Database Users

Size matters - how to make png's, exe's, tsk's and cabs smaller

Hello, this is one of the first posts, I don't know if you have any interest on this, but here it goes:
fact 1: EXE's and DLL's may be compressed
fact 2: PNG's may be compressed without any quality loss
based on that, I will explain what I do to make smaller CAB's and do not waste so many space when you have those installed.
tools used:
UPX (http://upx.sf.net)
pngout (http://advsys.net/ken/util/pngout.exe)
msceinf (http://www.codeppc.com/telechargements/msceinf/msceinf.htm)
cabwiz (from Microsoft)
let's put this together with a simple example with HTC Audio Manager CAB file:
size before: 1.135.294
size after: 327.204
(yes, 347% reduction, and all works well)
1. used msceinf to decompile the cab, and decompress it to a directory
2. used command "upx *.exe *.dll" on the decompressed directory
3. used command "for %i in (*.png) do pngout "%i" /kp" on the same directory
4. recreated the cab using "cabwiz Audio Manager.inf /compress"
that's it, until now I could regain a lot of space, of course that using exe compression makes programs a bit slower, but I believe there are more advantages than disavantages.
On Themes you can also achieve better compression using the same technique, decompiling the file, then using pngout on them and recreating the cab's back.
some results on a theme file:
Htc_New_Default.tsk original: 106.828
Htc_New_Default.tsk optimized: 44.835
I also saw some problems on some icon packages: sometimes the authors compile them with thumbs.db on it, resulting in complete waste of space.
Regards.

interesting. I never thought about it this way.
Optimized rom chefs, start your engines!!!!
In other news, dig the title.

It should be pointed out that one of the main negatives to upx'ing files is that they take up more memory. Example..a 100k program upx'd to 50k takes up 150k when ran and not all of the ram is released. This is typically why everyone doesn't just go crazy with compressing everything in site. If you need the space and are willing to sacrifice some memory then upx it..otherwise you'd be better off leaving it be. Also..if you are going to use upx or one of the other utils make sure you are using the most recent version to get best performance.

Yes, that's why I wrote that last sentence regarding EXE compression, some figures for CommManager that occupies 508KB as a process, it was tested by reading the in use memory when CommManager was running, and after I forced it's close (to check real memory usage, since process memory reads the same):
using UPX EXE: 33.77-32.89 = 0,88MB
original EXE: 33.67-32.89 = 0,78MB
so it's about 100KB difference for this EXE (since I don't usually run a lot of programs at the same time, I don't care about this), but for PNG's that are used more and more on pocket pc programs, it really makes a difference.

I've updated this with how to optimize Themes as well...

BullGates said:
I've updated this with how to optimize Themes as well...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know there is a upx --ultra-brute switch that basically tries everything to get the smallest size?

Yes thanks. But as you pointed well, it's better to use EXE and DLL compression evaluating your needs. I've rebuilt many cab's concentrating on the graphics compression and I'm quite happy with the results. Smaller CAB's means smaller install times (not very noticed, but it's a fact) less need for storage - if you build your setups based on extended rom storage, this is quite handy. Also you have better performance since less bytes are involved on the loading (so better loading times).

Actually, I was looking to do exactly the same!
I had already found upx and was going to combine this with infocabxp and my own simple parser for the *.000/_setup.xml files, until I found the free msceinf tool - and about an hour later I find your post.
I just wish I found your post first, it would have saved me a lot of time
It is probably best to apply upx compression on exe's and dll's of standalone applications that you start manually or for short time use, and not all background processes as well, but I see there are already some thoughts on that subject

