruses...

- it will be compatible with Word, Excel, PowerPoint etc...

 

[John Barnes]

In addition to the extra ram, you will need a faster cpu. My system was
maxed out at 100% with a 3500+ cpu and on XP rarely hit 50%. I upgraded to
a 5200+ to be able to use it and not be constantly waiting. You can buy an
OEM copy of XP for less than the cost of the upgrades necessary to use
Vista. Nice OS but not a necessity.

 

[Larry]

Why not trash the hard disk completely and reinstall with Windows 98SE and

Office 97...? It'll run like the proverbial off a shovel...

Sounds like you're being sarcastic. Not very helpful.

 

[Betty]

I bought a new desktop 4 weeks ago today, I wanted XP, NOT Vista and they
told me they had sold all the XP machines. I wish I had done more research
on Vista before buying but I didn't. My old 5 yr. old Dell had died & I
really needed a computer.........at least I thought it had died. My son took
the old machine, did a few little things and now it's working just fine and
I'm stuck with this new Vista machine. I'm still slapping myself and crying.
My son doesn't live close to me so he wasn't able to check out my old Dell
until it was too late to take the new machine back.........and then I would
have had to pay up to 25% restocking fee.

Betty

 

[Betty]

Are you saying a person could buy a new hard drive, buy a copy of XP,
install it and be rid of Vista?? It's very tempting!!

Betty

 

[thor]

Sounds like you're being sarcastic. Not very helpful.

And you're a troll.

Several hundred dollars to add RAM; give me a break.

But, have a nice day, anyway!

Thor

 

[AlanRRT]

Also, dumb question, but if Vista requires something like one GB minimum,
then that alone makes running Vista several hundred dollars more expensive,
doesn't it?

"Several hundred dollars"? I spent "several hundred dollars" ($742 to
be exact), and not only got 1 GB of memory, but a motherboard, video
card, case, Vista home premium. . .well, you get the idea. So far,
other than my scanner not installing, I have no complaints, and
Vista's doing good for me.
One criticism of Vista is that it's a "resource hog." It is, if
you're trying to upgrade on an older computer that may not be up to
the task without upgrading the hardware. For any new computer, just
about anything that's not bottom of the barrel should run Vista fine.
That's why many (including me) on this board don't recommend upgrading
to Vista, but getting it when you get a new computer.

 

[Lang Murphy]

As so many trolls in here like to say... (and I ain't one of them...) BINGO!

Lang

 

[Lang Murphy]

Totally off base dude... this guy is not a SME on computers... he's looking
for answers. And, I think, honestly. Certainly more honestly that the
calvacade of malcontents that have been spewing nothing but garbage in here
lately.

Lang

 

[Lang Murphy]

Betty,

What problems are you having?

Lang

I bought a new desktop 4 weeks ago today, I wanted XP, NOT Vista and they
told me they had sold all the XP machines. I wish I had done more research
on Vista before buying but I didn't. My old 5 yr. old Dell had died & I
really needed a computer.........at least I thought it had died. My son
took the old machine, did a few little things and now it's working just
fine and I'm stuck with this new Vista machine. I'm still slapping myself
and crying. My son doesn't live close to me so he wasn't able to check out
my old Dell until it was too late to take the new machine back.........and
then I would have had to pay up to 25% restocking fee.

Betty

 

[Lang Murphy]

Larry,

Vista likes just about as much RAM as you can throw at it. Max is 4GB's for
x86 (32 bit), although the OS will only report approx. 3GB available.
(Whatever...)

If this is a recent purchase, indexing could be slowing things down. When
you first activate Vista, it will index the HD. This may take a couple of
days. If your friend has had his laptop for more than a couple of days, then
indexing may not be the issue. Is the HD light lit up all the time?

No doubt, with 512MB RAM your friend is not going to be able to do much more
than surf the web without slowing performance down. Maybe one app... and not
a resource intensive app at that.

I'd say 1GB is minimum. Depending on what you want to do, 2GB's may offer
better performance, but I've run Vista on 1GB without issue. Did your
friend's laptop come with one 51MB stick or two 256MB sticks? If the former,
then he/she only need buy a compatible 512MB stick. If the latter, well...
yeah, they need to buy either two 512MB sticks or one 1GB stick allowing for
future upgrade to 2GB.

Searching Fry's outpost.com looks like notebook memory is about $50 for a
512MB stick and around $100 for a 1GB stick.

Lang

 

[Mark Rae]

Sounds like you're being sarcastic.

Not at all - perfectly serious...

Vista is the most powerful OS released by Microsoft to date and, as such,
requires the most hardware resources...

That's just the way it is...

But no-one's holding a gun to your head...

If Vista is too much for you, what alternatives have you considered...?