Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
Hymyly
wrote on the 3 Jan 09 at 17:27
|
|
|
+1, for I agree that 200 ms is too slow.
However, if what I've heard about Mac OS is true, the reason it can start applications so quickly is because it never shuts them down completely; it uses some clever memory management thing to keep frequently used applications' memory image somewhere. When you ask it to start the app, it just pages it into RAM. There's something I'd like to see in Ubuntu!
|
|
|
+1
I agree with you, but maybe setting the duration to 50 is a bit to short. You cant really see the animation so i suggest somewhere between 100 and 150.
But i really agree with you! It really looks like your system is faster this way, i have never thought about this before. :)
|
|
Nition
wrote on the 3 Jan 09 at 22:10
|
|
|
|
Vista also does what Hymyly said now, it's called SuperFetch. It uses all your spare RAM to hold commonly used applications. Would be nice in Ubuntu but might be hard to implement.
|
|
|
@Nition
Have you tried preload?
|
|
|
|
Isn't this one of the reasons to vistas really big use of memory? I mean would this leads to increasing the system requirements?
|
|
ubby
wrote on the 4 Jan 09 at 09:57
|
|
|
@sjellest
Maybe it is one of the reasons of Vistas big use of memory but OS X don't have the problem so maybe OS X has a better solution than Vista.
|
|
|
Actually the i set my 'open window' animation to none so it doesn't take any time at all.
And for the preload thing, they should have a list for us to choose which apps not to shut down completely, ie firefox which i presume is the most used.
Instead of Vista's requirement to have lots of RAM, ubuntu should implement it as an option so that we can make use of remaining ram instead of letting it sit there doing nothing.
Thanks for the votes guys!
|
|
shahin
wrote on the 4 Jan 09 at 12:05
|
|
|
|
+1, for I agree with U.
|
|
Hymyly
wrote on the 4 Jan 09 at 16:04
|
|
|
@pepperpupper
Wow, I had not heard of Preload. This is awesome. How about a packaging request to make this standard in Jaunty Desktop?
|
|
|
+1
The speed of animations could be a "global" variable.
|
|
eNz1m3
wrote on the 5 Jan 09 at 14:18
|
|
|
I set it to half and looks a lot better (opening and closing).
I haven't tested preload anyway.
|
|
|
|
I'll try speeding my animations back at home and, if I'm impressed, you'll get my +1. :P
|
|
|
@lawenlerk
Not just Firefox - why not let the user choose to leave the XUL stuff in RAM? That means Firefox, Thunderbird and Songbird - which cover the three big applications used by avergae joe (web browser, email client and music player) - will all load faster.
(Granted Songbird isn't as mature as the other two yet, and it sort of violates the UNIX philosophy quite spectacularly, but it's one way to speed that heavy 'bird up.)
---------------------
As regards the main idea, cutting down animation times really does help improve the perceived response. I wouldn't say 50ms is too short - on the default Compiz behaviour, we're dealing with the fade-ins and fade-outs which don't really need 200ms to be, er, savoured.
Though when I took this to its logical conclusion, I just ended up turning off desktop effects. Now Ubuntu runs faster than ever! :P
|
|
hmb1
wrote on the 5 Jan 09 at 21:14
|
|
|
Voted +1
I noticed this when I disabled compiz and used metacity instead. The system was a lot more responsive (HD3300, Phenom 9550).
|
|
Seph_VII
wrote on the 11 Jan 09 at 22:05
|
|
|
Pre-load needs to be standard.
Anyone up for posting that as a new idea?
|
|
talent03
wrote on the 13 Jan 09 at 07:34
|
|
|
|
@ ubby - OS X is also a memory hog and always has been the biggest up until vista came out. I still think they are on par.
|
|
|
@ubby
The difference between OSX and Vista's memory cache functionality is that OSX doesn't have any preload daemon. OSX is merely keeping already loaded data in RAM, while Vista tries to be smart and automatically preloads commonly used applications...
|
|
|
"Isn't this one of the reasons to vistas really big use of memory? I mean would this leads to increasing the system requirements?"
