Windows 8 Even More Resource Efficient Than Windows 7
Your old PC that came with Windows Vista will still run Windows 8 quite well. In fact, all you need is an old Intel Atom netbook with 1GB of RAM.
Usually a new version of Windows demands higher system requirements than the one before it. This wasn't the case with Windows 7, and it looks like it also won't be the case for Windows 8.
Microsoft yesterday demonstrated on stage at the Build event Windows 8 running on a three-year-old Lenovo S10 netbook, which packed an early model of the Intel Atom CPU and 1GB of RAM. Not only did it run Windows 8, but it ran it better than it could Windows 7.
The latest version of Windows 7 was demonstrated running with about 404 MB of RAM used for 32 processes. Windows 8 in its current, unfinished state is doing the same with about 281 MB and 29 processes.

This is not only good news for those who are still running on computers that are several years old, but it's also for those seeking a performance boost from the greater efficiency. Hopefully this will also translate into better power consumption numbers for notebook users.
Ubuntu is getting bloated and slower with Unity.
WTF just happened, it's like some sort of bizarro world.
Are you seriously moaning that the new OS from microsoft is TOO efficient.
Some people will find something wrong with everything.
gg
Maybe so, but if it is actually true, it'll be nice. Win7 is already resource-friendly and Win8 is promised to be even better. Let's see if it will be done.
gg
Been there, done that, all the way back to NT5/W2K and every version since then.
Are you seriously moaning that the new OS from microsoft is TOO efficient.
Some people will find something wrong with everything.
Ubuntu is getting bloated and slower with Unity.
WTF just happened, it's like some sort of bizarro world.
Ubuntu is getting bloated and slower with Unity.
WTF just happened, it's like some sort of bizarro world.
I like it. And Unity can be switched off
It's logical... no matter how much people flame MS, I'm sure they have enough sane people there to make a good OS (Win7 is, after all, a great one!). I just hope they don't pull a Vista on us, when they released a beta of Win7 as a full OS.
I doubt we'll see a PC sales revival until there's new software that both requires heavy system performance and enables the consumer to do something they absolutely can't live without.
This is in no way a bad thing though.
More PC gaming is all it takes. I hope that hardware companies will eventually realize that they'll make moar profit if they shift half of console n00bs to PC.
Toshiba Sat A300-177
230Gb hard drive
2Gb ram
9.08Gb - Initial used space
63 - running services
528Mb - In use
Not bad considering a bran new HP 6460b/HP 5330m/HP 8640p will ship with OVER 100 processes straight out of the box! I'd expect a tablet to kick the above 63 to near the 70 mark but of course this is the DEVELOPER PREVIEW SO ANYTHING CAN CHANGE! It's amazing how people can't seem to understand that.
Fewer resources as in memory use can also appear that way due to tweaking superfetch ("Oh no my laptop is using 2.7Gb ram and I'm worried but then again I have no idea what superfetch is" brigade would scream if they left it how it was)
P.s. In this day and age 4Gb is VERY cheap while 8Gb is hardly going to break the bank
Increasing resource consumption by the OS is what has driven Moore's law... I dont want to see P4s in 10 years from now.
Win 7 will work without WDDM but you lose all the gloss like Aero, which is non essential, Windows 8 leverages the GPU in Metro to the extent of WDDM class DX9 GPU!
So don't get your hopes up for reviving that 5yr old Laptop if its running a crappy Intel GPU!
What are you smoking and where can I get some? People care about the programs that run on TOP of the OS, not the OS itself. Especially people that are concerned about speed. The less resources the OS uses the more I can utilize for whatever I actually want to ACCOMPLISH ie gaming, folding proteins, database queries, whatever.