Ever since I got my diskcaching installed, I've grown use to the speed
of Arachne.  When I had to use IE at the hospital I about went bonkers
waiting for pages to load and appear.

But that was Arachne 1.50s.r.c. and with the new 1.60b1 I'm beginning to
feel like I'm using someone else's software again.

At first it was a matter of it seeming to take just a tick or two longer
to trash or move a file when reading mail.  But today I realized it was
taking just toooooo long to do anything in Arachne b1 compared to src.

So I started paying attention to that "time line" that was added on the
bottom with this newest version [unnecessary BLOAT TMWOT].  I wanted to
copy some spam to a file and read in ascii to have full look at headers. 
Hitting F10 for desktop took 8 seconds to get new screen, go to all
files and it was 7 seconds to get directory [no logos, thankyou], click
on the \\ to get access to all drives and it's another 8 seconds wait,
move from root to subdirectory on RAMdrive, 6 seconds ... going back
wasn't bad since it was just pages from cache.  At least it wasn't bad
until I got back to Inbox where I started.

Although the message was in cache, since I'd already read the trash
once, I shouldn't have had to wait an additional 8 seconds for the page
to be loaded .. should I?????

It felt almost as bad as before I installed cache.  So I shelled out and
got a report from my ncache.  Where I normally get a hit ratio of 98-99%
with s.r.c. I'm only getting hit ratio of 89% with 1.60b1.

Something is kludged somewhere.

I'm also getting video problems after using Arachne; I don't know it
that is traceable to Arachne or not ... I'm still trying to run that
down.

l.d.
-- Arachne V1.60;b1, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/

Reply via email to