It is currently Tue Oct 17, 2017 6:01 am

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Memory usage...
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:56 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:46 am
Posts: 9
Hi, nice app :)

Checking Task Manager, 12 MB seems like a lot of memory to use for such a seemingly simple program. Is there a reason it takes this much? A third of that would be nicer.

Cheers!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Memory Usage
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 10:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 2:36 pm
Posts: 3
I am running version 3.3.1.617 and it has a memory usage of only 3,000K on my Vista 32-bit.

_________________
- Flemming -


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 12:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:46 am
Posts: 9
3.3.1.617 - same here (XP SP2). Mem usage is 14 MB at the moment, just after startup:

Image

:?:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:06 pm 
Offline
Developer
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 12:44 pm
Posts: 554
Location: Saint Petersburg
avoidz wrote:
Checking Task Manager, 12 MB seems like a lot of memory to use for such a seemingly simple program. Is there a reason it takes this much?

First of all, thank you for the request!

Next, I'm not sure that 12 MB is "a lot of memory usage", because today's standard is about 1 GB memory "on board", so 12 MBs is about 1% of RAM space.

The program looks simple (because we try to make it as simple as possible), but it has a lot of things "under the hood", just look to the functionality list - http://safelyremove/fullFeaturesList.htm.

Aeries wrote:
I am running version 3.3.1.617 and it has a memory usage of only 3,000K on my Vista 32-bit.

Windows Vista has better memory optimizer than Windows XP. Probably it doesn't count memory used by standard dlls that are used in program.


Last edited by Igor on Wed Feb 20, 2008 2:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Feb 19, 2008 2:05 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:46 am
Posts: 9
Thanks for the info, Igor :) Really nice program, too.

Yes, I suppose these days 12-14 MB isn't a lot of memory (I have 1.5 GB of RAM at the moment, so with XP there's plenty to spare).

Vista must "manage" memory by limiting application resources and hogging all the remaining memory for itself :P


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Memory useage
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 6:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2008 1:48 am
Posts: 49
Location: Toronto
avoidz wrote:
3.3.1.617 - same here (XP SP2). Mem usage is 14 MB at the moment, just after startup:

Image

:?:


USB safely remove is using 11.7 MB, but as mentioned, that's nothing compared to what some other programs use and with 1 GB of memory on board, there's lots to spare.

avoids, I noticed that Firefox is using over 51 MB of memory, which is worse than what USB Safely remove uses. That is caused by memory leaks which is what FF is notorious for.
Totally off topic, I know.
I would like to suggest that you download and install a little Utility called Firefox Ultimate Optimizer which will reduce the amount of memory FF uses and improve it's performance.

Download it from here:

Code:
http://firefox-ultimate-optimizer.en.softonic.com/


Extract into an empty folder and run the Utility. It will install an icon on your Taskbar, where you can right click and configure it.

Notice the Difference? Click on the Image for a better view.

Image

_________________
If you think Experts are expensive, wait 'til you see how much Amateurs will cost you!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Feb 24, 2008 10:43 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Feb 18, 2008 3:46 am
Posts: 9
@Midnight - Yeah, 51 MB for Firefox is low (at the moment it's about 60 MB; and goes as high as 101 MB. I wish Mozilla would do something about that :?

Wouldn't a Firefox optimizer just drastically lower the cache usage? I don't have a lightning quick broadband, so page caching is quite useful.

Cheers :)

EDIT: Well from what I've read - http://www.ghacks.net/2008/01/12/firefox-ultimate-optimizer/ - the Firefox Ultimate Optimizer is just snake oil. It just moves RAM usage into Virtual Memory and eats CPU cycles. Given the choice, I'd stick with physical RAM being used by Firefox.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 7 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Crystal Rich Ltd © 2014 Powered by phpBB ©