Windows' ressources

I have a problem with a Software update which takes too much ressources so
that it doesn'nt run any more on my W98 machine within the given
environment.

All I know is that W98's system ressources are of fixed size so that there
is no way to change this if system responds with low on ressources. But do
the available ressources grow up with higher RAM capacity so that a 'low on
ressources' problem at a 128 MB machine might be made obsolete by adding
some more 128 MB RAM?

In other words, does the size of the ressources memory block depend on the
RAM capacity?

Someone told me that the ressources problem wouldn't exist any more in
Windows XT - is that true or is simply the ressources block larger in WinXT
than in W98/WinME and the problem would come back some day?

Thank you, and merry christmas.

do
the available ressources grow up with higher RAM capacity so that a 'low on
ressources' problem at a 128 MB machine might be made obsolete by adding
some more 128 MB RAM?

No. As you said, Windows resources have a fixed size.

This web page has an explanation of “System Resources” in Windows.

http://www.apptools.com/rants/resources.php

The following was written by Ron Martell, a Microsoft MVP:

Here is my standard explanation regarding System Resources, which may
be of some assistance.

System Resources refers to two 64K blocks of memory that Windows
allocates to programs for tracking purposes. These blocks are called
User Resources and GDI Resources respectively and Windows reports
whichever has the least available free space as the value for "Free
System Resources".

The value of Free System Resources should not be a concern unless and
until you start getting "System Resources are getting low" type
warning messages, which generally happens at about the 10% level. In
test circumstances it has been shown possible for a computer to
operate at full performance with System Resources showing zero percent
free.

System Resources are totally unrelated to the amount of RAM installed
in your computer and adding more RAM will not affect the System
Resources (unless you start running more applications because you have
more RAM).

System Resource usage is determined by the number and type of
applications that you have running on the computer. Certain types of
applications have been shown to be especially demanding in terms of
System Resource usage:
- "Eye and Ear Candy" such as Active Desktop View As Web Page,
sound effect schemes, animated mouse cursors and desktop icons, and
fancy screen savers.
- Web browsers, as each open browser window requires additional
resources.
- Multimedia applications of all types
- System monitoring utilities such as Norton SystemWorks.

If you are using any applications that have the ability to "preview
fonts in fonts list" such as Office 2000 then all of the installed
fonts will be loaded into GDI resources when the application is
launched. This will result in the usage of approximately 1% of GDI
resources for each 64 fonts that are installed. If no such
applications are in use, or if the "preview fonts in fonts list" is
turned off then resources will only be consumed by those fonts that
have actually been used by windows or by an application.

If you are running any 16 bit applications (Windows 3.x) then Windows
95/98/Me will treat the System Resources allocated to all of these
applications as one block and will not release any of them for reuse
unless and until all of the open 16 bit applications have been closed.

Also, when an application is loaded it is quite common that it will
also require some additional Windows components to be loaded as well.
However, when that application is closed Windows will, by design,
retain the Windows components because they are likely to be needed
again. Therefore the resources initially allocated when an
application is opened will not all be released when that application
is closed. Most, but not all.

Footnote:
To be absolutely technically correct, there are 5 System Resource
heaps not just 2, the two 16 bit 64K ones plus three 32 bit ones. The
32 bit ones are big enough so that there has never been a documented
instance of resource usage problems caused by them, so it is simpler
to pretend they do not exist and just focus on the two 64K resource
heaps when troubleshooting system resource related problems.

Someone told me that the ressources problem wouldn't exist any more in
Windows XT - is that true or is simply the ressources block larger in WinXT
than in W98/WinME and the problem would come back some day?

There is a Windows NT and a Windows XP, but not a Windows XT.

The previous "system resources" errors do not occur with Windows XP,
but it is still possible to get error messages about resouces. These
errors concern resources used by peripheral devices. For example --

"Not enough resouirces" with Bluetooth --
http://support.microsoft.com/default...b;en-us;886918

Bill Starbuck (MVP)

http://www.onlinehelp.bc.ca/tips.htm#resources

Regards,
Emrys Davies.





"Bruno Köller" wrote in message
...
I have a problem with a Software update which takes too much
ressources so
that it doesn'nt run any more on my W98 machine within the given
environment.

All I know is that W98's system ressources are of fixed size so that
there
is no way to change this if system responds with low on ressources.
But do
the available ressources grow up with higher RAM capacity so that a
'low on
ressources' problem at a 128 MB machine might be made obsolete by
adding
some more 128 MB RAM?

In other words, does the size of the ressources memory block depend on
the
RAM capacity?

Someone told me that the ressources problem wouldn't exist any more in
Windows XT - is that true or is simply the ressources block larger in
WinXT
than in W98/WinME and the problem would come back some day?

Thank you, and merry christmas.

"Bruno Köller" wrote:

All I know is that W98's system ressources are of fixed size so that there
is no way to change this if system responds with low on ressources. But do
the available ressources grow up with higher RAM capacity so that a 'low on
ressources' problem at a 128 MB machine might be made obsolete by adding
some more 128 MB RAM?

As you said, they are fixed. Nothing - not adding RAM, not adding disk
space, NOTHING - affects their size.

The only way to free resources (besides rebooting to recover resources
taken and not returned to the system) is to close programs. See all
those icons in the System Tray on the right end of your taskbar? Each
of those is a program running in your computer and consuming
resources. How many of them do you really need?

The ultimate solution to this bottleneck is WindowsXP. "System
Resources" just don't exist there. Programs can use whatever space
they need until memory - RAM and virtual - is exhausted.

--
Tim Slattery
MS MVP(DTS)

"Bruno Köller" wrote:

I have a problem with a Software update which takes too much ressources so
that it doesn'nt run any more on my W98 machine within the given
environment.

All I know is that W98's system ressources are of fixed size so that there
is no way to change this if system responds with low on ressources. But do
the available ressources grow up with higher RAM capacity so that a 'low on
ressources' problem at a 128 MB machine might be made obsolete by adding
some more 128 MB RAM?

In other words, does the size of the ressources memory block depend on the
RAM capacity?

Someone told me that the ressources problem wouldn't exist any more in
Windows XT - is that true or is simply the ressources block larger in WinXT
than in W98/WinME and the problem would come back some day?

Thank you, and merry christmas.


One of the best ways to improve the value of free System Resources is
to reduce the number of background "tools and toys" (a.k.a. crap and
corruption) that gets loaded when the computer starts up. Use Start -
Run - MSCONFIG and go to the Startup tab. Compare the list of items
that are loading at startup with the following checklist web sites to
see what can be safely dispensed with:

http://www2.whidbey.com/djdenham/Uncheck.htm
http://www.pacs-portal.co.uk/startup_content.php
http://www.3feetunder.com/krick/startup/list.html - has trojan related
items listed

Note: Please ensure that you fully understand the purpose of a
startup item, how and why it was put into the startup, and the
consequences (if any) of removing it before you make any changes.
Some items are very important for the proper and safe functioning of
your computer, including at least one item that is listed twice.

Disabling an item by unchecking it in MSCONFIG should only be done for
testing purposes or as a "last resort" when no other way of getting
rid of the unwanted item can be found.


Good luck and Merry Christmas.


Ron Martell Duncan B.C. Canada
--
Microsoft MVP
On-Line Help Computer Service
http://onlinehelp.bc.ca

"The reason computer chips are so small is computers don't eat much."