<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Windows 7: Smaller Footprint?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/2009/02/07/windows-7-smaller-footprint/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/2009/02/07/windows-7-smaller-footprint/</link>
	<description>Operating systems. Broadband. Issues. Reviews ... tech info you can use.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 18:35:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: free win 7 themes</title>
		<link>http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/2009/02/07/windows-7-smaller-footprint/comment-page-1/#comment-4239</link>
		<dc:creator>free win 7 themes</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 14 Oct 2011 10:24:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/?p=312#comment-4239</guid>
		<description>&lt;strong&gt;win 7 themes...&lt;/strong&gt;

[...]Scot’s Newsletter Blog &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Windows 7: Smaller Footprint?[...]...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong>win 7 themes&#8230;</strong></p>
<p>[...]Scot’s Newsletter Blog &raquo; Blog Archive &raquo; Windows 7: Smaller Footprint?[...]&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Scot</title>
		<link>http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/2009/02/07/windows-7-smaller-footprint/comment-page-1/#comment-1633</link>
		<dc:creator>Scot</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 14:47:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/?p=312#comment-1633</guid>
		<description>Curious, Michael: Have you noticed the same thing? I haven&#039;t given the reason for it much thought. It&#039;s worth doing a little research on -- I&#039;ll talk to some of my contacts at VMware and Parallels.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Curious, Michael: Have you noticed the same thing? I haven&#8217;t given the reason for it much thought. It&#8217;s worth doing a little research on &#8212; I&#8217;ll talk to some of my contacts at VMware and Parallels.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MichaelHorowitz</title>
		<link>http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/2009/02/07/windows-7-smaller-footprint/comment-page-1/#comment-1632</link>
		<dc:creator>MichaelHorowitz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 05:25:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.scotsnewsletter.com/?p=312#comment-1632</guid>
		<description>Scot, 
Why the difference in ram needed for virtual vs. real copies of Windows? In my case, due to both the throw-away nature of VMs and the checkpoint features in the VM software, I turn off system restore and the recycle bin but that wouldn&#039;t explain needing less ram. I don&#039;t think so at least.  
Michael</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Scot,<br />
Why the difference in ram needed for virtual vs. real copies of Windows? In my case, due to both the throw-away nature of VMs and the checkpoint features in the VM software, I turn off system restore and the recycle bin but that wouldn&#8217;t explain needing less ram. I don&#8217;t think so at least.<br />
Michael</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

