I love the idea of Retina Display Macs but..... there is always a 'but'.... Every time we get more speed and storage there are 'improvements' to the system which means that the potential performance hike virtually disappear. It is inevitable and I wouldn't want it otherwise but I remember a friend who had a PC laptop on which he ran DOS, way after Windows appeared. He was a writer and didn't require all the candy. I thought he was nuts but I remember being impressed with the speed of his computer. Starting up and closing in the blink of an eye was impressive. That's pretty much all... but I'd love a system which could respond to my every command in a couple of milliseconds. I have spent a lot of time watching icons bounce and beach balls spin over the years. I can't even remember what I was looking at while MacOS was 'thinking' in the old days - pre beach ball.
Dude, get an SSD! The delays you're describing are almost all due to the limits of HDD, and an SSD abolishes those limits. Once you've used one, you will never go back to HDDs. Just remember that not all SSDs are equally fast. For a Mac, Sandforce or Samsung drives are a good bet, since they do their own garbage collection and don't need TRIM as badly as the Indilinx drives. My boot drive in my Mac Pro is a striped RAID of two 2nd generation Sandforce drives (OCZ Vertex 3). When I use a computer, even a Mac Pro, without an SSD now, it's agony.
Dude, get an SSD! The delays you're describing are almost all due to the limits of HDD, and an SSD abolishes those limits. Once you've used one, you will never go back to HDDs. Just remember that not all SSDs are equally fast. For a Mac, Sandforce or Samsung drives are a good bet, since they do their own garbage collection and don't need TRIM as badly as the Indilinx drives. My boot drive in my Mac Pro is a striped RAID of two 2nd generation Sandforce drives (OCZ Vertex 3). When I use a computer, even a Mac Pro, without an SSD now, it's agony.
Do you know if there is a way I can test the SSD in my MBA to see if it's functioning correctly then? It genuinely seems absolutely no faster than the HDD in my old MBP.
I love the idea of Retina Display Macs but..... there is always a 'but'.... Every time we get more speed and storage there are 'improvements' to the system which means that the potential performance hike virtually disappear. It is inevitable and I wouldn't want it otherwise but I remember a friend who had a PC laptop on which he ran DOS, way after Windows appeared. He was a writer and didn't require all the candy. I thought he was nuts but I remember being impressed with the speed of his computer. Starting up and closing in the blink of an eye was impressive. That's pretty much all... but I'd love a system which could respond to my every command in a couple of milliseconds. I have spent a lot of time watching icons bounce and beach balls spin over the years. I can't even remember what I was looking at while MacOS was 'thinking' in the old days - pre beach ball.
This is also a concern I have I have found on my windows 7 OS that when I go into my catalyst control Center for my AMD Radeon 5770 HD and choose LCD overdrive it puts my machine in the standard windows visual configuration and takes away all the fancy gloss, swoosh movements, pop-up windows in the task bar, transparent effects, and switches to basic colors and plain text. It isn't nearly as pretty but when I am multitasking many hungry programs it is noticeably faster but not nearly as enjoyable. My point is, I didn't realize the visual effects of the OS had that much load on the processes and memory... so if these do (of course I am talking about windows here because I haven't bought my new Mac "YET") So I wonder if they do put these High res displays on the new machines if like the post above says we will lose much of it's benefit on purely visual improvements? I'm asking this to help me decide if I want the new one or opt for a sale priced machine that they have now.
I wonder where the disproportionate file-size increase comes from? Are they using different/less compression in addition to increased resolution?
Continued HiDPI work on Lion would seem to indicate the Mountain Lion isn't shipping next month as one recent report suggested. If Apple were to release new Retina Macs soon and Mountain Lion were coming next month, you'd think they'd just launch them on 10.8. Further HiDPI work in Lion suggests Mountain Lion is still a ways off and Retina Macs will have to ship with Lion.
Not necessarily. Might just be that a decree went out to all teams that they need to start including larger icons as of now. The current (Lion) version of certain apps may well be the version that ships with Mountain Lion, too.
Dude, get an SSD! The delays you're describing are almost all due to the limits of HDD, and an SSD abolishes those limits. Once you've used one, you will never go back to HDDs. Just remember that not all SSDs are equally fast. For a Mac, Sandforce or Samsung drives are a good bet, since they do their own garbage collection and don't need TRIM as badly as the Indilinx drives. My boot drive in my Mac Pro is a striped RAID of two 2nd generation Sandforce drives (OCZ Vertex 3). When I use a computer, even a Mac Pro, without an SSD now, it's agony.
SSD is soooo 2008. Get a Mercury Accelsior PCIe SSD from OWC and experience the speedier difference. Or read this.
