<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for rlaksana</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/rlaksana/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/rlaksana/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 10:39:08 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: FileInspect.com &amp;#8211; The Windows Process Library With A Personal Touch</title><link>http://www.gigglecomputer.com/2009/06/fileinspectcom-windows-process-library.html#comment-13534388</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Awesome, very usefull and handy :)&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RichardLaksana</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2009 10:39:08 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: TweetDeck Plugs Memory Leak; Launches Facebook Integration for All</title><link>http://mashable.com/2009/04/08/tweetdeck-memory-leak/#comment-7979711</link><description>&lt;p&gt;LOL ... I'm loss in word here. My first thought when I wrote the comment was that there are a lot of misconception about memory leak. Most user assume that high memory consumption is memory leak. It might not be memory leak that causing large usage but just caching to decrease memory swapping. So instead of explaining to regular user about the complexity of programming term and algorithm. They just announce that the memory leak is fix and usage is down and capped.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I believe that TweetDeck developer are a great programmer and they must have a reason to program something that accumulate 1.5gb overtime. I used an app to do a simple call to garbage collect memory in tweetdeck and in a short time the memory goes back to 1.5gb.When I run it for instance in Firefox where real memory leak happen it never go back up as fast as TweetDeck. So I'm "guessing" they use the memory to cache something. So by caching, their intention must to improve performance. Thus the reason why I hope it does not degrade performance with the memory leak fix.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I hope the explanation is good enough. We are talking based on my assumption and I don't think that it is going anywhere without working knowledge on how TweetDeck is implemented.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RichardLaksana</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 13:15:36 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: TweetDeck Plugs Memory Leak; Launches Facebook Integration for All</title><link>http://mashable.com/2009/04/08/tweetdeck-memory-leak/#comment-7977115</link><description>&lt;p&gt;Great news about the memory leak fix. I hope it does not degrade the performance.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I recently moved to Seesmic Desktop mainly because it has better group management and it seems the memory consumption is a bit lower. TweetDeck use up to 1.5gb on my pc and that is just too much.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;I really like the Facebook integration on TweetDeck :).&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RichardLaksana</dc:creator><pubDate>Wed, 08 Apr 2009 11:34:40 -0000</pubDate></item><item><title>Re: Google Chrome Offline Installer</title><link>http://rlaksana.blogspot.com/2009/03/google-chrome-offline-installer.html#comment-6896116</link><description>&lt;p&gt;... Disqus comment test.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">RichardLaksana</dc:creator><pubDate>Thu, 05 Mar 2009 03:32:57 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>