• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!

If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum

Main Menu

Songbird Media Player

Started by Barbara, 2008.02.03, 12:43:51

Previous topic - Next topic

Saijin_Naib

If that is the case, isn't that a good thing in terms of performance and streamlined usage?

Criguada

Yes, it is. That's the whole point behind DLLs. At least until you find that you have tons of unneeded DLLs loaded in memory because someone (MS) decided you HAD to have the whole IE engine in memory just to use your desktop, even if you use Firefox (or any other browser) to surf the web. That it suddenly turns into a waste: basically you are forced to have to engines in memory but using only one.
Yes, I know... the one that's not used will soon have most of its pages swapped to disk, but that's not the point: it's a waste.
Note: this is not a fault in the way things are written, rather in the way MS forces you to do things the way THEY want instead of the way YOU want.

Saijin_Naib

O_o. I seem to recall seeing "idle RAM is wasted RAM" as an adage somewhere. Also, the above does not really seem to be a problem for me. XP idles at about 150mb of usage, which from my tests puts it under eCS @ idle. I even have paging turned off on XP & I have never run into an issue with free memory, not even while playing Crysis @ max resolution or playing Quake 4 @ max resolution with 512mb+ allocated for just texture memory. As for IE being in memory, it makes sense considering explorer uses many of the features of IE and its like complaining Konquorer is in memory on KDE when you may use firefox. Well, thats how you view/access your computer, so.. makes sense IMO.

Criguada

Saijin,
"idle ram" is really a ridiculous sentence with today's software, and when it comes to XP (true in general with MS OSes) is almost an oxymoron.
I don't really know where your statistics come from, or how do you work with your system, but you won't find XP working or even booting with 150Mb anywhere, at least not where *real* work is done. Yes, it can probably be done as an experiment, but nothing more.
Here at work (XP Professional on every box, thousands of them) my colleagues who maintain workstations are always pressed to add more RAM. My system (1Gb of RAM) _starts_ with about 40% of RAM occupied, and normal work lies between 80 and 90 % of occupied RAM and more than 50% of swap usage (as reported by RainMeter).
To have eCS idle at _more_ than XP I don't really know what you're doing to your operating systems (both).

Regarding IE (and KDE too) in the GUI: that's what I call bloat. But even if you like it, you should be able to remove it. Linux offers a much wider array of choices. Moreover, IE engine is not modular, while the feature set you need for the GUI is vastly inferior to what is needed for a web browser to work.

Bye
Cris

Saijin_Naib

#19
What do you do for real work? And yes, my XP box boots and runs fully loaded with about 26 processes and 150some MB of RAM usage. When I had 2k, it was 19 processes and 90MB. With XP Fundamentals for Legacy PCs, it boots to desktop with 64-80MB of RAM usage. I know how to get performance from Windows, I am a gamer, and have had to use sub-par equipment to game my whole life, thus, I learned to tweak my equipment to get me performance. I get my statistics from the Help-> Product Info (in eCS) and the task manager in Windows XP, or, use a program and get the Help->About dialog which is the same thing as the eCS product info dialog.. I got eCS booting a bit more lean by tweaking my threads, but it still seems to idle with more usage than my XP. Now, without using NVC with eCS, it idles at 192 on the desktop, down from 300+ it used to be.

RobertM

#20
Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.02.09, 16:45:04
What do you do for real work? And yes, my XP box boots and runs fully loaded with about 26 processes and 150some MB of RAM usage. When I had 2k, it was 19 processes and 90MB. With XP Fundamentals for Legacy PCs, it boots to desktop with 64-80MB of RAM usage. I know how to get performance from Windows, I am a gamer, and have had to use sub-par equipment to game my whole life, thus, I learned to tweak my equipment to get me performance. I get my statistics from the Help-> Product Info (in eCS) and the task manager in Windows XP, or, use a program and get the Help->About dialog which is the same thing as the eCS product info dialog.. I got eCS booting a bit more lean by tweaking my threads, but it still seems to idle with more usage than my XP. Now, without using NVC with eCS, it idles at 192 on the desktop, down from 300+ it used to be.


Well, OS/2 is highly threaded - and that's not a problem. OS/2 handles threads differently than Windows, and has a much higher control over thread and process prioritization (also to a much higher degree). OS/2 runs as many threads and processes because it was designed that way, while the NT line was designed to minimize such use because it doesnt handle such as well.

As for CPU utilization, OS/2 should use near no CPU utilization when threads or processes are idle (using TOP, btw, will NOT indicate that, because it indicates how much of the USED CPU utilization is allocated to a specific process - so, for instance, if your CPU is at 1%, the total in the list on TOP will be 100%, with potentially one process showing some or all of that - ie: 100% CPU utilization - which actually translates into 100% of that 1% the CPU is actually using).

Memory utilization is something else entirely - and OS/2 will use a different amount depending on what is available. My WSeB laptop has 320MB total, and on boot has about 200MB available... my HP desktop with 500MB of RAM has 300MB available on boot - both running the same version of WSeB with the same components installed. My Netfinity (with 4GB installed) uses about 400MB on boot (though it does have more running, like the WSeB server components).

Why (does OS/2's memory usage vary so much) you ask? I dunno. Perhaps someone here with more knowledge in that area could answer that... but it does seem to scale it's memory usage up (or down) nicely to the amount of memory available.

-Robert


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|