Ned Konz <ned at bike-nomad.com> wrote:
> On Monday 15 July 2002 05:12 pm, Aaron J Reichow wrote:
> > If you wouldn't mind, trying out the Dynapad image, and running a
> > '0 tinyBenchmarks' would be awesome.  The Dynapad image can be
> > found on http://dynapad.swiki.net/8
> 
> 0 tinyBenchmarks => 3389830 bytecodes/sec; 90541 sends/sec

On my 206 MHz iPAQ, I get 4739336 bytecodes/sec; 386492 sends/sec. 
Perhaps I should look into getting an optmized GNU VM- your 131 MHz
machine gets twice the bytecodes/sec than my 206 MHz StrongARM. Is there
any page up about the procedure behind that?

> I did notice that Morphic -- at least bringing up menus, etc. -- is 
> considerably faster in your image than the 3.2 image I last tried.
> 
> I wonder why.
> 
> Anyone know why bringing up menus in 3.2 would be slower than in 2.8?

There was a discussion about this a while back, with no conclusions
other than that browsing is slower because the '-- all --' method
category is selected right away.  However, myself and others have
observed that there is a definate difference in how fast 2.8 and 3.2
feel.

Regards,
Aaron