Wouldnt it be sweet if you could use an interface other than the superslow (but beautiful) Aqua? I think Apple should incorporate "Auqa Light" for all of us that doesnt care about looks, just performance and speed. Aqua with OS 9 graphics would be perfect, imagine how fast OSX would be!
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Thin shell
- Thread starter daPhil
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Actually with QE in 10.2 I can't see a need for it, all the visual stuff is passed to the GPU which still leaves the CPU to do the real work.
Well, sure QE is nice and faster than older versions of OSX, but my Dual 800G4 with 1.5gb ram still has slower window handling than my 500mhz P3 running Windoze 
When i boot up OS 9 these days im always amazed over how blindingly fast it feels. I kinda miss that feeling under MacOS X.
When i boot up OS 9 these days im always amazed over how blindingly fast it feels. I kinda miss that feeling under MacOS X.
You can't be serious!Originally posted by daPhil
Well, sure QE is nice and faster than older versions of OSX, but my Dual 800G4 with 1.5gb ram still has slower window handling than my 500mhz P3 running Windoze
My DP1Ghz G4's (Pre-DDR, 1Gb RAM, GF4MX using 2 displays) window handling is far better than my 1.4Ghz AMD (512Mb RAM, Matrox G550 using 2 displays).I really can't see how a P3 500Mhz can be faster than your dual 800 G4.
Maybe its bacause my Cinema 22" only has 60hz refreshrate (liek all TFT i guess) and my P3 has a Mitsubishi 19" CRT with 120hz refreshrate? I cant put my finger on it but scrolling down through a webpage in IE is jerky in OSX and smooth in Windoze.. Well i should complain but i would still like a QE Aqua without all the transparancies and shadows and stuff.. Another thing that annoys me is that stuff can be put under the dock.. But like i said, no biggies just comments
Now I see....the keyword there was "IE", IE sucks on OSX, give Chimera 0.6 a go, it's MUCH better and faster than IE.
i've probably said it before, and i'll say it now.
those of use using OS X anything but the most brand spanking new of hardware are always going to feel the pain of performance issues. with jaguar i feel like its more than bearable.
OS X is, as Jobs has said, the future of Apple. It is providing the framework for the next 15yrs of MacOS. That being said, it is also extremely forward thinking in terms of hardware. The groundwork laid into the windowserver is nothing short of bleeding edge. As hardware, especially video hardware, ramps up we will begin to see the potential of OS X realized.
My view is that I am jumping onto the bandwagon a few years before it gets big. I saw the potential of OS X during the 10.0.x stages and it just haunted me from thereon out. I had this little voice telling me its the way to go. When i saw 10.1 the day it came out, I was sold. I bought an iBook a month later.
So i say, lay back and enjoy the ride. Maybe even take a few notes to be able to look back. OS X has the potential to be a revolution in computing, and Apple is leading the charge.
Wow, i think thats the most Mac-zealot I have ever been. Today is a great Apple day, and I look forward to tomorrow.
those of use using OS X anything but the most brand spanking new of hardware are always going to feel the pain of performance issues. with jaguar i feel like its more than bearable.
OS X is, as Jobs has said, the future of Apple. It is providing the framework for the next 15yrs of MacOS. That being said, it is also extremely forward thinking in terms of hardware. The groundwork laid into the windowserver is nothing short of bleeding edge. As hardware, especially video hardware, ramps up we will begin to see the potential of OS X realized.
My view is that I am jumping onto the bandwagon a few years before it gets big. I saw the potential of OS X during the 10.0.x stages and it just haunted me from thereon out. I had this little voice telling me its the way to go. When i saw 10.1 the day it came out, I was sold. I bought an iBook a month later.
So i say, lay back and enjoy the ride. Maybe even take a few notes to be able to look back. OS X has the potential to be a revolution in computing, and Apple is leading the charge.
Wow, i think thats the most Mac-zealot I have ever been. Today is a great Apple day, and I look forward to tomorrow.
i too would love a faster interface, but you can't have macosx without quartz, therefore you can't really trim down the interface (aside from schemes that use less translucency and such). there's still lots of optimizing to be done in the interface, but you have to keep in mind that it is the most advanced gui on earth.
sparkelytone is right: we'll have to wait a little while for the hardware to catch up to the software (has'nt this always been the case with apple ?). also keep in mind that anything below xp is on par with (and i use that term loosely) os9, which runs at breakneck speed on my 500mhz g3.
mac os x's interface will always be slower than os9, it's about a bajillion times as sophistocated, but once apple starts making hardware that's up to par with amd's latest offerings, you'll really be impressed. right now, it's kind of like trying to run os 7.5 on an apple II.
sparkelytone is right: we'll have to wait a little while for the hardware to catch up to the software (has'nt this always been the case with apple
?). also keep in mind that anything below xp is on par with (and i use that term loosely) os9, which runs at breakneck speed on my 500mhz g3.mac os x's interface will always be slower than os9, it's about a bajillion times as sophistocated, but once apple starts making hardware that's up to par with amd's latest offerings, you'll really be impressed. right now, it's kind of like trying to run os 7.5 on an apple II.
I trust that you've done things like turn off all the services that you aren't using (Apache, Samba, etc.), and disabled things like dock effects.
Aqua will continue to be optimized, and improve. XP & Win2k are very old codebases (NT based), so have had much more time to be optimized. OSX is some old stuff (NeXT, BSD) merged with a lot of very new stuff (QE, Aqua, Cocoa, Carbon, etc.), and so much of the optimization has been sacrificed for stability's sake.
Remember how unbearably slow 10.0.0 was? Compare it to Jaguar on the same machine, and you'll see the effect I'm talking about.
Aqua will continue to be optimized, and improve. XP & Win2k are very old codebases (NT based), so have had much more time to be optimized. OSX is some old stuff (NeXT, BSD) merged with a lot of very new stuff (QE, Aqua, Cocoa, Carbon, etc.), and so much of the optimization has been sacrificed for stability's sake.
Remember how unbearably slow 10.0.0 was? Compare it to Jaguar on the same machine, and you'll see the effect I'm talking about.
It isn't Aqua that's slow, it's Quartz. Aqua is just a theme on top of Quartz. You can change the theme to look completely different, but it will still be just as slow. And nope, Quartz isn't going anywhere, nor is anything else coming to replace it. All we can hope for is further Quartz Extreme hardware acceleration.
yes, it feels faster. in fact it is a bit faster, but that speed advantage is nixed when you take into account all the time you spend waiting for things to happen. like waiting while a print spools, or a PSD file renders, etc. etc.
all things considered, when you take into account the lack of multitasking ability in OS 9, OS X is significantly faster in a real world work environment.