Vista OS

[Jane Colman]

Someone should point out to the Inquirer the difference between Paging File
and RAM

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

Well, from what I understand, they are about to release a build in April
which will be beta. Everyone seems to be saying that there will be no
more content, feature, or design changes after that, only bug fixes. If
this is an actual problem in Vista, which given the article, it at least
could be, shouldn't it be reported here asap so as to be investigated
and fixed if it does exist?

If its an issue with kernel, or memory management which has a bug in, then
that will be fixed, thats not a feature set of Vista, its just a general
part of the system.

You say "that issue is probably fixed already" and I hope so. But is
this not the place where we report things like that?

Its possible that Windows Team members read these groups and looking for
public feedback. To send in feedback though, the general route would be
http://www.microsoft.com/wish but Microsoft is primarily looking for feed
back from its TAP Testers and Private BETA testers.

Also, you say that "all credibility went out the window with the source
of the report. The Inquirer has been many times too wrong, they also
contradict themselves..." This would be an opinion instead of a
statement of fact, unless you care to actually back up your words with
proof of your claim about The Inquirer. What you describe about The
Inquirer being wrong at times or contradicting themselves in some of
their reports could describe almost any reporting source because they
all make mistakes. The very nature of reporting is that it is imperfect.

The inquirer is in a category all by themselves. The made a similar
mistake CES 2006, they said they played with BETA 2 of Windows Vista when
it was actually the December 2005 CTP interim build. BETA 2 won't arrive
until April. They were confusing the build tag as BETA 2, but the point
is, its not BETA 2.

--
--
Andre
Windows Connect | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

 

[nubian]

If its an issue with kernel, or memory management which has a bug in, then
that will be fixed, thats not a feature set of Vista, its just a general
part of the system.

I hope that is the case. However, I kinda doubt it if everyone else
involved in the improvement and fixing of Vista is as closed minded as
many who responded to this thread here.

Its possible that Windows Team members read these groups and looking for
public feedback. To send in feedback though, the general route would be
http://www.microsoft.com/wish but Microsoft is primarily looking for feed
back from its TAP Testers and Private BETA testers.

Thanks for the info, I will make use of it.

The inquirer is in a category all by themselves. The made a similar
mistake CES 2006, they said they played with BETA 2 of Windows Vista when
it was actually the December 2005 CTP interim build. BETA 2 won't arrive
until April. They were confusing the build tag as BETA 2, but the point
is, its not BETA 2.

I understand you feel that way.

My, I'm confuzzled! That response was harder to follow than top
posting! Please follow usenet standards when replying to my posts in
the future.

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

However, I kinda doubt it if everyone else
involved in the improvement and fixing of Vista is as closed minded as
many who responded to this thread here.

I guess that means we are all normal and you're not.

My, I'm confuzzled! That response was harder to follow than top
posting! Please follow usenet standards when replying to my posts in
the future.

Get use to it.

--
--
Andre
Windows Connect | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

 

[nubian]

I guess that means we are all normal and you're not.

You are normal for a brainwashed Microborg possibly.

Get use to it.

It's too bad you show yourself to be so incredibly close-minded, small,
and immature. It's very childish to respond to a polite request in
exactly the opposite manner requested.

 

[Steve Drake]

I don't normally get into these debates, but.....

As people are saying its BETA that means it will ETA the MEMORY

joking aside, if you have 2 GIG of memory and your only using 300MEG are you
not wasting 1.7GIG?

I was under the impression that some changes to the way memory is managed in
vista mean if memory is 'spare' vista will find a use for it, it will pre
load program and files etc. but I haven't bothered to follow the link so my
comments my be out of context, but they maybe of interested to someone.



Steve

 

[nubian]

I don't normally get into these debates, but.....

As people are saying its BETA that means it will ETA the MEMORY
LOL


joking aside, if you have 2 GIG of memory and your only using 300MEG are
you not wasting 1.7GIG?

I don't share the same opinion, but I appreciate your serious reply.
What if I have a few other programs I am running that could use the
resources for background processes? The OS will usually have the
priority and if it takes up the remaining resources, that would seem to
me to make it a less efficient multitaking OS.

I was under the impression that some changes to the way memory is
managed in vista mean if memory is 'spare' vista will find a use for it,
it will pre load program and files etc. but I haven't bothered to follow
the link so my comments my be out of context, but they maybe of
interested to someone.



Steve

Thanks for your respectful reply Steve.

