"James Wilkinson Sword" wrote in message
news
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.

Nothing in the way with stuff you use much pinned to the taskbar.

In fact that is by far the best way to launch stuff if you are actually
stupid enough to close app when you stop using them.

Say I use 20 programs during a week. Leaving them all cluttering up my
taskbar would be stupid.

Makes no difference what so ever to the taskbar when you have
those you use much pinned there so it is easier to launch them.

I want to know what I'm using.

And even you should be able to either hover over the icon
if you can't manage to remember what is still running, and
could get real radical and see the list of what is running in
the task manager if you are too stupid to hover.

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

Try that again in english, I dont read gobbledegook.

MILLISECONDS.

I know what ms means, the rest is gobbledegook.

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.

Irrelevant to how stupid it is to turn the taskbar off.

It makes it look like a mac,

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

They're exactly like that.

Wrong, as always.

They have no ability to distinguish between running programs and links to
programs, except a little arrow above it.

Win doesnt do it like that.

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?

To see if its running if you are so stupid you can't actually
manage to remember if you have used it since the reboot.

And anyone with even half a clue has the system start
all the stuff they use much on a full reboot anyway so
there is no need to know what is running, it must be
if you have set it up to start on a full reboot.

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.

They dont. Nothing happens if you hover and it isnt running.

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?

I dont put everything away that I'm not in the middle of.

I'm not that stupidly anal. I've got much better things to do with my time.