Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #51310

Re: This myth no longer needs debunking

Show all headers | View raw

In article <slrnl7088b.ebu.mr@irc.sandman.net>, Sandman
<mr@sandman.net> wrote:

> In article <301020130938025709%YourName@YourISP.com>, Your Name
> <YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:
> 
> > > The desktop is just another folder, and its icons are treated the same
> > > way. 
> > > If one of the icons are, for instance, an image file as an alias to a 
> > > remote server or an external drive, displaying that icon preview
> > > (thumbnail 
> > > image) may take a while becuase it has to spin up the drive or mount the 
> > > server. There can be other reasons as well.
> > > 
> > > OSX 10.9, as all versions before it, can handle more files in a folder
> > > than 
> > > your desktop could ever handle.
> > > 
> > > Turn off icon preview for the desktop (click on desktop, cmd-J and
> > > uncheck 
> > > file preview and show item info) and see if that makes a difference. If
> > > it 
> > > does, then my above suspicion may just be correct. If not, then I'd still 
> > > say it's something else than just the sheer number of icons you have on
> > > the 
> > > desktop.
> > 
> >  Not quite true.
> > 
> >  The Desktop *is* just another folder in terms of storage, but in terms
> >  of displaying the content it is different. The content of any other
> >  folder is displayed in a window, whereas the content of the Desktop is
> >  displayed directly in the Finder.
> 
> Uh, that windows is also displayed "directly in the finder". I think you 
> mean directly on the background or something like that. It makes no 
> difference to how the Finder displays icons though.

The point was that folders open in a window that is updated as needed -
close the window and it doesn't need to be updated by the OS.

The files on the Desktop are constantly displayed and constantly need
updating by the OS because the Finder is rarely, if ever, closed - the
more files there are, the longer it takes. Even simply puttin, for
example, the 100 Desktop files into five folders that are still on the
Desktop can speed things up.




> >  I don't know how true it is, but I have read in various places that
> >  each icon on the desktop is supposedly treated in a similar way to an
> >  individual window by Mac OS X - LOTS of icons and / or open windows
> >  will cause the computer to be slow.
> 
> You're going to have to find a source for that information. That's highly 
> unlikely for the plain reason that there would be no reason.

In terms of resources used by the OS, it makes some sense. A windows is
a known entity that with known content that can be fairly easily moved
around and updated. A Desktop with lots of files on the other hand is a
different matter due to the way it is displayed (i.e. not a window).



> Needlesstosay, the FInder has no problems showing a multitude of windows 
> either way.

The more windows you have open the slower the computer gets ... of
course, it may have to be *LOTS* of windows on modern fast computers.

Back to comp.sys.mac.system | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-29 12:27 -0400
  Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-29 19:27 +0000
    Re: This myth no longer needs debunking nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 16:01 -0400
    Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-30 09:38 +1300
      Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-29 20:50 +0000
        Re: This myth no longer needs debunking nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-29 16:58 -0400
        Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-30 19:51 +1300
          Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2013-10-30 00:24 -0700
            Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-30 08:40 +0000
              Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 09:33 +1300
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-30 21:07 +0000
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 13:34 +1300
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-31 08:36 +0000
          Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-30 08:38 +0000
            Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 09:25 -0400
              Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 19:58 -0400
              Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 13:29 +1300
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 00:10 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 18:39 +1300
            Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2013-10-31 13:26 +1300
              Re: This myth no longer needs debunking nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 03:02 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 09:30 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 15:36 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 15:47 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-31 16:17 -0400
              Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-31 08:35 +0000
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 09:35 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-31 14:38 +0000
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-31 13:37 -0400
                Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Sandman <mr@sandman.net> - 2013-10-31 18:03 +0000
        Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-10-30 12:50 +0000
          Re: This myth no longer needs debunking nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2013-10-30 11:38 -0400
    Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-29 17:41 -0400
  Re: This myth no longer needs debunking billy@MIX.COM - 2013-10-29 20:18 +0000
    Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-29 17:44 -0400
  Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2013-10-30 12:48 +0000
    Re: This myth no longer needs debunking Wes Groleau <Groleau+news@FreeShell.org> - 2013-10-30 09:36 -0400

csiph-web