Comments on: CKEditor load time performance

By: fredck2

fredck2 — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 12:15:28 +0000

@meandmycode, I understand you may feel frustrated if you were not able to do something you wanted to do. Looking at the editor source code may be useful sometimes, but you can definitely find complex things that may look strange to you, but have a precise reason for being there. The fakeobjects things is one of them, and it’s this way because of the incredible flexibility we have with the data generation in CKEditor. It is complex really, but it is nothing anyone must deal with as this is part of the editor core. Please don’t assume it’s wrong just because it’s complex.

Anyway… these discussions are always going completely out of the article scope. I really hope you’re enjoying the performance improvements and the article we have written.

By: meandmycode

meandmycode — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 20:11:07 +0000

Sorry fred but I just don’t agree, after spending hours in the source (the only way to find out how to actually DO something), you see lots of weird dependencies.. and incomplete design.. for example, fakeobjects, the mock object is always an IMG tag.. and it has built in logic to specifically copy back the width and height properties to attributes.. errr ok?

Plenty of things like this, after 3 days I wasn’t getting anywhere near close to what I needed, I took a risk to move to tinymce and within 30 minutes I had converted my 3 days work.. how? their api works, and most importantly- documentation.

By: ajaxus

ajaxus — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 07:47:34 +0000

This was a great product way back in times where there were no such availability of rich text editors.

During those years we used it quite extensively and managed to get around its coding and settings.

Yes, the upload(Browse server) was interesting to set up at first but then it was working without any problems.

Hope to hear some feedback from real life testing!

By: nobleach

nobleach — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 01:55:50 +0000

@fredck2 until you try and use the built in uploader… I have only found one page via google that explains how to make it work. (HINT: your backend PHP/ASP/ASP.NET/CF/JSP needs to return a JS snippet with expected parameters functionNum and url and the optional message)

Yes this is strictly a documentation issue, it’s a BIG one that completely hampers a great feature…. the very feature that made me choose this editor.

I also noticed a bug setting a simple editor at run time but worked around it by loading a custom config.

By: fredck2

fredck2 — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 21:12:02 +0000

@meandmycode, that’s definitely not true. CKEditor is quite a complete product, ready to be used and stable. No hard coding going on in any way. I may still miss some features available in FCKeditor 2, but those are definitely not critical for the majority of its usage cases. We’re working to include them on it anyway.

By: meandmycode

meandmycode — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 18:22:07 +0000

I’d rather avoid ckeditor completely until they actually finish it (lots of ‘hard coding’ going on), and get some documentation..

By: gabel

gabel — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:56:20 +0000

@zzen: That seems to be the answer. Takes the same time 2.67s to render in FF 3.5.3 in Firebug and shows the correct filesize.

@ALL So ignore my post.. ;)

By: zzen

zzen — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:53:32 +0000

@gabel – that might be because Safari shows the size of objects after they have been decompressed – even though over the wire, by default, both Firefox and Safari try to fetch the gzip-compressed versions if available.

By: gabel

gabel — Thu, 22 Oct 2009 13:31:19 +0000

I got closely the same load time on the example page but a quit different size and it does not rely to the page overhead…

time:
http://bit.ly/3gRF1C

size:
http://bit.ly/47yGed

sys:
Mac OS X 10.5.8
Safari 4

loaded page:
http://nightly.ckeditor.com/latest/ckeditor/_samples/replacebyclass.html