David Nebenzahl wrote:
On 3/7/2010 8:43 PM Tony Hwang spake thus:

David Nebenzahl wrote:

On 3/7/2010 2:20 PM Oren spake thus:

On Sun, 7 Mar 2010 14:05:07 -0800 (PST), JIMMIE
wrote:

On Mar 7, 4:52 pm, "Steve B" wrote:

I switched from IE7 to 8 recently. Computer was slow. Bumped
up RAM to 2 GB, and hooey, what a difference. You might look
at yours and consider this inexpensive easy fix.

How much RAM did you have to start with?

What version of 'Winders'?

Yesterday I finally moved to Firefox, from IE6 :-/

Ya know, I really like Firefox, certainly over Internet
Exploiter/Exploder. Except for one thing: it's slower than dog**** on a
lot of things. Much slower than it should be.

I know why this is: because of the nature of distributed, open-source
software development, where lots of volunteer programmers each write a
little module here and a little module there, there's little or no
overall optimization like you'd have if it were a regular commercial
product. That's because you have module A which calls module B which
calls module C ... which calls module Z, and this happens many many
times per second. In a commercial product, a lot of these chains of
calls would be linearized so they'd execute faster.

So it's a tradeoff. I'd really love to someday see *fast* versions of
both Firefox and Thunderbird, but I'm not holding my breath.

Hmmm,
I use SeaMonkey configured to my own liking on a Vista Pro 64 bit with
8GB memory. Works just fine.

So? With that much memory I could get any browser to work well. Says
nothing.


Hi,
I do many other things. DAW, Photo/web editing, programming, etc.
Box is Xeon Quad cpu based. I cound use more memory. But when I need them
I/ll add more.