Comment 1 Andre Klapper 2010-06-17 14:48:40 UTC

Hi,
Does it use CPU in that time (e.g. you can check by running "top" in X
Terminal)?
I also wonder whether using strace could help to see what is happening.
See http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/devtools/maemo5 and
http://wiki.maemo.org/Documentation/devtools/maemo5/strace for more
information.

> EXTRA SOFTWARE INSTALLED:

Can you please list them?

How can I start the application so it behaves exactly like when started via
menu? I tried running "worldclock", but that leaves the program waiting with no
GUI showing up at all (even if I wait for a long time). If I run "worldclock
-s", it works immediately - the GUI comes up complete without the bug I
described originally.

Extra software:
Evince, Barriosquare, BatteryGraph, File Transfers, Mauku, mBarcode, Recorder,
XChat IRC, Conboy, Erming, GPXView, Hermes, mYTube, Password Safe, Vim, 3G/GSM
switcher, Flashlight, Foreca Weather, Sharing plugins (YFrog, Picasa), rootsh

Comment 3 Andre Klapper 2010-06-25 14:27:18 UTC

(In reply to comment #0)
> 1. Go to menu
> 2. Start "clock" application

Is it also that slow when starting by clicking the system-wide status bar (with
clock, battery icon etc) and click "Clock & Alarms" from the list?

(In reply to comment #3)
> Is it also that slow when starting by clicking the system-wide status bar (with
> clock, battery icon etc) and click "Clock & Alarms" from the list?

It's a different kind of slow :)

If I start it from the status bar, the clock window shows up complete with all
information displayed, but... I have to wait a couple of seconds for the window
to appear at all.

However, when I start the app from the applications menu, it shows up
immediately, but takes time to show all elements. I cannot tell if the time to
wait for the window in this case is shorter or longer than the time I wait for
the window to appear at all in the case above. They may be the same.

This time is definitely longer than the time needed for launching some other
applications which do much more than just display time / alarm though...

Here, starting Clock from the status bar takes about 8 seconds, and during this
time the CPU load is around 1 (100%). IIRC it was much faster in the past.

Same problem as the bug reporter when I start Clock from the application menu.
And before I can use Clock, the throbber appears, showing activity.

Comment 6 Andre Klapper 2010-07-22 16:06:26 UTC

How many Alarms do you have in the list?

(In reply to comment #6)
> How many Alarms do you have in the list?

About 200. If there's a simple way to empty this list, I could see if this
makes a difference.

Same here - probably hundreds, the list is crazy long. I never knew they were
saved when I stop them (but I guess discoverability / ui is another issue)

Following the suggestion given on
http://talk.maemo.org/showthread.php?p=738068#post738068 I removed all the
alarms, and now Clock starts almost immediately.

The number of alarms (including hidden ones, e.g. from the update notifier) can
be obtained with:
  grep -c cookie: /var/cache/alarmd/alarm_queue.ini

Comment 10 Andre Klapper 2010-08-25 14:11:17 UTC

My personal opinion: Clock FAIL because of several issues combined: There are
users that simply create a new alarm every day instead of reusing an existing
one, plus it's possible to create more than one alarm for the same time, plus
it's not possible to disable "storing" an alarm after it has been triggered.

Comment 11 Andre Klapper 2010-08-27 13:41:30 UTC

WONTFIX according to Nokia:
"When the application is launched it will show the screen shot of the
application first until the complete UI or any background process for the UI is
done. If the user taps on the screen shot icons nothing will happen. This issue
is wont fix issue."

I disagree about the WONTFIX: Nokia answers a different question. The main
problem here is not a UI problem (even though the UI could be improved), but an
efficiency problem: the fact that the application is *slow* to start. Needing 8
seconds to handle 200 alarms is too much! There's an important inefficiency
here.