> OK, I am less than impressed by Microsoft too, but 10K? Even embedded > versions of DOS take up at least 64K. I do admit 100M is way too big > though. What are they doing with all that RAM?
I've heard you can significantly reduce the memory footprint for XP Pro/Home by disabling services you don't need. Of course Microsoft doesn't make finding information about the default services easy to find. However this guys web site has good info on the default services http://www.blkviper.com/WinXP/servicecfg.htm. He claims you can reduce the memory footprint by 12 to 70 megs. Paul > I know a programming guru who says that the way Windows processes > keystrokes is amazingly inefficient. > He says thay allocate a chunk of memory and copy an event buffer or some > such block of data, appending the new event in the process. And this is > done with each press of the key or mouse click! No wonder the > resources get > fragmented on a Win9X/ME system! > > Just so folks know, recent versions of Linux are hogs too. And > slow! Well, > not the underlying OS, but the window manager on top of the OS. > Yes, that's > right folks, the window manager and the OS are separate and > distinct things > in Linux, not all thrown together and inseparable like Windows. Try > browsing files and directories on KDE desktop on Linux, and compare it to > browsing directories with Windows Explorer. I have a dual-boot SuSE 7.3 / > Win98SE machine at home, and browsing in Linux is MUCH slower > than browsing > in Windows. > > That said, I still (mostly) like Linux, I still (mostly) like > Windows, and I > still think Microsoft is digging their own grave. Their > licensing policies > are acting like better and better shovels, and Linux makes the ground > softer! > > Best regards, > Ivan Baggett > Bagotronix Inc. > website: www.bagotronix.com > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mike Reagan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Protel EDA Forum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2002 5:44 PM > Subject: Re: [PEDA] XP is a dog > > > > You are probably right Brad. Most of the comments were W2000. > I received > > some comments from other engineers that he had no problems with > XP/ Protel > > combo. Anyway, XP has the same delays I see with NT with certain > > commands ie place track there are long delays which I did not see in W98 > > unless my client rcs and ini files got corrupted. I just installed > > some system monitors. Looks like XP eats about 100 meg of memory > without > > anything else running. That's real efficient. I dont code but it > should > > use about 10K. I was using NT for the past 5 out 6 years, until > last > > year when I couldnt bear the installation, network setup, and > the patches > > Microsoft added to make NT more windows/ multimedia compatible any more. > I > > figured why try to make it compatible, why not use the real thing. I > stick > > my conclusion, XP is a dog. > > > > > > Mike Reagan > > EDSI > > > > ************************************************************************ > * Tracking #: 6FC3EB9061CAED47A35393ECA6970857C67D5043 > * > ************************************************************************ > > * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * To leave this list visit: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html * * Contact the list manager: * mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] * * Forum Guidelines Rules: * http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html * * Browse or Search previous postings: * http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
