On 3/28/01 10:20 AM, "Gregory Chan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 29/3/01 1:10 AM, Paul Berkowitz wrote:
>
>>> ooops sorry I should have been specific but this happened in 9.1 and not
>>> Classic. maybe everyone could give it a try, choose a folder with abt 150
>>> messages and select all to open all at once... each message took a while to
>>> open and I couldn't do anything else for a while but watch.
>>>
>> Is there something about this you find surprising? If you're in the habit
>> of opening 150 messages at once and you would also like it to be as quick as
>> opening one message at a time like most people, then you probably need 150
>> times as much memory as he default. But simply giving yourself 3 or 4 or 5
>> times might do the trick so you don't notice the difference much. Raise
>> Entourage's memory to 25 or 30 MB if this seriously matters to you. (That's
>> a guess - I haven't tried 150 messages at once myself.) Or experiment, and
>> let us know how much memory is needed to make you happy when you try to open
>> 150. As long as you realize that it won't be quite the same if you then try
>> to open 250 messages at once another time.
>
> yes I do find this surprising, esp when I try the same thing in Green,
> Eudora and Claris Emailer and they all beat Entourage hands down when given
> the same amount of memory to perform this task.
>
> A 70k email message takes about 3 secs to open and 2 secs to close in
> Entourage. And it opens lightning fast in the previous email clients I've
> used like Emailer and Eudora so I've always used this to judge other email
> clients. Shuttling between Outlook Express and Entourage makes this
> difference in speed even more obvious. Similar speed issues with the Search
> function has been discussed as well.
>
> I love Entourage for the slew of features it has. This speed issue rears its
> head once in a while and took this opportunity to ask whether other
> Entourage users were experiencing the same thing and if so whether it would
> be fixed in the upcoming update.
>
You don't have to be a computer expert - just use common sense. Every
application needs a certain amount of memory just to open and run, without
any user-initiated specific task at all. All the applications you mention
will require different amounts of memory to run. Entourage is an incredibly
complex application with all its many PIM and email features and
interconnections in the database. If you "love Entourage for the slew of
features it has", then stop complaining. They all require memory. Just one
of those features, for example, is the "links" features that automatically
links new incoming messages to the contact in your Address Book represented
by the sender of the message. For all I know, opening a message involves
accessing these links.
And it must take a _lot_ more memory to open a message which is part of a
complex Messages file, linked to a complex database file, than it does to
open a simple independent message in one of those other email apps you
mention. Undoubtedly code has to be processed just to extract it from the
Messages file. So there's no reason at all why it shouldn't take a lot more
memory for Entourage to try doing this on 150 messages at once than in an
app that just has to open 150 separate message files. If you don't care
about Entourage's extra features and are bothered by the amount of memory
you have to give it to do something as unlikely as opening 150 messages at
once (not the highest priority, I'm sure, when optimizing Entourage), then
probably you should go back to using one of those other apps.
Otherwise, if you plan on using Entourage as your regular email client, then
you still have a choice:
1) Be like everyone else and don't open more than 10 messages at a time, and
you can keep memory low if you don't have much to spare, or
2) Give Entourage more memory.
This choice seems pretty reasonable to me.
--
Paul Berkowitz
--
To unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To search the archives:
<http://www.mail-archive.com/entourage-talk%40lists.boingo.com/>
