Simple working RAM manager

  • Thread starter Thread starter Morgan Ohlson
  • Start date Start date
M

Morgan Ohlson

Simple working RAM manager for Win98

Basicly I think a small prg that allows freeing ram at command is what I
need.

In normal use it may use the OS original application... Hmmm, I think.


Morgan O.
 
Simple working RAM manager for Win98

Basicly I think a small prg that allows freeing ram at command is what I
need.

In normal use it may use the OS original application... Hmmm, I think.
Click to expand...
=========================================================================
BySoft FreeRAM 4.0 is freeware memory manager program that defragments
and reclaims memory from the operating system and leaking applications
and dlls. This decreases load time and boosts application performance.

Features:
- Easy to use
- Optimize memory manually or automatically
- Flushes unused libraries to disk
- Increases efficiency of your CPU
- Easily free specified amount of memory with shortcut
- Easily free predefined amount of memory (5%, 10%, ..., 80%)
- See real time chart of available memory and CPU usage
- Automatically or manually tunes system file cache
- Skin support
- Uses system tray
- Freeware!

http://www.downloadspin.com/System-Utilities/System-Maintenance/BySoft/BySoft-FreeRAM_2.htm

=========================================================================
Memory Optimizer is a small utility with one concept in mind. To free
physical memory in order to speed up you computer so that it may be run
at an optimal level.

http://www.brentleimsoftware.com/mopt/mopt.html

=========================================================================
RAM Def montiors and defragments your system's RAM, and excels in the
following fields:

Reliability: Like its predecessors, RAM Def XT remains extremely
reliable under any operating conditions. It has been tested on various
systems and proved 100% full-proof even on the most exotic
configurations.

Functionality: It now offers live display of available RAM in the system
tray, either in digits or as a bar graph, cleaner code and low resoruce
consumption.

Speed: The defragmentation algorithm has been massively improved, and
while remaining one of the most reliable available, it performs a lot
faster than previous versions. Great differences can be experienced if
using Windows XP, where older RAM Def versions performed slowly... If
using Windows 9x you will also benefit a significant speed bonus from
the intelligent defrag routines.

Add to this the full support offered by our company, with a complete
documentation, tips, support forum, support request form and email
support, and you will have the description of RAM Def XTreme.

http://www.majorgeeks.com/download2195.html

========================================================================
Optimize your memory (ram) using this lean program. Avoid application
crashes due to low memory. This program monitors your memory, and frees
up ram if it falls below a certain minimum. It consumes little memory
(the lowest when compared to other such programs available on the net).
You can configure it to free memory automatically or manually.

Note: WinXP has a very state-of-the-art memory management, and you won't
notice any performance improvement when using memory optimizers.
All such optimizers/boosters available on the market - both
freeware and trialware - are useless for XP and others to follow.
Such programs are recommended for 95/98/ME only.

http://www.acelogix.com/freeware.html

=======================================================================
 
Simple working RAM manager for Win98

Basicly I think a small prg that allows freeing ram at command is what I
need.

In normal use it may use the OS original application... Hmmm, I think.
Click to expand...
Memory-Trax III (MEM-Trax III) is a small program that reclaims memory
that Windows neglects to release (the famous Windows memory leak!). By
reclaiming your memory, you will find that your system crashes less and
most other programs will run more smoothly.

Memory-Trax offers visual indicators of your memory information and
allows you quick access to change settings. You can have your memory
reclaimed automatically when your memory reaches a predefined alarm
level that you select. You also have the opportunity to select how much
memory that should be reclaimed. Or you can choose to reclaim the memory
when you wish to and not use the automation portion of the program.

Hobbiest programmers: You may find that this program will come in handy
when you crash a project that you are working on. Many times, when your
project crashes, the memory that it had claimed, was not released. A few
more crashes, and you are on your way to a system crash due to lack of
memory available.

http://www.majorgeeks.com/download348.html
 
Morgan said:
Basicly I think a small prg that allows freeing ram at command is
what I need.
Click to expand...

It is not what you need. Windows memory allocation is dynamic by nature. So
called memory optimizers are screwing with these dynamics, achieving nothing
but a pretty "free memory"-figure and reduced performance.

Read Walds link if you have the time. If not, just take my word for it:
Memory optimizers are bad for you.