 

[Steve Drake]

Your last point is open to debate, and I agree. But its not as simple as I
make it sound, all I know its there are some new memory management features
that are suppose to make better use of the memory, in practise it may not
work for everyone, but IF it is configuratble then it may work well more
people.

If you cache 100MEG of data, and app X needs to allocate 100MEG, it would be
easy to just give up the cache. this is not your normal just cache files as
and when they are accessed, it about preemting what the user needs based on
the usage of the computer. Also remeber that a system should NEVER relay on
cache being there when it asks for it.

It would be great if start world of warcraft on my home PC and it loaded in
seconds, all I use my home pc for is to play this game, so when its sat
there using all 300MEG of the 2GIG, its not making use of what's available
(for my home usage)

My 'facts' are from my interpretation of events and training sessions I have
attendant, they maybe distorted a little as this is all new stuff.

I went to one event, years ago, and I remember a one liner say, 'the
allgorython that the page file uses has been rewritten and it hasn't been
rewritten for years' like I say, this was a long time ago.



Steve

 

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

You come in here with your attitude and expect to get pampered for it, get a
life and go away, you are of no use here, your contributions so far are a
reflection of the stupidity you are made of.
--
--
Andre
Windows Connect | http://www.windowsconnected.com
Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta

 

[roman modic]

Hello!

Is bloated!

Vista set to swallow 800MB of RAM

Memory, disk space hungry

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30128

By Fuad Abazovic in Wien: Wednesday 08 March 2006, 12:08
A CHAP who managed to sneak a peek at the Vole's internal beta version 2 of Windows 53xx informed us that, even while idling,
Vista eats as much as 800Mb of system memory.
http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html

Which brings us to the final piece of this puzzle: Windows tailors its memory footprint depending on the resources available. The
virtual memory manager, integral system processes and system services are, using a multitude of mechanisms, intelligent enough to
curtail memory utilization, both in commit and actual working set (memory resident in physical RAM) depending on the abilities and
circumstances of the machine. Witness the next screenshot of the Task Manager running on a 512MB Vista machine, with desktop
composition enabled, idling at about 237MB commit charge with little over half the physical memory in use.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-4.jpg
This by the way is strikingly similar to my low-end XP notebook idling, as depicted in this screenshot.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-5.jpg
In short, memory requirements and utilization for recent Vista builds are neither set in stone, limited to one configuration or even
indicative of the final products footprint.

Cheers, Roman

 

[Steve Drake]

A very good post.

Thanks for the info. I will go read the website now

Steve

Hello!

Is bloated!

Vista set to swallow 800MB of RAM

Memory, disk space hungry

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30128

By Fuad Abazovic in Wien: Wednesday 08 March 2006, 12:08
A CHAP who managed to sneak a peek at the Vole's internal beta version 2
of Windows 53xx informed us that, even while idling, Vista eats as much
as 800Mb of system memory.
http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html

Which brings us to the final piece of this puzzle: Windows tailors its
memory footprint depending on the resources available. The virtual memory
manager, integral system processes and system services are, using a
multitude of mechanisms, intelligent enough to curtail memory utilization,
both in commit and actual working set (memory resident in physical RAM)
depending on the abilities and circumstances of the machine. Witness the
next screenshot of the Task Manager running on a 512MB Vista machine, with
desktop composition enabled, idling at about 237MB commit charge with
little over half the physical memory in use.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-4.jpg
This by the way is strikingly similar to my low-end XP notebook idling, as
depicted in this screenshot.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-5.jpg
In short, memory requirements and utilization for recent Vista builds are
neither set in stone, limited to one configuration or even indicative of
the final products footprint.

Cheers, Roman

 

[nubian]

Hello!

Is bloated!

Vista set to swallow 800MB of RAM

Memory, disk space hungry

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30128

By Fuad Abazovic in Wien: Wednesday 08 March 2006, 12:08
A CHAP who managed to sneak a peek at the Vole's internal beta version 2 of Windows 53xx informed us that, even while idling,
Vista eats as much as 800Mb of system memory.
http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html

Which brings us to the final piece of this puzzle: Windows tailors its memory footprint depending on the resources available. The
virtual memory manager, integral system processes and system services are, using a multitude of mechanisms, intelligent enough to
curtail memory utilization, both in commit and actual working set (memory resident in physical RAM) depending on the abilities and
circumstances of the machine. Witness the next screenshot of the Task Manager running on a 512MB Vista machine, with desktop
composition enabled, idling at about 237MB commit charge with little over half the physical memory in use.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-4.jpg
This by the way is strikingly similar to my low-end XP notebook idling, as depicted in this screenshot.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-5.jpg
In short, memory requirements and utilization for recent Vista builds are neither set in stone, limited to one configuration or even
indicative of the final products footprint.

