1 Nov 2007 09:12
Re: Window opening performance
Michael Vincent van Rantwijk, MultiZilla <mv_van_rantwijk <at> yahoo.com>
2007-11-01 08:12:05 GMT
2007-11-01 08:12:05 GMT
Boris Zbarsky wrote: > Michael Vincent van Rantwijk, MultiZilla wrote: >> All PNG images are stored in an uncompressed format in classic.jar, >> and most of them are not as small as they could have been. Some up to >> a factor 20. Won't that degrade startup time somewhat also? > > Depends on whether reading the extra data from disk is slower than > decompressing them... > >> Yes, templates do have issues, but what else was changed recently, UI >> wise? The urlbar maybe? > > I never said templates have issues, just that raw element counts (which > force out all template instantiation synchronously) can sometimes be > misleading. > > As for what changed recently.... changed where? > >>> "Don't add UI"? ;) >> >> Clearly a joke ;) > > Not really, no. A lot of extensions seem to add huge gobs of UI. > Avoiding that is a good idea for so many reasons.... SeaMonkey v2.0apre builds don't seem to be affected by this, and using the exact same extension in Mozilla Firefox can make things a lot slower compared to SeaMonkey; so the question also is: Why? -- -- Michael Vincent van Rantwijk - MultiZilla Project Team Lead - XUL Boot Camp Staff member (ActiveState Training Partner) - iPhone Application Developer
RSS Feed