Hi,
this is my first posting to this forum, and I hate it to be a negative one, but I can't help it.
I've been a registered customer for a while now and I love UltraEdit for what it is, a fast versatile editor - no more.

Over the last few versions UltraEdit's startup speed has suffered increasingly. And it's apparently still getting worse. When I started with version 7 or 8, it was indeed a perfect Notepad replacement, it would start in the same amount of time. Now I have to wait 10 to 15 seconds to edit a damn 2 kb text file - on a P4 2.53 GHz, 1024 MB RAM and a relatively speedy HD under WinXP. Can you see why I'm royally pissed ?
From previous postings here on the forum I understand that this is caused by the copy protection attached to UltraEdit.
I can perfectly understand that the developer wants to protect his Software, and I'd be happy to support that, but not at the cost of my productivity.
It's just a pain in the ass to use it right now, and if this doesn't get any better, I'm afraid I'll be looking for another editor in the future.

Hi there,
it's not about loading a file, but starting UE.

Just while I was writing the previous posting I tried double-clicking an associated file to see how long it would take - it also takes as long if I just try to start it without a file.

I'm also sorry about the ranting, but it just annoys me, especially after I paid for it.

Out of curiosity, I just tried something new:
I downloaded a cracked version of UltraEdit, which loaded _considerably_ faster. After turning on pre-v9 style toolbars the startup wait was gone completely. It just pops up instantly.

Kind of ironic in my opinion.

The truth is that UE is slow on startup. I don't consider 5-6 seconds as a short delay. Text editors, especially UE used to be ultra fast on startup, even on old machines.
The problem as you all know, is Armadillo protection which adds this delay. IMHO, such protection schemes are nice for big applications, slow my their own, not for small and fast utils like UE.
We cannot ask Ian to release UE unprotected, though. As i've already told him, the problem is that pirates use cracked and fast UE copies, thus only legal users have such issues.
Thanks God, Ian removed debug-blocking and i can still use UE with my development tools. I really hope, he will do the same dropping Armadillo in favorite of a lighter protection, giving back to UE its lost speed and stability.

And something about "new" toolbar-menu. I've seen better implementations than the one used in UltraEdit. Actually current one only slows down startup. It's still odd - looking and less configurable than most similar libs.

Don't misunderstand my arguments, i really like UE

Inray wrote:The problem as you all know, is Armadillo protection which adds this delay. IMHO, such protection schemes are nice for big applications, slow my their own, not for small and fast utils like UE.

Aha! So that's it! I, too, have been rather disatisfied with the startup speed of UltraEdit, enough so that I'm looking at other editors. I'd rather not move off of UltraEdit, but on my slowpoke PIII 750 at work the startup time is too anoying.

What version of UltraEdit was the last to be without the protection? I've been registered since at least version 6; I may go back to a previous version.

I believe it was 10.10c, the last version with out Armadillo protection.

But check with someone else.

but on my slowpoke PIII 750 at work the startup time is too anoying

Armadillo's checking delay is the same even on much faster machines. It is really very annoying.
Last UE version not protected with Armadillo is 10.10b if my memory serves me well. You better ask Ian about that.

I dug up version 9.20b and tried it out on my PIII 750. Still takes about 4 seconds to start up when the tool bar is displayed, slightly less than three seconds with the tool bar turned off. I'm going to stick with this version for a bit and see if it fits my needs.

I am registered user and don't have any problems with speed. I can fire up an empty ultraedit window --with a file tree and function view-- in about a second. My machine is a fast one (1.7 Pentium M, 1GB ram), but I can't imagine it ever taking 15 secs.

In the past there have been times startup was slow and it was always one of two things: there was a network printer that was not responding (I think Ian fixed this in the early 10.x) and if there was a network shared file in the recent files list.

Joe

roland wrote:I am registered user and don't have any problems with speed. I can fire up an empty ultraedit window --with a file tree and function view-- in about a second.

Sorry but I cannot agree with you, unless you're using a pre-Armadillo version an unprotected one or cracked or whatever.
Armadillo protection definetely needs 3-4 secs just to verify validity, regardless machine speed. That is confirmed from Silicon Realms (Armadillo's author) and known to anyone who used it.
I hope you understand that it's not possible firing up UE in less than second, not counting loading of toolbar settings.

Regards
Sakis

Hi,

seems to be a very big problem with WinXP SP2. Without SP2 my P4 need less than a second to start UE and my older PC P2 need about three seconds. With SP2 installed the P4 needs moree than five seconds and on my P2 more than 10 seconds.
I think UE is great, but a slow TextEditor is like a Ferrari with diesel engine. Is there a statement from the developer?

I am using 10.20c on Windows XP SP2. It takes less than a second.

Joe

For crying out loud....it takes 4-5 seconds on my 700Mhz/512MB T22 thinkpad (with McAfee 9.0). IT'S 4-5 SECONDS.. You people can't wait FOUR FREAKING SECONDS!!!! Take a deep breadth...it'll calm you down, is good for you and UE32 will load in the time it takes for you people take a deep breadth.