Version 1.01
By dgtiii | November 14th, 2007 | 5:35 pm
I installed version 1.01 over version 1.0 (build 381). Version now shows 1.0 build 383 (not version 1.01, but that’s okay). Install went fine, and I deleted and rebuilt the cache. Cache building was very fast, and overall, the new version ‘feels’ snappier’. My only concern is that, with both releases (1.0 and 1.01), I now get the warning that my thumb drive (OCZ Rally 1gig double data rate) is ‘low speed’. I didn’t get that warning with any of the betas or release candidates. Other than that, no problems. I also noticed the yellow tray icon warning that the cache was rebuilding seems to have gone away (it was present a lot in version 1.0).
Nov 14, 2007
sure here i get 1.0 build 383. I too find it snappier when loading programs. So I can vouch for that. My Pc is caching off another harddrive. However I am stuck for what type or brand to use for my laptop to get the greatest speed with eboostr
Nov 14, 2007
I mean what brand of usb stick to go for to get the best eboostr speed
Nov 15, 2007
It can be any device with 200x (~30mb/s) read speed
Nov 15, 2007
Do we need to delete and rebuild the cache with each upgrade?
Nov 15, 2007
I’m using, as flash drive, A-data 8gb Pen (200x) and have no warnings at all
Nov 15, 2007
You do not need to delete and rebuild cache. It will be done automatically if needed.
Nov 15, 2007
there is defo something wrong if your OCZ Rally 1gig double data rate is showing as low cause isnt that a 19mb/s flash stick
Nov 15, 2007
clairebear, here is the URL to what I found on the web about the test of OCZ Rally drives:
http://www.techarp.com/showarticle.aspx?artno=267&pgno=5
Look at the read and write tests for “Small Documents” (that can approximately emulate the random access)–the speed is not so good :(
Nov 15, 2007
Andrew,
The issue is not really hte speed of my OCZ Rally drive, the issue is that, with each and every build that incorporated the reported speed of the drive by EBoostr has changed, and suddenly since version 1.0 and again 1.01, it is now reported as ‘low speed’, when it was not with the betas or release candidates.
Nov 15, 2007
Hm, OK. Did you remember the values shown in BETAs?
As we added the code to measure the speed in BETA 4 — there were no changes in it, as far as I know. Ilya may probably correct me if I’m wrong.
Nov 15, 2007
just as well i dont have a ocz rally then Lol
Nov 15, 2007
clairebear, oops, sorry :)
Nov 15, 2007
Andrew,
Version 1.01 (383): Random Read speed: 1400 KB/s (low speed warning)
Uninstalled 1.01, reinstalled RC (378): Random Read speed: 4003 KB/s (no warning)
Uninstalled RC, reinstalled 1.01 (383): Random Read speed: 10521 KB/s (no warning)
I had previously installed 1.01 over version 1.0 (381). That’s my point, the numbers are all over the place, and erroneous low speed warnings may have people trying to replace thumb drives that are perfectly fine.
Nov 15, 2007
Ouch. Sorry for being so stupid. I’ve finally got you mean :)
OK, we will re-check this part of code. Thank you.
Nov 15, 2007
You weren’t being stupid, Andrew. I think I was being unclear ;) I love the product, and want other people to love it also, and so I think it’s important for the speed numbers to be consistent for the customers. By the way, uninstalling completely then reinstalling seems to give a much better performance boost than simply upgrading an existing installation. It may be a good idea for the help file to say that. Nice work!