Desktop usage

  • Thread starter Thread starter Bill
  • Start date Start date
B

Bill

Hi, I was told that storing folders and or information
(files) on the desktop was a bad thing, because in XP or
2000 this would take up RAM. Is this true?
 
Bill said:
Hi, I was told that storing folders and or information
(files) on the desktop was a bad thing, because in XP or
2000 this would take up RAM. Is this true?
Click to expand...

Don't know if this is the case but for other practical reasons, I place
files in the appropriate folder (My Documents or a subfolder), then create a
shortcut on the Desktop. Either a right click or clicking on File gets a
menu item "Send to"; point to it and next menu should have"Desktop (create a
shortcut)".

Malv
 
Thanks, yes I know... But what I am concerned about is if
placing items on the desktop has any impact on RAM usage,
similar to having several items on your taskbar.
 
I honestly don't know about RAM; anyone else who does, please respond. I go
the shortcut route for two reasons;
1) your concern--shortcuts are 1 kb ,maybe 2 at most in size.
2) can be safely removed without affecting the actual document. My vision
requires me to have larger-than-average icon and label sizes, so things get
cluttered pretty easily here.

Malv
 
Thank Malv... But yes I am looking at it for the RAM
issue.. Many of my users like to create folders on their
desktop..
 
I just put a 60 meg folder with 100 files on my desktop.
No change in the RAM usage and not noticeable change in boot
time. But for safety's sake I agree with Malvern.

gls858
 
I just put a 60 meg folder with 100 files on my desktop.
No change in the RAM usage and not noticeable change in boot
time. But for safety's sake I agree with Malvern.

gls858
Click to expand...
OOPS sorry about the top post. Another group I frequent EVERYBODY top
posts.

gls858
 
It appears that the more items you have on your desktop, the more RAM is in
use by Explorer.exe (in Task Manager - the first instance of Explorer.exe is
your desktop shell). It doesn't seem to matter what size the actual file
is, it just allocates memory for the icon to appear on the desktop, so it's
just a few K. I tried copying a Word document (116K) multiple times on the
desktop and it only increased memory usage a little bit, nowhere near the
size of the file - and no, they weren't shortcuts. I'd say it's a minimal
usage of RAM, but better organization not to clutter the desktop with actual
files. Shortcuts are much smaller, and users could actually have a shortcut
to a folder full of files they use.
 
i saw i girl that put all her movie collection on the desktop (of course
movies were down......ripped from legally purchased CD's)
she had no problems concerning RAM overusage
 
Andrew Lomakin said:
i saw i girl that put all her movie collection on the desktop (of course
movies were down......ripped from legally purchased CD's)
she had no problems concerning RAM overusage
Click to expand...

Nothing to do with RAM - the Desktop is NOT designed as a data storage area
and also is prone to corruption when Bingo! you lose all your data.
 
Back
Top