Vista Memory requirements: Too much, way too much

Discussion in 'Windows Vista General Discussion' started by Chris, May 29, 2006.

  1. Chris

    Chris Guest

    At first I thought this was a joke:

    I finally got my Vista beta 2 installed, and was shocked to find it
    operating at idle at about 861 megs of memory!!
    That is way too much memory consumption, and is flatly ridiculous. None of
    my games have ever pulled that amount of memory usage. And this from an
    operating system?

    I work for another software company, and this is bad for our business. Why?

    Vista will cost around $350 (US currency).
    But there is a hidden cost:
    At a minimum each customer will have to buy an additional 1 GB ram stick
    just for the OS!! This will cost around $300 (US currency). Heaven help the
    customer who cannot simply buy more memory, but have to buy new systems.
    There is now more of a strong tendency to ditch windows and Intell PC's and
    switch to other OS's and such. Now not only have our customers left MS
    behind, they have left all our 3rd party application's behind too.

    An operating system is responsible for memory allocation and deallocation,
    and file management. But trying to outdo games with memory consumption is
    strange. I am the first one to test vista on my production team, but I see
    no other option at this point to tell my software bosses that Vista is very
    bad for our software product, and to discourage them from doing so.

    Microsoft should just start from scratch with their OS, and get something
    that installs about 100 megs of files on a Harddrive, and runs at about 50
    megs of memory during runtime. That would really get the worlds attention.

    Chris J.
     
    Chris, May 29, 2006
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Chris

    Noozer Guest

    At a minimum each customer will have to buy an additional 1 GB ram stick
    Bahahahaha... Where do you shop?!?!
     
    Noozer, May 29, 2006
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Hmm, well, Vista is still "BETA", and the focus now is to optimize the code
    for performance and fix any bugs that are found. Vista contains a lot of
    debug code right now, thats part of the reason why its really so memory
    intensive. I am running Vista on a machine with 512 MBs of RAM, yes, its not
    as fast as XP but I don't see any loss in productivity really from it. Even
    Zack Whittecker has managed to install Vista on a system with 256 MBs of RAM
    (don't know the performance) but it sounds like its working ok.

    Anyway, don't cast judgment yet, lets wait until the software RTM's before
    we do so. Also, we are still not at RC1 yet, and that build will be a true
    reflection of what the RTM will be, then we can start to decide if Windows
    Vista is right for us. We currently have the opportunity to make things
    right, I would implore on you to send in your feedback using the Feedback
    link on your desktop. And where did you get the idea that Vista will cost
    $350? The last time I heard, pricing details have not yet been determined.

    When I look back at the memory requirements for each Windows release, it has
    always increased with each version at a gradual rate and the same case
    applies to Vista.

    Windows 95: 8 MBs of RAM
    Windows NT: 12 to 16 MBs of RAM
    Windows 98/SE: 16 to 24 MBs of RAM (32 MBs if you plan to do multimedia)
    Windows 2000: 32 to 64 MBs of RAM (64 MBs recommended)
    Windows ME: 32 MBs of RAM
    Windows XP: 64 to 128 MBs of RAM
    Windows Vista - after a five year gap and the changes that have taken place,
    Windows Vista has more stuff in it, more complexity, more technology, 512
    MBs of RAM, a minimum, seems like a logical step.

    Even with XP, you had to add more RAM over the years, I first started out
    with 256 MBs of RAM and the more stuff I did with it, the more RAM I needed
    which provided a better experience using the OS.
    --
    --
    Andre
    Windows Connected | http://www.windowsconnected.com
    Extended64 | http://www.extended64.com
    Blog | http://www.extended64.com/blogs/andre
    http://spaces.msn.com/members/adacosta
     
    Andre Da Costa [Extended64], May 29, 2006
    #3
  4. Chris

    Peter M Guest

    What planet are you from? I can get 1 Gig of ram for between $100-120
    canadian.
     
