Rob -
The way an OS sets up a RAM disk is by "stealing" or allocating some RAM
from main memory. This is, essentially what PS is doing normally. I would
find it very hard to believe that a RAM disk would help speed things up when
1) there is now less main memory, and 2) everything would now have to go
through some program code that handles or manages the RAM disk. This assumes
there is nothing else up and running and, therefore, fighting for main
memory. In this later case you might see some minor improvement if the only
thing that gets to use the RAM disk is PS. Better yet is to shut everything
else down that isn't necessary - leaving only PS using main memory and, of
course, investing in more RAM. Even Windows likes more RAM and although MS
says Windows will run in meager RAM, it only does so by swapping on and off
code segments from hard disk. Ever notice how much hard disk is consumed by
temp files?
Bob Marin
-----Original Message-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Rob Geraghty
Sent: Friday, December 15, 2000 5:34 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: filmscanners: infos on Nikon LS 2000 or Microtek 4000T
[stuff about photoshop speed snipped]
Out of interest, has anyone noticed whether the OS makes a difference - I
seem to recall that NT gives better memory management with PS so Win2K
should also?
The main question I wanted to ask was whether making a RAM disk and pointing
the PS "scratch disk" at it makes any difference? It sounds like what's
needed is a way to try to fool PS into avoiding the hard drive.
Rob
