>> OS+applications requires 1 Gb of RAM
>> new OS+same applications requires 2 GB of RAM
>>
>> It's not the point that RAM is cheap the question is why do you need 
>> to double your RAM size in order to get similar results as with your 
>> previous OS?
> 
> Because Vista was designed for new computers?  I guess MS saw it as a 
> waste of money optimising it for older machines.

Getting an OS to work with less than a small star system's worth of RAM 
doesn't requite "optimising", it requires basic design principles.

But then, Vista isn't really an OS, is it? It's an OS plus a huge stack 
of other bits and pieces. I understand that out of the box you get DVD 
authoring, a web server (!!), various online collaboration software, and 
so forth. Not to mention layer upon layer of unecessary eye candy [which 
may or may not be pretty, I don't know].

I think we can safely say that the *real* reason it demands so much 
hardware is to keep the hardware vendors (M$'s real customers) happy.

(They say this is why Windows NT displaced Netware. What sane hardware 
vendor is going to recommend a product that works on cheap hardware?)

-- 
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*

Post a reply to this message