Thanks
How to do this
. used command "for %i in (*.png) do pngout "%i" /kp" on the same directory
Would u please explain more?
Regards

my 3 cents..
there's no reason to upx small files, lol...
40 kb of space may be equal of 40 kb mem less, if dll is persistent/resident(works all the time) - also not every dll/exe may be upxed - it may be broken after upx(i.e. isilo).
.net apps CANNOT be upxed for now.
DO NOT upx today plugins' dlls! they may lose stability/ you may have loading problems etc + mem loss, of course.
you can upx cpl's too.
always crunch at maximal pack setting!
do not pack exe icons, and relocs.
do not try to make xip modules from upxed files!
gfx resources like bmps may became smaller after pallette decrease(it is quite useful while reshacking - i.e. commgr may be smaller = faster launch times etc) regardless of saving method(24,32bit).
almost 100% of pngs, that are used in software/system etc usually loses its size after reedit = faster software loading/ working/less mem used(dialpad res's, home plug, etc) - usually palette decreasing works in same way, as with bmps - smaller file size(yeah, i know, that png is saved as 8bpp, but..sometimes palette may be 4 bit i.e.).

Caching

I've read some thread here in this site that file explorer has been cached so that opening folders won't take too long to open, especially the windows folder. i was just wondering how do you do the caching or is there such a program that does this?

Yup... Opera 8.65 also got cache but we can set the size by editing the input.ini file any size let say 2000KB or 8000KB etc..etc. It will replace new files as more and more items coming but the size remain its maximum.NetFront also got this feature. But how to set limit for the cache size of IE so that it will not grow and grow unless we manually delete those and once delete it will clear all. Then starting a page will have to start all over again.
Any one knows about registry hacks to do this?

i'm proud to be a noob!!
Well, i for sure don't know how to do registry hacks cause i'm just a noob adoring all the incredible work the other guys are doing and it just stuns me and leaves in awe everytime somethin' new comes up. so does anybody how to do the thing i mentioned?, registry hacks? anyone?

[Q] How to speed up memory acess on RA2?

I've waited for a while to see how everything would develop, but RA2 just remains slow as hell.
I'm getting main memory write of ~1700 and read of ~6100.
Storage card gets stuck at ~650 write and ~ 2600 read.
It's drama. Did anyone find a way to improve this, or must we start PM'ing tnyynt?

All I did was reflash back to the R1 firmware. I didn't see anything in the R2 that was better. So unless I missed something, I just went back to the R1 with the tweaks and it seems to be a lot smoother and quicker than the R2. Just my .02

I think and maybe wrong here, but the r2a roms are using a different memory model, that caches a lot more.
I've found that letting wm control the cache works best.
16mb pagepool is also good
despite the benchmarks I definitely find r2a faster than 1, inclduing sdcard access.
have you tried spb benchmarks "real world" tests, using word etc?

fards said:
I think and maybe wrong here, but the r2a roms are using a different memory model, that caches a lot more.
I've found that letting wm control the cache works best.
16mb pagepool is also good
despite the benchmarks I definitely find r2a faster than 1, inclduing sdcard access.
have you tried spb benchmarks "real world" tests, using word etc?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So what exactly did you change?
I haven't tried a SPB benchmark. I know SKtools isn't the most reliable test, but I think that the numbers I gave you tell us enough; it's not good.

Angelusz said:
I've waited for a while to see how everything would develop, but RA2 just remains slow as hell.
I'm getting main memory write of ~1700 and read of ~6100.
Storage card gets stuck at ~650 write and ~ 2600 read.
It's drama. Did anyone find a way to improve this, or must we start PM'ing tnyynt?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Can you verify that the registry entries from the cab have been indeed written to the registry?
If yes, use a tweaking program to verify File System Cache is enabled and set according to SD TuneUp.
Write operations should not be cached by default, so that result I seem fair but the SD read result I find low. What was your result on the previous ROM?

I checked and I think I found the issue. The settings are not applied indeed.
Funny thing is, I can't change them. I've tried with SOTI Pocket controller, as well as with SKtools' regeditor. The registry keys cannot be modified! Will try in another way, will post results.
EDIT: After some more thorough inspection, I found something is wrong.
The registry does show the correct HEX keys. In decimal however, it shows completely the wrong thing!
For instance the DWORD CardDetectControlMask:
In tnyynt SDtuneup.cab
Hexidecimal: fffff3ff
Decimal: -3073
In my registry:
Hexidecimal: fffff3ff
Decimal: 4294964223
How can this be explained? I've never seen HEX differ from decimal before..
Edit2
Third inspection shows me that the registry doesn't like a "-". In your CAB, - values are used. I can now modify positive values (took the SD card out), but can't enter minus.

