5 ms·

I don't think microsoft mac apps are a fair test of how fast mac apps start. native apps are better, in general. and for Word in particular, I bet microsoft opt

I don't think microsoft mac apps are a fair test of how fast mac apps start. native apps are better, in general. and for Word in particular, I bet microsoft optimized the hell out of the startup on windows.

weaksauce 16y ago
Word is a native app in osx. Word on the Mac is a completely different piece of software and not a bad port. I read a blog from one of the team members on the word.app team and it showed me that they are very committed to a good product. I doubt they would intentionally slow down the startup of the app just because it's on osx.
- xenophanes 16y ago
  i've used word on mac, and it kinda sucks (even has data corruption problems). even if microsoft is trying, it doesn't mean they are nearly as good at making mac apps as windows apps (let alone fast mac apps, which is not their area of expertise). and there's a world of difference between "intentionally slow down" (that's crazy) and neglecting to put a ton of work into optimization of startup.
- Qz 16y ago
  Several people I know have told me that Word on Mac was even better than Word on Windows, but that may have been 2003 or 2007.
  - lallysingh 16y ago
    The current Word for Windows is based on an older Word for Mac source base -- the mac team did that much of a better job. Sorry, no sources, just hearsay from friends who have good info on this.
- Groxx 16y ago
  For vague values of "native", yes. They rolled their own interface (which means buttons, events, accessibility tools, text boxes...), dictionary, spell check, grammar check, API, scripting interface, damn near everything. And it integrates extremely poorly with other Mac applications, even screwing up basics. By that logic, Flash apps are native too. So are Java, GTK (on non-GTK-unixes), etc etc until anything that runs on the machine can be considered "native", unless you're remote-controlling another machine through something like SSH/VNC/Remote Desktop. I doubt the developers would intentionally slow down the startup. But I also doubt Microsoft would invest their better/best programmers in optimizing it. But isn't that the same thing as intentionally slowing it down, but from the business's standpoint instead of the developers?

weaksauce 16y ago

Word is a native app in osx. Word on the Mac is a completely different piece of software and not a bad port. I read a blog from one of the team members on the word.app team and it showed me that they are very committed to a good product. I doubt they would intentionally slow down the startup of the app just because it's on osx.

xenophanes 16y ago
i've used word on mac, and it kinda sucks (even has data corruption problems). even if microsoft is trying, it doesn't mean they are nearly as good at making mac apps as windows apps (let alone fast mac apps, which is not their area of expertise). and there's a world of difference between "intentionally slow down" (that's crazy) and neglecting to put a ton of work into optimization of startup.
Qz 16y ago
Several people I know have told me that Word on Mac was even better than Word on Windows, but that may have been 2003 or 2007.
- lallysingh 16y ago
  The current Word for Windows is based on an older Word for Mac source base -- the mac team did that much of a better job. Sorry, no sources, just hearsay from friends who have good info on this.
Groxx 16y ago
For vague values of "native", yes. They rolled their own interface (which means buttons, events, accessibility tools, text boxes...), dictionary, spell check, grammar check, API, scripting interface, damn near everything. And it integrates extremely poorly with other Mac applications, even screwing up basics. By that logic, Flash apps are native too. So are Java, GTK (on non-GTK-unixes), etc etc until anything that runs on the machine can be considered "native", unless you're remote-controlling another machine through something like SSH/VNC/Remote Desktop. I doubt the developers would intentionally slow down the startup. But I also doubt Microsoft would invest their better/best programmers in optimizing it. But isn't that the same thing as intentionally slowing it down, but from the business's standpoint instead of the developers?