Behind the Windows 7 memory usage scaremongering

And now if they could explain the random cursor and keyboard lags in Win 7 even on capable hardware and fresh installs.

 

If the guy had no understanding of how Windows memory use worked in Vista/7, why the heck would he publish something like that publicly as a company CTO? He just made a fool out of himself, and, sadly, some of the public will likely believe his claim (although I'd love to see a general user try to wrap their head around why Windows and all their programs are still running smooth if they truly do only have a few megabytes of memory that is free).

Whitedragon, crossing my fingers but I've yet to have that issue on my system.

 

That's because of large system cache size. Use CacheSet to set the cache to a lower value.

http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/sysinternals/bb897561.aspx

 

How do you know? And what do I set it to? My system is more than minimum requirements for Win 7. Ive got an Asus M50SV-A1 laptop. Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 2.5Ghz CPU with 6Mb L2 cache, 250Gb Seagate Momentus 5400.6RPM HD, 3Gbs RAM, NVIDIA 9500GS 512Mb GDDR2 GPU and a 1440x900 default resolution.

 

Well in your case it seems to be an issue with your laptop.

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=252283



About superfetch and cacheset.... My system is also more than minimum requirements for Win 7, I barely restart it and after a while it becomes slow due to superfetch loading data to ram while task manager shows plenty of ram is available. Clearing cache with cacheset makes the system responsive immediately.

 

Not really sure how an issue with Vista is related to a Windows 7 install as the primary and only OS.

 

The company making the claims seems to have provided a more thorough explanation this time around.

If it's true, and microsoft can't provide an explanation, hopefully a service pack update or so on will see improvements.

 

.
It's an interesting issue and hopefully Microsoft will comment. I'm running Windows 7 on three computers though, and I don't have any performance problems. For me it runs faster then Vista on the same hardware.

 

http://www.osnews.com/story/22896/Windows_7_Memory_Usage_FUD_Explained

 

I don't have Windows 7 yet, but when I tested it, memory was definitely lower than Vista (as I'm writing with Chrome my memory usage is 700 MB with Vista32, with Windows 7 was never more than 500 MB, XP Home 200MB, XP Pro 300 MB).

 

And with that, everything he ever did and said beneficial to readers is now irreversibly overshadowed by his decision to deceive. I would honestly like to know how many people not only bought into this claim of his, but also used it to further anti-MS ranting. You just know someone out there somewhere saw this claim, saw that it was from a "professional" person/website, and went "What?! This piece of crap is going off my machine now!" once they opened up Task Manager and "confirmed" it. You KNOW someone did it.

Anyway, good riddance to him, and, if you haven't figured it out yet, you can't believe everything you read, even from "trusted" sources.

 

Good ol internet, where anyone can be a 'keyboard warrior'.

20 years ago, people would meet face to face to get a story. Get the cold hard facts.

As we, us, rely on instant news, this is the kind of 'junk' we're now served. Who knows how many other articles out there are made up with quotes from unknown identities as journalists rely on email and phone as their main source of getting a story.

I used to only do face to face for interviews, confirm later on over phone! The news today $%^&!