--- "David W. Fenton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > There are many things that eat up memory. The > > soundfont is loaded into memory. . . . > > Not if you're not using it. >
I'll have to check again, but I believe this isn't the case. Essentially, as long as the soundfont file and the aiolib.dll file are in their correct places, these will be loaded upon running Finale. > > . . . Plug-ins take up > > memory. . . . > > Not when you're not running them, and even then, > only a very small > amount. Again, I'm pretty sure this isn't true. Removing plug-ins from the plug-ins folder decreases the amount of memory Finale takes to run. > > > . . . The application is going to load things into > > memory to speed up access to them. . . . > > If Finale 2006 runs just fine on this James's > system, then I can't > see why Finale 2006 would not. Can anyone with both > 2006 and 2007 > profile memory usage? Perhaps the code to support > linked parts has > vastly bloated Finale. This is an installer issue, right? It's basically checking to see how much memory is reported as installed? I think Finale 2007 includes new latin percussion soundfonts as well as new plug-ins that would take some additional memory. This could have been enough to make them decide to up the requirement. > > > . . . There are a lot of > > graphics being thrown around here, . . . . > > You of all people should know that this is much less > an issue of > system RAM than it is of the graphics card installed > on the machine. Yes, but the actual Finale data that it's keeping track of? > > > . . . .and part of Finale > > 2006 getting much faster at redrawing probably > > included making more use of system RAM. . . . > > Perhaps. But James says Finale 2006 runs just fine > on his system, so > that makes this point completely irrelevant. Not if we're talking about small changes that pushed the requirement up to the next level. After all, you make a requirement for the amount of memory that's going to safely run the software - not the bare minimum to keep it working reliably. We typically see packaging reporte requirements for 128 MB or 256MB... how often do we see a requirement for 206.5MB? It's just normal for companies to express requirements in amounts that match typical configurations. > > > . . . Keep in mind > > that Windows XP is supposed to be given 128MB of > > memory, and so MakeMusic has to require an amount > that > > takes this into consideration. . . . > > The WinXP RAM minimum does not mean that WinXP takes > over 128MBs of > RAM, it is only the basic amount of RAM that is > needed to boot the OS > and run an application or two. Nevertheless, MakeMusic is going to consider the stated OS requirements when it makes its own requirements. > > > . . . Looking at Finale in > > the task manager right now, it's using about 110MB > of > > memory. That doesn't strike me as being extreme. > > Maybe not, but I just loaded up a large file in > Finale 2003 and it's > taking only 23MBs. The same file loaded into the > Finale 2005 demo > takes up 57MBs. If each version of Finale is > doubling the RAM needs, > that would be 120MBs for Finale 2006, and 240MBs for > Finale 2007, but > it would be ridiculous to assume such a doubling > with every version. > > What version of Finale do you show using 110MBs? I'm looking at Finale 2007. But keep in mind that the memory usage is going to depend on how much RAM you have installed. On computers that have more memory, Windows XP will let Finale use a greater portion of it (assuming it's not being used by another app). After working with the program for a while, the amount of RAM used can vary by hundreds of megabytes, depending on the machine. Tyler __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [email protected] http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