Do you know if there is a way I can test the SSD in my MBA to see if it's functioning correctly then? It genuinely seems absolutely no faster than the HDD in my old MBP.
You have to remember that the speed of an SSD will also rely on the power of the processor in the machine. Tp out it simply, why throw 230MB/s at a processor that takes forever and a day to processes just one chunk of that data?
I have a Lenovo G575 laptop I use for Windows development. That has a pretty nice OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD in it but it only has a 1.3GHz AMD E300 CPU. That computer boots and loads applications just as fast as my MacBook Pro (sandy bridge i7) with a conventional hard disk. I can't tell the difference between the two in terms of disk access speed.
If you have a C2D MacBook Air, then there's your problem!
This is also a concern I have I have found on my windows 7 OS that when I go into my catalyst control Center for my AMD Radeon 5770 HD and choose LCD overdrive it puts my machine in the standard windows visual configuration and takes away all the fancy gloss, swoosh movements, pop-up windows in the task bar, transparent effects, and switches to basic colors and plain text. It isn't nearly as pretty but when I am multitasking many hungry programs it is noticeably faster but not nearly as enjoyable. My point is, I didn't realize the visual effects of the OS had that much load on the processes and memory... so if these do (of course I am talking about windows here because I haven't bought my new Mac "YET") So I wonder if they do put these High res displays on the new machines if like the post above says we will lose much of it's benefit on purely visual improvements? I'm asking this to help me decide if I want the new one or opt for a sale priced machine that they have now.
Given the speed of modern processors (especially Ivy), its not the load on the CPU that you have to worry about, but the amount of RAM it will use.
However, I don't think it will have much of an impact on MacOSX as it does with Windows. You have to remember that the Aero interface in Windows piles on as many visual effects as possible and all of them need to be rendered in real time by the GPU. OSX just pushes some raster graphics to the screen and calls it a day.
You have to remember that the speed of an SSD will also rely on the power of the processor in the machine. Tp out it simply, why throw 230MB/s at a processor that takes forever and a day to processes just one chunk of that data?
I have a Lenovo G575 laptop I use for Windows development. That has a pretty nice OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD in it but it only has a 1.3GHz AMD E300 CPU. That computer boots and loads applications just as fast as my MacBook Pro (sandy bridge i7) with a conventional hard disk. I can't tell the difference between the two in terms of disk access speed.
If you have a C2D MacBook Air, then there's your problem!
There's the rub, it's a Core i5!. The 1.7GHz one. Should be powerful enough, surely?
Comments
in regards to the text edit icon...
zapf chancery sucks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rpsx
in regards to the text edit icon...
zapf chancery sucks.
I'm sorry you feel that way. Maybe this will make you feel better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
I love the idea of Retina Display Macs but..... there is always a 'but'.... Every time we get more speed and storage there are 'improvements' to the system which means that the potential performance hike virtually disappear. It is inevitable and I wouldn't want it otherwise but I remember a friend who had a PC laptop on which he ran DOS, way after Windows appeared. He was a writer and didn't require all the candy. I thought he was nuts but I remember being impressed with the speed of his computer. Starting up and closing in the blink of an eye was impressive. That's pretty much all... but I'd love a system which could respond to my every command in a couple of milliseconds. I have spent a lot of time watching icons bounce and beach balls spin over the years. I can't even remember what I was looking at while MacOS was 'thinking' in the old days - pre beach ball.
Dude, get an SSD! The delays you're describing are almost all due to the limits of HDD, and an SSD abolishes those limits. Once you've used one, you will never go back to HDDs. Just remember that not all SSDs are equally fast. For a Mac, Sandforce or Samsung drives are a good bet, since they do their own garbage collection and don't need TRIM as badly as the Indilinx drives. My boot drive in my Mac Pro is a striped RAID of two 2nd generation Sandforce drives (OCZ Vertex 3). When I use a computer, even a Mac Pro, without an SSD now, it's agony.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junkyard Dawg
Dude, get an SSD! The delays you're describing are almost all due to the limits of HDD, and an SSD abolishes those limits. Once you've used one, you will never go back to HDDs. Just remember that not all SSDs are equally fast. For a Mac, Sandforce or Samsung drives are a good bet, since they do their own garbage collection and don't need TRIM as badly as the Indilinx drives. My boot drive in my Mac Pro is a striped RAID of two 2nd generation Sandforce drives (OCZ Vertex 3). When I use a computer, even a Mac Pro, without an SSD now, it's agony.
Do you know if there is a way I can test the SSD in my MBA to see if it's functioning correctly then? It genuinely seems absolutely no faster than the HDD in my old MBP.
