Bob, you have enough RAM - perhaps too much.
A lot of motherboards can only 64 MB handle by their cache-management, more is getting slower.
During last weeks I had very good possibilities to compare different system and different OS. It's CLEAR that NT 4.0 works faster than Windows 95 (SR2) when you have several takes running the same time.
But - as Janko said - the bottleneck (? Nadel”hr) is BANDWITH. Try it out - I'm loading nearly every day more than 7k/s down from Microsofts servers (ISDN 1 channel). This is twice the rate of 56k in our triste reality. So, the best hint I can give is ISDN (or T1...). And - take a cheap "AVM Fritz!Card", never this "intelligent" stuff - it's slower!!!
Re. hardware, you can observe yourself whether waiting-time is coming when you have disk-activity (browsing...) or screen-activity (f.e. realtime-tables...). There are universes between new AGP-cards and a good old S3, also between 10000 UPM fast-wide-scsi-drives and a good old 4200 upm "Fast"-IDE-drive with mini-cash.
Re. browser it's a good idea to use the NEW 4.01-release of ie. Netscape is not discutable when you like to use the very interesting "Microsoft Investor" - there's too much very good software in, and with any browser but ie you don't see nothing of it.
On a good system, you can - without problems - run a few windows with different "live-quotes" of quote.com, a huge realtime-table of interquote, SI (!!!) and some "quiet" windows like brokers and info-tools. And, last not least, Microsofts investor, the by far best portfolio-tool in the web. All together, of course.
I hope you can find something for you between all this mess...
Jury |
