memory usage myths

[Eric Gisin]

Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit charge of 800MB.

On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM usage.
Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.

[url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]

To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?

[Zack Whittaker \(R2 Mentor\)]

OK, wait until Beta 2 to come out (April) to find out that all these sorts
of myths really are myths, because until April, the Vista lot are doing very
little in terms of performance bashing. I think if you wait until then,
you'll realise that you can have *just* the current requirements for Vista
and it will run pretty smoothly still.

--
Zack Whittaker
Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
» ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
» MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
» ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
» VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!


--- Original message follows ---
"Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%23Ga2tLtRGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

> Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit charge of
> 800MB.
>
> On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
> Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM usage.
> Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.
>
> [url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]
>
> To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
> This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
> Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?
>
>
>

[Travis King]

From videos of seeing people using Vista, it seems to run just about as fast
as XP - although I don't know how fast of computers they were using in the
videos. These would be videos I found using Google.
"Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:O$wFGStRGHA.4740@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

> OK, wait until Beta 2 to come out (April) to find out that all these sorts
> of myths really are myths, because until April, the Vista lot are doing
> very little in terms of performance bashing. I think if you wait until
> then, you'll realise that you can have *just* the current requirements for
> Vista and it will run pretty smoothly still.
>
> --
> Zack Whittaker
> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
> not
> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>
>
> --- Original message follows ---
> "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Ga2tLtRGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

>> Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit charge
>> of 800MB.
>>
>> On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
>> Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM usage.
>> Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.
>>
>> [url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]
>>
>> To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
>> This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
>> Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?
>>
>>
>>

>
>

[Zack Whittaker \(R2 Mentor\)]

The videos were more than likely tweaked and edited to run faster :op

--
Zack Whittaker
Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
» ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
» MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
» ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
» VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
» This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and not
of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!


--- Original message follows ---
"Travis King" <Anonymous@none.com> wrote in message
news:OSV9RWuRGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

> From videos of seeing people using Vista, it seems to run just about as
> fast as XP - although I don't know how fast of computers they were using
> in the videos. These would be videos I found using Google.
> "Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:O$wFGStRGHA.4740@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

>> OK, wait until Beta 2 to come out (April) to find out that all these
>> sorts of myths really are myths, because until April, the Vista lot are
>> doing very little in terms of performance bashing. I think if you wait
>> until then, you'll realise that you can have *just* the current
>> requirements for Vista and it will run pretty smoothly still.
>>
>> --
>> Zack Whittaker
>> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
>> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
>> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
>> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
>> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
>> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
>> not
>> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>>
>>
>> --- Original message follows ---
>> "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:%23Ga2tLtRGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

>>> Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit charge
>>> of 800MB.
>>>
>>> On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
>>> Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM usage.
>>> Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.
>>>
>>> [url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]
>>>
>>> To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
>>> This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
>>> Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?
>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Travis King]

One of the videos was a person that was actually using Vista in their home.
It was an older release, however - pre-5270.
"Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:%23yyFgcuRGHA.252@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

> The videos were more than likely tweaked and edited to run faster :op
>
> --
> Zack Whittaker
> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
> not
> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>
>
> --- Original message follows ---
> "Travis King" <Anonymous@none.com> wrote in message
> news:OSV9RWuRGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

>> From videos of seeing people using Vista, it seems to run just about as
>> fast as XP - although I don't know how fast of computers they were using
>> in the videos. These would be videos I found using Google.
>> "Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:O$wFGStRGHA.4740@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

>>> OK, wait until Beta 2 to come out (April) to find out that all these
>>> sorts of myths really are myths, because until April, the Vista lot are
>>> doing very little in terms of performance bashing. I think if you wait
>>> until then, you'll realise that you can have *just* the current
>>> requirements for Vista and it will run pretty smoothly still.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Zack Whittaker
>>> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
>>> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
>>> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
>>> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
>>> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
>>> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
>>> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
>>> not
>>> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>>>
>>>
>>> --- Original message follows ---
>>> "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>> news:%23Ga2tLtRGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>> Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit charge
>>>> of 800MB.
>>>>
>>>> On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
>>>> Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM
>>>> usage.
>>>> Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.
>>>>
>>>> [url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]
>>>>
>>>> To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
>>>> This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
>>>> Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Deansweb2004|NT]

I agree on Zack with this one.. Wait intill April.. At the moment they are
changing things everywhere. I remember going to one place in the originally
builds and in the new builds its completely been moved which is annoying but
good in another ways..

