Solved Does an OS need more RAM over the years?

Ghot said:

I remember when screens had two colors. Black screen and either orange or green text. :)

Click to expand...

Now when I think about it, I remember those too. Good times!

As the OP, I will mark this thread solved.

Whereas everyone can/will interpret this thread in his own way, my own conclusion is that the OS does load more GB into RAM as it gains bulk over its lifetime.

There were two data points. The first one is an XP that gained so much bulk, and loads so much into RAM that the laptop became unusable.

The second data point is more quantified. A W10 whose RTM version loads 1.1GB into RAM and whose 21H1 version loads 1.5GB into RAM. The significance of this is that the 0.4GB increase is not sufficient to slow down older machines directly, although user apps will have 0.4GB less available to them and can slow down older machines indirectly that way.

There were also related discussions on the accumation of 'crud' on much used machines that have seen a lot of installs and (not quite 100%) uninstalls. The accumulated 'crud' could slow down these much used machines, a clean install could remove the 'crud' and reverse its contribution to the slow down.

I think this is a quite insightful thread, thanks to all who contributed!

Modern operating systems are designed completely differently from old XPired ones, they now preload a lot of data into memory and retain information as it is then quicker to process. the fact that a modern OS has less unused memory than previous ones is by design. unused memory is wasted memory, and even with today's solid state storage it still much faster to access data from a memory preload than it is to load from disk.

A lot of users do not maintain their systems well or often at all, and this will lead to a slight increase in RAM usage in older systems that still load unused or unneeded background applications and utilities The mainstream laptops purchased in White goods stores are one of the worst offenders. use of Autoruns from microsoft will list all the items that load into windows - a few minutes checking these out every month or two can improve the responsiveness of the whole OS

Haydon said:

There were also related discussions on the accumulation of 'crud' on much used machines that have seen a lot of installs and (not quite 100%) uninstalls. The accumulated 'crud' could slow down these much used machines, a clean install could remove the 'crud' and reverse its contribution to the slow down.

Click to expand...

On that related theme, my System One in My Computers below is currently running an an upgrade to W11 of an installed Windows 10 copied from a 2011 Toshiba laptop. That donor machine can trace its upgrade path back through every version of Windows 10 to its original OEM install of Windows 7.

Crud doesn't necessarily accumulate. In my experience each W10 feature update does a reasonable job of resetting errors in the registry. Regular use of Disk Cleanup's 'Windows update clean up' can keep the component store from becoming bloated. OEM bloatware can be (and has been) uninstalled. After ten years, three different OS, and more in-place upgrades than I can count I don't feel it would be running any better with a clean install of W11. It's the regular clean up routine, I think, that has kept the crud in check.

barman58 said:

Modern operating systems are designed completely differently from old XPired ones, they now preload a lot of data into memory and retain information as it is then quicker to process. the fact that a modern OS has less unused memory than previous ones is by design. unused memory is wasted memory, and even with today's solid state storage it still much faster to access data from a memory preload than it is to load from disk.

A lot of users do not maintain their systems well or often at all, and this will lead to a slight increase in RAM usage in older systems that still load unused or unneeded background applications and utilities The mainstream laptops purchased in White goods stores are one of the worst offenders. use of Autoruns from microsoft will list all the items that load into windows - a few minutes checking these out every month or two can improve the responsiveness of the whole OS

Click to expand...

This thread does not compare XP to W11, this thread compares the OS on a specific machine to itself as the OS goes through its life cycle.

The Autoruns is practically part of the bloat of the OS as 99% of machine owners don't even know what they are, let alone do something about it. But even if this 'unreal' bloat is eliminated, then you still have the 'real' bloat of the OS, e.g. W10 21H1 loading 0.4GB more into RAM than W10 RTM. Of course, the 'unreal' bloat makes things worse.

Edit: Autoruns (the utility as such) needs something like the 'Show Less' of the Task Manager, or you won't be able to optimize your machine beyond what you can do with the Task Manager and the Startup Apps control panel, IMHO.

Bree said:

On that related theme, my System One in My Computers below is currently running an an upgrade to W11 of an installed Windows 10 copied from a 2011 Toshiba laptop. That donor machine can trace its upgrade path back through every version of Windows 10 to its original OEM install of Windows 7.

