8 years ago
I've used it and it works although I didn't see that drastic difference on my computer. Is there any arguments against this worth mentioning here?
Why hasn't it been a default setting in the past. It can run in the background without the user evoking any settings.
I didn't know such an app existed. I'll give it a try, but your idea has my +1 for the moment
I'm in favour. Have been using it for quite some time on Debian and must say it really speeds things up. It might add a second or 2 on boot, but is totally worth it, especially with programmes like Firefox et al.
Preload has been used successfully in Gentoo for years (I've used it for quite some time) and paired with prelinking. I think this has been misunderstood as well - it's caching binaries for faster access since they are already in memory. This is why for example a second instance of Firefox starts quickly if one is already still open - a large chunk of the necessary code is already launched.
There's no magic, like @Rovanion as said.
@heltonbiker I think that you are misunderstanding the basic idea behind Preload. It does not do magic, it cannot predict what photo you are going to view next. What it does is to cache IE binaries that you use a lot so that when you launch your photo viewing application it will start much faster.
And on the idea of duplicating effort: unless there is some basic architectural issue with the way Preload works, why would you rewrite it? It is Open Source.
The overall idea is pretty fine. I don't know if it would be best to use Preload itself or any third-party/outsource or in-house solution, but the concept seems very strong. I feel the lack of it on some jobs, specially rapidly viewing photo sequences.