Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 11th May 2009 20:43 UTC
Windows SuperFetch is a technology in Windows Vista and onwards that is often misunderstood. I decided to delve into this technology to see what it is all about, and to dispel some of the myths surrounding this feature.
E-mail Print r 3   · Read More · 79 Comment(s)
Thread beginning with comment 362972
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Test Canedidate
by OSGuy on Tue 12th May 2009 08:44 UTC
OSGuy
Member since:
2006-01-01

Well, I believe OOo would be a perfect candidate to test the SuperFetch theory and see how efficient SuperFetch is. Don't you agree? Put its shortcut in Start Up (the whole thing, not just the pre-loader), restart Windows about 10 times and see if it makes a difference (as in whether OOo will start to launch quicker).

P.S. The title of my post should be "Test Candidate".

Edited 2009-05-12 08:46 UTC

Reply Score: 2

RE: Test Canedidate
by Thom_Holwerda on Tue 12th May 2009 08:54 in reply to "Test Canedidate"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Well, I believe OOo would be a perfect candidate to test the SuperFetch theory and see how efficient SuperFetch is. Don't you agree? Put its shortcut in Start Up (the whole thing, not just the pre-loader), restart Windows about 10 times and see if it makes a difference (as in whether OOo will start to launch quicker).

P.S. The title of my post should be "Test Candidate".


In my article, there's a link to Tom's Hardware which indeed performed this very test on OOo 2.1 a few days after Vista was released. Where Writer 2.1 first took 9 seconds to load, it dropped to just 2-3 seconds, and that was on a machine with 512MB of RAM. Adding in more RAM made launching Writer even faster; less than a second on 2GB machines.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Test Canedidate
by lemur2 on Tue 12th May 2009 09:23 in reply to "RE: Test Canedidate"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

In my article, there's a link to Tom's Hardware which indeed performed this very test on OOo 2.1 a few days after Vista was released. Where Writer 2.1 first took 9 seconds to load, it dropped to just 2-3 seconds, and that was on a machine with 512MB of RAM. Adding in more RAM made launching Writer even faster; less than a second on 2GB machines.


I wonder why they needed to wait for Vista to be released?

OOo and preload were available on Linux before Vista came on the scene, I'm sure.

Let's see.

http://www.debianadmin.com/load-applications-quicker-in-ubuntu-usin...

July 9th, 2007

Vista launch?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vista#Development

January 2007

OK, so we have to go back a bit further.

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=492870

Preload first appeared in 2005.

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=597292

A few improvements in 2006.

http://sourceforge.net/forum/forum.php?forum_id=849333

Then some more tuning starting in 2008.

http://sourceforge.net/projects/preload

Last update, April 2009.

So Tom's hardware could have done their review of this idea two years earlier if they had wanted to.

Reply Parent Score: 1