If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Telling Explr to settle down
"cquirke (MVP Win9x)" wrote:
wrote in message ... Thanks for taking the time to respond Ron. However I was not referring to new items being added, I was referring to the item already being there, already being sorted, but being shoved to the bottom when re-saved! I quite like that. If adding or changing 5 dirs in a location that has 100 dirs in it already, it's nice that the right pane shows only the changed ones if the parent dir is not expanded. Makes it easier to flip between them without wading through the rest. -------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Tip Of The Day: To disable the 'Tip of the Day' feature... -------------------- ----- ---- --- -- - - - - Not sure what that is supposed to mean, but to each his own. gm |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Telling Explr to settle down
Jeff Richards wrote:
Good point - the other day I had to apply a simple update to all files in a folder. As I saved each one after the update the next one popped to the top of the folder listing automatically! -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (DTS) "cquirke (MVP Win9x)" wrote in message news snip I quite like that. If adding or changing 5 dirs in a location that has 100 dirs in it already, it's nice that the right pane shows only the changed ones if the parent dir is not expanded. Makes it easier to flip between them without wading through the rest. One thing this tread wil show if nothing else, is that any "feature" can be considered good by one and bad by another! gm |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Telling Explr to settle down
Well, all I can think is that if my 33MHz Windoze 3.1 File manager could do this
with no noticable delay whatsoever, then one would surely think my super-duper 2.8GHz Win98 machine (~84 times faster) could also! Just shows how much crap the newer windoze must be doing in the background such that it doesn't have time to keep up with the simple stuff, but I digress. I just hope that hack come through but it ain't looking good so far! gm Jeff Richards wrote: That's not how processing items in a list works in W98. If there is any possibility that any details (even a non-displayed item) in a listed entry has changed, the item has to be removed from the list and re-added. Adding an item at the end of a list is trivial - refreshing the list so that it is sorted properly is major overhead. Adding the item back into its proper place would involve finding out how the list is currently sorted and finding the correct sort position, remembering that the sort item, such as date, might have been changed. It's doable, but it's not simple. It is an OS issue, not a file system issue. I am ussuming that FAT32 performance is a reason that the list was not automatically refreshed, because I have seen how FAT32 performs under heavy load. The issue could have been overcome by more sophisticated list processing, but they chose not to - having written list processing routines myself, I understand how comlicated it can get. AFAIK thre is no magic switch to turn auto-refresh on, but if someone proves my wrong I would be happy to add the tweak to my list of useful W9x tips. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (DTS) wrote in message ... Thanks for the input Jeff. That makes sense if it were a choice between sorting and doing nothing. However, WE is not "doing nothing", it is removing the file from the list where it was originally, and putting it at the bottom (presumable by a sort by date default function but that's a guess). If the goal was indead to maximize performance, then leaving the file where it was in the list would be the faster performance. The name hasn't changed, why move it. (It wasn't necessary for FM to move the file!!) I use Windows 2000 at work, and it does the same thing. I am pretty certain the computer there is using NTFS so it seems like and OS problem not a file system problem to me! So, still waiting for the expert hacker to post a way to correct this....!! -gm |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Telling Explr to settle down
Why are you running Windows 98 on a machine with that specification?
Surely you would use a newer OS that could take advantage of all that processing power. I don't think it's worth sticking with W98 for anything faster than about 800Mhz. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (DTS) wrote in message ... Well, all I can think is that if my 33MHz Windoze 3.1 File manager could do this with no noticable delay whatsoever, then one would surely think my super-duper 2.8GHz Win98 machine (~84 times faster) could also! Just shows how much crap the newer windoze must be doing in the background such that it doesn't have time to keep up with the simple stuff, but I digress. I just hope that hack come through but it ain't looking good so far! gm |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Telling Explr to settle down
I have Win98 on a P3-700 and a P4-2800 with similar other hardware including
the same amount of memory and virtually identical video cards. The P4 is noticably faster, so as far as I can tell staying with 98 doesn't inhibit improvement as you suggest. Perhaps you are running some specific application that can benefit from a newer windows. But I've tried XP, and in the interest of not further getting way off topic, I will just say I personally saw no reason to stay with that OS. But to directly answer your question, because I OWN Win98 already! -gm Jeff Richards wrote: Why are you running Windows 98 on a machine with that specification? Surely you would use a newer OS that could take advantage of all that processing power. I don't think it's worth sticking with W98 for anything faster than about 800Mhz. -- Jeff Richards MS MVP (DTS) wrote in message ... Well, all I can think is that if my 33MHz Windoze 3.1 File manager could do this with no noticable delay whatsoever, then one would surely think my super-duper 2.8GHz Win98 machine (~84 times faster) could also! Just shows how much crap the newer windoze must be doing in the background such that it doesn't have time to keep up with the simple stuff, but I digress. I just hope that hack come through but it ain't looking good so far! gm |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Telling Explr to settle down
|
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|