Let’s hope it’s actually true.

  • Jesus_666@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Yeah. 60% more responsive for something infamous for taking multiple seconds to launch is depressingly bad. That’s “not even trying” levels of improvement.

    The start menu should open essentially instantly (excluding optional animations) – 100 ms is good, 200 ms is somewhat adequate. They’re aiming for somewhere between 400 and 1200 ms.

    I hope for them that they underpromise and overdeliver because this does not inspire confidence.

    • youmaynotknow@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      10 hours ago

      For a menu to take longer than 200ms is ridiculous. At 500ms of wait for my menu to show, the OS is getting nuked.

      As for the ‘inspire confidence’,when was the last time MS inspired anything that was not disgust? Excluding the C-suite and some investors, of course.

      • Jesus_666@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        7 hours ago

        Some of the newer C# features are nice. Of course .Net is not handled by the same people who keep setting Windows on fire.