which one is faster? first startup after a reboot?
xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
Moderators: helmut, XnTriq, xnview, Dreamer
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
0.95:
First run after computer booted: very slow (5~10 seconds, sometimes longer)
Second and later runs: fast (same as before)
0.94: can't remember

Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
yes first run after reboot is always slow, DLL need to be loaded...BK201 wrote: Thu Feb 20, 2020 4:00 am0.95:
First run after computer booted: very slow (5~10 seconds, sometimes longer)
Second and later runs: fast (same as before)
0.94: can't remember![]()
Pierre.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
3~5 seconds is normalxnview wrote: Tue Feb 25, 2020 10:02 amyes first run after reboot is always slow, DLL need to be loaded...
But 10~20 seconds before the window shows itself? I can't remember any application slower than this
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
I have not 10-20 seconds after a reboot. Please try another app using Qt libs like https://sqlitebrowser.org/BK201 wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2020 3:58 pm 3~5 seconds is normal
But 10~20 seconds before the window shows itself? I can't remember any application slower than this
Pierre.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
Tested with "DB Browser for SQLite - .zip (no installer) for 64-bit Windows"xnview wrote: Sat Mar 07, 2020 11:13 amI have not 10-20 seconds after a reboot. Please try another app using Qt libs like https://sqlitebrowser.org/BK201 wrote: Fri Mar 06, 2020 3:58 pm 3~5 seconds is normal
But 10~20 seconds before the window shows itself? I can't remember any application slower than this
Same slow as xnview, first run takes 16 seconds, second and later runs takes 1 seconds to startup
spec:
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
Windows 10?BK201 wrote: Wed Mar 11, 2020 12:13 pm Same slow as xnview, first run takes 16 seconds, second and later runs takes 1 seconds to startup
Pierre.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
I just tested XnViewMP 0.84 vs the current version (0.98.x) myself and I can confirm the threat author's findings: Launching into XnViewMP by double clicking a single small JPEG image in an otherwise empty directory takes about 2 seconds with the current version while it is almost instant with 0.84. It also does not seem to make a difference if an image is loaded on startup or if the application is started on its own.
I do not have many additional fonts installed. This issue is especially annoying when XnView is to be used as a quick viewer out of the Desktop (which is what I mainly use it for).
Has there been any progress on this? I went back to using XnView Classic for now, but I would really prefer MP. I don't think this is a QT5 issue per se, i.e. it should not take 2 seconds to load a QT5 UI.
I do not have many additional fonts installed. This issue is especially annoying when XnView is to be used as a quick viewer out of the Desktop (which is what I mainly use it for).
Has there been any progress on this? I went back to using XnView Classic for now, but I would really prefer MP. I don't think this is a QT5 issue per se, i.e. it should not take 2 seconds to load a QT5 UI.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
Windows 10?Sethur wrote: Tue Sep 07, 2021 3:18 pm I do not have many additional fonts installed. This issue is especially annoying when XnView is to be used as a quick viewer out of the Desktop (which is what I mainly use it for).
Has there been any progress on this? I went back to using XnView Classic for now, but I would really prefer MP. I don't think this is a QT5 issue per se, i.e. it should not take 2 seconds to load a QT5 UI.
Pierre.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
Yes, I was using windows 10.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
I'm using Windows Version 10.0.19043.1165 and have 162 fonts installed.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
I've updated the QT version and now there is no more problem
See issue
See issue
Pierre.
Re: xnview mp 0.84 is fast, 0.85 is slow
This problem is supposed to be fixed in XnView MP 0.99.0. Please check and confirm the bug fix here.
Pierre.