Windows 7 high on system resources

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by Stella, Feb 18, 2010.

  1. Stella macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #1
  2. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
  3. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #3
    windows 7 (2009) needs double the RAM of windows xp (2001), and somebody find it surprising?

    does OSX SL run smoothly on OSX Puma's hardware (256MB RAM)?
     
  4. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #4
    I don't think you understood the OP.
     
  5. maflynn Moderator

    maflynn

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2009
    Location:
    Boston
    #5
    While that situation is not a good one for MS, people in glass houses should not throw stones.

    OSX is anything but svelte. Its conumes huge amounts of ram on its own. Compared with Linux (which can easily run on 512meg) OSX is quite bloated.
     
  6. *LTD* macrumors G4

    *LTD*

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2009
    Location:
    Canada
    #6
    Linux?? It's barely passable as a desktop OS, when it actually works. There isn't even any comparison between Linux and the OS X Experience.
     
  7. flopticalcube macrumors G4

    flopticalcube

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    In the velcro closure of America's Hat
    #7
    I don't see this in my systems. My netbook (Atom N280, 1GB RAM) runs about 70% RAM and 10% CPU most of the time. My iMac (2.4GHz, 4GB) under Windows 7 runs about 50% RAM and 20% CPU when running WoW, Firefox, iTunes. For me Windows 7 has been less of a resource hog than XP.
     
  8. theLimit macrumors 6502a

    theLimit

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2007
    Location:
    up tha holler, acrost tha crick
    #8
    Windows 7 uses RAM much the way OS X does, it will consume all that is available and make excellent use of it. Windows 7 is much more scalable and friendly to various types of hardware than Windows XP.
     
  9. steve2112 macrumors 68040

    steve2112

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2009
    Location:
    East of Lyra, Northwest of Pegasus
    #9
    Oh, fun. More FUD.

    I have installed 7 on four different machines, and I am yet to see this happen. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I haven't seen it. In comparison to XP, it has been using more RAM. On my main gaming machine that had Vista, it dropped the RAM usage in half. Before, it was using almost 2GB at idle. After installing 7, it dropped to around 1GB. I would also like to see if they are using 64 bit across the board. 64 bit systems use more memory, and if they are comparing 32 bit XP to 64 bit Win7, it is a bit unfair.

    I also noticed that in order to join this XPnet, you have to install their software. I suspect they may have a problem with their software and/or reporting metrics. Win7 changed the way memory is managed, and allocates more memory to prefetching/caching. When needed, it will re-allocate that memory to applications. If they are still using XP style metrics to measure memory usage, it will not report correctly.
     
  10. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #10
    its more than passable, for what most people use it for.

    for most people, the downfall of linux is the same as the downfall of OSX, abysmal flash content performance.

    the article Op linked, portrays a windows 7 system that will "ALWAYS" slow down with several hours of usage, which is utterly crap and false.
     
  11. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    #11
    You're joking, right?
     
  12. clevin macrumors G3

    clevin

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2006
    #12
    why asking a question you already know answer to? lets remove that meaningless step and ask whatever real question you have, okay?

    to the op, here is my win7, haven't rebooted for 10 days. system has 2G Ram

    [​IMG]
     
  13. Stella thread starter macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #13
    I posted the story because I thought some would find it interesting - I have no opinions, negative or positive - other than what I originally posted.

    ( btw - I have never been impressed with any version of windows - I have always found the whole windows experience clunky and rather unpleasant. Unfortunately, my work dictates I have to use the crap day in, day out. )
     
  14. kernkraft macrumors 68020

    kernkraft

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    #14
    What makes people in Canada so obsessed with those precious resources?
     
  15. Stella thread starter macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #15
    What on earth are you talking about?
     
  16. xIGmanIx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2008
    #16
    Then why post? I have found that W7 has been a welcomed upgrade to my XP box and have been nothing but pleased. If you don't care, then why post a non-apple related story on a mac website?

     
  17. Stella thread starter macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #17
    I'll repeat -
    *Because Thought it may be of interest to others*

    The forum is "Apple, Industry and Internet Discussion" - I think other OSes certainly fall into the "industry" category.

    P.S
    I'll glad your pleased with your XP Box.
     
  18. kernkraft macrumors 68020

    kernkraft

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2009
    #18
    Seven out of the seventeen comments are from two Canadians. The thread is about Windows being high on system resources. Should I repeat the question or should I state more obvious facts?
     
  19. xIGmanIx macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2008
    #19
    more please with W7 and pleased with the difference between the two

     
  20. Stella thread starter macrumors 604

    Stella

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2003
    Location:
    Canada
    #20
    Dunno. System resources - Canadian interest - maybe you should ask other Canadians! Canada has certainly plenty of natural resources!
     
  21. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #21
    What do you mean by when it actually works?
     
  22. Silvereel macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2010
    #22
    Honestly, right now I am running Firefox, three tabs open, Google Earth downloading new models, downloading a video game and running Windows 7 with all graphical settings on. It says I am consuming 25% RAM and 7% CPU. Then again, this is a gaming system and all...
     
  23. djellison macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Pasadena CA
    #23
    LOL indeed.

    Win 7 works wonderfully on my NC10 Netbook, an i7 workstation, a 2.2 MBP and a 2.4 UBMB.

    I've had less headaches, less 'wtf?', less browser nightmares, a faster, more reliable and more intuitive experience using Win 7 on all of those machines, than OSX on any of them. Win 7, on all those machines, is a much much snappier, responsive platform for office apps, and ignoring the NC10, for content creativity as well, than OSX.
     
  24. MacsRgr8 macrumors 604

    MacsRgr8

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2002
    Location:
    The Netherlands
    #24
    It is so fun to see how many MacRumors' posters love Win 7.

    I am not attacking or defending Windows 7 but with the resources Micro$oft have, I find it so laughable that when they finally get a decent OS working on most modern hardware, MacRumors' posters seem to love to love it.
    I have Windows XP, Vista x64 and Win 7 x64 all running. Is Win 7 x64 so much different (i.e better) to Vista x64 for the average user???
    Nope.
    Sure, the OS has a new desktop pic, a sort of Dock, Gadgets turned off by default, but come on.... please. If you use Word, Internet Exploder, games.... it doesn't feel different to Vista. Either Vista wasn't all that bad, or Win 7 isn't all that much better.
    BTW.. it should be Win 6.1, not 7

    Run dxdiag... and see the *real* version of the OS.
     
  25. roadbloc macrumors G3

    roadbloc

    Joined:
    Aug 24, 2009
    Location:
    UK
    #25
    Have you even used Ubuntu or Fedora Core? Brilliant free Distro's.
    PC-BSD is also rather good.

    If I had a company, I would have all the servers and desktops on Linux (probably Ubuntu), simply because it is free (saving my company money), most distro's do not require much resources (saving me money again on hardware), compatibility with Windows is second to none and they are very stable indeed. Much more stable than Snow Leopard may I add.
     

Share This Page