Quote Originally Posted by Sly Fox View Post
How you do you figure this?

Vista wasn't that much obscenely slower than XP considering the time gap. And 7 is actually faster than Vista by most accounts.

The Mac OS X updates also don't seem to have any major impact on performance from an update-to-update basis.
its just some mean math to say that windows use to work fine on 32MBs of ram just a decade ago, and now need 2GBs. from Win98 to XP was a big jump (around 100MB to 512-1GB) and from XP to Vista the cpu really needed to be upgraded or its a slideshow without all the visuals turned off.

no OS past Win7 should really need to take up more resources, i cant see what they could possibly need with all that space and power. but in another decade we will laugh at anyone who cant use Win9/10 on less than 10GB and GPU acceleration.

dont read too much into this, the point was that no matter how good the hardware gets, the OS seems to be able to abuse it happily.