Angelusz said:
EDIT: After some more thorough inspection, I found something is wrong.
In tnyynt SDtuneup.cab
Hexidecimal: fffff3ff
Decimal: -3073
In my registry:
Hexidecimal: fffff3ff
Decimal: 4294964223
How can this be explained? I've never seen HEX differ from decimal before..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i can explain this one. (i will use h for hexadecimal numbers and d for decimal numbers and b for binary numbers)
normally FFFFF3FFh =4294964223d in 32bits
but in binary you can not enter "-" in a cpu registry only 0 and 1
and you can only do addition. So to do 5d-2d they must do 5d+(-2d).
but (-2d ) can not be express in ordinary binary.
the example is only on 4bits
5d=0101b
2d=0010b
3d=0011b
the result must be 3d=011b
0101b
+xxxxb
_____
0011b
we find that xxxxb=1110b=(-2d) but 1110b also = 14d !!!
it works because of a registry overflow. on 4 bits you can only count up to 15 normally 0101b+1110b = 10011b -> 5 bits but only 4 bits can be stored so the one on the left is not in memory. so the result of the operation is 0011b.
the shortest way to find the representation of (-2d) is
take the biggest number on the number of bits you use. remove the absolute value of the negative number you are are looking for and add 1.
(computer can not do binary subtraction but human can )
on 4 bits
1111b - 0010b +0001b =
1101b +0001b=1110b
or 15d-2d+1d =14d
now on 32bits.
3073d=00000C01h
so
-3073d=FFFFFFFFh - 00000C01h +00000001h
-3073d=FFFFFFFFh- 00000C00h
-3073d= FFFFF3FFh !!!!!
all that to say that the value in the registry are the same....LOL
all depend if you consider it or not has a negative number.
normally we use the first bit on the left to know if its a positive or negative value.

Alright. So it actually is the same. Thanks for your elaborate explanation, it's never a bad time to learn something.
So it's all in the way it's displayed. I gues WinCE cab manager does allow showing -xxxx in registry entries, where the winmo registry does not.
This does mean that the values should indeed be applied correctly. Tnyynt?

After updating my firmware I've notice, faster boot up times, and TF3D is a lot smoother. A lot. Before the update TF3D would crash my phone. It hasn't crashed yet. I wondering why you guys are experiencing a sluggish update.

yogibear2009 said:
After updating my firmware I've notice, faster boot up times, and TF3D is a lot smoother. A lot. Before the update TF3D would crash my phone. It hasn't crashed yet. I wondering why you guys are experiencing a sluggish update.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This thread is not about it being sluggish, I'm pointing at the raw numbers. File transfer btw, is much slower.

Angelusz said:
This thread is not about it being sluggish, I'm pointing at the raw numbers. File transfer btw, is much slower.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My apologies. I didn't mean to highjack the thread.

tnyynt said:
What was your result on the previous ROM?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i got around 3000 on R2A
on R1A i use to have 12000 on my 16g sd card.
so it's significantly lower on R2A

Angelusz said:
Alright. So it actually is the same. Thanks for your elaborate explanation, it's never a bad time to learn something.
So it's all in the way it's displayed. I gues WinCE cab manager does allow showing -xxxx in registry entries, where the winmo registry does not.
This does mean that the values should indeed be applied correctly. Tnyynt?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it depends if Tnyynt have used decimal or hexadecimal to enter the values. registry are always imported in hexadecimal
if Tnyynt has entered the initial value in hexadecimal so the values are good but if Tnyynt entered the initial value in decimal there is a problem, but this one can be easily solved. it will just mean that R1A and R2A may not use the same code for numbers so in this case we will just have to recode the value to have the good numbers.
but i logicaly for a mask you use hexadecimal...
Has somebody tried to contact se about this problem?

Tylwith said:
i got around 3000 on R2A
on R1A i use to have 12000 on my 16g sd card.
so it's significantly lower on R2A
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yeah same here. This is why I was wondering if it was worth staying on the R1A since most programs are installed onto the mem card, the R1A firmware should be quicker at loading programs correct?

