In ,
Ron Martell had this to say:

My reply is at the bottom of your sent message:

"Mike M" wrote:

Donna wrote:

Is that under system properties/performance?
If so I have 128 MB with 40% free

Forget about 40% free, it is a rather meaningless measure. Once
again remember that unused memory is wasted memory. With 128MB of
RAM and an "in use" swap file hovering around 64MB it is possible
that adding 64MB of RAM might show some small improvement but
whether it is worth doing is perhaps debatable. The Win Me box I
have here runs quite very happily with 128MB of RAM with a copy of
Office 2000 installed as well as Corel WordPerfect and PhotoPaint
plus all the usual utilities, etc.

I think that adding more RAM might prove to be more than just a
"small" improvement. I have noticed fairly significant gains on a
number of systems running Windows Me when the RAM was increased from
128 to 256 mb.

With over 60 mb of "Swap file in use" my recommendation would be to
add more RAM.

Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada

While I agree - and I do - that additional RAM will certainly improve the
situation the main point and a part I think we all (even me) forgets is that
RAM not in use is truly being wasted and if it wasn't then the various RAM
compacting tools would be viable. I wish - like a mad man - I could get a
couple of GB of RAM fully in use at NORMAL operation time in XP for
instance. It gets at about 70% and never seems to want to go beyond that. I
get, even with a dual CPU system, 100% CPU first. It makes no sense now nor
then. However the it's good to hear that any RAM not in use is really of no
value. (Of course if the system can and will use it then there's nothing
better and I'd trade a CPU upgrade - back then - for a RAM upgrade any day.
More RAM is almost always better.)


--
Galen - MS MVP - Windows (Shell/User & IE)
http://dts-l.org/

"My life is spent in one long effort to escape from the commonplaces of
existence." - Sherlock Holmes