Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: Notetab slower load on xp than 98

Expand Messages
  • bbinder79
    ... I wouldn t say that...(maybe many cases)...XP doesn t run every process in the same memory space in the same fashion that 9x did. This means that a new
    Message 1 of 3 , Jul 12, 2004
      > You probably have something wrong with your XP installation.
      >
      > All of your aps should load faster in XP.

      I wouldn't say that...(maybe many cases)...XP doesn't run every
      process in the same memory space in the same fashion that 9x did.
      This means that a new thread process occurs in RAM for the app
      loading. This protects the OS in case one program crashes, as others
      can stay running and the OS can remain stable. Because of this, XP
      sometimes takes a bit longer to load apps. It also tries to mix
      speed and stability, whereas 98 just tried to be fast.

      I used to tell that to others and they kinda shrugged it off. So I'd
      constantly load Word and close it and load it and close it, etc.
      Guess which OS would start to constantly crash Word over and over
      again, and lose valuable system resources? Now guess which one
      didn't exhibit the same behavior?

      > NoteTab Lite and Pro both load in < .5 seconds on my XP machine.
      >
      > Word and Excel load in < 1 second.

      Word also takes advantage of caching on machines too. The first
      program load is normally the slowest after initial boot. From then
      on, Word and other MS programs are much faster.

      Also realize that if you run NoteTab like I do, I expect slower load
      times because I have about 20 documents that it has to search for to
      build my accessed file list at the top for my tabs.

      I can understand the post, but when did 2 seconds become that big a
      deal?

      Brian
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.