> -----Original Message----- > From: Ross Bernheim [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 8:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [users] Connection Magazine October 2006: > OpenOffice.org: One Suite Alternative > >> I agree with much of what you write. Still, to the degree > that public > >> perception of OOo as bloated and slow is justified, I think these > >> problems should be addressed in the course of development > work on the > >> programme - small is often beautiful, even if RAM costs are down ! > > There is active development on reducing RAM usage, etc... > > > > -- > > Andrew Pitonyak > > This is most welcome. OOo tries to reach a very broad > audience and while a large number of us have newer machines > with a good bit of memory, I know that there are a large > number of users with more limited amounts of memory. > > The machines that I use on a regular basis have at least a > half a gigabyte of memory. I have not had problems with OOo's > memory use, but I try not to leave too many programs open at > a time and do not use some of the graphics programs that > really eat memory. > > I have a number of friends who use older machines and > particularly laptops with limited memory. Sixty four > megabytes to 128 megabytes is fairly common. > They > will greatly appreciate any reductions in memory and hard disk useage. > > Ross
My experience tells me that 128MB of total RAM (without any other apps open) is reasonable minimum requirement on Windows XP and I think it can not be reduced. IMO, much bigger problem is much higher CPU demands when starting, opening and saving files. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
