I updated to a beta a year ago because DisplayFusion was wasting more time than it was saving and support could not provide to solution to the horrible bugs of windows being moved around, windows save/restore NEVER working, etc.

I do think the beta helped, but....

This is the #1 process for pagefaults and uses as much cpu time as my browser displaying my security camera 24/7.

The page faults are ridiculous. I have 128G RAM and an SSD. I am sometimes having to wait 3-5 seconds just to click on a different process.

The task bar is SOOOOOOOOOO incredibly slow. I tried ActualMultipleMonitors one night and it was night and day.

At 4.6 days uptime, it's used 1.1 days of CPU time. I'm( choosing to use days instead of hours)

In other words, 16-core rig with 128G RAM and 12% [due to multi-core math] of the CPU is being dedicated to ... DisplayFusion.

System - 5.9 days
opera proc 1 - 4.5 days
opera proc 2 - 1.2 days
displayfusion - 1.1 days
ProcessLasso - 0.75 days
Interrupts - .6 days
dwm.exe - 0.5 days
chrome - 0.25 days

I expect opera with 50-100 tabs to be "up there" because it doesn't have separate processes for each tab the way Chrome does.

But yea. Gotta say.

No real release in a year for a program i paid for that hasn't worked right the entire time? I have buyer's regret. I'm going to hvae to stop using the taskbar and run ActualMutipleMonitors at the same time as DisplayFusion because it doesn't quite replicae all of displayfusion's functionality.

The taskbar is night and day, but I have accessibility issues, ActualMultipleMonitor doesn't let you increase the taskbar size the way DisplayFusion does, so my choice is.....

Slow taskbar i can read
Fast taskbar i can't read

Of course the original letdown is Microsoft themselves for having such poorly configurable taskbars

But geeze. At this point I'm starting to wonder what the point is of even running a buggy program that doesn't seem to be properly maintained.