Ok, why are you people so keen about the benchmarks? Copy a file on your SD and compare the result. This is a lot more realistic test and there you can see if there is any real difference for your programs. Everything else is just for bragging, sorry.

Dandie said:
Ok, why are you people so keen about the benchmarks? Copy a file on your SD and compare the result. This is a lot more realistic test and there you can see if there is any real difference for your programs. Everything else is just for bragging, sorry.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it's not that simple because of the file system and how machine handles access to them. depending of the size of file you are copying the result can be very different. Some fs are better with tiny files some other with bigger files. there is also the access speed of the file that you can not really tell even if it has a big importance. it's a bit like internet speed . you can have a fast non responsive internet connection(will take long time to access a server but will download very fast for example). Or a responsive but very slow internet connection(remember of the days people were playing counterstrike on rtc modem because the rtc modem gave them a better ping than adsl or cable)
benchmarks try to copy different kind of file size and try to make an average score they also test multiple simultaneous access and thing like that which is important for multitasking. Futhermore it's not easy to try launch a copy a several tiny files by hand.
if your system is faster reading bigger file it doesn't mean that program that use smaller files will be faster.

Very true. tnyynt, what does all this tell you?

Sorry to be so late, time is not on my side nowadays.
I find it really strange that the TuneUp would work on any device sporting a Card but on the Xperia with the latest firmware. I think we can easily rule out registry and import incompatibilities since it's the same operating system.
Nothing clever comes to my mind but this:
try exporting the regustry entries from my CAB with WinCE CAB Manager and apply them as a registry patch on your device. See how that goes.

Understanding ROM/RAM Space

Howdy, guys. Hope one of you 'chefs' can help me get my head around this issue so I know how to approach decisions on which ROM I want.
The question I'm trying to understand is this.
If I were to create (or have made for me) a ROM with a smaller footprint (let's say maybe only 300mb), will the extra 276mb be available for user space to load programs? Or, is this a case where the ROM space is fixed and must be used; or even if unused would still not available for the system runtime or user purposes?
I ask because it would seem to me that if memory would be returned to the system for user purposes, that the leanest most lightweight ROM containing only the latest builds of WM, Manila and radios would make sense, because then the user can load whatever other utilities (footprints, compass, camera, etc.) that they want to.
It's entirely possible I'm asking for more work than it's worth, but I am curious to know, because if I'm right and that space would be made available for user purposes, I'd rather start with a 'vanilla' base and experiment with different utilities than have stuff put into the ROM that I might not want and/or would conflict with other programs that I do want.
Hope I'm making sense. Thanks in advance!

There are many different ROMs here. I've tried some of them (all right most of them) and there are roms that have many things build in and the free space is around 180 - 200MB free and on others that have only the most needed programs the free space goes up to near 300MB! As much as I know, the 512MB of ROM that is advertised is not devided by some way and the OS is part of the whole thing. So as bigger the ROM image is the less free space you have!
Correct me if I'm wrong!

A 300meg footprint is fairly hefty, the .nbh file for the rom i use is around 170Meg, Its a pretty lightweight rom that only installs the system, htc sense, and maybe a half dozen apps.
After installing maybe 10 (small) apps myself, plus opera, my 'Storage size' shows as 262.5 Meg total with 87 meg in use.
With stock roms it is down towards 160Meg total or there abouts, so just shows a cooked rom (which has sense and all the tabs) can still have at least 100meg knocked off the size by removing the extra apps.
As for RAM, that is no longer connected in any way to the rom. Not like old winmo devices where whatever space was left after install you decided how much is ram and how much is storage, no longer works like that. ROM is ROm and RAM is RAM.
If you want to utilise all that ram, look into ramdisks. I run my system, opera and IE cache from a ram disk, and it works fine.

samsamuel said:
If you want to utilise all that ram, look into ramdisks. I run my system, opera and IE cache from a ram disk, and it works fine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
How does that work mate?
I understand what a Ramdisk is from the olden days of MS-DOS.
Are you actually using the micro-SD slot to install your ROM, or using a portion of the SD as system memory?
What application could I use to create a Ramdisk?

