Work at SourceForge, help us to make it a better place! We have an immediate need for a Support Technician in our San Francisco or Denver office.
For a simple capture / editor, I've noticed Greenshot uses a lot of memory compared to some other, more complex prgms. For instance, whether idle or both have the exact same screen capture & editor windows are maximized, PicPic portable only uses ~ 40 - 42% of the private or working set as does GS portable 1.1.2437. Since PicPick is a far more complex prgm, this is puzzling.
If you compare FastStone Capture 5.3 (which still works pretty well in Vista & probably has more editing options), it only uses ~ 1/3 the memory of GS - either both idle or both w/ same screen shot.
GS has its place & I like to support open source projects - but if I'm using a simple capture / editor prgm because don't need anything very fancy, I don't expect it to use 2 - 3x the memory of prgms w/ more features.
Any thoughts on that?
Different programs are built upon different frameworks and libraries. Greenshot is built upon .NET framework and .NET needs some RAM, too. In turn, .NET apps have other advantages, e.g. they are able to share resources with other .NET apps.
Just be assured that we're doing our best not to waste any RAM. And after all, I do not think that Greenshot is too memory hungry for what it offers.
And by the way: other capture programs use far more money compared to Greenshot ;-)
No, as I mentioned, (several) other far more advanced screenshot prgms use LESS memory than GS. I'm sure SOME use more than GS. I don't know about framework or libraries they use, but if an extremely advanced prgm like PicPick uses far less memory, it's worth investigating.
I don't always need complexity of a PicPick, but it's troubling that GS seems to use > 2x the memory of PicPick.
I understood what you wrote. We did our share of investigation, don't worry.
And we're constantly keeping an eye on it during development.