Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] KDE Consumes Less RAM Than GNOME?

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 wrote
on Sat, 16 Sep 2006 01:18:14 +0100
<1967545.iKDUymcoRC@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> __/ [ The Ghost In The Machine ] on Friday 15 September 2006 03:00 \__
>
>> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, flatfish+++
>> <flatfish@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>  wrote
>> on Thu, 14 Sep 2006 19:24:27 -0400
>> <jwlOg.352$T76.329@xxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>> On Wed, 13 Sep 2006 18:09:15 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>>
>>>> Desktop memory usage
>>> Who cares?
>> 
>> Indeed; memory is cheap.  This is why everyone should go out right now
>> and buy a copy of Windows Vista Beta 2 -- or Windows XP in lieu thereof
>> -- plus sufficient RAM to make it run smoothly on their system.
>> 
>> The boost to the economy will be considerable.  (As will the boost in
>> bandwidth, for various reasons.)
>
> I love a good satire.
>

Oops.  </sarcasm>

:-)

Of course, I do wonder how much bang for the buck -- or, more
specifically, operations per joule -- one can accomplish.

Desktop RAM, after all, is dynamic, and each cell -- a
tiny charge packet (capacitor) atop a FET gate -- means
a tiny current pulse and a tiny expenditure of energy,
but they do add up.

Seems to me XP likes to page a lot; head movements and
I/O transfers add up, too.

-- 
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Windows Vista.  Because it's time to refresh your hardware.  Trust us.

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index