2 ms·
+1. I can't speak to Windows but I suspect it's similar: if you're running a well-implemented native app (ex. Pixelmator) the responsiveness is entirely there a
by potatolicious 4y ago
+1. I can't speak to Windows but I suspect it's similar: if you're running a well-implemented native app (ex. Pixelmator) the responsiveness is entirely there and in fact significantly better than it was in the 90s. Even fairly graphically heavy apps have no issues resizing and otherwise being real-time interactive.
I would hazard that the vast majority of "jank" you see in desktop apps today is due to cross-platform code. A large portion of this is webviews (ex. Slack), but some of it is also poorly-implemented shims between the platform's native APIs and shoehorning that into some cross-platform library (ex. Photoshop).
- iforgotpassword 4y agoI recently used a legacy win32 app at work, on a windows 10 laptop. It looked old, even though the buttons etc got styled the win10 way. Since the app had some issues, I wanted to rule out a compatibility problem with modern Windows, and ran the app in a windows XP VM on the same laptop. Unfortunately the same issues arose, but I was really surprised by how snappy the app felt. Everything was just immediate, sub-windows popped up instantly. Sure, the machine was an order of magnitude faster than the typical XP machine back in the day, so it's not an apples to apples comparison, but still it was one of these revelations that we just seem to be taking one step forwards and at least one step back every time we improve something.
- cogman10 4y agoEven if you take a step above win32 and use a framework like GTK or QT, you'll find that sort of responsiveness.