Muvo TX FM: is the 256mb slightly faster than the 512mb when switching modes?(and starting u

Question

I was just wondering if the muvo tx fm 52 is slightly slower than the muvo tx fm 256 when switching modes ?
because i have the 52 and my dad has the 256 and i noticed there's a difference
both of them have the lastest firmware on them .5.0
both of them are reasonably full / capcaity close to full
when i switch from radio mode to music in folders mode : the transition between the two modes are smooth and immediate on the 256
but when i do this on my 52 : i seem to have to an extra second of waiting time before it goes back into music mode
yeah i know it's a bit nitpicky to bring such a thing up , but i thought it was strange that there would be a difference , since they're both the same model and firmware ( only a difference in capacity between the 2 )
this occurance didn't start to happen until i upgraded it recently to .5.0 ( when this occurance starting appearing )
or maybe it's just my 52 that does this ?
anyway another thing that's strange that i've tested :
if i do switch back to an older firmware version for my 52mb : this extra delay between switching modes is non-existant / goes away
( it was non-existant before i upgraded to the new firmware )
also another thing i've noticed is the 256 seems to be faster at starting up after turning on too
when i first turn it on , only takes till the /4 of the sand in the egg timer icon and drained to the bottom before it starts playing music
with the 52 , it doesn't start playing music until all the sand in egg timer icon has drained to the bottom ( a second longer wait before the music starts playing )
also another thing to note is that
the firmware that came with the 256 , was .5.0 ( bought in april )
i bought the 256 a couple of months ago
with my 52 , which i had since december : i've used firmware old firmware that came with that ( i think .0.04 ) ( until switching to the newest firmware recently )
i was just wondering what's calling this extra seconds worth of delay in my 52 , that's not present in the 256 ?Message Edited by low-quality on 07-04-2005 0:43 PMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 04:08 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:37 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:38 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:38 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:38 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:39 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:39 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:39 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:40 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:40 AMMessage Edited by low-quality on 07-05-2005 05:42 AM

Answer 1

Sounds like it could be because of the capacity difference, maybe a mod could confirm this.