samsamuel said:
A 300meg footprint is fairly hefty... stock roms it is down towards 160Meg total or there abouts, so just shows a cooked rom (which has sense and all the tabs) can still have at least 100meg knocked off the size by removing the extra apps.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, I was just using that size as an illustration to make sure I understood the concepts.
So what you're saying is that since there is 512MB of ROM space available, whatever size the ROM image is will be loaded into user space for runtime. Just to be sure I'm on the same page, let me show it this way to be sure (again, just as an illustration):
Basic cooked ROM
512MB ROM space
-112 basic ROM image
= 400MB unused ROM space
Loaded cooked ROM
512MB ROM space
-176 basic ROM image
= 336MB unused ROM space
When the system starts that ROM is loaded to RAM...
Basic cooked ROM
448RAM
-112ROM
=336MB RAM
Loaded cooked ROM
448RAM
-176 ROM loaded image
=272MB RAM
Do I have it right? If so, then it doesn't matter whether I have the programs I want pre-loaded in ROM or install them myself, since it's going into RAM anyway, other than the convenience of not having to reaload them in the event of a hard reset.
If I'm right, what still puzzles me is why HTC would have a ROM image larger than available RAM, unless some of those programs are 'execute-in-place', in which case it would make sense to have a larger ROM image.
Sorry about the questions, I'm just trying to get my head around how it all works.

Nezbert said:
How does that work mate?
I understand what a Ramdisk is from the olden days of MS-DOS.
Are you actually using the micro-SD slot to install your ROM, or using a portion of the SD as system memory?
What application could I use to create a Ramdisk?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Just like the good old days, it creates a file in RAM that the system 'sees' as another memory card. (It gives it the same system image as the sd card, , , or it would, but it runs better hidden, so i run mine hidden, lol) but which runs at full RAM speed.
The system can then use that just like a seperate hard disk (i use mine for cache, as i said) and it has the added benefit that a soft reset recreates it from new, so it therefore empties your cache folders.
There is more than one way to do this on win mo, there are a few threads strewn about the xda circus, but theres one on the hd2 section by appelflap HERE and ive attached my ramdisk cab built from that thread for you to play with if you like.
When you instal the cab, it creates a 30 meg hidden disk called wramdisk (it messes with the documents tab if you leave it visible, but the system can use it in paths and such), and it sets opera cache, IE cache and system cache to use it.

@BillTheCat
The 512 meg rom space is partitioned up into (at least, not sure of the technicalities) three chunks.
One for rom, one for radio, and one for splash screen.
Splash screen is immaterial, but the radios tend to be about 25 meg, The rom itself uses up around 150 - 200, lets say 200, so total used space so far is 225, add a bit for overhead (partitioning, file system etc) and we can assume 230/240, which leaves 272 meg total storage space.
The tricky part is the 'in use'/'free' part, because some of the files in the rom, (the system files and such) run from within the rom, which is why they cant be deleted, so they dont count towards the 'in use' figure, , but some files DO, i.e the ones that you can delete, such as the lockscreens, and the button graphics.
I would be surprised if the 'in use' before you install any third party apps got much higher than 80 meg.
All this leaves a 'free' figure of around 190 meg.
I hope this helps, even if it only does a half arsed job at explaining!
EDIT - oh and as for your RAM useage figures, the thing to remember is the hard coded system files run directly from the rom, that is why theyre such a pain to extract. These ones arent copied to RAM at all. (as far as i understand it, anyway, always happy to be corrected.)

samsamuel said:
EDIT - oh and as for your RAM useage figures, the thing to remember is the hard coded system files run directly from the rom, that is why theyre such a pain to extract.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, that's what I thought. It's kind of like what HP used to do with the x00LX series of palmtops, where DOS and the other internal applications would run in what they called 'Execute-In-Place'.
I'm asking, because I think I might want to 'hire' a chef to make a ROM for me based on my specifications, but I at least need to have a basic understanding of what the F is going on so that I don't sound like a blithering idiot when I finally talk to someone about it.
You've been most helpful - thanks so much!

