slhk Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 1) Handle protection. 9x lacks proper GDI handle validation which may result in incorrect memory access or wrong...USER Salvation was explained before. In short, it saves >100 bytes per process by combining comctl32 classes with system classes. Not much, but you can run 60% more Notepad copies on clean system.Tihiy, could you copy all these information to your first few posts of RP9? I think it necessary to let more people know the "resource salvation" side of RP9. There are still many people (like me) using Win98 heavily at work. System stability is very important to usThank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tihiy Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 I think it necessary to let more people know the "resource salvation" side of RP9.Of course it is. I just lack time to compile all info about RP9. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted March 19, 2009 Share Posted March 19, 2009 I've just installed RP9. I did a full install. I am not using any skin, nor 32-bit icons at the moment, but I'm using ClearType. Here're my first impressions: Before RP9, just after system startup: 57% USER resources & 82% GDI resources.After RP9, just after system startup: 71% USER resources & 81% GDI resources.And the resource drain is much slower, and resource recovery (after working for some time and then closing every aplication that was not open just after startup) is much better. Wow! Wonderful! Thanks a whole lot Tihiy! Keep on the great work! You rock! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Results reported by RetroOS on post #60 in the RP9 thread:Okay, RP9 officially ROCKS! No change in GDI, but USER resources went UP 7% from no RP to after installing RP9!!!That is so ultimately awesome!It was the USER resources that I always had a problem with.Testing so far is all good.[...]I took the liberty to quote it here because it's relevant to this thread's main topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tihiy Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Well, if your USER percentages go up that high, i have bad news for ya It can only mean that there's too much resource intensive apps in startup. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queue Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 Well, if your USER percentages go up that high, i have bad news for ya It can only mean that there's too much resource intensive apps are in startup.No, no, it's GOOD news. They're talking about how much FREE resources they have. When they say resources went ''up'' by 7%, they mean 7% more free resources.Queue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tihiy Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 No, that's bad news. Since percents are trimmed by amount of resources left after startup programs, it means those programs eat too much resources.I saw 3% up max. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 (edited) Well, if your USER percentages go up that high, i have bad news for ya It can only mean that there's too much resource intensive apps are in startup.Sure, Tihiy!But those are real-life configurations:RetroOS machine's USER resources had a 7% free increase.Mine own machine's USER resources had a 14% free increase.Of course, I've got many real programs in start-up that do IMHO useful things, like Pop Up Killer 1.45.5, HDDHealth 2.1 and Disk Space Monitor 1.0b4 ... At any moment, from start-up onwards, I have at least 16 icons in the system tray. I've trimmed my start-up configuration to the limit. I can't do without any of the programs in the tray. I need the things they do. Now you know why we are talking about "Heaps Expansion" since 2007... Of course, now the name of the subject might as well be changed to "Resources Salvation". But these real-life examples illustrate well the situation: even little improvements in resource management lead to impressive results, because people run many real programs from start-up onwards. Thanks to your efforts, our systems are much better now. You do rock! Edited March 21, 2009 by dencorso Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queue Posted March 20, 2009 Share Posted March 20, 2009 No, that's bad news. Since percents are trimmed by amount of resources left after startup programs, it means those programs eat too much resources.I saw 3% up max.Ahhh, now I understand.And dencorso... your system tray is an abomination. ^_^ Mine has two icons, and that's two too-many. The speaker icon (which I leave just so I always have one thing, because truthfully an empty system tray is weird) and ZoneAlarm. The only other thing I have run at startup is TweakUI.Queue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 And dencorso... your system tray is an abomination. ^_^ Mine has two icons, and that's two too-many. The speaker icon (which I leave just so I always have one thing, because truthfully an empty system tray is weird) and ZoneAlarm. The only other thing I have run at startup is TweakUI.Yes, I know! Then again, my system is quite stable, and before RP9 I already had > 40h uptimes easily...Now it's bound to be even better, because it was the resources that usually caused me to reboot.BTW, I do run Tweak UI, too. I didn't mention it because it doesn't add any icon to the tray, so I forgot about it.And I do run the much maligned Norton Crash Guard, that never gave me any grief, and time and again helped me avoid a reboot. Here, however, YMMV aplies, of course! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroOS Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 Hi folks!Just to get my 7% USER resources increase in perspective...Without RP or UberSkin, I had 77% USER resources free and 97% GDI resources free...I always trim down unneeded startup apps.With RP9 installed, I get 84% USER resources free and 97-98% GDI resources free (It sits at 97%, but sometimes it's 98% - I never saw it above 97% without RP9...)I know Tihiy thinks this kind of increase is bad (from a technical viewpoint), but I think it's good!So, to conclude, it would appear that RP9 is doing good things by freeing wasted resources. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfor Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 I've been thinking about the GDI resources limit while reading this thread from the beginning. There are many opinions telling it can not be done.My conclusion is, it was done somehow in Windows 2000. Since the same applications are working in Windows 2000 and 98, it should be possible to increase the resource limit in 98 without recompilation of the user applications.I would like to know how Windows 2000 does manage the GDI resources. And where is the difference from the Windows 98 point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RetroOS Posted March 21, 2009 Share Posted March 21, 2009 (edited) ...My conclusion is, it was done somehow in Windows 2000. Since the same applications are working in Windows 2000 and 98, it should be possible to increase the resource limit in 98 without recompilation of the user applications....That is exactly what has been bugging me for years!Windows 2000 onwards will run many of the apps that run on 9x.However, they don't have the same kind of resources issues.So... It is technically possible...Whether it could be done is quite another problem.I expect it would require extensive modifications to the Windows kernel... Edited March 21, 2009 by RetroOS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dencorso Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 Quick reference index of information about RP9 by Tihiy himself:USER SalvationGDI Salvationadditional functionality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noguru Posted March 22, 2009 Share Posted March 22, 2009 That is exactly what has been bugging me for years!Windows 2000 onwards will run many of the apps that run on 9x.However, they don't have the same kind of resources issues.So... It is technically possible...Wrong analogy. There are also plenty apps that run on w2k and onwards but will never run on win9x by design. Kernel modifications like KernelEx don't change this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now