Now, what you _really_ need is probably something like more RAM. Or a system
cleanup, to kick out a lot of crap you don't need.
 
Now, what you _really_ need is probably something like more RAM. Or a
system
cleanup, to kick out a lot of crap you don't need.
Click to expand...

.....and for that there's always CrapCleaner which has been taking care of
these tasks on my computer for quite a while. Will give you much more of
an performance boot than any of so called memory optimizers and/or
cleaners will be able to.

www.ccleaner.com
 
Morgan said:
Simple working RAM manager for Win98

Basicly I think a small prg that allows freeing ram at command is what I
need.
Click to expand...
Try cacheman (http://www.outertech.com). I find this program invaluable.
It's freeware/contributionware i.e. if you have the $ then you can register it.
Regardless, it is not crippleware. HTH, He2
*************************************************************
* Remove "-XXX" and "pi." before replying by email. *
*************************************************************
 
It is not what you need. Windows memory allocation is dynamic by nature. So
called memory optimizers are screwing with these dynamics, achieving nothing
but a pretty "free memory"-figure and reduced performance.

Read Walds link if you have the time. If not, just take my word for it:
Memory optimizers are bad for you.

Now, what you _really_ need is probably something like more RAM. Or a system
cleanup, to kick out a lot of crap you don't need.
Click to expand...
That's right! Spend $$$ just to avoid having to put up with the crappy
OS that has been foisted on us just to extract more $$$ from your
wallets.

Use Linux.
 
David said:
That's right! Spend $$$ just to avoid having to put up with the crappy
OS that has been foisted on us just to extract more $$$ from your
wallets.

Use Linux.
Click to expand...

If the problem is memory shortage under Win98 I do not believe Linux to be
the solution. The minimum requirements for a working desktop solution with
Win98/IE6 is lower than, say, Linux, X, any WM and
Opera/Firefox/Mozilla/Konqueror/whatever.

That being said, old boxes can still serve a purpose with an open source
*nix on it. But desktop usage is not one of them, unless you also have a
terminal server in the house.

Also, Windows 98 is ancient by all standards, and is no longer supported by
MS. Any new security threats show up, and you're on your own. A more modern
OS (and thus probably a hardware upgrade) is preferred.
 
That's right! Spend $$$ just to avoid having to put up with the crappy
OS that has been foisted on us just to extract more $$$ from your
wallets.

Use Linux.
Click to expand...
ROFLMAO. Linux: free if your time isn't worth anything.
 
If the problem is memory shortage under Win98 I do not believe Linux to be
the solution. The minimum requirements for a working desktop solution with
Win98/IE6 is lower than, say, Linux, X, any WM and
Opera/Firefox/Mozilla/Konqueror/whatever.
Click to expand...
I disagree with respect to Linux. Yes X requires some resources but
you can use one of the less resource hungry window managers. The point
I was making however is that clever marketing has foisted a second
class operating system on the world. The only way you can protest
about this is to not use it.
That being said, old boxes can still serve a purpose with an open source
*nix on it. But desktop usage is not one of them, unless you also have a
terminal server in the house.

Also, Windows 98 is ancient by all standards, and is no longer supported by
MS. Any new security threats show up, and you're on your own. A more modern
OS (and thus probably a hardware upgrade) is preferred.
Click to expand...
As I said! Upgrade your OS to Linux and you do not need to upgrade
your hardware. Unless you play games you do not need M$ bloated OS and
you do not need to pay exorbitant prices for software to do that which
you desire.
 
I disagree with respect to Linux. Yes X requires some resources but
you can use one of the less resource hungry window managers.
Click to expand...

I did say /any/ WM, didn't I? Believe me, I tried different systems on old
computers. Win98/IE6 works (technically speaking) on P133/32MB systems, as
long as you don't open more than one browser window. Linux/X/Fluxbox/Opera
is way slower on a P133/96MB. Mozilla was completely useless. I didn't try
Firefox, but I doubt it would make much difference
 
David said:
As I said! Upgrade your OS to Linux and you do not need to upgrade
your hardware.
Click to expand...

Errm?
Try finding Linux drivers for my Canon i550 printer and my HP 3300c
Scanner and I may believe that statement.

