Live data from Hacker News

Splash screens == sloth

asserttrue.blogspot.com

111–120 of 246 posts

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#111
The video game industry has the same issue. Initial bloat screens. A lot.

Skyrim for instance, it takes anywhere from 30 seconds to load the initial screen, which is just the logo of Bethesda. You know what is on the initial screen. A button for me to click that says Start. Once I click that button, then I have to hit Continue for it to load the last save point. Then another 30 seconds to 1 minute to load my game/map point.

So basically, two actions and over a minute later, I am finally in the game. A much easier thing would be to just load my last save/map point. I can turn on the console, and know to come back in a minute. Just have it paused until I am ready to play. If I wanted to say restart the entire game, I could go into the menu system from there.

I find this the case on almost all games. FIFA, Madden, Bad Company, Call of Duty. Just start the game I played last. If I regularly play online, go and find me a server automatically. Auto load my game, unless I hold down the start button or some other button that would then default to the menu.

I don't care that Bethesda or EA made my game, I just want to play.

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#112
post #11

This weekend the 3G mysteriously stopped working on my iPhone, so after months of use, I rebooted it. Rebooting the iPhone takes 1+ minute, and there _is_ a kind of splash screen shown during that time. The reason it appears instantenous during normal use is that it doesn't actually boot or load, it just turns the display back on. Also, many iOS apps actually have splash screens, you just don't see them very often as…

I guess this is sort-of the idea behind OSX behavior where an App is running with no open windows. They WANT you to leave everything running in the background. As a longtime Windows user, I still find this confusing, but I think they're trying to make everything appear to "load" instantly because it's just always running... sort of like on a phone.

At first I didn't like it, but I've eventually started to really like this in OSX. Having a ridiculous amount of RAM to "waste" may have helped change my mind. My only gripe is that I wish it were a per application setting.

Some apps, like my browser, mail program, the terminal, Emacs, ... I love having start quickly, even if it's because they were just in the background before.

Other stuff, like Preview, I don't use often enough to care about the load time, and I would probably configure it to exit when the last window closed.

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#113
post #11

This weekend the 3G mysteriously stopped working on my iPhone, so after months of use, I rebooted it. Rebooting the iPhone takes 1+ minute, and there _is_ a kind of splash screen shown during that time. The reason it appears instantenous during normal use is that it doesn't actually boot or load, it just turns the display back on. Also, many iOS apps actually have splash screens, you just don't see them very often as…

I guess this is sort-of the idea behind OSX behavior where an App is running with no open windows. They WANT you to leave everything running in the background. As a longtime Windows user, I still find this confusing, but I think they're trying to make everything appear to "load" instantly because it's just always running... sort of like on a phone.

If you don't have any windows open in the app, doesn't Lion quit it for you?

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#114
post #57

Boo and/or hiss. If you hate splash screens, use simpler tools or get more RAM. When Photoshop finishes loading, it's ready to kick ass. The Finder, on the other hand, taunts with its almost-readiness. Faking readiness is far worse than setting and honoring expectations.

Agreed. If you're seeing that Photoshop splash screen regularly you simply don't have enough RAM. I keep my PC running for weeks on end and seldom close anything. With 12GB of RAM (which costs nothing) I almost never run out of RAM and every application is cached in RAM, so if I DO happen to close an application then reopening it is extremely fast. I shutdown my PC for the first time in weeks last night, and that was…

Saves on electricity, and noise. Though suspend to RAM does that, too.

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#115
post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is sort-of the idea behind OSX behavior where an App is running with no open windows. They WANT you to leave everything running in the background. As a longtime Windows user, I still find this confusing, but I think they're trying to make everything appear to "load" instantly because it's just always running... sort of like on a phone.

+1. I find that extremely annoying. Some times I reopen a window of preview let's say just to close the whole program.

You know you could just close it from the Dock or application switcher, right?

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#116
This is so true. My friend has been a games programmer for most of his life, where you have 16 milliseconds to do everything and it pays to be smart, use clever algorithms, etc. A while ago he took a break from the games industry (he was moving country a lot) and began working at a very large company producing software for the film industry.

It was less than six months before he got sick of the "if it takes a long time, don't optimise - stick up a progress bar" attitude and moved out of the country chasing a real programming job again...

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#117
OP has a point. Not a f*cing important point, but a point. UIs can and should be faster, Adobe and MS are slow to catch on with current user expectations, and splash screens are annoying relics of a bygone era of bloated desktop UIs.

Agreed.

But in the end, to me it's just one more instance of Everything's Amazing and Nobody's Happy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r1CZTLk-Gk

I guess I just don't get the tone. Why the righteous indignation? This not Human Rights we're talking about, it's software.

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#118
The computers I use now are far more capable than the ones I used in 2005, in terms of CPU, RAM, disk space, GPU, and anything else that should affect an app's boot time. Today, Photoshop takes just as long to boot as it did in 2005. Yet the features I use today are almost identical to those I used in 2005, the only exception being the ability to import camera raw images. (And I'm sure that the binaries for importing camera raw images don't come anywhere close to accounting for all the bloat in that time.)

So, my computers have gotten better and better, while the demands I place on them have remained basically constant, yet boot time stays the same. The only thing I can think to blame is bloat.

Re: Splash screens == sloth

#119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I guess this is sort-of the idea behind OSX behavior where an App is running with no open windows. They WANT you to leave everything running in the background. As a longtime Windows user, I still find this confusing, but I think they're trying to make everything appear to "load" instantly because it's just always running... sort of like on a phone.

At first I didn't like it, but I've eventually started to really like this in OSX. Having a ridiculous amount of RAM to "waste" may have helped change my mind. My only gripe is that I wish it were a per application setting. Some apps, like my browser, mail program, the terminal, Emacs, ... I love having start quickly, even if it's because they were just in the background before. Other stuff, like Preview, I don't use…

>> Other stuff, like Preview, I don't use often enough to care about the load time, and I would probably configure it to exit when the last window closed.

Under Lion, that is (sort of) what Preview and TextExit do. When you close all open documents in Preview and then switch away from the app, the app will terminate.

Post reply on HN