TechWhirl (TECHWR-L) is a resource for technical writing and technical communications professionals of all experience levels and in all industries to share their experiences and acquire information.
For two decades, technical communicators have turned to TechWhirl to ask and answer questions about the always-changing world of technical communications, such as tools, skills, career paths, methodologies, and emerging industries. The TechWhirl Archives and magazine, created for, by and about technical writers, offer a wealth of knowledge to everyone with an interest in any aspect of technical communications.
Subject:Re: WinWord6 memory issues From:"David L. Bergart" <bodafu -at- CCVAX -dot- SINICA -dot- EDU -dot- TW> Date:Mon, 15 Aug 1994 16:25:08 +0008
John Russell <johnr -at- brs -dot- com> and David M Girardot <dmg -at- PENTAGON -dot- IO -dot- COM>
commented on WinWord6's voracious appetite for resources. In passing, David
said "The older version of the video driver I was using (AT Mach 32 v 2.2.2)
exacerbated the problem...". This is a key point. A good video driver is
essential for the stable operation of MS Windows. A poorly written video
driver can waste enormous amounts of resource memory and then fail to release
it. Until my computer was stolen, I was using a video card from Matrox. It was
very very fast, but the video driver for it caused Word to bring the machine
to it's knees--running Word would consume 60% or more of the resources and
I'd only get about two-thirds of this back when I exited the editor! Now that
I'm back to using a plain et4000-based dumb buffer with a more down-to-earth
driver, Word uses about 15% of the resources and I get it all back when I
exit the editor. The only difference is the video driver.
Fancy video cards and drivers may offer great power, but at a price not
entirely financial.
David (no, the other one)
____D__a__v__i__d_____B__e__r__g__a__r__t___________________________________
bodafu -at- ccvax -dot- sinica -dot- edu -dot- tw
