At the point of the article when the apparently poor performance of the Outlook 2007 client is being mentioned, they put in the following quote from me:
Chris Whisonant, a senior systems administrator at Comporium Communications, a telecommunications service provider in Rock Hill, S.C., said the increased functionality in Notes 8 means that the upgrade "does use more RAM than before." But Whisonant said that Notes 8 "is easy to get used to because you just like using it more."I did say that more RAM is used, but only in passing. In fact, that was possibly the only negative statement I made in my e-mail to Computerworld. Note 8 is very impressive - both the Basic and Standard clients. Sure there is more overhead, but there is a ton more functionality! It's a great article for Notes. I just wish that they had put the short paragraph I sent them about performance instead of just the sentence. Here's what I sent them:
Even though this is still a beta (please keep that in mind) with debug code and some kinks to work out, it still runs very well and I haven't noticed too much of a difference from my 7.0.2 client I previously had installed. But it does use more RAM than before. At the same time, it has a lot more functionality so that offsets the jump in system requirements.Notes 8 should be a great .0 release after some more tweaking. If you want to see some of the other things I've written about the client, check out some of my posts at the Public Beta forum.