** Question moved to new thread **
** Question moved to new thread **

samsamuel said:
When you instal the cab, it creates a 30 meg hidden disk called wramdisk (it messes with the documents tab if you leave it visible, but the system can use it in paths and such), and it sets opera cache, IE cache and system cache to use it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, its great idea this RAM disk, i installed your cab and its visible speed difference with and without it...

BillTheCat said:
'Execute-In-Place'
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
yea thats the name I couldn't think of... the xip I think its called in cooking.

samsamuel said:
yea thats the name I couldn't think of... the xip I think its called in cooking.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, now it's starting to make sense. If the ROM is XIP, then it makes HUGE sense to maximize that rather than consume user space.
Now that I have the concepts down, if you know of a chef for hire, let me know!

BillTheCat said:
Ok, now it's starting to make sense. If the ROM is XIP, then it makes HUGE sense to maximize that rather than consume user space.
Now that I have the concepts down, if you know of a chef for hire, let me know!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
sorry, not me, i know nothing! i'm planning to spend the early summer figuring it out myself. alittle light reading! heh

[Q] Task Manager: How To Change The CPU Priorities?

Eg, when using Task Manager on PC, i go to the CPU prosess tab and now im able to change the CPU priority of any program to: very high/high/medium/low/very low.
Can we do this with WM?
Rn

You can set the priority level of a thread, not of a process.
The system scheduler works quite different from desktop Windows. A thread with a priority level above normal can lock the entire system. An application must be designed very well if it want to change the priority level of one of its threads.

...
id like to 'trial and error'.
i understand the risk of locking the system = my own fault if it does.
but id still like to know your info about the system scheduler and changing the priorties please.
even if i cant get it to do what i want, ill still learn something new
Rn
ps, thanks for your reply

raving_nanza said:
but id still like to know your info about the system scheduler and changing the priorties please.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here you find to both subjects a very good answer.

Just install dotfred's task manager, and set the priorities with it. If you screw up, it doesn't matter. A soft reset restores them to the stock configuration.

...
cheers dude, ill download and try it now.
Rn

update
i tried dot fred TM, but didnt like it though :/
cant i just add a .reg for each specific program that i want to have a higher cpu priority?
eg, something like this:
Dword="priority256", Value="XXX"
("XXX" = eg: "255" is normal priority)
???
Rn

raving_nanza said:
i tried dot fred TM, but didnt like it though :/
cant i just add a .reg for each specific program that i want to have a higher cpu priority?
eg, something like this:
Dword="priority256", Value="XXX"
("XXX" = eg: "255" is normal priority)
???
Rn
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that I'm aware of; this stuff isn't set in the registry, except for a few thread priorities for the file system that are in the boot.rgu, and aren't user accessible. You can get a program called Speedbooster that will automatically watch for specific processes opening, and will then adjust thread priorities to however you want them. Wait, I'll save you the time and money, because it sucks. It changes all thread priorities for a given process, and most of the time makes things worse instead of better. You're better off just doing it with a task manager manually for a while, and then giving up and realizing it's a waste of time. Lol.

...
Farmer Ted said:
Wait, I'll save you the time and money, because it sucks. It changes all thread priorities for a given process, and most of the time makes things worse instead of better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah i already found SpeedBooster on google but its not freeware, which cant be cooked into roms
I suppose it would be cool if someone develops an app dedicated to do this = no task manager, no nonsense, no nothing, just a simple small app which lets you select a program and set its priority.. Simples!
Farmer Ted said:
and then giving up and realizing it's a waste of time. Lol.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Basicly i wanted to increase the priority of Total Commander and Opera10 because their the main two programs i use. (probably the main two programs everyone uses.)
I think your right though dude, ill take your advice and give up now before i do waste my time, my precious ORD time! lol
Cheers dude!
Rn

I tried increasing the priorities of PIE and UCWEB with sppedbooster, and the problem is that it slows down finger-scrolling dramatically, to the point that the browsers were unusable. You can make a sppedbooster package, but just not distribute it. I cooked it in for a while, when I was determined to convince myself I hadn't blown twenty bucks on a piece of crap.
Why do you need to speed up total commander? I use it all the time, too, and it's pretty snappy. I'd suggest limiting the number of processes and not using manila to optimize speed.

...
Farmer Ted said:
I tried increasing the priorities of PIE and UCWEB with sppedbooster, and the problem is that it slows down finger-scrolling dramatically, to the point that the browsers were unusable. You can make a sppedbooster package, but just not distribute it. I cooked it in for a while, when I was determined to convince myself I hadn't blown twenty bucks on a piece of crap. Why do you need to speed up total commander? I use it all the time, too, and it's pretty snappy. I'd suggest limiting the number of processes and not using manila to optimize speed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i wanted to speed up total commander because its slow at accessing some folders eg, accessing the windows folder, there is a lag i dont like waiting for and increasing the cpu priorities for TC would reduce this lag
ive deleted the manila package, it eats up way too much storage/ram, so iv made my own skin for a today screen, which is aprox 1mb.
obviously manila is eye candy but im prepared to loose it for the increase in storage/ram.
i also didnt want manila in my rom due to the fact i dont actually like it, ok some stuff is cool eg, album and audio manager the way they rotate and the slide effect but its so gdam popular so most roms look the same, i wanted my rom to be differant. (i didnt want to be a sheep )
you gave me an idea for increasing the touch velocity of the finger scrolling, could anyone tell me whats the highest velocity were able to use?
(both up and down velocities? )
is there one for left and right?
(obviously there must be, but do you know whats it called so i can find it?)
thanks again dude!
Rn

The easiest way to speed up access to the windows folder is just to select 'hide files in rom' in the settings. Then you can get into it quickly. Looking at rom files is pretty useless most of the time, anyway. The downside is that TC then doesn't show the plugins folder in the device root. You can also set shortcuts on the hotlist to folders you might want to access, like startup or the start menu. Finally, you can just limit the number of rom files during cooking to speed things up; the fewer the better, obviously.

...
Farmer Ted said:
The easiest way to speed up access to the windows folder is just to select 'hide files in rom' in the settings. Then you can get into it quickly. Looking at rom files is pretty useless most of the time, anyway.
The downside is that TC then doesn't show the plugins folder in the device root. You can also set shortcuts on the hotlist to folders you might want to access, like startup or the start menu. Finally, you can just limit the number of rom files during cooking to speed things up; the fewer the better, obviously.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
id rather have everything viewable in the rom rather than to hide files, useless or not. im sure everyone else would probably do the same, that way you can see exactly what you have got.
i also like to have hidden files always viewable on my pc too. eg, in my kitchen nothing is hidden, ive went through every folder and almost every file has had its hidden properties removed, including the files that dont un-hide when using the hidden files toggle on pc, which was weird
the plugin folder is one of the main functions i use TC for as i dont use regedit.exe or any other registry viewer other than TC. so i wouldnt want to be dissabling that function, if i dissable it i may as well add fexplore.exe back into the rom and use that instead
yeah, thats one of the good things about TC = the ability to create shortcuts with the >>>, however i always make them myself with a good old .txt file with the link wrote inside
agreed, the less files the better, obviously lol
at the moment my rom for blackstone is 103mb ... storage is aprox (18 - 20mb) ... ram is aprox (40 - 50mb) in use after the initial first boot and customisation.
ill search my kitchen for the finger velocity up/down scroll tonight.
if i can improve the scroll ill be nbecause the scroll is really crap!
Rn
btw:
if anyone wants to Alpha test my rom then private message me because i wont be uploading it for public use untill its Beta.
im just finishing the today screen skin but ill start letting people Alpha test it after that.
(basicly to find bugs, recomendations bla bla bla.)

I totally forgot this, but the process manager in sk tools has an option to create shortcuts with a command line that will change priorities. You could create one for total commander, and then use a mortscript that would launch TC, maybe wait a few seconds, then run the shortcut to bump up the priority.