Main Area and Open Discussion > General Software Discussion

Is XP really that good?

<< < (2/10) > >>

gorinw13:


well -- I always used alternative software --- in example 10 years ago I was using opera when most of the people were using IE, Netscape, AOL or other popular browsers.... Or I was using Eudora -- not outlook or similar software... later these became popular along with Mozilla programs and other open source software....

I can tell that popular is not always the best.... you can find the best software that you want to use most fits to your habits or usage.....

However when it comes to the operating systems I never think anything alternative to windows --- the main reason being that you can find any software for windows platform that suits your needs... But when you use linux etc. you do not have much possibilities when you want to find a software for a spesific purpose.... There are some software that allows windows software run on linux platform  --- but it does not replicate or run these software as on windows...

so I guess the main obstacle why other OS platforms does not become more popular is that you do not have lots of choices in respect of software.....

Thats what I think...

Darwin:
I'm currently running all of my normal stuff plus Google Chrome and have used only 1 GB RAM.  I'm using Process Explorer and I have been sitting at 1GB.  I've got  8 freaking tabs open plus I'm watching a movie* with VLC on top of all the other RAM sucking things I run normally.  WTF?  Is XP really that good at RAM management?-Rover (November 28, 2008, 12:51 AM)
--- End quote ---

Well... on my aging Centrino notebook (first generatrion, single core, 1.4Ghz) I've upgrade my RAM from 512MB to 1Gb and finally to 2GB and with the current setup, I have rarely seen my total free RAM as reported by Task Manager fall below 1GB free - that's with every Office 2007 app installed (Word, Excel, Access, Outlook and Powerpoint) open with a couple of files open in each AND with Maxthon 2 running with numerous tabs open AND with Corel Paint Shop Pro Photo X2 open... In my experience, XP is pretty good. Vista is better, mind you!

Dormouse:
with the current setup, I have rarely seen my total free RAM as reported by Task Manager fall below 1GB free -Darwin (November 28, 2008, 02:57 PM)
--- End quote ---

I very rarely have that much memory free.
You just don't have enough applications Darwin   ;D

nontroppo:
I like 40hz's phrase: "Good enough" -- XP's memory management works for most scenarios (it was manna from heaven coming from Win9x for those unlucky enough to remember *that* memory train-wreck). Linux is supposedly much better at proactive cache management; XP is, as f0dder mentions, quite conservative. My girlfriend's iBook runs Leopard for weeks on 640MB RAM, watching films etc. without problems. It will of course swap as several apps are open (Microsoft Office is a chief culprit), but stays useable. I notice that OS X is more similar to Linux in that it keeps stuffed cached (inactive rather than free ram is shown), rather than the more conservative flushing of XP. I think I'd rather my meory was stored with stuff I may need than just flushed to make it look good.

Vista follows the cache more stuff path as I understand it, though it certainly doesn't handle low memory system well from my experience.

Darwin:
with the current setup, I have rarely seen my total free RAM as reported by Task Manager fall below 1GB free -Darwin (November 28, 2008, 02:57 PM)
--- End quote ---

I very rarely have that much memory free.
You just don't have enough applications Darwin   ;D
-Dormouse (November 28, 2008, 03:59 PM)
--- End quote ---

I have 335 applications installed  :P

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page