I have always been amazed at how much memory XP needed to amuse one user. I can amuse sixty users in 4 gB RAM. “7″ needs that for one user… Wow! For a lean, mean OS, “7″ is a resource hog. I guess the 600 million XP PCs out there will not be migrating to “7″. They could switch to GNU/Linux instead of staying with obsolete XP.
Seriously. My people are running XP in 256MB with a serious over-commit to virtual memory. I can run 12 users at once and services in 1024 MB with GNU/Linux. That would explain a lot of the speed difference. My terminal server is not swapping.
Update: SJVN opines that “7″ is not a resource hog, but he does say, “Now, that’s not to say that Windows 7 doesn’t require a lot of memory real estate. It does. I recommend a minimum of 2GBs of RAM for 32-bit Windows 7 and 4GBs for 64-bit Windows 7. For choice, I like to give either version at least 6GBs.”
Ah,,, resource hogs are not resource hogs when you give them enough slop…