--
Deansweb2004|NT - Dean Wronowski
Server2003 R2 (Grasshoppers) NNTP Hoster
* VistaCentral - [url]www.deansweb2004.com/vista/[/url] *ServerCentral -
[url]www.deansweb2004.com/longhorn/[/url]
* LiveCentral - [url]www.deansweb2004.co/live/[/url] * ScreenCentral -
[url]www.deansweb2004.com/screen/[/url]

"Travis King" <Anonymous@none.com> wrote in message
news:usm8G3uRGHA.5728@tk2msftngp13.phx.gbl...

> One of the videos was a person that was actually using Vista in their
> home. It was an older release, however - pre-5270.
> "Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:%23yyFgcuRGHA.252@TK2MSFTNGP10.phx.gbl...

>> The videos were more than likely tweaked and edited to run faster :op
>>
>> --
>> Zack Whittaker
>> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
>> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
>> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
>> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
>> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
>> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
>> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
>> not
>> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>>
>>
>> --- Original message follows ---
>> "Travis King" <Anonymous@none.com> wrote in message
>> news:OSV9RWuRGHA.2300@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

>>> From videos of seeing people using Vista, it seems to run just about as
>>> fast as XP - although I don't know how fast of computers they were using
>>> in the videos. These would be videos I found using Google.
>>> "Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> news:O$wFGStRGHA.4740@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...
>>>> OK, wait until Beta 2 to come out (April) to find out that all these
>>>> sorts of myths really are myths, because until April, the Vista lot are
>>>> doing very little in terms of performance bashing. I think if you wait
>>>> until then, you'll realise that you can have *just* the current
>>>> requirements for Vista and it will run pretty smoothly still.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Zack Whittaker
>>>> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
>>>> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
>>>> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
>>>> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
>>>> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
>>>> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
>>>> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so,
>>>> and not
>>>> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --- Original message follows ---
>>>> "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:%23Ga2tLtRGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit
>>>>> charge of 800MB.
>>>>>
>>>>> On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
>>>>> Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM
>>>>> usage.
>>>>> Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.
>>>>>
>>>>> [url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]
>>>>>
>>>>> To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
>>>>> This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
>>>>> Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>

>>
>>

>
>

[Andre Da Costa [Extended64]]

Actually, I would wait until RC1.
--
Andre
Extended64 | [url]http://www.extended64.com[/url]
Blog | [url]http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre[/url]
[url]http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta[/url]
FAQ for MS AntiSpy [url]http://www.geocities.com/marfer_mvp/FAQ_MSantispy.htm[/url]

"Zack Whittaker (R2 Mentor)" <admin@zacknet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:O$wFGStRGHA.4740@TK2MSFTNGP14.phx.gbl...

> OK, wait until Beta 2 to come out (April) to find out that all these sorts
> of myths really are myths, because until April, the Vista lot are doing
> very little in terms of performance bashing. I think if you wait until
> then, you'll realise that you can have *just* the current requirements for
> Vista and it will run pretty smoothly still.
>
> --
> Zack Whittaker
> Microsoft Beta (Windows Server R2 Beta Mentor)
> » ZackNET Enterprises: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk[/url]
> » MSBlog on ResDev: [url]http://msblog.resdev.net[/url]
> » ZackNET Forum: [url]www.zacknet.co.uk/forum[/url]
> » VistaBase: [url]www.vistabase.co.uk[/url]
> » This mailing is provided "as is" with no warranties, and confers no
> rights. All opinions expressed are those of myself unless stated so, and
> not
> of my employer, best friend, mother or cat. Let's be clear on that one!
>
>
> --- Original message follows ---
> "Eric Gisin" <ericgisin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:%23Ga2tLtRGHA.1096@TK2MSFTNGP11.phx.gbl...

>> Some posts claim Vista requires 1GB because they notice a commit charge
>> of 800MB.
>>
>> On systems with 512MB, the commit charge is comparable to WinXP.
>> Commit charge is pagefile allocated (not used), certainly not RAM usage.
>> Also, there are extra services running by default in Ultimate.
>>
>> [url]http://thelazyadmin.com/index.php?/archives/396-Mythbusting-Windows-Vista-Memory-Management.html[/url]
>>
>> To all the people running in 512M, how does it compare to XP?
>> This affect Pentium III owners, who are limited to that.
>> Are the first gen P4 (Intel 845) owners limited too?
>>
>>
>>

>
>