|
OK, I'm sincerely happy not to be on the project you guys are working on. I can't say I'd find a use for that in a month of sundays.
|
|
|
|
|
Norm .net wrote: OK, I'm sincerely happy not to be on the project you guys are working on. I can't say I'd find a use for that in a month of sundays.
It is not valid code in the first place.
And it is just me. Just experimenting 
|
|
|
|
|
Phew, thank god for that 
|
|
|
|
|
Using VS2008 Express, I get a crash too, the dialog looks different, inviting me to "look for a solution" on the web.
However I appreciate the reaction VS has to such abuse of the var keyword. Use string[] instead and all is fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Luc Pattyn wrote: inviting me to "look for a solution" on the web.
That's probably because the 'Error Reporting for Dummies' option is still turned on  (I always get rid of that)
|
|
|
|
|
leppie wrote: Error Reporting for Dummies' ... I always get rid of that
I don't need to turn it off, VS does very seldom reject my code as I am a defensive programmer.
|
|
|
|
|
I've your doomed then you should sing the doom song![^]
|
|
|
|
|
Hi,
Interestingly, seems to work ok if .Net 2.0 is the target framework, but not on 3.5. Haven't tried 3.0.
|
|
|
|
|
why use an undocumented feature that might, due to its very nature, be removed in a later version of the compiler?
A train station is where the train stops. A bus station is where the bus stops. On my desk, I have a work station....
_________________________________________________________
My programs never have bugs, they just develop random features.
|
|
|
|
|
Today is exciting, my new solid state hard drive (60GB for £160) arrived in the post and tonight I'm going to plug it in. Woha!
I bought this because Windows 7 seems very slow to start up. Anyone got one of these things and have they noticed any vast performance improvements? I'm half expecting a huge anticlimax.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Philpott wrote: (60GB for £160)
And I paid $175 US for my 80GB Intel 25x-m. Although I did get it used. My only regret is I did not opt for the $225 120GB OCZ agility as 80GB is too small.
Rob Philpott wrote: Anyone got one of these things and have they noticed any vast performance improvements?
Under linux applications (like firefox) load instantly instead of 2 to 4 seconds. It's amazing.
[EDIT]This post bumped me up to "Fixture" status  [/EDIT]
John
|
|
|
|
|
Having a ssd as a boot drive must be truly outstanding.
.45 ACP - because shooting twice is just silly
-----
"Why don't you tie a kerosene-soaked rag around your ankles so the ants won't climb up and eat your candy ass..." - Dale Earnhardt, 1997
-----
"The staggering layers of obscenity in your statement make it a work of art on so many levels." - J. Jystad, 2001
|
|
|
|
|
John M. Drescher wrote: This post bumped me up to "Fixture" status
Fizture? As in screwed?
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
SO did it finally turn out to be an faster  ??
|
|
|
|
|
Yes, it does seem faster. Windows 7 hits the log-in screen quite quickly, and it reaches 6.9 on the primary hard disk performance check - now the best component in my computer.
Regards,
Rob Philpott.
|
|
|
|
|
I got an Intel 80GB SSD a few months ago and it's worth its weight in gold. My machine now waits for me, not the other way around
I use it for my C:\ drive - Windows 7 and Programs only. Put your swap file on another drive and run powercfg -h off to get rid of the hibernation file.
I'm sure you'll be impressed.
Nick
----------------------------------
Be excellent to each other
|
|
|
|
|
I'm finding Windows 7 to be dramatically faster at startup.
Have you checked your hardware and drivers? Could be something is hanging or waiting around for something to initialise (or maybe the glowplugs need to warm up)
cheers,
Chris Maunder
The Code Project Co-founder
Microsoft C++ MVP
|
|
|
|
|
I second Chris - it boots much faster than XP or Vista on my laptop. I'd suspect that disk is not the bottleneck, which means the SSD won't do much good.
|
|
|
|
|
So far, I'm happy with my 2xVelociraptor RAID0 setup, and I got a cost around 1€/GB which is still expensive but affordable. Firefox opens in under 1 second with 14 addons. Visual Studio opens in 2 seconds and a solution with 16 C# projects and around 110KLOC builds from scratch in 7 seconds (but I have an i7 920 + 12GB DDR3 RAM, which makes a lot of difference, trust me).
I'm not sure how a Win7 setup will fit in 60GB. My C:\ drive, with only the OS and applications uses ~70GB (no pagefile, no hibernation file).
Besides that, I don't mind if the OS takes a lot of time to boot as I mostly use standby, but I prefer fast applications startup. If you install applications on a regular drive, I think you're wasting the benefits of a SSD drive.
What really matters, in my opinion, is a balanced system. On a laptop I replaced the HDD with a faster one, and doubled the RAM, yet performance was not that much better because the CPU was already maxed out (and it's not that bad as it's a Core2 Duo 2.0GHz).
I'd like some feedback.
|
|
|
|
|
Win7 OS boot time dropped from 33 to 14 sec; sadly my Mobo bios putters around for 30s before handing over to the boot loader.
I haven't noticed any wow level speedups but in general my PC is much more responsive anytime I need to access the disk. I got a 120gb since that's enough space to hold everything except my photo/music/video collection.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
XP starts up in a few seconds on my Intel 80 GB HD.
Trouble is launching firefox for the first time on starting up takes forever because of the way it manages its database (which I have on a 7200 rpm HD).
|
|
|
|
|
Last month I also bought OCZ Summit 60GB for $150.00 (it was on sale at amazon.com) It has quite good Read (210 MB/Sec) and Write (145 MB/Sec) speed. so you need to make sure that it has more speed then RAID 0 (~140 MB/Sec Read and Write speed). Otherwise you can buy two 1 TB HDD in almost same price and you can setup RAID 0.
After adding SSD as a boot device my Windows 7 boots within 18-20 sec after BIOS screen (with sql server express 2008 installed). that means now instead of hibernate/sleep I can shutdown the windows.
|
|
|
|
|
The Samsung controller in that performs much worse in random IO than rival intel/indilinx controllers, without trim random write eventually decays to the level of a magnetic disk (OTOH that's still better than the jmicron controller); and it's random IO that makes the biggest noticeable difference in performance (becuase your system seems slowest when thrashing the disk). OCZ is claiming on newegg that samsung is working on a tool to update the firmware and add trim support; YMMV on if/when it becomes available and how much it actually helps. Baring major improvements elsewhere it's still going to be a poor third to intel/indilinx controllers.
3x12=36
2x12=24
1x12=12
0x12=18
|
|
|
|
|
Rob Philpott wrote: Windows 7 seems very slow to start up
Not really. Raid 0 pair of not-outstanding SATAs and it's maybe 30 secs to login from the end of POST.
I hope you realise that hamsters are very creative when it comes to revenge. - Elaine
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
