Windows性能监控软件公司Devil Mountain Software发布了一篇简单报告，根据它监控的数十万台电脑上收集的数据，有86%的Windows 7机器使用了90-95%的物理内存，相比之下，Vista是80%，Win XP是40%。如此高的内存使用率显然和Windows Vista和Windows 7引入的SuperFetch技术有关，SuperFetch会预载入用户经常使用的程序数据，以加快启动速度。

It was claimed yesterday that Windows 7 machines are “alarmingly low” on memory, with 86 percent of Windows 7 machines using 90-95 percent of their physical memory. Craig Barth, CTO of Devil Mountain Software, a company developing performance monitoring software, cited data from his company’s XPnet community. Community members use a freely downloadable tool that periodically uploads performance data to the XPnet servers, and it’s this data, from a few tens of thousands of computers, that was used to justify the claim.

Having used Windows 7 in one form or another for more than a year, this struck me as a little surprising. The laptop I use most of the time is no powerhouse—the 1.2GHz Core 2 Duo processor is positively anemic, and the 64GB SSD cramped—but excessive memory usage (with all the consequent performance problems caused by excessive paging) has never been one of them. Sure, the laptop has a full 4GB of RAM, and since I’m using 64-bit Windows, all of that 4GB is available to the OS, but even under heavy usage, memory just hasn’t been a problem.

I installed the XPnet performance monitoring tool and waited for it to upload my data to see what it might be complaining about. The cause of the problem was immediately apparent. It’s no secret that Windows 7, just like Windows Vista before it, includes aggressive disk caching. The SuperFetch technology causes Windows to preload certain data if the OS detects that it is used regularly, even if there is no specific need for it at any given moment.

Though SuperFetch is a little less aggressive in Windows 7, it will still use a substantial amount of memory—but with an important proviso. The OS will only use memory for cache when there is no other demand for that memory. If an application needs lots of memory then Windows will discard cached data to make it available to the application. The rationale for this behavior is simple: memory that is currently not used by anything at all is memory that is wasted. Filling unused system memory with data from the disk just in case that data is useful is much better than leaving the memory unused. Why? Because if that data is needed—and SuperFetch strives to ensure that the data it loads is likely to be needed—having it already in memory means it can be used near-instantly, rather than having to wait tens of milliseconds to load it from disk.

Windows XP, with its “low” memory usage, does nothing like this, thereby “boasting” much higher free memory figures. But as should be obvious, such figures are nothing to boast about. Windows XP just allows a large proportion of system memory to go to waste.

Well that’s pretty awful! Big and red and 100% used! 

So it was little surprise that, upon checking my reported stats on XPnet, I found that I too was in the “alarming” position of having virtually no free memory. A quick glance at Task Manager revealed the truth. Though my “free” memory is indeed negligible, this is because so much is used by cache. The important number is not “free,” but “available.” The “available” memory includes both memory that is free, and memory that can be trivially made available, and this figure is far more representative of the true amount of memory available to applications. The vast majority of cached memory can be freed up near-instantly, since it is used up merely by cached data from disk.

The amount of “free” memory is not the only statistic tracked; the level of pagefile usage is also used, with anything above 5 percent being “bad.” Most Windows systems, even with ample available memory (as I have) will show some degree of pagefile usage, due to the vagaries of some of the ways Windows implements sharing and communication between processes. It’s a harmless artifact that causes no performance issue in practice.

Oh, but in reality it’s not a big deal at all. Phew!
Though this “Available” count is new in Windows 7—Windows Vista’s Task Manager just shows Total, Cached, and Free—this cache behavior is not new. For the company to misunderstand it (which it most certainly has; I doubt the level of free resources on my system has ever dropped to the level the chart shows) more than three years after Vista became available is quite astonishing.

One might almost think that this whole exercise was simply a cynical ploy. Allegations of Microsoft bloatware are, of course, nothing new, and oblique references to the old canard that what Intel gives, Microsoft takes away does nothing to dispel the impression that this is another case of Microsoft bashing.

先说一下市场兑换，按照现在日本全国人均年收入37500美元，按照兑换牌价

我们能算出，日本年均收入是3494625日元(349万~)，折合人民币255806.55(25万5千)，日本卖一个psp的售价是18000和23000（人民币 1317-1683元rmb），对于日本的经济能力，买一个psp是绰绰有余，而对于中国，人均实际收入也才2000左右，可支配收入15781元（公务员和贪污受贿的不算，毕竟额外补贴太多），这样的数字如果买个psp，相当于花了一个月工资，对于实际收入（高薪IT收入也不过3000-8000不等），可能不算什么，但跟国际市场接轨无非是成为中国人的压力

再看廉价版的WIN7，对中国人来说，虚荣可能需要豪华版，而普通人则更喜欢廉价版，满足功能和实用是现在社会多数人的想法，而价格低廉又能减负，何乐而不为呢？对湖发展中国家来说，中国是最大的用户市场，那么我们可以理解为WM7廉价版是为中国而出！那么再回头看看身边什么人再买豪华版吧~

　　早在去年我们就听说微软将会针对不同的市场推出不同版本的Windows Phone版本，而当时还未发布的Windows Phone 7则自然被定为到了高端手机之上，而相对低端以及入门级别的只能手机产品则会采用Windows Mobile 6.5的系统。

Windows Phone 7

　　当时令微软没有想到的是在今年的MWC 201大会上推出了全新的Windows Phone 7之后，获得好评远远地高于预期，因此微软也打算重新的调整他们的产品线结构以使得Windows Phone 7能够发挥他更大的作用。

　　近日在印度召开的一个开发者大会上微软首次提出了推出廉价版Windows Phone 7的计划，当然微软随后补充道由于我们之前已经通过各种途径向大家透露了目前运行Windows Phone 7所需要的硬件配置，在那样的硬件配置下搭载Windows Phone 7操作系统的手机在成本方面自然也不会达到廉价的水平，因此第一批的Windows Phone 7手机将不会有廉价版的出现，但是在第一批机型推出之后微软则会开始进行他们的Windows Phone 7廉价化之路。