Re: memory reading and writing

From: f0dder (f0dder_spicedham_at_flork.dk)
Date: 07/19/04 

Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 16:57:14 +0200

The Wannabee wrote:
> På Mon, 19 Jul 2004 00:17:15 +0200, skrev f0dder
> <f0dder_spicedham@flork.dk>:
>
>> XP postpones at lot of stuff to give the illusion that it is ready
>> to use before it actually is.
>
> Thanks. This confirmes my thinking. XP is so slow, that one has time
> to contemplate, whats wrong with it, faster, than it would take to
> confirm it ??? :-))))
>
Hehe - postponing the load of stuff until it's necessary isn't a bad
idea, though. And it's not all smoke and mirrors, I think XP is fully
loaded and ready to use some 20-30sec faster on this box than win2k
used to be.

Still don't know what I think of the system as whole, though. Some
things are better, a lot of things are worse. Once you've tweaked
the hell out of the system, it's okay. I guess the main benefits
XP has over 2k is the ability to run without paging file, antialiased
fonts, and the ability to detach debugger from a process without
terminating it. The remote desktop stuff isn't bad either. Some file
operations in explorer seem faster (dunno if it really is, or if they
just do some background thread processing, but it "feels" faster).

But on a whole... *shrug*