Hmm. I just made a 100,000 word/600,000 character text to put in a single binder item, from a long enough PDF lying around.
in Scrivener, pasting in takes 5 seconds, and scrolling around is instantaneous. Clicking from another normally short binder item to this one takes about 1 second, maybe a little plus.
in Word 2003, which is generally very snappy indeed, and using its fastest display mode, Normal, which is comparable to Scrivener, pasting in takes 10 seconds - twice as long. Scrolling is also instant, but only after Word gets through paging the document, which is endless and silent – during that period of minutes, scrolling is a 10-20 second thing. Switching between two copies of the document is instant, as is working with splits.
so this got me to try making a second binder item of the same big size, back in Scrivener. Now only do I see an appreciable slowdown, switching between two 600Kchar articles. On the order of 20 seconds, so maybe what you see. Yet this happens, I found, only on the first switch of binder items. After that, switching even between two 600Kchar giants is only a second or so.
I got similar results making a third huge binder item. Same time to paste, longer for the first switch - to each of the other huge items. After both others had been switched to, Scrivener was again taking a second or two to switch between them.
But again, I’m doing something which seems pretty unusual, having these binder items which are each mammoth in themselves.
Also for reference, I am doing the Scrivener tests in a document that has on the order of 100 ordinary-size (page or so) binder items, and a few more in folders within it. Machine here is dual-core 2GHz 3GB laptop, reasonably fast hard disk, lean on CPU onboard cache and in-memory graphics ‘card’, as it’s a fortunately priced Lenovo model. I would say pretty normal recent laptop.
My conclusion is that anything like normal use of Scrivener would not be slow here, indeed faster than Word.
Also, the behaviour of slow-once, but fast-for-item-hugeness-ever-after seems to say Scrivener is being pretty smart about doing a once-only internal organization for document structure and memory use. And it is doing it a lot faster than Word does – remember the minutes-long paging setup interval for Word before it attains useful speed.
That’s here, though. Whatever is slowing you guys down, it doesn’t look like it would be straight memory usage either, unless you are really short, as Scrivener is taking only about 50MB with this size document, and 64MB in the case of three huge items.
Do you see heavy disk activity during the slowdowns, which might indicate your Windows is memory swapping? I see no disk activity for Word or Scrivener here.
Hoping this will help getting on a trail, and build some confidence that Scrivener seems pretty solid at least as things operate here. I’m using the recent 1.6, and believe I remember doing a clean deinstall/install manually, not that I think that matters any more.