[sugar] perceived sugar performance
Tue Apr 29 13:53:00 EDT 2008
On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 7:44 PM, Michael Stone <michael at laptop.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 29, 2008 at 07:26:12PM +0200, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> > We cannot presume that _all_ activities will be able to put a window
> > in 0.1-0.5s,
> I think we are better served by presuming that activities which fail to
> start quickly are broken need to be fixed. For goodness' sake, we have a
> processor clocked at over 400 MHz that can play full-screen video. Does
> someone here actually wish to argue that it's acceptable for process
> creation, X connection setup, window creation, and painting to take long
> enough to require secondary feedback mechanisms?
In a perfect world, you would be right. But that doesn't seem to be
the world we are living in, because so many apps seem to need a banner
while they launch (openoffice, gimp, banshee, etc.).
I'm not 100% sure that we need such a strong feedback during
launching, but just saying that we'll make everything fast enough and
slow activities won't bite us is a bit courageous, at least.
More information about the Sugar-devel