There is no performance-penalty for the Superfetch feature in Vista. The memory that is used for caching is released if required. I don't know if this is the case for Preload though...
|
|
sproaty
wrote on the 14 Jan 09 at 02:06
|
|
|
|
Sounds great to me, just turned down my window opening time from 200 to 50 and my system does feel nicer
|
tuxxy
(Brainstorm moderator)
wrote on the 19 Jan 09 at 16:04
|
|
|
Dont forget that Ubuntu will use the GPU more than other OS's on the actual desktop. Vista and OS X also have RAM stored for frequent applications like Hymyly pointed out.
Also when the user setsup open animations wouldnt it be up to them to set other specifics such as time, effect etc
|
|
|
tuxxy,
yup it's up to the user to set the duration after all. Though i think it'd be better to have it short as a default so that new ubuntu users will already have a seemingly responsive system after compiz is enabled. First impression matters.
And we shouldn't require every user to go to the preferences and change it to 50. If most people would use the shorter duration, why not make it a default? I bet it just takes a number change in the xml file right? though im not sure how. Well, after all it's just a suggestion.
Thanks for the comment and thanks for stopping by.
|
|
Nait
wrote on the 20 Jan 09 at 19:55
|
|
|
Shouldn't animation be shown when the program is still loading? Best possible way would be to start animation as fast as possible after click and then duration would last until the app is loaded(for example 0,5 second for pidgin, 4 seconds for FF, 0,03 second for menu). Biggest problem is size of the windows, but I think that it would be relatively easy to keep them somewhere or preload only them
I think that was a part of idea of perceived speed(It was somewhere here on brainstorm) so I won't propose it as solution
|
|
dalhamir
(Idea reviewer)
wrote on the 25 Jan 09 at 09:53
|
|
|
There should be a optimal middle ground. The animation takes long enough to see the snazzy effect, but not long enough to slow you down.
As a neuroscientist I can tell you that it takes about 70ms for people to recognize a visual object, so I'd be willing to bet that as long as you keep the animations under 70ms, most people won't think that a growing window appears any more slowly than a standard window draw. The only hard part is figuring out which animation looks the best with that shortened time window.
|
|
Tom6
wrote on the 25 Jan 09 at 19:02
|
|
|
I've not poked around with this but i like the sound of being able to tweak the speed of various different things independently and also of having one big master control.
I think a good default would be 100 to open and 120 to close, with users able to tweak away.
|
|
young
wrote on the 26 Jan 09 at 20:27
|
|
|
@tom
you can already tweak away to your heart's content, just install Compiz Config Setting Manager
|
|
|
though we can tweak these in Compiz Config Settings Manager, most of the normal users would not know or bother about this app.
Thus, they will be using a system that could be made more responsive by default.
|
|
dael99
wrote on the 31 Jan 09 at 04:39
|
|
|
why anybody think on the final users??
a user that NEVER EVER will open a terminal or will install a package from Synaptics??
+1 by default, tht's why it's in Brainstorm.
|
|
jarlath
wrote on the 2 Feb 09 at 05:00
|
|
|
Great idea, my systems much snappier now. But I found 50 too fast. 100 with 75 for the fades works really well for me.
However, I find that on my other system with shared graphics chip, the same values don't work so well. I think it's just a little too fast and the event has passed before the animation gets to kick in so this may be a hardware specific choice.
This is probably why the developers chose such high values in the first place.
|
|
|
jarlath
well i don't know about that. i thought the values were the durations for how long the animations last(number of milliseconds) but in ur case two different hardware showed different results.
even so, i think 200 may be a bit too long even on fast machines. We want the system to look as responsive as possible. For me, i even turned off the open animation. (though that might not be appropriate as a default setting)
|
Post your comment
|
