Comment by dataflow
14 hours ago
> Windows 10 explorer.exe is 100x faster than Windows 11 explorer, it's not even close.
I have a hard time believing this. I'm pretty sensitive to performance losses and I haven't noticed any difference between those. It wouldn't make sense either, given they should both host the same shell icon views. Are you sure the difference you're seeing is in explorer.exe? As opposed to something else, like a new shell extension or a new filesystem filter driver on Windows 11?
> As opposed to something else, like a new shell extension or a new filesystem filter driver on Windows 11?
Ultimately, what difference does it make? The file explorer in Windows 10 is much faster than the one in Windows 11, and it's very noticeable. Turn on the old context menus, and try right clicking a file. Instant in Windows 10, visible delay in Windows 11.
It is certainly perceptibly slow. Carried out a test on my 12 year old PC running Win-10 vs a new HP Win11 laptop of my friend which he bought in a hurry before price increases. Opened a directory of several thousand files with nested folders - much slower at navigation. Much slower at opening right-click menus. Much slower at pretty much everything.
M$ has now introduced web-latency into the desktop along with their adoption of web-tech into the OS. You gotta get used to staring at that spinning blue circle, counting the many precious moments of your life draining away.
> M$ has now introduced web-latency into the desktop along with their adoption of web-tech into the OS.
So we're back to the woes of Active Desktop on Windows 98. Everything old is new again.
You could at least disable Active Desktop to dethrottle your PC. Meanwhile, my work W11 PC has a second+ delay for explorer right click and there's nothing I can do about it.
3 replies →
I measured once. It uses about 50% more resources and offers less feautures (or at least hides existing feautures). You may not have noticed if you had resources to spare.
It does offer some new features for businesses. Nothing useful for the consumer, and nothing to justify the massive performance loss
The Windows computer I have to use at work takes over ten seconds to open the calculator. It literally is faster to type the calculation I want into a search engine and get the results back over the network.
The new calculator even manages to screw up basic input. The old calculator accepted both commas and periods as decimal separator inputs. It just worked no matter what I typed in. The new calculator has some sort of "clever" localization where my inputs change depending on the language of the operating system. My language uses commas so of course it only accepts those. Infuriating. Hope whoever coded this is enjoying their promotion.
Off-topic, but do you know Mozilla Firefox has a builtin calculator and unit conversion in the URL bar? For my personal use I rather use python and GNU units, but I guess for most users that live in the browser instead of the terminal, this could become their default calculator.
I don't know if you need to restore the urlbar first, before that works.
One of the first projects I made while learning to code was a calculator.
It wasn't very sophisticated. But it was fast and it handled commas and periods. It wasn't localized, but it could be.
Sad to think that me having a month of coding experience made a better product than MSFT, yet whoever coded the calculator is probably making ten times what I am right now.
Is that Windows, or the EDR that is hooking every system call and pinning a whole core with analytics?
The old notepad would still open instantly so that can't be it. The updated machines with the new notepad are just as infuriating.
Reminds me of the shitty gamer laptop manufacturer apps that would take over a minute to display a glorified rectangle on the screen. All this to configure keyboard LEDs. I reverse engineered that garbage and made a Linux version that works instantly, proving their incompetence.
1 reply →
Its not faster bereft of context, its just bloated. If you have enough resource to throw at it, its roughly the same. Theres some specific things that can themselves be slower, the Windows 11 Start Menu has had a lot of words written about its new implementation.
That _is_ slower. The fact that it's possible to throw enough resources at it that both "look" the same speed, doesn't change the fact that one of them is 10x slower.
> if you have enough resource to throw at it
An i9 with 128GB RAM isn’t enough resources to open a menu?
I dont know what to tell you. I have endless user complaints at i5 16GB RAM, and none at i5 32GB RAM. Not to mention that I run 32 myself and its mostly fine. I can open menus.