Quote:
Originally Posted by paxman
I love the idea of Retina Display Macs but..... there is always a 'but'.... Every time we get more speed and storage there are 'improvements' to the system which means that the potential performance hike virtually disappear. It is inevitable and I wouldn't want it otherwise but I remember a friend who had a PC laptop on which he ran DOS, way after Windows appeared. He was a writer and didn't require all the candy. I thought he was nuts but I remember being impressed with the speed of his computer. Starting up and closing in the blink of an eye was impressive. That's pretty much all... but I'd love a system which could respond to my every command in a couple of milliseconds. I have spent a lot of time watching icons bounce and beach balls spin over the years. I can't even remember what I was looking at while MacOS was 'thinking' in the old days - pre beach ball.
This is also a concern I have I have found on my windows 7 OS that when I go into my catalyst control Center for my AMD Radeon 5770 HD and choose LCD overdrive it puts my machine in the standard windows visual configuration and takes away all the fancy gloss, swoosh movements, pop-up windows in the task bar, transparent effects, and switches to basic colors and plain text. It isn't nearly as pretty but when I am multitasking many hungry programs it is noticeably faster but not nearly as enjoyable. My point is, I didn't realize the visual effects of the OS had that much load on the processes and memory... so if these do (of course I am talking about windows here because I haven't bought my new Mac "YET") So I wonder if they do put these High res displays on the new machines if like the post above says we will lose much of it's benefit on purely visual improvements? I'm asking this to help me decide if I want the new one or opt for a sale priced machine that they have now.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ltcommander.data
I wonder where the disproportionate file-size increase comes from? Are they using different/less compression in addition to increased resolution?
Continued HiDPI work on Lion would seem to indicate the Mountain Lion isn't shipping next month as one recent report suggested. If Apple were to release new Retina Macs soon and Mountain Lion were coming next month, you'd think they'd just launch them on 10.8. Further HiDPI work in Lion suggests Mountain Lion is still a ways off and Retina Macs will have to ship with Lion.
Not necessarily. Might just be that a decree went out to all teams that they need to start including larger icons as of now. The current (Lion) version of certain apps may well be the version that ships with Mountain Lion, too.
.tsooJ
SSD is soooo 2008. Get a Mercury Accelsior PCIe SSD from OWC and experience the speedier difference. Or read this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulMJohnson
Do you know if there is a way I can test the SSD in my MBA to see if it's functioning correctly then? It genuinely seems absolutely no faster than the HDD in my old MBP.
You have to remember that the speed of an SSD will also rely on the power of the processor in the machine. Tp out it simply, why throw 230MB/s at a processor that takes forever and a day to processes just one chunk of that data?
I have a Lenovo G575 laptop I use for Windows development. That has a pretty nice OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD in it but it only has a 1.3GHz AMD E300 CPU. That computer boots and loads applications just as fast as my MacBook Pro (sandy bridge i7) with a conventional hard disk. I can't tell the difference between the two in terms of disk access speed.
If you have a C2D MacBook Air, then there's your problem!
Quote:
Originally Posted by not1lost
This is also a concern I have I have found on my windows 7 OS that when I go into my catalyst control Center for my AMD Radeon 5770 HD and choose LCD overdrive it puts my machine in the standard windows visual configuration and takes away all the fancy gloss, swoosh movements, pop-up windows in the task bar, transparent effects, and switches to basic colors and plain text. It isn't nearly as pretty but when I am multitasking many hungry programs it is noticeably faster but not nearly as enjoyable. My point is, I didn't realize the visual effects of the OS had that much load on the processes and memory... so if these do (of course I am talking about windows here because I haven't bought my new Mac "YET") So I wonder if they do put these High res displays on the new machines if like the post above says we will lose much of it's benefit on purely visual improvements? I'm asking this to help me decide if I want the new one or opt for a sale priced machine that they have now.
Given the speed of modern processors (especially Ivy), its not the load on the CPU that you have to worry about, but the amount of RAM it will use.
However, I don't think it will have much of an impact on MacOSX as it does with Windows. You have to remember that the Aero interface in Windows piles on as many visual effects as possible and all of them need to be rendered in real time by the GPU. OSX just pushes some raster graphics to the screen and calls it a day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by benanderson89
You have to remember that the speed of an SSD will also rely on the power of the processor in the machine. Tp out it simply, why throw 230MB/s at a processor that takes forever and a day to processes just one chunk of that data?
I have a Lenovo G575 laptop I use for Windows development. That has a pretty nice OCZ Vertex 60GB SSD in it but it only has a 1.3GHz AMD E300 CPU. That computer boots and loads applications just as fast as my MacBook Pro (sandy bridge i7) with a conventional hard disk. I can't tell the difference between the two in terms of disk access speed.
If you have a C2D MacBook Air, then there's your problem!
There's the rub, it's a Core i5!. The 1.7GHz one. Should be powerful enough, surely?