Crud doesn't necessarily accumulate. In my experience each W10 feature update does a reasonable job of resetting errors in the registry. Regular use of Disk Cleanup's 'Windows update clean up' can keep the component store from becoming bloated. OEM bloatware can be (and has been) uninstalled. After ten years, three different OS, and more in-place upgrades than I can count I don't feel it would be running any better with a clean install of W11. It's the regular clean up routine, I think, that has kept the crud in check.

Click to expand...

I think that an OS upgrade removes old crud of the upgraded OS so that the new OS is relatively crud free (initially) I subscribe to install from scratch is crud free (initially)

About crud not accumulating in W10, it may be that MS has become so good that the crud left is not significant anymore. But that related theme was also about the many install/uninstall of user apps over the years. How good is the clean up of those? I remember when you couldn't let Windows uninstall AV apps, you had to go the vendor's website (like Symantec) > download a special utility to uninstall the AV app, and even then I don't think that 'no crud' is left. How much effort would a software vendor spend on the cleanest uninstall of their product? That's lost $ for them. FWIW, it was part of my decision not use 3rd party AV apps anymore, at least not those that require installation.

Haydon said:

...

The Autoruns is practically part of the bloat of the OS as 99% of machine owners don't even know what they are, let alone do something about it. But even if this 'unreal' bloat is eliminated, then you still have the 'real' bloat of the OS, e.g. W10 21H1 loading 0.4GB more into RAM than W10 RTM. Of course, the 'unreal' bloat makes things worse.

Edit: Autoruns (the utility as such) needs something like the 'Show Less' of the Task Manager, or you won't be able to optimize your machine beyond what you can do with the Task Manager and the Startup Apps control panel, IMHO.

Click to expand...

A large proportion of the "stuff" loaded at startup on a windows system has never been displayed in task manager, which is why the separate company Sysinternals developed Autoruns, (and a lot more useful utility software), for use by IT professionals to run their systems more efficiently. Microsoft, in an unusual piece of insight at the time bought sysinternals and gave their staff their own department in Microsoft development. Although it's never officially been a part of Windows installs the sysinternals suite is one of the first things that a lot of pros turn to on client systems for troubleshooting and repair.

Autoruns is a tabbed application and thus selecting a single tab will show what is loaded by the system, additional apps etc and has online links to most to let you decide if it is needed

Haydon said:

FWIW, it was part of my decision not use 3rd party AV apps anymore, at least not those that require installation.

Click to expand...

Yes, completely agree with that. I never use 3rd-party AVs for that reason, only Microsoft's MSE in W7, then Defender in W10/11.

Of course, all of the RAM usage estimates made (including my own comments) seem to have been considered on the presumption that "Windows 10" is/has been one single operating system that has evolved over time because the headline name wasn't changed by Microsoft - Wasn't supposed to be the "Perfect 10"? However, it might be more accurate to consider Windows 10 to be a family of operating systems that has been regularly and fully replaced many times over its lifetime by new named (numbered) versions that can be clearly identified. Every 'feature update' has required a complete reinstall of "Windows 10" either via Windows Update or by manual upgrade using a full system installer. Isn't that what most people would recognise as typical definition of a full OS Upgrade if the headline name hadn't remained the same? It now seems to be that Windows 11 is destined to follow the same model, but with less frequent (annual) feature upgrades which again allows Microsoft to retain the same headline name until such time as it again sees the need to justify an increase the base hardware requirement. Retaining the same headline name, of course, provides a something of comfort blanket for users who might otherwise consider the need for regular periodic full upgrades negatively but it also reduces the cost to Microsoft of maintaining multiple OS versions. So the Windows 11 version available in 2-3 years time isn't very likely to be that which will be installed on/after 5 October 2021, though it will probably carry the same name.

Perhaps, as a long-time Mac User (10 years+) in addition to Windows I have a different perception, i.e. there was only one MacOS X which massaged into one MacOS, but there have been numerous named versions below that headline title released approximately every 2 years; each of which has introduced significant differences and many of which have moved the bar when it comes to both hardware and software requirements, linked in some part to the age (series) of the CPU used. Apple's general policy has been to support the current and previous 3 sub-versions of the OS, with the oldest dropping off the supported list when the next iteration is released and to block new Apple systems form installing earlier OS versions than the one they were originally supplied with. This equates up to a supported hardware life-span of roughly 8-10 years. Of course, I'm leaving out more recent M1+ CPU developments which has broken the compatibility link with all x86-based Systems and OSs; and which followed Apple's other major decision to remove all support for the running of any 32-bit software/processes.

