Existing users, 
 Renicer - 1.5graphical tool to automatically set cpu process priority |
|
||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||
Feedback Summary:
| This Version: | |||||
| Overall Rating: | Not rated (0.0) | Features: | Not rated (0.0) | Support: | Not rated (0.0) |
| Ease of Use: | Not rated (0.0) | Quality / Stability: | Not rated (0.0) | Price: | Not rated (0.0) |
Key to Types of Feedback:
Reviews 
Troubleshooting 
Usage Tips 
Developer Notes 
Commentary 
Featured Reviews
Mainly good ... 
- Version: 1.2.9, 4/27/2005 03:10AM PST
(3 of 5 users found this comment useful)
stickman67
Most Recent Replies: View All 1 Replies
- Corrections
Password field problem - Version: 1.2.7, 7/2/2004 11:43PM PST
(1 of 2 users found this comment useful)
John Sawyer
The password entry window for this app isn't a standard OS X password request window, since it won't accept "no password" (just a click on the "Okay" button), though most other apps will--I don't use a password since I don't need one. Would be nice if this was fixed so I didn't have to conform to the password-protected world.
Cute idea - Version: 1.2.6, 10/22/2003 10:04AM PST
(1 of 1 users found this comment useful)
Amras
Obvuously a lot of work went into this, but I don't like the way it automatically renices stuff. A better idea would be to explain to the user what a 'nice' value is, and let them choose the app's priority with a slider or something (a little more intuitive than straight values). Most people, like me, who understand what /usr/bin/renice is will do it in the terminal since it's much faster than using this GUI, IMHO.
Feels slower - Version: 1.2.5, 9/23/2003 06:39PM PST
(1 of 4 users found this comment useful)
cristiana
I used this program to try to eek out more performance on my 400mhz powerbook. Even with much tweaking, this program seemed to make my entire system slower.
Most Recent Replies: View All 1 Replies
PW is much better - Version: 1.2.5, 9/23/2003 11:34AM PST
(1 of 5 users found this comment useful)
hangon
Process wizard is much better....
I've stopped using Renicer - Version: 1.2.4, 7/17/2003 05:48AM PST
(2 of 3 users found this comment useful)
NickCollingridge
I had used renicer since i first moved over to MacOS X many many moons ago, but I had a major system crash which necessitated an archive and install. This caused me to question all of the stuff I had loaded on my system and I tested to see what difference it made. On my system (G4AGP/800) I have to say that I cannot see any positive benefit from Renicer, either in terms of subjective responsiveness or objectively in terms of what I can see in top. The one major disadvantage is that switching between apps is definitely slower with renicer running (not surprisingly as renicer has to change the nice value as part of the application switch). One point is that I think Jaguar is much better at minimising the amount of processor time used by applications which are idling in the background - most of them when looked at in top use essentially no processor time at all. So in this case I can't really see what positive purpose renicer serves. If you want to use it, fine, and I'm sure for some it does serve a positive purpose. Personally though I won't be using it again on my system.
I use this,… - Version: 1.2.3, 4/21/2003 05:48AM PST
peterpayne
and it's okay. I agree, it should be a background app. Anyone second it? I use Dockless to do this but it should be automatic. Also, it should allow you to renice background apps like Filemaker Server as long as it's going to do anythiing.
Tried it using… - Version: 1.2.3, 4/14/2003 04:11PM PST
PSmith
the default settings, and got the Colored Pinwheel of Boredom every time I tried to use a Finder window toolbar. So I deleted Renicer, logged out, and the FInder works properly again.
Great idea. Works… - Version: 1.2.3, 4/14/2003 09:43AM PST
Zaphire
well. But since its not an application that actually does something for the user, it should really be turned into a preference pane or a background process with menu extra, or a combination therof. The dock should really be reserved for things the user is expected to be continually playing with, not stuff they set once and forget about. (but thats just my opinion)
Works great, and… - Version: 1.2.3, 4/14/2003 08:05AM PST
youcanrunnaked
the developer is right on top of the OS updates. Thanks! Would also like to see individual process settings, saved profiles, menu item and/or preference pane rather than dock item, and the reaction time could be a bit faster.
And from the speed with which MS Word just opened tonight, when I gave the latest version of Renicer a try after using DBoost for a while (OK, I'm indecisive!), I think I'll be sticking with this app for now. There was definitely a bit of a zing happening.
A couple of minor gripes. First, I really think developers would be doing themselves a favour if they posted on VT what's changed in their latest version. It's not here, it doesn't seem to be on the developer's website, and it certainly ain't in the manual (still dated 2002 -- gripe no. 2!).
Otherwise, this seems to be a pretty solid little package. And according to my 60-second observation test using Cunning Fox (no, not very scientific, but what do you want for nothing?), Renicer uses only around 18 MB RAM, and between 0 and 4.1% CPU in the background, according to Cunning Fox. By comparison, DBoost uses 27 MB of RAM and up to 5.5% CPU in the background, and seems more busy in terms of CPU activity overall. OK, not huge differences, but differences nonetheless.