IB4VistaIsAMemoryHog
Then turn the shit off…
104 processes :barf:
2814 cached… Linux does the same thing… Look at the kernel usage. Its a lot less than the crap you posting up
Yea I keep everything off almost except what windows needs and antivirus
Here’s mine from my 130$ build (for mobo/processor/ram from newegg)
amd 4400+ oc’ed to 2.76ghz
2GB ram
Vista Premium
I have not turned off any services to ‘save ram’, and this is with Onecare, Firefox (since 8am), and itunes (doesn’t get closed unless i’m updating it/restarting the computer).
I’ll update with my laptop shortly.
and you still are running 61 processes…
and i’m still not noticing any performance loss…i’m still not having a problem multitasking…i’m still not having a problem doing anything performance wise on this computer.
With those 61 processes still running i can load up grid, cod4, rsv2, etc and get the same frame rates out of the hardware as i did with xp…
The fact that there are 61 processes running doesnt mean shit.
oh yeah, and the computer hasn’t been shutdown/restarted/whatever in 7 days, 23 hours, and 15 minutes.
You are missing the point… if you have nothing open and 61 processes running… odds are there are processes trying to run or are doing somethign in the back ground.
Not all processes sit dormant
im not saying they are sitting dorment. But what i am saying is your looking at the amount of processes running and saying it’s bad.
Hell, if MS wanted to they could throw all those processes into one bundle, so it looked like only, say 5 processes were running. But would it save performance? No. because the same work is being done.
Other than Vista you have extra shit running. On my XP machine I have 25ish processes running, I know Vista is different than XP… But 61 is insanely HI.
edit: and with nikuk bitching about OMG VISTA IS SOO BLOATED, he has 101 processes running, Which is 40 more than you have currently. Its kind of hard to say OMG VISTA IS BLOATED, when he is running 101 processes
but it’s only hi because your used to seeing 25…
Yes, there might be more stuff running, i’m not going to argue with you there. But…you are just looking at the running process and saying it’s bad/slow…when in reality it’s just as quick, if not quicker than xp (imo).
$ ps -eaf
UID PID PPID C STIME TTY TIME CMD
0 1 0 0 0:49.17 ?? 0:52.69 /sbin/launchd
0 10 1 0 0:00.86 ?? 0:01.05 /usr/libexec/kextd
0 11 1 0 1:18.44 ?? 2:26.82 /usr/sbin/DirectoryService
0 12 1 0 0:09.55 ?? 0:14.12 /usr/sbin/notifyd
0 13 1 0 1:40.81 ?? 2:40.41 /usr/sbin/syslogd
0 15 1 0 0:04.65 ?? 0:08.48 /usr/sbin/configd
1 19 1 0 0:14.30 ?? 0:32.09 /usr/sbin/distnoted
65 23 1 0 0:01.95 ?? 0:03.07 /usr/sbin/mDNSResponder -lau
0 28 1 0 0:01.74 ?? 0:02.97 /usr/sbin/securityd -i
0 44 1 0 40:01.94 ?? 40:02.73 /usr/sbin/update
0 45 1 0 0:00.01 ?? 0:00.01 /sbin/SystemStarter
501 50 1 0 0:01.58 ?? 0:04.08 /System/Library/CoreServices
0 51 1 0 0:00.15 ?? 0:00.19 /usr/sbin/KernelEventAgent
0 52 1 0 0:56.56 ?? 1:38.09 /usr/sbin/kdcmond -n -a
0 54 1 0 0:00.01 ?? 0:00.01 /usr/libexec/hidd
0 55 1 0 3:53.00 ?? 5:17.96 /System/Library/Frameworks/C
0 57 1 0 0:00.50 ?? 0:00.50 /sbin/dynamic_pager -F /priv
0 59 1 0 0:06.56 ?? 0:15.14 /usr/sbin/diskarbitrationd
0 64 1 0 0:00.08 ?? 0:00.09 autofsd
0 65 1 0 0:18.15 ?? 0:22.50 /usr/libexec/ApplicationFire
0 77 52 0 0:00.04 ?? 0:00.07 /usr/sbin/krb5kdc -n -r LKDC
0 80 1 0 0:19.10 ?? 0:35.84 /System/Library/CoreServices
88 81 1 0 186:08.04 ?? 469:45.31 /System/Library/Frameworks/A
0 102 1 0 46:33.74 ?? 48:40.33 /usr/sbin/SiCoreService
0 103 1 0 0:03.72 ?? 0:04.78 /Library/Application Support
0 109 1 0 0:00.01 ?? 0:00.01 /Library/Application Support
0 111 1 0 0:00.00 ?? 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support
0 114 1 0 0:00.00 ?? 0:00.00 /Library/Application Support
0 118 1 0 0:00.01 ?? 0:00.01 /Library/Application Support
0 120 1 0 0:00.01 ?? 0:00.01 /Library/Application Support
0 130 1 0 0:01.29 ?? 0:02.30 /usr/sbin/coreaudiod
501 133 1 0 0:33.44 ?? 0:37.24 /sbin/launchd
501 137 133 0 0:00.22 ?? 0:00.69 /System/Library/CoreServices
501 141 133 0 0:26.69 ?? 4:21.48 /System/Library/CoreServices
