I have two monitors and deal with a lot of different topics, so I have a lot of icons on my desktop for quick access.
I've been hearing for years that desktop icons slow the system. How much do they slow it? If you put fice icons into one desktop folder, does that count as 1, or 5, or 6? Do shortcut icons slow things?
I've heard that overuse of desktop icons can reduce productivity (eg. slows you down) but never that it slows down the system.
Hi,
Yea if they are just shortcuts I doubt it but then again not all systems are created equally :)
Most people like neat and clean desktops though
If they need more than the start button listings they would create a toolbar on the taskbar to quickly access programs/ files/....
Startup might suffer a little since the desktop manager must pull up all these shortcuts.
Agreed. Personally I keep desktop clear of shortcuts and instead use a launcher and use it assign shortcuts to files or folders. The launcher appears/ disappears at the press of a button when needed/ not needed.
Toolbars are another option that some users prefer:
Toolbars - How to Use in Windows 7 and Vista
They don`t slow a good machine down at all, but then there is no reason to keep any icons on your desktop.
To answer the question
Desktop icons have never slowed my systems that I was ever able to detect.How much do desktop icons slow you down?
I've never noticed a slowdown using desktop icons. If a person has so many icons they have to hunt for the one they want, that could cause a slowdown in productivity but it will not slow down the system. Of course, grouping the icons by type and listing them alphabetically will speed up access to them.
I access my most frequently used programs from the Quick Launch menu and notification area on my task bar and the other programs from the Start menu. Most of the icons I have on the desktop are shortcuts to folders and files I frequently access. I prefer using shortcuts since they will allow me to keep the folders and files themselves on drives other than my C: drive. Occasionally, I will put a shortcut to a new program on the desktop temporarily until I decide if I want to keep it or not.
I'm not sure what aspect of a system would slow down due to desktop objects (shortcuts, files, folders).
Maybe the time that it takes Windows to create/paint and auto-align the desktop objects:
As a test, I used the tool from this tutorial (Restart Time) to measure the restart/reboot time of one of my virtual machines. I was not able to tell any difference between 2 objects on the desktop and lots of objects. I had VirtualBox create 8 displays for my VM and had Windows extend the desktop across them. That let me test with 800+ desktop objects... but still no slowdown during reboot. So, I took the number of desktop objects to 4200+. Not that 4200+ items could be displayed, but I was testing to see if some extreme number slowed things down. It did not.
The tool in that tutorial probably does not wait for the desktop objects to show up before displaying the reboot time, but the desktop and the message box seemed to appear at the same time for me.
I doubt that the desktop objects would slow down the launching of apps. I'm not even going to test for that.
I glanced at the desktop of a dozen coworkers and all of them had more than 30 objects on their desktop. I currently have a lot more than 30 objects on my desktop. Some of those are folders which have dozens of files inside of them. (e.g. files that let me remote into other computers). Some "folders" on my desktop are really hard links to folders on a file server. The hard link allows those "folders" to work as a menu via the Desktop toolbar on the Task bar as if the "folders" were really local. Items that need attention in the next few days go in the center of the desktop. More permanent objects stay around the edges. But that is just me
I've been mindful of how many desktop objects people have for years... so I have a bit of data on it - if only in my head. The company that I work for has several levels of computer support. I've met nearly every support person at every level and almost without exception, the higher the level, the more desktop objects. Perhaps when one reaches the highest level, one realizes that a desktop devoid of icons is best. I'll probably never get there
Uni, would you like to even if you could? Managerial job is such a boring one, I would take a technical one any day insteadI'll probably never get there
Wonder how others think?
Some managerial positions are just bureaucratic/functionary. Sometimes this is due to the manager (lazy, incompetent, self-serving), other times it's due to poor policy - often implemented by lazy, incompetent, self-serving upper management.Wonder how others think
Other times, a skilled and diligent person in a managerial position can be the difference between the failure or success of an organization, or between the organization "just surviving" and thriving. The kind of person suited for those kinds of managerial positions finds [productive] ways to keep from becoming bored. Unfortunately, this often results in lazy, incompetent, self-serving upper management implementing the aforementioned policies to cut them off at the knees, lest others realize that they (upper management) are lazy, incompetent, and self-serving.
Quote
