Storage card Access faster than ROM? - Ramifications?

[yardcat]

I may be totally off-base here, but upon reading a phrase in a Menneissys thread here (Blog unrelated to my question):http://www.pocketpcthoughts.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=48558&highlight=review+java, containing the quote:

...Results of trying to relocate J9-related stuff...trying to relocate the latter to a faster-than-the-ROM card from the slow(er) built-in ROM storage)...

Now, Ive really pulled this out of context, but it got me wondering.

I have always held the (wrong?) opinion that one should try to locate programs in main ROM, because I always assumed that they would run slower from Storage Card (even a fast card). :?

If it doesn't make much difference, performance or speedwise, it seems like a big incentive to store more programs on storage!

Thanks in advance - yardcat

[Nurhisham Hussein]

My experience jives with Menny's - storage cards are much faster than built-in ROM and have been for the last few years even with the limitations of the SD and CF interface i.e. you'll never get the headline speeds in a slot as opposed to a card reader. I only install programs (never data) in built-in ROM only if I have no choice.

[applejosh]

Most of the time you are encouraged to install to ROM (or RAM in pre-WM5 devices) because storage cards are initialized later in the "turn on" process. So if you have a today screen plugin or an app that runs when you press the on/off switch on a storage card, there's a (sometimes pretty good) chance that you'll get either an error message or a blank spot on the screen because when the OS tried to run the app/display the plugin, it didn't see the storage card.

[Nurhisham Hussein]

Most of the time you are encouraged to install to ROM (or RAM in pre-WM5 devices) because storage cards are initialized later in the "turn on" process.

And that is the only reason why I ever install apps to RAM or internal ROM - anything else is offloaded to the card.