From amigans.net
http://www.amigans.net/modules/xforum/viewtopic.php?topic_id=5512&forum=37

_________________
retired

@AmigaBlitter

_________________
____________________________
c64-2sids, A1000, A1200T-060@50(finally working!),A4000-CSMKIII
! My Master Miggies- Amiga 1000 & AmigaOne X1000 !
mancave-ramblings
X1000 I BELIEVE

@klx300r

Great news.

_________________

I haven't even got to power my computer up yet and I need to update Timberwolf and Run-In-UAE.

Great news.

_________________
AmigaOne X1000, A4000(T), A3000, A2000, A1200(T), A1200, A500, CD32, Minimig+ARM, FPGA Arcade, Chameleon64, C-One, C128, C128D, C64C, C64, VIC-20, CBM 8032, CBM4032, Efika, Ultimate64

I am more pleased he's feeling better.

_________________
The Machine: Bride Of The Pin•Bot by Williams Electronics

Whoa! There was a slowdown bug on last version? Could TW go even slower than RC1 I had tested?

Edit: Added appropriate emoticon.

Last edited by Cool_amigaN on 05-Sep-2012 at 03:49 PM.

_________________

Installation went just fine, now I'am gona make some heavy tests

Thank you!

_________________
5*C-64, C128, A500, A1200 PPC, Micro-A1(sold).....and X1000

Installed fine and works. The speed is sometimes ok on SAM667Mhz.
(need to update the system to 4.1u5 on the next time slice)

_________________
- KimmoK
// For freedom, for honor, for AMIGA
//
// Thing that I should find more time for: CC64 - 64bit Community Computer?

Works nice :) thanks

@AmigaBlitter

Installed and working fine, seems a bit faster on my SAM460, well done all involved, it's getting there

_________________
SAM 460 with 2GB or RAM, 1000GB HD, 4 port SATA, DVDRW drive and Radeon HD 4650 GFX card.

Well it doesnt pass the Facebook test still far too slow

_________________

I'm not sure why 'everyone' is speed-testing Timberwolf, when we (should) know that it is basically unoptimised at the moment. and is therefore very CPU demanding. The current aim being to fix bugs (which I imagine includes anything where it stalls for a long time seemingly doing nothing).

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

@ChrisH

Because Its the most natural thing to do! Also it doesn't just appear to be slow 'graphically' which has been emphasised alot already, but also resolving, waiting for and transfering data.

I think the other frustration stems from how long it is taking to get even to the stage it is at right now with other factors in play such as AmigaOS 4.2 and the fabled netbook.

Last edited by djrikki on 05-Sep-2012 at 06:23 PM.
Last edited by djrikki on 05-Sep-2012 at 06:19 PM.
Last edited by djrikki on 05-Sep-2012 at 06:18 PM.

_________________

About facebook usability...

On a SAM667Mhz, facebook is painfully slow on both muiowb and TW, while muiowb is faster of the two. I guess I still need other HW for some sites, untill optimizations bring huge improvements (they should if they plan to release the 400Mhz netbook).

btw... how can I see if my system is swapping (beside trying to look HDD led behaviour).
(IB+muiowb+TW took the HW pretty close to 512M limit)

btw2: we NEED those new schedulers (a'la executive) to keep the system in flight, even with some 300% CPU load.

Last edited by KimmoK on 05-Sep-2012 at 06:36 PM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 05-Sep-2012 at 06:34 PM.
Last edited by KimmoK on 05-Sep-2012 at 06:34 PM.

_________________
- KimmoK
// For freedom, for honor, for AMIGA
//
// Thing that I should find more time for: CC64 - 64bit Community Computer?

RC3 seems pretty stable and quick on my x1000. Bookmarks are working well too.

_________________
AmigaOne X1000

@ddni

Yeah to be fair fb is slow in both.

Also to be fair I guess more amigans have been waiting for amodern mozilla browser a lot longer than I have.

_________________

Does anyone have problems with downloading files with new RC3. I tried to download a mp3 file from facebook. It asked me where to download (temp:files/) and then requester closed and nothing was downloaded.

@ChrisH

Because speed matters. And because it's called release candidate. A RC version is supposed to show what's actually coming in the final release. Probably a very misleading and wrong label for these versions.

_________________
My programs: via.bckrs.de
MorphOS user since V0.4 (2001)

@ChrisH

Quote:

I'm not sure why 'everyone' is speed-testing Timberwolf, when we (should) know that it is basically unoptimised at the moment. and is therefore very CPU demanding.

Thing is, progress is based on speed. We should understand that these releases are mostly bug fixes, but tracking any speed increase shows progress in optimization with later releases. I don't see a problem with that as long as ppl understand the way TW is being developed.

_________________
Hate tends to make you look stupid...

@Zylesea

Quote:

Because speed matters. And because it's called release candidate. A RC version is supposed to show what's actually coming in the final release. Probably a very misleading and wrong label for these versions.

speed does matter. and it's nice to know where things stand, especially when looking at progress over time. however keep in mind that the friedens have stated -- many times -- that the first version would be focused solely on feature completeness. performance hasn't even been looked at substantially yet. that is to come in a subsequent version.

so given that was the published goal, then no, it's not misleading to be calling these builds release candidates, because that's what they actually are.

-- eliyahu

_________________
"Physical reality is consistent with universal laws. When the laws do not operate, there is no reality. All of this is unreal."