My measurements:

VM 3.4.2, Windows 2000, P3-600, 640mb ram:

Dragging the image onto Squeak.exe takes 1.5 seconds.

Double clicking Squeak.exe and letting it find the image (only one in this
directory) takes 16.5 seconds.

Hmm!

I did this several times, so disk access speed should not be a factor. I
turned on printerzilla and it didn't make a difference. During this 'hang
time' Squeak isn't using any cpu, and its only got about 1 meg allocated
(goes to 28 megs once it finishes loading).

Eddie

----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Rowledge" <tim at sumeru.stanford.edu>
To: <andrew_c_berg at yahoo.com>; <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 3:35 PM
Subject: Re: A sort-of status report, and a newbie cry for help.


> Andrew Berg <andrew_c_berg at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > I recently downloaded the latest Squeak 3.4.1 image and VM for windows,
and
> > installed onto my laptop, which is a 1GHz Pentium IIIm with Windows XP
and
> > 512MB of ram.  I only mention that because from the time that I double-
> > click my shortcut to 'squeak.exe squeak.image' to the time that I see a
> > window appear it seems to vary from 1 to 3 minutes, and once up the
mouse
> > moves very slowly and jerkily across it, and windows do not drag around
> > smoothly, etc.
> Something must be _very_ wrong for this to happen. On my 200MHz
> StrongARM machine it usually takes 20 seconds or so to start up and that
> is bad enough. On a friends tabletPC it takes barely 3-5 seconds and on
> my ancient 400MHz pBook it doesn't take much longer.
>
> Has somebody put some dreadful net-dependant startup code in recently?
>
> tim
>
> --
> Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
> Useful random insult:- She's a screensaver:  Looks good, but useless.
>
>