The comparison between Windows and Apple OS is a difficult one due to the fact that Apple control the hardware, (even to the extent that they make a minor modification to standard hardware, patent it and change a licence fee to anyone who wants to market it), whereas Microsoft does not - Windows is designed to work on any hardware that 3rd parties make available to the market, (incidentally this includes Apple hardware at least up to the M1 changes).

Windows 10 was never intended to be the last Windows but I agree it has developed considerably over the last 6 years. The reason for the name change to Windows 11 looks to be to be a commercial one, as there is not much revolutionary change, on the surface at least, between 10 & 11 but will likely appeal to the market. the cosmetic changes will sell, (the Oooo Shiny! reaction will apply )

The "security" changes that are mandatory with Windows 11 are I believe customer driven, by the Windows users who actually pay for the OS - businesses'

It will be interesting to see how Windows 11 "Sells" in the various market sectors

barman58 said:

The comparison between Windows and Apple OS is a difficult one due to the fact that Apple control the hardware, (even to the extent that they make a minor modification to standard hardware, patent it and change a licence fee to anyone who wants to market it), whereas Microsoft does not - Windows is designed to work on any hardware that 3rd parties make available to the market, (incidentally this includes Apple hardware at least up to the M1 changes).

Windows 10 was never intended to be the last Windows but I agree it has developed considerably over the last 6 years. The reason for the name change to Windows 11 looks to be to be a commercial one, as there is not much revolutionary change, on the surface at least, between 10 & 11 but will likely appeal to the market. the cosmetic changes will sell, (the Oooo Shiny! reaction will apply )

The "security" changes that are mandatory with Windows 11 are I believe customer driven, by the Windows users who actually pay for the OS - businesses'

It will be interesting to see how Windows 11 "Sells" in the various market sectors

Click to expand...

Hi there
agreed on that : BUT

AppleOS is based essentialy (like Linux) on a UNIX type OS which right from the start incorporated a lot more multi-threading (of application processes) and also in the case of Linux was also developed as a multi-user (concurrent) system. Windows (at least the domestic editions) are essentially single user systems.

Windows can run very well as a server system -- OK far too expensive for typical users to mess around with it - but if you can test some of the 180 day trials and modify a bit to use as a workstation I think you might be pleasantly surprised at how well it performs.

For me W2K19 server goes at greased lightning speed compared with W10 pro (W11 is IMO a better performer - but this is more intuitive as I don't have any measurements) . I was lucky to get a VL copy from work as part of the training course so good for testing in a VM and running as a "WintoGo" type of thing.

It's perhaps a shame but had IBM and Ms not fallen out years ago the OS/2 system could have been really great -- however that's history.

Cheers
jimbo

I actually used OS/2 and especially OS/2 Warp "in anger" as the base OS for industrial control systems as it was 32-bit protected mode when windows was not - only lasted a year or so until we switched to NT.3.5 (I think), but it was reliable which is the main thing in "real" applications

barman58 said:

A large proportion of the "stuff" loaded at startup on a windows system has never been displayed in task manager, which is why the separate company Sysinternals developed Autoruns, (and a lot more useful utility software), for use by IT professionals to run their systems more efficiently. Microsoft, in an unusual piece of insight at the time bought sysinternals and gave their staff their own department in Microsoft development. Although it's never officially been a part of Windows installs the sysinternals suite is one of the first things that a lot of pros turn to on client systems for troubleshooting and repair.

Autoruns is a tabbed application and thus selecting a single tab will show what is loaded by the system, additional apps etc and has online links to most to let you decide if it is needed

Click to expand...

I just spent a few hours with the utility autoruns.exe because I had to look up on the net the many, many candidates what they exactly are for potentially disabling them. Turns out, I had to disable none beyond what I have disabled via Task Manager and the Startup Apps control panel. True, I do some minimal personalization, disable the never used Cortana and leave the vendor app enabled (to always have access to device specific support info and tolerate the occasional vendor spam) I am delighted that autoruns.exe can be run from a USB stick, so I have added it to my collection of portable utilities, so heartfelt thanks!

Considering the above, though, I would count OS bloat on a machine maintained and optimized with the Task Manager and the Startup Apps control panel (i.e. pertinent utilities that come with the OS) as real OS bloat. If laptops bought from white goods stores and so maintained and optimized exhibit more real OS bloat, then that's what it is, don't buy laptops from white goods stores, then!

(White goods appear to be a common UK term, meaning major appliances, like fridges, kitchen stoves, clothes washers, etc. I had to look that up, LOL)