501 142 133 0 0:00.74 ?? 0:01.44 /usr/sbin/UserEventAgent -l
501 145 133 0 64:06.34 ?? 257:00.50 /System/Library/CoreServices
501 146 133 0 0:33.47 ?? 1:10.07 /System/Library/Frameworks/A
501 147 133 0 0:00.00 ?? 0:00.01 /usr/sbin/pboard
501 148 133 0 2:49.39 ?? 5:21.55 /System/Library/CoreServices
501 149 133 0 13:31.49 ?? 31:45.99 /System/Library/CoreServices
501 164 133 0 0:00.25 ?? 0:00.44 /Applications/iTunes.app/Con
-2 166 1 0 0:00.01 ?? 0:00.02 /System/Library/PrivateFrame
501 199 133 0 0:00.02 ?? 0:00.06 /usr/bin/ssh-agent -l
501 895 133 0 0:00.63 ?? 0:01.46 /System/Library/Services/App
501 9353 133 0 0:44.43 ?? 2:31.63 /Library/PreferencePanes/Gro
501 10451 133 0 0:06.77 ?? 0:30.23 /Applications/Utilities/Term
501 11010 133 0 145:45.22 ?? 1125:29.00 /Applications/Firefox.app/Co
0 11175 1 0 48:17.80 ?? 114:05.39 /System/Library/Frameworks/C
501 11599 133 0 0:02.47 ?? 0:08.19 /Applications/iCal.app/Conte
501 11953 145 0 0:02.92 ?? 0:05.65 /System/Library/CoreServices
501 12251 133 0 2:37.57 ?? 29:44.27 /Applications/Adium.app/Cont
501 12937 133 0 2:37.27 ?? 12:28.76 /Applications/iTunes.app/Con
501 13492 133 0 5:05.32 ?? 19:34.12 /Applications/Skype.app/Cont
501 13635 133 0 0:36.08 ?? 1:15.40 /Applications/TextEdit.app/C
501 15184 133 0 2:46.00 ?? 5:41.12 /Applications/MacPAR deLuxe.
501 15185 15184 0 0:00.07 ?? 0:00.22 /Applications/MacPAR deLuxe.
501 15271 133 0 0:01.37 ?? 0:08.11 /Applications/UnRarX.app/Con
501 15464 1 0 0:00.19 ?? 0:00.52 /System/Library/Frameworks/C
0 15486 10451 0 0:00.03 ttys000 0:00.04 login -pf boardjnky4
501 15487 15486 0 0:00.01 ttys000 0:00.02 -bash
0 15496 15487 0 0:00.00 ttys000 0:00.01 ps -eaf
63 processes on the mac, ~280 threads; 2 gigs of ram and only 48MB free
oh and since when is having high cache usage a bad thing? It is the fastest storage in the machine.
oh, and one more thing, this is just so that you can compare a unix based OS to a Vista output. I am not stating that the mac is better. In fact, a lot of the usages are very similar.
edit: one last thing. Just because you have process “running”, does not mean that they are using a significant amount of processor time. You should compare the average cpu time of the processes on the XP machine to that of the Vista machine.
vista is just rubbish, I cant wait to go back to xp.
I look at it from this point of view.
IF xp was = to windows 98
Vista would be = to windows ME
meaning everytime Mr Gates gets it right he has to release an OS that FAILS misserably to remind us how good we have it.
I think we are arguing about something different… Performance and memory usage are different.
I’m saying that memory usage (can’t find the appropriate phase) is X cause omg 101 processes…
You are talking about actual speeds seen
Umm no… ME is based off of 98… and 95…
XP is based off of NT/2000
Vista is a pretty XP with newly re written security and networking
Plainly put your analogy sucks
memory usage is less of a performance factor than people think. Actually, higher memory usage means that there is a better chance that when a process needs some amount of data, that it won’t have to do a HDD Read/Write.
It is more of an issue of memory management. How does the OS determine what should stay in memory, and what should be written back to the HDD when memory is getting low?
Higher memory usage is a good thing. What would be the point of upgrading the Random Access Memory in your box if it won’t be used?
Tom, you are talking to me like I don’t know what I’m talking about. Go lick your dogs ass.
hows the weather? Its gonna be getting chilly here soon 
In a perfect world high mem usage is a good thing. This isn’t a perfect world and you know half the shit thats going to be running is poorly fucking coded, and/or a virus (with your normal everyday dipshit user)
way to hop in line behind the rest of the drones.
Please, do not bother educating yourself before spreading the BS around. There is nothing I would like more than for Windows OSes to be buried.
I know that you know Dan, I was just trying to spread some education to the rest of the people in this thread. Sorry for quoting you hunny.
weather is gooooooood