Here's an interesting paper I found that describes the design and benefits of a rapid-start system.  It includes results from their experiments testing varying starting voltages and cathode heating current and changes to the lamps to improve performance on rapid-start, including starting aids and lower resistance cathodes.  They touch on potential issues, such as unreliable starting in high humidity or potential for cold-cathode starting that would negate the benefits of heating.

New Fluorescent Lamp and Ballast Design for Rapid Start

Although I haven't read it entirely, it is an interesting document from 1952. Also interesting is the fact that they refer to pre-heat ballasts as switch start, and sometimes the F40T12 lamp is referred to as 40W T12. This nomenclature is closer to the European systems than the North American systems. I guess the fluorescent lamp technology was so new at the time that standardisation was not yet put in place.

I think it is very nice article actually describing most of the fundamentals around the RS ballast. It quite well explains, why the RS concept was so successful in the US (or better say 120V world), but the switch start preheat have remained the dominant style in the 230V areas.
But according to many of the responses published below, not all of the explanation was really understood well (during that presentation?).
And it explicitly uses the term "switch start preheat...", as with many of the the RS systems the cathodes are heated before and the heating stopped after the ignition as well, the only difference is in the way, how the power delivery into the filament is controlled: By as switch element in the "switch start", vs the phase shifts in the RS circuits (and there belong the 230V "SRS" as well, the only difference is the vector summing happen in the form of currents rather than voltages)


But one item caught my attention, as it is especially valid even today, mainly with the relation to LED's, in the Discussion post from H.E. Bachman (citation):
"Unfortunately, as is usual with most new ideas and developments, there are some very distinct disadvantages and serious problems presented by this system. It is our firm conviction that the ultimate customer must be adequately forewarned of these as possible pitfalls and, even more so, possible reasons for ultimate non-acceptance."

I think today, with the electronic lighting and mainly LED's, all the pitfalls are kept hidden by the marketing morons, with the only result of people not being aware of them (so not being able to upfront take the required measures to mitigate those problems), yielding to bad surprises and general disappointments with the new technology. So it is not the LED's, but the snobbery of their manufacturer's marketing staff, what had caused the LED's to fail in many installations...