Re: Window opening performance

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