4 ms·

I guess I don't get the concern. Bootup happens once for me. I used to use vim but atom is much more Web friendly.

by qudat 10y ago

sotojuan 10y ago
New software law: Every thread about Atom must contain a few people complaining about the start up time. It's also fine for me, and I love plugins like the merge conflicts one[1]. [1] https://atom.io/packages/merge-conflicts https://atom.io/packages/merge-conflicts
- striking 10y ago
  Eh, vim has that too: http://vimcasts.org/episodes/fugitive-vim-resolving-merge-conflicts-with-vimdiff/ http://vimcasts.org/episodes/fugitive-vim-resolving-merge-co... (edit: holy downvotes, Batman! I thought I'd provide a helpful point about vim, since not everyone knows it has plugin capability. My bad!)
  - fizzbatter 10y ago
    On the note of Vim, i wonder what could make Plugin development as active as Atom? To me, that is a large part of what makes Atom attractive is the development community. I don't feel like Vim or Emacs has that, despite having so many plugins/etc. There just isn't as much Zeal for it. I wonder if something about Vim could simplify this. Make it easier to support, develop, extend and use plugins?
    - sotojuan 10y ago
      Don't use Vimscript? You can't beat the react and ease of use of JavaScript. Also, a lot of people like their editors minimal. Vim users especially delegate a lot of work to Unix tools.
- biocomputation 10y ago
  Atom is ~30 years newer than the original version of Windows Notepad, and Atom runs on hardware that is orders of magnitude faster than the 286 on which early versions of Windows ran. Yet Atom is still slower and laggier than Notepad running on Windows in 1986. How did GitHub manage to pull off that feat? Given the fact that faster programs were made 30 years ago on vastly inferior hardware, Atom's performance absolutely deserves to be criticized. I can start Visual Studio right now and make a simple Windows desktop app in an hour with a text editor whose performance ( startup/ file load / editing ) will blow Atom away.
  - lghh 10y ago
    > Yet Atom is still slower and laggier than Notepad running on Windows in 1986. I would love to see something beyond just a void claim of this. Numbers, a video, literally anything. Even though Atom has a completely different use case than Notepad, one is for a quick edit of a file and one is for managing a project including file indexing, project search, and plugins, I still don't believe this is true. And I don't even like Atom!
    - biocomputation 10y ago
      It would be great to post a video or some actual performance numbers, but I don't know where I'd get my hands on a 286 running the original version of Windows.
      - lghh 10y ago
        I'd wager, if you somehow could find it, your nostalgic view of the speed of a computer from the 80s would quickly diminish. Especially when you had to deal with more than one file with Notepad.
        biocomputation 10y ago
        I was actually just a kid, so I don't really have nostalgic views of computer performance from the 1980s. I do remember typing reports in Notepad. We had a PC because my parents couldn't afford a Mac.
- rgreasons 10y ago
  I love Atom as well and didn't understand why there were so many complaints about its performance, but once I ran into one of these issues myself I was unable to use it for the time being. This specific issue opened on github[0] seemingly would affect a large number of atom's userbase - "Windows users with git repos" - and yet the best course of action is to modify atom from a community workaround. I love the editor and can't wait to go back to it, but I do really wish they would make a push to fix the smattering of performance issues and transition to v2.0. I think the editor is going to continue to have a bad PR problem as long as each discussion thread is half-full of potential users complaining about performance. [0]: https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/9544 https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/9544

I guess I don't get the concern. Bootup happens once for me. I used to use vim but atom is much more Web friendly.

by qudat 10y ago

I guess I don't get the concern. Bootup happens once for me. I used to use vim but atom is much more Web friendly.

New software law: Every thread about Atom must contain a few people complaining about the start up time. It's also fine for me, and I love plugins like the merge conflicts one[1]. [1] https://atom.io/packages/merge-conflicts https://atom.io/packages/merge-conflicts

striking 10y ago
Eh, vim has that too: http://vimcasts.org/episodes/fugitive-vim-resolving-merge-conflicts-with-vimdiff/ http://vimcasts.org/episodes/fugitive-vim-resolving-merge-co... (edit: holy downvotes, Batman! I thought I'd provide a helpful point about vim, since not everyone knows it has plugin capability. My bad!)
- fizzbatter 10y ago
  On the note of Vim, i wonder what could make Plugin development as active as Atom? To me, that is a large part of what makes Atom attractive is the development community. I don't feel like Vim or Emacs has that, despite having so many plugins/etc. There just isn't as much Zeal for it. I wonder if something about Vim could simplify this. Make it easier to support, develop, extend and use plugins?
  - sotojuan 10y ago
    Don't use Vimscript? You can't beat the react and ease of use of JavaScript. Also, a lot of people like their editors minimal. Vim users especially delegate a lot of work to Unix tools.
biocomputation 10y ago
Atom is ~30 years newer than the original version of Windows Notepad, and Atom runs on hardware that is orders of magnitude faster than the 286 on which early versions of Windows ran. Yet Atom is still slower and laggier than Notepad running on Windows in 1986. How did GitHub manage to pull off that feat? Given the fact that faster programs were made 30 years ago on vastly inferior hardware, Atom's performance absolutely deserves to be criticized. I can start Visual Studio right now and make a simple Windows desktop app in an hour with a text editor whose performance ( startup/ file load / editing ) will blow Atom away.
- lghh 10y ago
  > Yet Atom is still slower and laggier than Notepad running on Windows in 1986. I would love to see something beyond just a void claim of this. Numbers, a video, literally anything. Even though Atom has a completely different use case than Notepad, one is for a quick edit of a file and one is for managing a project including file indexing, project search, and plugins, I still don't believe this is true. And I don't even like Atom!
  - biocomputation 10y ago
    It would be great to post a video or some actual performance numbers, but I don't know where I'd get my hands on a 286 running the original version of Windows.
    - lghh 10y ago
      I'd wager, if you somehow could find it, your nostalgic view of the speed of a computer from the 80s would quickly diminish. Especially when you had to deal with more than one file with Notepad.
      - biocomputation 10y ago
        I was actually just a kid, so I don't really have nostalgic views of computer performance from the 1980s. I do remember typing reports in Notepad. We had a PC because my parents couldn't afford a Mac.
rgreasons 10y ago
I love Atom as well and didn't understand why there were so many complaints about its performance, but once I ran into one of these issues myself I was unable to use it for the time being. This specific issue opened on github[0] seemingly would affect a large number of atom's userbase - "Windows users with git repos" - and yet the best course of action is to modify atom from a community workaround. I love the editor and can't wait to go back to it, but I do really wish they would make a push to fix the smattering of performance issues and transition to v2.0. I think the editor is going to continue to have a bad PR problem as long as each discussion thread is half-full of potential users complaining about performance. [0]: https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/9544 https://github.com/atom/atom/issues/9544