Quote:
Originally posted by stief
[B]a good read--lots to think about. Thanks.
re the crashing---FWIW, I reorganized my shares (4.5 GB; ~1400 files), and then started having start-up problems. Bit the bullet, trashed the fileurns.cache and .bak, waited the 40 mins for them to rehash (thought maybe it would be faster than the 1GB/10 min figure it used to be). The CPU stayed ~35-40 % which is MUCH better than before, and everythings been much quicker since. No data loss, gui slowdowns, etc. Can't say I've seen any error messages though, and it ran for 50 hours this weekend (OSX). So--looks like a new fileurns.cache is good here.
|
May try that.
Quote:
| re the 100+ downloads, I can't offer anything similar. Did try 50 plus (small) at a time last week--I guess habits develop because it seemed abusive--but couldn't see any problems other than firewalled (?) hosts that only let one or two at a time through. btw--since the search results now show already downloaded files, I'd forgotten about the old request for the "remember" checkbox. |
The faster you get files, the faster you share them -- I don't see how that can be abusive. As for the new icons showing already-downloaded files, it would help if only the icons were accurate. Unfortunately, they aren't: doing a search often produces results listings with stars by items you already have, and even occasionally a checked paper by something you don't.
Quote:
| I don't buy your "no Pro" argument though. Sounds more like it should be "Get Pro" so there's more push to get the program developed and fix those bugs--many of which remind me of when Java and OSX were (are) learning to play nicely together. Aren't all of you on XP due for a Java update soon--1.5, isn't it? |
An incentive to fix bugs is to make people thing "This thing is great! I'll chip in and get pro." Give them your money before they're fixed, and the incentive disappears. I thought software users had learned that a long time ago, from Microsoft -- once they have your money they don't give two puffs any more, save that more bugs makes it more likely you'll pay to upgrade...
As long as there are serious bugs I keep waiting one more version, one more version to see fixed, I want to keep on the "upgrading is free" side of the divide thank you very much.
I might consider paying for a genuinely stable product. Current versions don't approach that by a country mile, especially the 4.0 series...
As for a new version of Java, I hadn't heard. 1.5 sounds like an unstable version though -- wouldn't it likely make things worse? Might be better waiting for 1.6. Also, given that Limewire's performance took a steep nosedive going from late 3.8 to 4.0.2, it seems that major version jumps and the accompanying new feeping creatures tend to be accompanied by sharp drops in performance, only made up gradually over succeeding minor version increments (e.g. the improvement from 3.8.5 to 3.8.10) -- so going from Java 1.4.2 to 1.5.0 will probably mean going from a fairly well tuned VM to one that runs badly. Running an app with performance problems inside a VM with performance problems would compound problems massively.
And none of this addresses the disturbing fact that it regularly complains of being out of memory when run on a 1GB machine...