Cheers, Roman

Wow, this looks like a great article. Thanks a million, I think it puts
my fears to rest!

 

[nubian]

You come in here with your attitude and expect to get pampered for it, get a
life and go away, you are of no use here, your contributions so far are a
reflection of the stupidity you are made of.

Why is it that I received many civil, concise answers from other posters
here but I have only received childish, immature, and inflammatory
responses from you? I can only believe that this is your true
personality shining through since this is all you have shown me. Good
riddens...

 

[Grok]

Jane Colman wrote:
| Someone should point out to the Inquirer the difference between Paging
| File and RAM

No kidding. And point out that it would help to mention what build and what
47 processes .. the article is worth less than the HDD space it's stored on.

 

[Steve Drake]

I sent the inquirer an email, telling them todo some research, this was just
headline grabbing to get more HITS.

All its done for me, is make them even less credible!!! so.. lets hits from
me

Steve

Hello!

Is bloated!

Vista set to swallow 800MB of RAM

Memory, disk space hungry

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30128

By Fuad Abazovic in Wien: Wednesday 08 March 2006, 12:08
A CHAP who managed to sneak a peek at the Vole's internal beta version 2
of Windows 53xx informed us that, even while idling, Vista eats as much
as 800Mb of system memory.
http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html

Which brings us to the final piece of this puzzle: Windows tailors its
memory footprint depending on the resources available. The virtual memory
manager, integral system processes and system services are, using a
multitude of mechanisms, intelligent enough to curtail memory
utilization, both in commit and actual working set (memory resident in
physical RAM) depending on the abilities and circumstances of the
machine. Witness the next screenshot of the Task Manager running on a
512MB Vista machine, with desktop composition enabled, idling at about
237MB commit charge with little over half the physical memory in use.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-4.jpg
This by the way is strikingly similar to my low-end XP notebook idling,
as depicted in this screenshot.
http://thelazyadmin.com/images/vista/vista-mem-myth-5.jpg
In short, memory requirements and utilization for recent Vista builds are
neither set in stone, limited to one configuration or even indicative of
the final products footprint.

Cheers, Roman

Wow, this looks like a great article. Thanks a million, I think it puts
my fears to rest!

 

[SHS]

You both wrong
Commit Change (K) Total is main memory being user
Paging on other side of the screen

 

[Grok]

SHS wrote:
| You both wrong
| Commit Change (K) Total is main memory being user
| Paging on other side of the screen
|
| || Jane Colman wrote:
||| Someone should point out to the Inquirer the difference between Paging
||| File and RAM
||
|| No kidding. And point out that it would help to mention what build and
|| what 47 processes .. the article is worth less than the HDD space it's
|| stored on.

On what build of Vista? And what processes are running?

 

[SHS]

On what build of Vista? And what processes are running?

I don't have Vista I'm waiting the public ver

 

[Jevon]

I know this is a late reply, but: Linux is perfectly happy to "gobble up"
everything it can get, it's not just a Vista thing. This enables the OS
((Vista, Linux distro, etc) to cache as much as possible, which improves
performance as memory is quicker than HDD. If an application requires more
memory, the OS is able to release some of the cache to free up memory for
the application to use. I.e. high memory usage is not always indicative of
poor performance.

Regardless, as has been pointed out elsewhere in the thread, they are
apparently (I haven't bothered to read the article) using an internal build
which is less polished than even a CTP build; in addition, it's still pre
RTM so there will be extra debug code left in (to help diagnose errors)
which will slow the system down anyway.

And regarding the validity of The Inquirer: this isn't the first time
they've been knocked, and this isn't the first place I've heard it said
either. I don't keep a diary, but I'm sure you could do a search and find
some examples if you're desperate

Jevon

Andre Da Costa [Extended64] wrote:

Did you actually go to the link? Did you look at the screenshot? It
does not appear to have been doctored at all.

Is bloated!

Vista set to swallow 800MB of RAM

Memory, disk space hungry

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=30128

The fact that they used a build *not* released makes the whole article
and its intent suspect.
I have a test machine here running the latest CTP on 512 meg of installed
memory. From what you quote, that should be impossible?

Not at all, from the article it just seems like if you have the
memory/virtual memory, it will gobble it up. That does not necessarily
mean it can't run with less.