25 May '13 - 14:17 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Reply  |  Print  
Author Topic: Why bass, XM-Play "eat" less memory than other ?  (Read 3795 times)
kenshin1101
Posts: 543


« on: 2 Sep '07 - 14:47 »
Reply with quoteQuote

in wmp & other use mp3 codec and use ~20MB when play an mp3, but bass (use mp3codec) use only a lite memory ?
Logged
Dotpitch
Posts: 2478


« Reply #1 on: 2 Sep '07 - 17:31 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Windows Media Player does a lot more than XMPlay, it plays videos and dvds, rips music and supports DRM, etc. All this extra stuff has to be loaded into memory, even if you don't use it. Ian tries to keep XMPlay as light as possible, and doesn't add that much stuff that hardly anyone would use.
Logged
saga
Posts: 1365


« Reply #2 on: 2 Sep '07 - 19:43 »
Reply with quoteQuote

simple answer: all these popular players are bloatware Tongue they have more features than anyone would need.they only eat up memory.
Logged
kenshin1101
Posts: 543


« Reply #3 on: 3 Sep '07 - 06:36 »
Reply with quoteQuote

i don't think so. i had try to use bass to play mp3 file and compare with directshow to play mp3. the result is bass eat only 1-3 MB and directshow eat 16~20 MB
Logged
saga
Posts: 1365


« Reply #4 on: 3 Sep '07 - 12:05 »
Reply with quoteQuote

isn't that what we just said?
Logged
Zarggg
Posts: 1239


« Reply #5 on: 5 Sep '07 - 20:04 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Yes, it is. Kenshin just doesn't seem to understand that is what we are saying. Tongue
Logged
youji
Guest
« Reply #6 on: 18 Oct '07 - 17:54 »
Reply with quoteQuote

Others are big. XMPlay is small. The big ones eat more memory because they are big. The small ones don't.

Most simple answer, I suppose. Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Reply  |  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines