bpa wrote: > My testing was with delay to zero - which should be the norm - problems > system such as single core CPUs or some WIndows system needed bigger > delays. > > The problem with 1.6.0 was that frequently with the delay setting at > zero - there would be an unnecessary 5 sec delay added depending on > arithmetic.But I was just wondering why you thought the startup time was too > fast in 1.6.1.
Sent from my SM-G900F using Tapatalk ------------------------------------------------------------------------ slartibartfast's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=35609 View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=109826 _______________________________________________ plugins mailing list [email protected] http://lists.slimdevices.com/mailman/listinfo/plugins
