>> I want to make sure we don't slow down the launch time without a very >> good reason. > > Well, how much risk and how much of Marco's, my, and Tomeu's time do you > think we should squander on supporting hacks to make activities launch > quickly?
Whether I am right about this or wrong, it seems to me that many developers are emulating Sugar on a desktop-class machine. Thus they are not faced with the day-in/day-out slowness of an XO-1. In terms of the *perceived* "snappiness" of a machine, few things make as big an impression as: "how quickly do activities launch?" I presume because my XO has thousands and thousands of files on line, it is the opposite of "snappy". When I click in Journal on an Activity, it often takes more than one second for even the "launch screen" to start pulsing. And on several occasions I have given up (after half a minute or so) on something I tried to launch and have tabbed off to an already running Activity -- only to unexpectedly have the screen be replaced later by whatever I had tried to start. I do not think making the machine appear to be more "snappy" is 'squandering' of resources. In my opinion, using project resources to improve "responsiveness" will bring in more goodwill than, say, adding a "Discard Network History" button to the Control Panel. mikus _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list [email protected] http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar
