Windows Seven = Vista II After All

Discussion in 'NZ Computing' started by Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 18, 2010.

  1. <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/most-windows-7-pcs-max-out-memory>

    The low-memory condition of most Windows 7 PCs is even more notable
    considering the amount of RAM in Windows 7 systems: According to XPnet's
    polling, Windows 7 PCs sport an average of 3.3GB of memory, compared to
    1.7GB in the average Windows XP computer. (Machines running Windows
    Vista contain an average of 2.7GB.)

    ...

    "This is alarming," Barth said of Windows 7 machines' resource
    consumption. "For the OS to be pushing the hardware limits this quickly
    is amazing. Windows 7 is not the lean, mean version of Vista that you
    may think it is."
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 18, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Nik Coughlin Guest

    On 18/02/2010 10:57 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/most-windows-7-pcs-max-out-memory>
    >
    > The low-memory condition of most Windows 7 PCs is even more notable
    > considering the amount of RAM in Windows 7 systems: According to XPnet's
    > polling, Windows 7 PCs sport an average of 3.3GB of memory, compared to
    > 1.7GB in the average Windows XP computer. (Machines running Windows
    > Vista contain an average of 2.7GB.)
    >
    > ...
    >
    > "This is alarming," Barth said of Windows 7 machines' resource
    > consumption. "For the OS to be pushing the hardware limits this quickly
    > is amazing. Windows 7 is not the lean, mean version of Vista that you
    > may think it is."


    That's (wilfully?) ignorant on so many levels.
     
    Nik Coughlin, Feb 18, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. In message <hlj2tq$k76$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/most-windows-7-pcs-max-out-memory>
    >
    > Other data that Devil Mountain collates as part of a new metric dubbed
    > "Windows Composite Performance Index" (WCPI) quantifies peak processor
    > workload and I/O performance. Both of those measurements are also
    > higher for Windows 7 systems than for XP machines. While 85 percent of
    > the former are running at peak I/O loads, only 36 percent of the
    > latter do; the numbers for CPU workload are closer, as 44 percent of
    > Windows 7 computers are running a computational backlog that delays
    > processing tasks, compared to 36 percent of the XP systems.


    To be fair, an opposing viewpoint here
    <http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=7389>. But the question remains, if it’s
    just caching, then why the great increase in I/O activity?
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 18, 2010
    #3
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Dave Doe Guest

    In article <hlk9ug$8ep$-september.org>,
    says...
    >
    > On 18/02/2010 10:57 pm, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:
    > > <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/most-windows-7-pcs-max-out-memory>
    > >
    > > The low-memory condition of most Windows 7 PCs is even more notable
    > > considering the amount of RAM in Windows 7 systems: According to XPnet's
    > > polling, Windows 7 PCs sport an average of 3.3GB of memory, compared to
    > > 1.7GB in the average Windows XP computer. (Machines running Windows
    > > Vista contain an average of 2.7GB.)
    > >
    > > ...
    > >
    > > "This is alarming," Barth said of Windows 7 machines' resource
    > > consumption. "For the OS to be pushing the hardware limits this quickly
    > > is amazing. Windows 7 is not the lean, mean version of Vista that you
    > > may think it is."

    >
    > That's (wilfully?) ignorant on so many levels.


    It sure is...

    http://microsoftpdc.com/Sessions/P09-20?type=wmv

    http://blogs.technet.com/markrussinovich/

    But lets not feed the troll anymore :)

    --
    Duncan.
     
    Dave Doe, Feb 19, 2010
    #4
  5. In message <>, peterwn wrote:

    > ... but is [caching] the only factor related to the high memory usage
    > allegations ...


    But the question remains, if it’s just caching, then why the great increase
    in I/O activity? From the original article
    <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/news/most-windows-7-pcs-max-out-memory>:

    Other data that Devil Mountain collates as part of a new metric
    dubbed "Windows Composite Performance Index" (WCPI) quantifies peak
    processor workload and I/O performance. Both of those measurements
    are also higher for Windows 7 systems than for XP machines. While 85
    percent of the former are running at peak I/O loads, only 36 percent
    of the latter do; the numbers for CPU workload are closer, as 44
    percent of Windows 7 computers are running a computational backlog
    that delays processing tasks, compared to 36 percent of the XP
    systems.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 19, 2010
    #5
  6. Seems like a lot of people are in denial over this. The company responds
    here
    <http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9159158/Metrics_vendor_defends_Windows_7_memory_claims>,
    saying its probe measures “peak memory pressureâ€, which is a more realistic
    measure of what users’ PCs are doing than the simple view they get when they
    open Task Manager:

    And it accurately describes the reality of PC use and performance, Barth
    maintained. As a Windows computer runs throughout the day and consumes
    most, if not all, of its available physical memory, pressure builds on
    the Windows virtual memory manager to reshuffle the physical memory deck
    and page portions of certain processes to the hard disk. And swapping to
    the hard drive is a performance hit.

    "Virtual memory activity slows up machines," Barth said.

    So you see, it’s not just about the “caching†as some keep insisting. Mere
    “caching†would not cause increased page-swap activity.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 20, 2010
    #6
  7. Turns out that “Craig Barthâ€, the name of the CTO of Devil Mountain
    Software, is a pseudonym for former InfoWorld writer Randall C Kennedy
    <http://computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf/technology/correction-and-apology-windows-source-lies-about-identity>.

    Some people are already jumping on this an excuse to disbelieve the whole
    report. Remains to be seen...
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 22, 2010
    #7
  8. In message <hlsnup$86c$>, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:

    > Some people are already jumping on this an excuse to disbelieve the whole
    > report.


    Response from Kennedy
    <http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-10532-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=75498&messageID=1468379&tag=content;col1>:

    Craig Barth may be fictitious (though, legally, both names are
    in fact mine to use), but the data never was. I may like to stoke
    the presentation a bit, but I never embellished the facts. We've
    got nearly 24,000 users. We don't need to invent data.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 23, 2010
    #8
  9. More toing and froing here
    <https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=1285849328344730084&postID=6358611235340384392>,
    involving another fictitious name, “DrPizzaâ€, who turns out to be the
    author of this piece
    <http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/02/windows-7-memory-hog-story-takes-turn-towards-the-strange.ars>.
    He says:

    The docs are, as ever, imprecise. The thing that triggers the paging out
    is not growth of committed bytes, it's a drop in available memory.

    So there’s an argument over what exactly the tool should be measuring, that
    leads to increased page faults. Yet as far as I can tell, nothing in the
    discussion has addressed Kennedy’s claim that he _has_ seen increased paging
    behaviour across so many machines.
     
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Feb 23, 2010
    #9
    1. Advertising

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

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Eric Nay

    Microsoft.Public.Windows.Seven ?

    Eric Nay, Jul 6, 2009, in forum: Windows 64bit
    Replies:
    7
    Views:
    451
  2. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Dissatisfaction With Windows Seven Starter

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 11, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    571
    ~misfit~
    Nov 13, 2009
  3. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Windows Seven Price Premium

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Nov 17, 2009, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    2
    Views:
    476
  4. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Windows Seven Insecurities

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Sep 22, 2010, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    9
    Views:
    406
    Lawrence D'Oliveiro
    Sep 29, 2010
  5. Replies:
    5
    Views:
    266
Loading...

Share This Page