    Peter M, May 29, 2006
    #4
  5. Andre Da Costa [Extended64], May 29, 2006
    #5
  6. Chris

    Lang Murphy Guest

    I'm running just a couple of small apps and I'm only using 320 megs of
    physical RAM... I assume you mean by "running at idle" that no apps are
    loaded and the OS is just "sitting there"... does your video card use shared
    RAM? That might take a good sized chunk.

    Yeah, the hardware requirements are steeper for Vista... but, hey,
    hardware's CHEAPER these days. You can get a hummin' box for under $1K these
    days... Remember when a friggin' IBM XT cost $4K? (or much more, depending
    on who your "Computer Guy" was...) Hahahahaha! I had a 6MHz IBM AT back in
    the day... thing was blazing fast compared to the 4MHz boxes. Isn't that
    just crazy? Now we're getting close to having hardware performance 1,000
    times faster than just 15 years ago (or so...). Ah, sorry for rambling...

    Thanks,

    Lang


    --
    Dell XPS Gen 2 running Vista 5384
    P4 3.0GHz (HT)
    1GB RAM
    160GB SATA HD
    ATI Radeon Pro 9800 w/ 128MB
    Audigy 2 soundcard
     
    Lang Murphy, May 29, 2006
    #6

  7. Where do you buy your stuff. I never pay anywhere near what you are quoting
    "off the top of your head".

    --
    Regards,

    Richard Urban
    MVP Windows Shell/User
    (using Vista 5384.4)

    Quote from George Ankner:
    If you knew half as much as you think you know,
    You would realize you don't know what you thought you knew.
     
    Richard Urban, May 29, 2006
    #7
  8. Chris

    Roy Coorne Guest

    Registered ECC...


    rOy
     
    Roy Coorne, May 29, 2006
    #8
  9. Hell yeh :eek:) Memory at the moment stands about 300-500MB but I always keep a
    few windows open including Windows Live Messenger & Desktop.

    And dude... come on, I make an effort to spell everyone elses name right -
    just copy and paste it in if it's too difficult.

    --
    Zack Whittaker
    » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
    » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
    » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
    » 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, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
    that up!

    --: Original message follows :--
     
    Zack Whittaker, May 29, 2006
    #9
  10. We've got this great shop just round the corner (about 20 miles but hey...)
    and it's really really cheap!
    www.web-systems.co.uk

    --
    Zack Whittaker
    » ZackNET Enterprises: www.zacknet.co.uk
    » MSBlog on ResDev: www.msblog.org
    » Vista Knowledge Base: www.vistabase.co.uk
    » 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, Ghandi, my mother or my cat. Glad we cleared
    that up!

    --: Original message follows :--
     
    Zack Whittaker, May 29, 2006
    #10
  11. Chris

    AMDX2 Guest

    Vista Ultimate $688.


     
    AMDX2, May 29, 2006
    #11
  12. Andre Da Costa [Extended64], May 29, 2006
    #12
  13. Chris

    Chris Guest

    Well, Ok, I did pull the numbers out of the top of my head, based on
    reasonable estimates.
    I have seen WinXP Pro in stores in the US selling for $299, so I see it as
    no stretch that Microsoft could up the price on Vista here, especially Vista
    Ultimate (Which I have installed).

    Now I am probably guilty as charged about misquoting the price of a gig of
    RAM. I have been studiously avoiding the hardware market for upwards of year
    now: so since I was wrong on Memory Prices go ahead and rake me over the
    coals for that one. I for one am very glad that memory is more affordable,
    and so I think that is then in Microsoft's favor. However, someone else
    noted something I had failed to mention, I always buy ECC RAM for my systems
    which is alittle more expensive than the regular varieties out there.

    Now Andre mentioned in another thread:

    Anyway, don't cast judgment yet, lets wait until the software RTM's
    before
    we do so.

    Your right, but there is only so much a software developer can do to pair
    down the fat from a Beta build to a Release build. I don't really expect
    much improvement in that regards once RTM occurs. It's not like the code is
    going to be substancially rewritten, I mean they are in bug fixing mode now
    I would think.

    Chris J.
     
    Chris, May 30, 2006
    #13
  14. Chris

    Gaoler Guest

    Can you site a link you got that information from?
     
    Gaoler, May 31, 2006
    #14
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.