I know this has been asked so many times but I'm having trouble getting a definitive answer. Right now, the difference between $100 and $200 for a RAM upgrade is significant in my household. So, 1 GB or 2 GB? I am a writer, who quite frankly is spending much, much more time raising 3 kids than writing -- but writing is what I do and will be doing more as the kids get older. I use Nisus or NeoOffice (which is going to be slow to open no matter what, really), iPhoto a lot; iTunes a lot; Safari a lot; Mail a lot; Dashboard a lot; iCal a lot; iMovie some; iDVD occasionally. Various small utilities that only slow things down if many are open. A couple of small applications requiring Rosetta, but I try to upgrade to universal binaries as soon as they are available. I might use GarageBand some in the future. I might use PhotoShop some in the future, but nothing extreme. Maybe a couple games, but this is a fringe benefit not a requirement. We have kids, so we have consoles. I know I can add 1 GB for a total of 1.25 GB -- for about the same price as 1 GB total -- but I lose the dual-channel mode. But my inclination is that if can do just fine with 1 GB, I'll do 2 512 MB modules, keep operating in dual-channel, so I don't take the hit on graphics performance. I get the feeling I'll feel the slow down more there than waiting an extra "bounce" for an application to open because it has to be loaded off disk because it's not lurking in the inactive RAM. The only time I really feel serious performance problems now is when I keep all the apps I use open all the time, or have many windows or tabs going in Safari. So, based on what I do, 1 GB or 2 GB? I mean, with that I do, will I even feel the improvement of 2 GB over 1 GB?