On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 20:21:24 +0100, Rod Speed wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 25 Oct 2016 02:35:00 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Mon, 24 Oct 2016 21:14:53 +0100, Rod Speed
wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Sat, 22 Oct 2016 00:11:46 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Tue, 18 Oct 2016 22:38:11 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 07:02:15 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news On Sat, 15 Oct 2016 19:27:45 +0100, Rod Speed

wrote:



"Bod" wrote in message
...
On 15/10/2016 09:44, alan_m wrote:
On 15/10/2016 01:23, David Paste wrote:
am I barking up the
wrong tree to assume an SSD will improve the snappiness of
the
user
interface?)


When I replaced a traditional hard disk in my 5 year old
laptop
with
a
SSD I noticed a faster start up but for day to day use no
overall
difference in speed.

Hmm! that hasn't been my experience. I've changed several
laptops
to
SSDs
and *everything* is much snappier.

Only with the laptops that dont have enough physical memory.

Bull****.

We'll see...

My desktop has 32GB and the SSD still makes an enormous
difference.

Not to anything except the time to start from a full reboot and
with launching apps that are very disk intensive when starting.

Or when in use.

There are **** all of those that most use much.

Anyone with even half a clue only reboots every few months and
doesnt
close apps at all.

I only have open the apps I'm using.

More fool you.

It's tidier.

Its stupid.

Why have more clutter on the taskbar?

Makes no difference what so ever to the taskbar when you use
that properly as where you start apps that you use much.

I use about 20 programs, and about 5 in one day. Stupid to leave
all
20
open.

Not when you have enough physical memory so the system doesnt swap.

Only a fool like you closes them so it has to wait for them
to open again, particularly with the slowest opening apps.

I've explained this already

Nope.

- if you have enough physical memory not to swap, then if you closed
the
program, it would be in the disk cache in memory anyway,

Wrong when you have done anything useful with your
data like watch some movies or recorded TV etc.

and still open fast.

Doesnt work like that with the slowest opening **** like firefox.

With my SSD, that's fast the first time anyway.

Still slower than not closing it, just switching to it.

No,

Yep.

it appears instantly as far as my brain's concerned.

Still more clicks involved.

But less junk in my way when doing other things. Say I use 20 programs during a week. Leaving them all cluttering up my taskbar would be stupid. I want to know what I'm using.

There's no point in loading a program in less than 20ms.

Try that again in english, I dont read gobbledegook.

MILLISECONDS.

I have 32GB RAM, and the 2nd and subsequent times I open any program
after the last reboot, they appear instantaneously, with zero disk
access.

Still no point in closing apps you wont be using for a while. The act
of
closing it and opening it again is completely pointless even if it is
instant.

It tidies your taskbar so you can find what you need.

Wrong, as always. Anyone with even half a ****ing clue launches the apps
they use much at all from the pinned icon on the taskbar, so
closing it has no effect what so ever on what icons are on the taskbar.

That's the first very annoying thing I turn off.

Yes, you are that terminal a ****wit. No surprise that
you have always been completely unemployable.

Most people customize their interface immediately. The standard form M$ is stupid.

It makes it look like a mac,

Even sillier than you usually manage. Macs dont have anything like that.

They're exactly like that. They have no ability to distinguish between running programs and links to programs, except a little arrow above it.

hard to distinguish between what's running and what isn't.

Even sillier than you usually manage. Just hover over it shows you if its
running or

Why would I want to have to hover?

not. Not that anyone but a terminal ****wit needs to know that very often
anyway.

A running program and a link to a program are entirely different things, and shouldn't look similar.

As in real life, things I'm not currently in the middle of go away in the
drawer, not left lying on the desk.

Yes, you actually are that terminal a ****wit.

You never put things away?

--
For Sale: Parachute. Only used once, never opened, small stain.