Memory Fox Next 220.127.116.11-signed.1-signed 要再起動
Amended Memory Fox.
Attempts to reduce both Browser and Flash usage of RAM memory. Memory Fox Next will promote the increase of available RAM for other application processes, hopefully, fostering any attempts of Memory Recovery and Retention.
Memory Fox Next was NEVER intended to be a permanent fix for the memory issues. At best, a Get By Solution, toward helping users extend a browser session's longevity while using the Firefox browser.
For those with Windows x64 Operating Systems and needing support for 64 bit browsers, use Memory Fox Professional version 18.104.22.168. Memory Fox Professional will work for all 32 bit and 64 bit processes. Requires Microsoft Windows 64bit ONLY. As long as Richard's website is offline this is an alternative download location:
Free Memory Fox Professional version 22.214.171.124 - Update as of 10-08-2013
You can check it is the same file and its health through the hashes and the virustotal.com link at the bottom.
Richard spoke about his application in this video.
Most browsers such as Google Chrome, IE9, Flock, Opera, Firefox will normally require an increase to the memory for the Virtual Paging and Physical Ram. You'll see this memory increased periodic by the constant refreshing of a web page dynamically by it's server or the addition of a new web page URL without any assistance of a memory reduction or recovery add-on. This action would also exclude any stand-alone external application aids as well.
When Physical Ram memory reaches a limited accessible amount, a user will more than likely be introduced to an OS Blue Screen or a Memory Exception lockup freezing the system. The idea of Memory Fox as an add-on is to help service an increase of the amount of available Physical Ram memory to help foster the continuation of a browser's logged session including additional active applications. The Operating System Virtual Manager can handle the Virtual Paging effectively and efficiently. If a user observers a speed variation by the browser during this memory recovery action or latency of which would become very noticeable, then it's time to upgrade the Operating System and/or hardware for proper browsing or stand-alone application usage, IMHO.
During the early development phase I've discovered some API calls internally within the core of Firefox that would habitually cause an increase for the two types of memories, Virtual Paging and Physical Ram. I initially tried utilizing the coding within an XPCOM Dll to force a flushing of the Ram memory back to the Virtual Paging thereby having Firefox close some of the orphaned files and memory handles. This message action allowed me to post out to the Firefox.exe some additional API messages to halt this redundant action causing the increase. What a user would see is the Ram Memory being again filled in by the Virtual Paging Manager, and this being ONLY the valid and essential pages of information need at that current immediate time. This action would be without the inclusion of unnecessary obsolete data paging information that had been left abandon in Physical Ram. This operation action would seem to improve memory intermittently at times, so I moved the code out of the XPCOM add-on to an Out-Of-Process application as a stand-alone known as Memory Fox. Memory Fox would reduced the overhead of the Physical Ram which would indicate that it was successful by testing with the same Tabs Opened ( With ) and ( Without ) the aid of the Memory Fox add-on as being activated. Although, one could verify that there would be a normal increase in the Virtual Page memory, the idea was to increase as much as possible the available Physical Ram memory. The action would lessening the chances of a memory exception failure by providing a longer usage time for the Firefox browser session or allow other applications running parallel the same advantage.
Some writers have tried at best, to show the author's in-depth knowledge of what's going on with application memory cleaners in some cases by not providing a balanced evaluation or testing without a non-bias or slanted views. Some of the opinionated writings have failed even to the mentioning of Firefox's browser supported application, the "plugin-container.exe" and it's memory overhead. Session longevity was never mentioned as a comparison ( With ) or ( Without ) an assistance of an add-on for memory reduction and recovery. Obviously, this should indicate an incomplete, incoherent testing environment at best. Most technical subject information is usually left out due to the limited knowledge of the core software's actions which in most case is not easily understood by some of these authorship's. Their goal is simply to increase readership by providing bits and pieces of knowledge content that give a reader a false sense of security on making a decision to use or not use a software or add-on.
Blogging or writing test validations using listed Screen-Shots should at the least SHOW both evaluations, ( With ) / ( Without ), an add-on's assistance using the same opened Tabbed web pages concurrently within a browser session.