Shoutbox

Lightweight version of WLM? - Printable Version

-Shoutbox (https://shoutbox.menthix.net)
+-- Forum: MsgHelp Archive (/forumdisplay.php?fid=58)
+--- Forum: Skype & Technology (/forumdisplay.php?fid=9)
+---- Forum: Skype & Live Messenger (/forumdisplay.php?fid=10)
+----- Thread: Lightweight version of WLM? (/showthread.php?tid=89773)
Lightweight version of WLM? by James Potter on 03-20-2009 at 02:16 PM

Hello folks! :)
I often like to do some video encoding and converting, as well as other activities/tasks that would use up more than 60% of my RAM. Messenger, by itself, takes up as much, if not less, of that amount.  I tried hunting down a "Page-clearer," to clear the unused pages in memory, with no avail.  I have recently stumbled upon a script known as ReduceMem, however, to my knowledge, it is not compatible with the current version of Messenger.
Therefore, my request is: Could there be a lightweight version of WLM (not WLMLite), like a third-party applications that has the necessities, such as IM, OIM, emoticons, and file transferring. This is basically what I'm looking for in an alternative for WLM. I would like to use this alternative only in cases where I'm multi-tasking so WLM wouldn't hog my memory.
I have considered a-MSN, but clearly have no clue whether it is a good pick or not, so what do you think? :)

Thanks! (yn)

RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by :No-Frost: on 03-20-2009 at 03:19 PM

you can watch for WLM 9 Lite maybe... I couldn't find a link in english, but search for it...

In google just tipe WLM 9 Lite and there you go...

RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by James Potter on 03-20-2009 at 03:23 PM

quote:
Originally posted by :No-Frost:
you can watch for WLM 9 Lite maybe... I couldn't find a link in english, but search for it...

In google just tipe WLM 9 Lite and there you go...
WLMLite 9 takes as much RAM usage, or doesn't it?
RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by :No-Frost: on 03-20-2009 at 03:36 PM

Mmm I don't know really... I belive that uses a little bit less of ram... But can't ensure that...

RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by prashker on 03-20-2009 at 05:51 PM

Pidgin

Miranda

RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by James Potter on 03-20-2009 at 06:47 PM

quote:
Originally posted by SonicSam
Pidgin

Miranda
Which one's better? :P
RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by tony on 03-20-2009 at 07:15 PM

Try both and make your choice :p

RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by david13579 on 03-21-2009 at 06:22 PM

WLM takes 60% of our RAM?!!!!!!!!!!! How much RAM do you have?

RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by robert_dll on 03-21-2009 at 06:38 PM

quote:
Originally posted by david13579
WLM takes 60% of our RAM?!!!!!!!!!!! How much RAM do you have?
That's ridiculuous
RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by prashker on 03-21-2009 at 07:04 PM

quote:
Originally posted by robert_dll
quote:
Originally posted by david13579
WLM takes 60% of our RAM?!!!!!!!!!!! How much RAM do you have?
That's ridiculuous

Not if you have 128MB of ram :p
RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by robert_dll on 03-21-2009 at 09:47 PM

quote:
Originally posted by SonicSam
Not if you have 128MB of ram :p
Well yeah...:P
RE: Lightweight version of WLM? by James Potter on 03-26-2009 at 06:30 PM

Don't you worry, Sam. I have 2GB DDR1 RAM, so... :P
Well, I did not do precise calculations, for all I know is that PC becomes so slow and RAM usage bumps up to 350,000 K of Memory Usage.