View Single Post
Old 24 March 2015, 17:54   #7
Unregistered User
demolition's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Copenhagen / DK
Age: 38
Posts: 3,696
Originally Posted by Hewitson View Post
Really? I thought 3.9 sucked even on an 060. There's no way it's faster than 3.1.
Depends on how you compare them.

I'm comparing a 3.1 with UI modifications to function similar to 3.9 but without the optimized libraries as I didn't experiment with those until 3.9 as I made a custom kickstart 3.9 for it. Just icon.library makes a big difference.

There are many ways to compare the speed. I'm talking about the speed of opening directories and moving windows around in WB. Booting takes a while longer though, but that is not important to me.

Obviously a plain 3.1 installation will fly along but it is not very usable to me as it is missing a lot of things.

For the general user, I'd recommend ClassicWB 3.1. It has a very nice GUI and is not missing much from 3.9.
demolition is offline  
Page generated in 0.06182 seconds with 10 queries