KeithS
 
I did say /any/ WM, didn't I? Believe me, I tried different
systems on old computers. Win98/IE6 works (technically
speaking) on P133/32MB systems, as long as you don't open
more than one browser window. Linux/X/Fluxbox/Opera is way
slower on a P133/96MB. Mozilla was completely useless. I
didn't try Firefox, but I doubt it would make much
difference
Click to expand...
In re Firefox:
Don't bother trying. However, it is possible to run it on
P233/128MB and images off -- IFF one has a lot of patience. ;)

J
 
Errm?
Try finding Linux drivers for my Canon i550 printer and my HP 3300c
Scanner and I may believe that statement.
Click to expand...

The Cups BJC 800 driver works fine with your printer. Sane backend for the
scanner here:

http://sourceforge.net/projects/hp3300backend

So there! :)

P.S. I am currently not using Linux on my desktop because it still takes
time doing trivial business stuff like dealing with MS Office docs. That's
just the way it is. Sorry for being OT.. :)
 
Try cacheman (http://www.outertech.com). I find this program invaluable.
It's freeware/contributionware i.e. if you have the $ then you can
register it.
Regardless, it is not crippleware. HTH, He2
Click to expand...

I actually tried this one. I am VERY sceptical to all kinds of optimizers,
but this one actually made my system more responsive. However, doesn't
seem to have to do with the programs memory management, but rather with
built in tweaks and it's dynamic cache management.

Crap! Now I have a program running of a kind I absolutely do not like, but
which does work. I tried to uninstall it and my machine went back to a
slight feeling of molasses. So now it's running again. I am afraid I am
going to have to keep it. Crap Crap Crap! :)
 
I did say /any/ WM, didn't I? Believe me, I tried different systems on old
computers. Win98/IE6 works (technically speaking) on P133/32MB systems, as
long as you don't open more than one browser window. Linux/X/Fluxbox/Opera
is way slower on a P133/96MB. Mozilla was completely useless. I didn't try
Firefox, but I doubt it would make much difference
Click to expand...
I think the operative statement in the above paragraph is "tried". As
a fairly recent graduate from a '486/32MB system I have to disagree
about Linux. I first installed Slackware back in '94 or thereabouts,
probably on a '486/66. I progressed to RH 4, 5, 6, etc. Use of X was
slowish but no slower than Win95 or, later W98.

I finally was able to upgrade memory to 64MB before moving on to a new
M/board and bigger hard drive. My new machine sported a P90 with 64MB
RAM and a whopping 512MB HDD. I installed W98. By using Ieradicator to
get rid of most of IE I experienced an immediate surge in speed of
reaction of at least ten percent. Installing Netscape or Mozilla did
not jeopardise any responsiveness. After obtaining another hard drive
I started dual booting Linux and Windows. For both stability and
responsiveness Linux wins over W98 every time on the same machine.

I have never used IE in any of its incarnations preferring to stick
with Netscape and, later, Mozilla. I do not trust M$ and so prefer to
limit my exposure to the vagaries of their programming.

Currently I have a Celeron 800/512MB RAM. I use W98SE purely because I
enjoy playing games. I also have a _slower_ machine on which I install
Linux with the KDE window manager. On both machines I use Mozilla, and
I install Windows using W98Lite to allow me to remove most of IE.

I'm still experimenting with networks and will, very likely, not
upgrade past Win98 SE on any Windows machine due to the exorbitant
amount requested for any current copy of M$. The rest of my network
will be Linux. The Windoze machine will _only_ be there to allow me to
play games.
 
I did say /any/ WM, didn't I? Believe me, I tried different systems on
old computers. Win98/IE6 works (technically speaking) on P133/32MB
systems, as long as you don't open more than one browser window.
Linux/X/Fluxbox/Opera is way slower on a P133/96MB. Mozilla was
completely useless. I didn't try Firefox, but I doubt it would make
much difference
Click to expand...

Firefox just barely works on (my) old 100Mz pentium, 64megs ram,
windows 95 (which some think is more stable than 98) system.
I wonder how much more can be squeezed out of an old system,
by using a more efficient shell, than explorer? I have never
tried the popular, litestep, for instance, but alternative
shells are often billed as using substantially less windows
resources (distinct from memory per se).
 
Back
Top