Ugh … i would give you negative rep right now cause I’m jealous… but I ran out for the day 
performance and memory usage aren’t going to be that much different though…on a machine with 2gb of ram, why should it matter if you have 512mb free or if you have 1.5gb free if they both operate the exact same? while for numbers, yes it might appear that the one with 1.5gb free would be quicker, but in reality it’s not…(btw, would you mind posting up your task manager view, just for comparison - i haven’t used an xp computer since december and dont have one around to compare to here)
and as stated in the above posts (except just karter…but his can’t be taken for shit anyway) why should the number of running processes matter…Your saying the more running processes/more ram used, the worse it is for the computer (trying to ignore performance here 
). But again, as was already said why shouldn’t the computer use the ram for what it was intended for? Personally, i’d rather have 50 processes in the faster ram taking up that extra room where it can be accessed 100x (i know it’s not exact…) quicker than it could if it was in a pagefile on the hard drive. but to each their own.
if the 2 systems run the same, but one offers more features, better security, better error handling, etc (i’m going to say this is for all os’s, not just windows)…i dont see why the processes should matter.
Memory caching, you even eluded to it later in your post.
My bed time was 2 hours ago I’m gonna get yelled at. Also you are taking what I wrote the wrong way, as in not as I intended it to be portrayed as. I’ll explain tomorrow
hey at least vista looks cool.
:io:
did I park my car over here
haha this thread is so fucking lame.
where did I say that Vista was bloated?
I had quite a few programs running when I snapped that.
IIRC - FF 3.0 with a few tabs; aim (older v.); msn msngr; poker; excel; streaming audio; mcafee; I’m sure a ton of small background stuff.
Sorry, I wasn’t trying to post an “OMGLookHowSweetThisRigIs” pic. I just wanted to know what the average user sees.
Vista runs great if you have a machine capable of running it. When you’re cobbling together some POS on a welfare budget with a $20 SATA drive you begged NYSpeed for I can understand why you think it’s slow.
At home I’m running XP on both the laptop and desktop because I know my old POS’s wouldn’t run Vista very well, at least not as well as XP. At work though I’ve got a nice new machine and it runs Vista perfectly. People who think they have to have the latest OS even while refusing to get the latest hardware always make me laugh.
Looks like I’m leading for longest uptime. 
I love the snipping tool
My mom has a brand new dell laptop with vista, it is already bogged down just surfing the internet in explorer.
Dell PCs (stock) fuckin blow though. They are a decent option for entry level users, but otherwise they are for shit. The mobo throughput is ridiculously behind.
I bought a new Dell laptop for th wife to play on / tuning the car. Maxxed out the ram and, yea…
On a fresh vista x64 install (no updates or anything installed yet). Nod32, Comodo Firewall, Alcohol 120%, UltraMon and IE open/running
It’s interesting that vista seems to consume about 30-40% of the systems memory, despite the amount of memory avalible.
I wonder if thats the case on an 8gb rig as well
my 4gb setup consumes about 1.1gb regularly with nothing running other than AIM