On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:39:01 +0200, Haavard K. Moen <haavard@no-spam
com.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:24:56 +0200, Toman <toman@no-spam> wrote:
>
>> If you think it's slow, use opera 6.06 instead. It's better suited for
>> oldies like p233 :)
>
> That isn't necessarily true. Use the Windows skin rather than the
> standard skin, and you shouldn't really notice any difference. We have
> a P166 with 32 MB RAM in the office, and neither of them stands out as
> noticeably faster than the other.
Not even with 20 windows open?
--
Toman
(win98,PII300,256MB)
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 12:39:01 +0200, Haavard K. Moen <haavard@no-spam
com.invalid> wrote:
> On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 20:24:56 +0200, Toman <toman@no-spam> wrote:
>
>> If you think it's slow, use opera 6.06 instead. It's better suited for
>> oldies like p233 :)
>
> That isn't necessarily true. Use the Windows skin rather than the
> standard skin, and you shouldn't really notice any difference. We have
> a P166 with 32 MB RAM in the office, and neither of them stands out as
> noticeably faster than the other.
OK, maybe 7.2 is faster than 7.11... :)
--
Toman
(win98,PII300,256MB)
On Tue, 08 Jul 2003 20:24:30 +0200, Toman <toman@no-spam> wrote:
> >> If you think it's slow, use opera 6.06 instead. It's better suited for
> >> oldies like p233 :)
> >
> > That isn't necessarily true. Use the Windows skin rather than the
> > standard skin, and you shouldn't really notice any difference. We have
> > a P166 with 32 MB RAM in the office, and neither of them stands out as
> > noticeably faster than the other.
>
> Not even with 20 windows open?
With 20 windows open, any browser slows down on that system.