I typically have 10-15 applications running and if I come close to
using 4GB it's a sign that one of my apps (usually Firefox) has a
memory leak. As I noted earlier, I ran 64-bit Windows at work for a
year and a half and performance was indistinguishable from my 32-bit
system at home, and at work I preferred the 32-bit version of
Photoshop since the 64-bit version took so long to load.

If people experience performance bottlenecks on a PC with 4GB of RAM
and 32-bit Windows when not performing resource-intensive tasks such
as editing video, it's due to unnecessary bloatware, cycle-hogging
utilities such as Bitdefender, software with memory leaks, or malware.

On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:56 AM, Harding, Dan <dhard...@illinois.edu> wrote:
> "I think buying more than 4GB of RAM would be a waste of money for most tech 
> writers."
> I disagree 100%. It's not just the specific application(s) you run, but also 
> how you work, that determines how much RAM is useful.
> If you only ever run a single word-processing application, then yes, more 
> would be a waste. However, if you are a rampant multitasker, as I am, where 
> you have a desktop pub application, word processing, Excel, a half dozen 
> browser windows, etc., running simultaneously, system RAM is essential for 
> responsiveness and to avoid virtual memory swapping.

You are currently subscribed to framers as arch...@mail-archive.com.

Send list messages to framers@lists.frameusers.com.

To unsubscribe send a blank email to
or visit 

Send administrative questions to listad...@frameusers.com. Visit
http://www.frameusers.com/ for more resources and info.

Reply via email to