Uhhhh, no I don't, because it's extremely easy to fake something like that by opening up three dozen programs, taking a screenshot that claims the system is "idling", whatever that means, but not showing the task manager tab that shows the running processes or their memory usage, just the tab that shows total memory allocation. Nevermind that the fact that this source, such as it is, is actually breathlessly reporting on the performance and resource usage of beta software, and assuming it has something to do with the final product - even if it's not fake, it's still meaningless. Although I'm sure there are plenty of folks out there who won't be too skeptical, insofar as it confirms their worldview - the guys who wrote this pile, for example....
Not a bad response. Your point about not seeing the process manager I'd thought about myself.
However, there's historical context to be considered.
Microsoft has a track record of bloatware. The final product may "only" need 600. 500.
Any way you cut the cake I'm sure we could all say it's a safe assumption to make that Vista will eat alot more than XP currently does. Most average xp installs that I've seen eat up about as much memory as OS10 does, about 250-350MB.(and in both instances those are too much as well, nevermind what's coming out in the near future)