Author Topic: Slow to start...  (Read 3154 times)

Andy_Burn

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Slow to start...
« on: January 16, 2010, 08:35:42 PM »
Hi.
I have a slimmed down XP running on an embedded Epia ML-6000.  With 1 gig ram, its ideal for a simple jukebox. Once .NET 3.5 framework is installed and I run JBP, it takes an age to load each time. When I purchased JBP I expected it to run a little quicker, even on this hardware.
The question I guess is why do you need to use .NET 3.5 with all its bells and whistles, when Im sure there are other dev environments that would be quicker.
I'm certain there are others who would like to put that older PC to use :)

Regards,
Andy

Steve

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2313
    • Jukeblaster.com
Re: Slow to start...
« Reply #1 on: January 16, 2010, 08:51:17 PM »
Hi.
I have a slimmed down XP running on an embedded Epia ML-6000.  With 1 gig ram, its ideal for a simple jukebox. Once .NET 3.5 framework is installed and I run JBP, it takes an age to load each time. When I purchased JBP I expected it to run a little quicker, even on this hardware.
The question I guess is why do you need to use .NET 3.5 with all its bells and whistles, when Im sure there are other dev environments that would be quicker.
I'm certain there are others who would like to put that older PC to use :)

Regards,
Andy

Hi Andy

I dont know what speed the cpu is running at on that machine but I can tell you that I have JBP running great on an old pc (650mhz) with 128mb ram and it is fast enough to use, I also know of others that suffer no performance loss on sub-1ghz systems.
JBP is not resource hungry so I dont know what problem you are having but i doubt it is down to the program size or lack of ram, you may get away using the compact framework but I have not tested that, (let me know if you try it ?)... I'm just wondering what the "slimed down XP" is missing ?, will the system run full XP ? give that a go perhaps ?

Let me know how you get on  ;D

 
Send us some crypto :-)
It helps us pay for the forum and new jukebox developments


Bitcoin
bc1qlfjvxfpj75wcpraa5phvvxjpc9w7dxhd8y9s0k

Doge
DGvvJZ6JNxcGtSSbgjaNE5zDe13YWwaPVE


Andy_Burn

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Slow to start...
« Reply #2 on: January 16, 2010, 09:01:17 PM »
Hi Steve,
The machine is 600Mhz and Ive been running n-lite to strip out all the things you dont really need in a jukebox.
Once JBP is up and running which can take a minute, it seems to work fine, until I run a search.
I'll try a fresh install of 'full' xp. I have a feeling it may be the network. I cant remember, but if I've stripped out network/indexing features, it may be the root cause. Does JBP build a music database at all?
I have a gigabit network and a big linux server which works a treat, so Im sure its not the other components of my network.
Thanks for the quick reply.
I'll have another go this weekend.
Regards,
Andy

Andy_Burn

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Slow to start...
« Reply #3 on: January 18, 2010, 05:08:15 PM »
Hi Steve,
I tried a fresh full install of XP, and a ripped out version of 7.
On both, the screen update is slow, and it looks like its redrawing all the icons/splash screens several times. However, once it gets going, it works. It may the low res Im running at, as mentioned in my other post, 800x600.
The searches run quicker when I move music to the local drive.
Heh, I should stop complaining! I can live with it  ::)

Thanks,
Andy

Andy_Burn

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 8
Re: Slow to start...
« Reply #4 on: January 18, 2010, 05:10:04 PM »
Hi Steve,
I tried a fresh full install of XP, and a ripped out version of 7.
On both, the screen update is slow, and it looks like its redrawing all the icons/splash screens several times. However, once it gets going, it works. It may the low res Im running at, as mentioned in my other post, 800x600.
The searches run quicker when I move music to the local drive.
Heh, I should stop complaining! I can live with it  ::)

Thanks,
Andy

I should mention it also does has the redraw problem at 1024x768.  Its probably the unichrome video chipset, which I dont think has ever has full support from any OS.

Cheers,
Andy