4 ms·
The responsiveness of contemporary applications has vastly improved. Two examples would be Photoshop and Firefox. Photoshop3 didn't have many features but it w
by xirium 19y ago
The responsiveness of contemporary applications has vastly improved. Two examples would be Photoshop and Firefox.
Photoshop3 didn't have many features but it was the best application in its field. However, after using Photoshop4 for short period, you looked upon the previous version as clunky, even though you never noticed the shortfalls when using it. This cycle of improvement continued for the next two versions.
For web browsing, Mosiac1.0 was a fantastic program. When it was written, it was the best in its field. However, if you've used a modern web browser then it would only take about 10 minutes to make you entirely frustrated with Mosiac. Let's run through some of the features. A single, non-presistent connection to web server. Caching of previous pages in history only. No incremental rendering. Awful responsiveness, especially when using multiple windows. No scripting. No tables. No background images. No font styling. No text alignment. And on very early versions: no forms. It also crashed frequently. Regardless, it was an absolutely fantastic program which made impossible tasks trivial and saved lifetimes of effort.
Important aspects that make me happy in decreasing priority: make it open source; make one task trivial; make it crash less; make it more responsive; make the repetitive parts of interaction take decreasing amounts of subjective time.
- kulkarnic 19y agoEcho the last part. Dependability and responsiveness are absolutely top-importance! In fact, I feel that what's more important than responsiveness is a uniform response time. Nothing puts me off more than a file-copy among the same teo disks taking 10s one day and 2 min on the next (for the same filesize). Of course that could be just me! :)