- Joined
- 24 Jan 2002
- Messages
- 12,389
those of you that have 512 mbs of memory or more can try something which goes contrary to old dos ideas concerning efficient computing
now, mind you, I say try, and what I will suggest is not for every program and every user.
for instance, gamers would probably not get any benefit out of my suggestion.
here it is;
xp's multi tasking ability is a friggin marvel...if you don't take advantage of it, you are cutting yourself short...this tool is huge
if you have enough memory, and your memory is not under any pressure, you might get a gain in your computing over all if you leave the programs that you are bound to launch and return to open, instead of launching them every time you need them.
a perfect example here would be Microsoft's "word", which takes forever to launch...email takes some time also...whatever.
I go to word at least 20 times every day...beleive me, leaving word running even when I'm not using it gives me an untold gain in computing then launching it every half hour or so...same thing with my spreadsheets.
now, on my box, this gain is at no price...there is no performance degradation leaving word open whatsoever, and quite a speed boost when I return to the program
besides my security programs, I also leave mozilla open, i.e., fox mail, excel, clip track, my download utility, cookie wall, and whatever else I think I'll be going back to...for the most part, once I launch a program it'll stay launched till I notice a performance hit doing it.
beleice me, there is no measurable "system" slow down on this tiny laptop using this practice at all, and side by side against anyones desktop in this office, programs do not run faster on desktops running only one program at a time then they do on this little bitty thing running a bunch...god I love xp.
on the other hand, there is a huge "computing" speed up over all over those desktops, as I never have to wait for the programs to load.
you obviously need to experiment, and see if leaving any particular program open is giving you a noticeable hit...if it is, that program should not be left open when you're done, but closed...games would be good examples, and programs that are in constant use of your CPU.
give it a shot...keep the programs launched you use often if they can sit idle when they are not in use.
now, I've taken heat from people who think the very philosophy is flawed...it's not flawed, since you need to decide on your own box...but I'll tell you on every computer in my office however, these users that now do not close their programs down are much more productive and less frustrated in their computing activity then when they used to go with that obsolete advice of closing everything down when you're done
experiment...this might be good for some of you...it will be bad for others, so just don't assume it's a good idea without trying...but try for sure
now, mind you, I say try, and what I will suggest is not for every program and every user.
for instance, gamers would probably not get any benefit out of my suggestion.
here it is;
xp's multi tasking ability is a friggin marvel...if you don't take advantage of it, you are cutting yourself short...this tool is huge
if you have enough memory, and your memory is not under any pressure, you might get a gain in your computing over all if you leave the programs that you are bound to launch and return to open, instead of launching them every time you need them.
a perfect example here would be Microsoft's "word", which takes forever to launch...email takes some time also...whatever.
I go to word at least 20 times every day...beleive me, leaving word running even when I'm not using it gives me an untold gain in computing then launching it every half hour or so...same thing with my spreadsheets.
now, on my box, this gain is at no price...there is no performance degradation leaving word open whatsoever, and quite a speed boost when I return to the program
besides my security programs, I also leave mozilla open, i.e., fox mail, excel, clip track, my download utility, cookie wall, and whatever else I think I'll be going back to...for the most part, once I launch a program it'll stay launched till I notice a performance hit doing it.
beleice me, there is no measurable "system" slow down on this tiny laptop using this practice at all, and side by side against anyones desktop in this office, programs do not run faster on desktops running only one program at a time then they do on this little bitty thing running a bunch...god I love xp.
on the other hand, there is a huge "computing" speed up over all over those desktops, as I never have to wait for the programs to load.
you obviously need to experiment, and see if leaving any particular program open is giving you a noticeable hit...if it is, that program should not be left open when you're done, but closed...games would be good examples, and programs that are in constant use of your CPU.
give it a shot...keep the programs launched you use often if they can sit idle when they are not in use.
now, I've taken heat from people who think the very philosophy is flawed...it's not flawed, since you need to decide on your own box...but I'll tell you on every computer in my office however, these users that now do not close their programs down are much more productive and less frustrated in their computing activity then when they used to go with that obsolete advice of closing everything down when you're done
experiment...this might be good for some of you...it will be bad for others, so just don't assume it's a good idea without trying...but try for sure
