Vista actually does not use all that ram. Vista uses Superfetch so that when you launch programs, it will release the memory it held to the program straightaway. This speeds up program lauching. Vista had superfetch problem which was slowing down vista but it was fixed on april and now with sp1 RC, it has used lesser ram and works faster and increased compatibility. Wait for sp1 because I think its a really good update.
You should only use Superfetch on systems with at least 1.5 GB of RAM or more.
I think 4gb for SuperFetch is perfect. Its sluggish on 2GB…
Guys, really that was a very funny article, well written but funny from the first word to th end.
This explanation of Windows vista usage , even if its accurate its useless to the normal intermediate or on an advanced IT consultant that supports through windows vista and i will explain why .
A personal computer with a vista configuration, if the memory is sucking up the whole universe for the reasons that you say it does is only usable ad comfortable for a secretaries personal pc that is meant to run and execute procedures that are measured in the fingers of one hand. Like Microsoft office applications and STOP!!! nothing more nothing less,so in a pc configuration used by someone specific for specific procedures and applications yes YOU ARE CORRECT THAT VISTA IS THE BEST!!! Cause it will continue to suck up all cache memory showing in the task manager that the pc has only 1byte of free memory 
but the applications that are always used will of course be extremely fast. OK thats good, but i don’t think that e people that came here in your blog and read this article is part of the users i mentioned above…
Good article but not with essence.
Thanks and goodbye .
Have fun ,do good work and the money will come,or not
netlawmaker, he isnt justifying how vista works and all, he is just trying to explain it, so that more people will understand how vista REALLY works… many people has the absurd idea that vista is eating the memory, not keeping it ready, they think its a second game they have running in the background, so yes… its with essence if you get it.
my vista ultimate works fluid(but only because i got a big gamning rig)
so i agree that vista isnt exactly for people like the ones that are just surfing the e to read blogs like this, they should stick to xp or something.
I think that Vista isn’t exactly the problem with your game…I think it’s the game creators…they need to tell vista what not to do while it’s running to prevent SuperFetch from being annoying.
Not only does it make noise, it also drains a laptop’s battery.
It appears to me that this is a debate between quickly available memory and quickly available programs.
Like it has been mentioned many times here, SuperFetch is great for office applications, and it’s certainly appreciated that your trusty Excel loads up in just a few seconds.
However, you must keep in mind that eating up all the memory means you need to unload stuff to fire up something that isn’t cached, such as a game. That’s double the work for the hard drive: putting fetched data into swap, and loading the game into memory.
HEY HAS ANYONE NOTICED THAT ONE IS IN MB THE OTHER IS IN KB And that means he has about 1000 mb compared to 1500 mb
i’m now the hero but still vista is stil using alot but look at the feactures vista up holds and it is going to be the future if you can’t update then you’ll be left behind sry 
hard truth anyway i will admit that vista need more fine tuning and that should of tested it first before releasing it ( they should of payed poeple form off the steet to muck around with it )but hey no one is perfect
“ps i was kidding about the hero stuff and next time please read what you post before posting i will admit i have mayde many stupid lil errors like that on forums myself”
Vista is ALLWAYS accessing my Hard Drive, I have 4GiB of ram, I allways see the hard drive light blink, it never stops. There’s no easy way, (if possible) to set it to passively fill the ram, index the hard drive, etc…, for those of us who hate hard drive noises.
hero… since when does 6MB = 1000MB ?.
by the way we use rendering software that can use 2Gb or more for one rendering task but the core of the program only uses about 100MB. If superfetch has these 2Gb cached with other crap, surely the time it takes to unload in order to perform the rendering task will be longer than in XP where the memory is free?. Would you say that in our case where we use the same software all the time and in the case of the 24/7 gamer who only uses the PC for one game that it would be better to disable superfetch?
It seems to be one of those features that caters for the average receptionist or home user who checks email, writes a letter and browses forums but isnt really going to help people who run memory intensive applications? Or do I have it the wrong way around?
You have gotten it ALL WRONG.
The meaning of figures changed between XP and Vista.
Let’s do some preschool math. The XP screen says you have 2G of memory total, 1.5G available (note, it doesn’t say free as in Vista!), and 1.5G minus few megs disk cache. Would you think those 2 figures add up and still fit in your RAM? Of course NOT! The disk cache is available for immediate allocation. This is a pure read cache, which only needs to be unmapped to free up memory. To sum it up, XP genuinely uses just 0.5G RAM on your machine, with the rest being read cache.
(only a fraction of megabyte to few megabytes are normally used for write cache, and even then the data is usually written as soon as there is free time, and the data then goes from write cache into read cache so it needn’t be reread immediately)
Now, loot at Vista. 2G - 1.3G (cache and genuinely free) means it genuinely uses just about 0.7G RAM. More than XP, but bearably so. And most significantly, the disk cache size is not drastically different from XP.
Next, let’s look at the page file. XP has just over 300 MB, while Vista has way over 1.5G - the data which has been written AFTER on operating system has started. This has taken some time, and even if the transfers were initiated when the system had to do nothing anyway, they mean less responsiveness for a while. By the way, this makes it also obvious that one needs at least 4G RAM to be able to disable the swapfile on Vista and make a crash at least somewhat unlikely.
So besides Vista having grown in memory consumption (0.7G XP vs. 2.3G Vista from your screenshots), you should consider that agressive swap use and caching benefits manufacturers much more than users, because it optimizes the OS for high RAM configurations and faster drives, while conventional wisdom says one should rather optimize for a slower system, which is more likely to desperately need that extra performance.
What the marketing buzz describes by “superfetch” is probably just a change in the caching algorithm, which makes it less remembering already read data and more speculatively prereading, but we have seen traces of that even in XP. I am using such a speculative prereader (preload deamon) on Linux too.
And now for de-confusing my post:
Available memory = disk read cache + free memory. If it weren’t so (that is, disk read cache wouldn’t count as available memory) that would mean you have more than 3G of RAM, which is obviously wrong.
Haha, i didnt know vista uses superfetch. I just thought it was a virus because every day it seems like the ram keeps filling up, although a scan showed no viruses.
Glad you cleared that up.
Now if only we could disable superfetch from loading specific programs.
Free RAM is wasted RAM.
your thing should be more memory in a person while on the computer
do you think ms didn’t test it or something i’m sure all options have been discussed and this is the best implementation.
Why Does Vista Use All My Memory? Because it does use more its called bloat and bad coding! I see alot of these games run out of memory and crash. Did they do this in XP simple answer is no! Why? Because XP used less memory. When will people stop being sheep and get brains? Maybe never if they believe stuffing 3gb in vista is a cure all sorry its not. All 32bit system be it xp or vista have a 2gb user cap! No its ok dont listen to me keep getting drunk off of the fud kool-aid. Want proof? Put in 3gb play a newer game when you hit 2gb crash!!! hahah. Now install XP with 2gb wow the games plays with no crashing it gets no where near the 2gb limit.
There are plenty of reviews online about the 2gb limit with actual proof. Its easy to tell this sap was paid by microsoft or is a complete moron!
There is nothing special about vista’s memory management its called garbage.