On Tue, Oct 4, 2011 at 11:59 PM, Shane Fagan <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:shanepatrickfagan@ubuntu.com">shanepatrickfagan@ubuntu.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Hey Didier,<br>
<div class="im"><br>
> People trying to use video have the same critics that when<br>
> they don't look the audio support: slow to start, confusing interface and so<br>
> on.<br>
<br>
</div>Well there is a bit of an interesting give and take here and it should<br>
be talked about. The people who complain about a player being slow to<br>
load are not the people that are really in the target any more its<br>
people who want more features but dont care if it takes 2-20 seconds<br>
to open.</blockquote><div><br></div><div>For me, I cannot agree at all, all features should be in plugins and by default applications should offer absolutely minimum features so that they load as quickly as possible. Then, as users wish to do something, the plugin can be loaded on demand - the currently situation is that all plugins are loaded automatically but this takes additional time.</div>
<div><br></div><div>For instance, users will accept that a video takes 5-10 secs to load I think, because they are waiting for something they directly want to do, they will be pleased once it is playing and forget about the wait - this is seen in the popularity of streaming sites. Yet, taking "2-20 secs" to even begin doing what you wish to do? The user will be deeply frustrated.</div>
<div><br></div><div>This is of course utterly opinionated, but as we see in the focus of system boot times, the user really cares about how long it takes to start doing what they want. Linux is perceived as slow simply because we create a situation where the application responds well - we load everything just in case the user wants to use it.</div>
</div>