486 performance, suggestions and curiosity on marketing issues

By carmenara | January 16th, 2009 | 11:47 pm

Great, Version 486 raised my disk performance considerably compared to version 484.

Direct Access: 35.424515 MB/s
Cache Enabled: 51.318626 MB/s

This is a laptop 8GB internal SSD running a 512mb cache on a class 4 Kingston SDHC. I’ve noticed cache building has become even faster and I don’t have to manually add OpenOffice to the startup list.

Current caches are:
Windows Explorer
Media Player Classic
OpenOffice Base, Writer, Calc, Impress
Photoshop 6.0
ESET Smart Security
VMC Mobile Connect (3G Modem Driver)
Mozilla Firefox

SpeedMeasure Firefox Test:
Direct Access: 1.73s
Cached: 1.17s
Cache Hits: 91%

Program load times generally shorten significantly after caching.


1. Probably want the “boost meter” icon in the system tray to have some functionality, such as displaying cache statistics upon mouseover, such as (Active, Y: Cache Hits 40% over 2h 20min) – duration might be helpful for those free trial users whose software terminates function after 4 hours.

1a. Maybe give program access options on right-click, like many common system tray apps – for this program, might include Eboostr Control Panel,etc

1b. Well if it’s already implemented, then the systray is mysteriously dormant on my system! (EeePC701SD, running WinXP SP3) Though the boost meter graphic works.

2. Pre-installation of filename exclusion of cache would be most welcome, otherwise many people will be caching their entire winamp music collection into their flash memory cache which is very wasteful. There is currently no way to delete files in cache that I know of besides destroying the entire cache (correct me if wrong).

Perhaps we can make a listing of “document and media” files that can be excluded automatically?

Mine would be *. mp3, pdf, doc, jpg etc

Might have an install option – automatically exclude media files from cache?

3.Upon installation and restart, Eboostr asks if the user would like to build a cache after assigning the first device. I put “No” in the box but Eboostr started to precache anyway. Quite redundant askance, si?

I would find it more helpful if it would ask the user if s/he would like to assign the applications priority, first.

486 is a very good build – I believe the product is highly marketable should we focus on the concept of being able to cut down loading times by up to 50% especially on resource intensive applications and on older computer systems.

I would however be curious – if I upgraded this machine to 2GB RAM how effective is Eboostr and its semi permanent cache? Is this still a competitive product for its main function of increasing general performance for normal computing functions? Many reviews out on the net suggest that this product would find more acceptance for laptops and older computer systems.

2 Responses to “486 performance, suggestions and curiosity on marketing issues”

  1. Colonel ONeill
    Jan 17, 2009

    IMHO, there’s a lot of possible new features that could be added to eBoostr. Unfortunately the way things are going recently (Build 486 post), it seem’s like they’re going to make this version 3 and throw everything to version 4 to entice users to upgrade.

    (Do I smell another Microsoft?) =D

  2. carmenara
    Jan 17, 2009

    I don’t blame them for that – they have to make the business successful after all.

    A 100% solution spends a long time in making. When finally released, everyone would have gone somewhere else – a 70% solution that strives for perfection grows progressively and generally works far better in the long run.