Is there a gig I can get that'll pay me to resize windows? I'll take it!
Shoot, I use 10.2.6 on a 450MHz G4 and I don't have any real reason to complain about window resizing. sure, it's a bit laggy, especially if the document's complex, but I hardly ever do it, and otherwise the OS purrs along just as nice as you please. As Programmer said, at least it lags when I expect it to, rather than pausing or becoming unresponsive at random times for unknown reasons the way Win2K and XP do.
Is there a gig I can get that'll pay me to resize windows? I'll take it!
Shoot, I use 10.2.6 on a 450MHz G4 and I don't have any real reason to complain about window resizing...
I think a point has been missed in all of this. The ability of a platform to resize a browser and all of its graphics on the fly is a direct indicator of its overall performance. OS X cannot resize windows properly because it is unable to process a graphical environment well in addition to the graphical demands that have already been placed on the CPU by the OS. That's why iPhoto performs horrendously on OS X. That is also why PShop, and Canvas, and Illustrator also perform poorly relative to their performance on Windows machines.
My assumption was that all of this would be taken care of with the advent of the G5....that it was just a matter of time before Apple would have the kind of hardware needed to run this, admittedly beautiful, graphics-bloated OS.
I think a point has been missed in all of this. The ability of a platform to resize a browser and all of its graphics on the fly is a direct indicator of its overall performance
In "Your" Opinion it is. You simply cannot apply that generalization to everyone. Expose alone allows you to keep windows on Full Size with no penalties for window switching.
Quote:
OS X cannot resize windows properly because it is unable to process a graphical environment well in addition to the graphical demands that have already been placed on the CPU by the OS. That's why iPhoto performs horrendously on OS X. That is also why PShop, and Canvas, and Illustrator also perform poorly relative to their performance on Windows machines.
Fluff and Puffery. OSX buffers EVERY window on the screen. Even under heavy processor utilization you don't get the redraw errors of Windows 2000(Haven't tried XP to see if it's better yet). I happen to think Quartz Extreme is pretty amazing and getting better. Nothing to worry about.
Quote:
Maybe that will still happen.
Count on it or at the least count on Expose obviating the need to resize windows since running windows at max size won't comprise switching that much. This is rapidly becoming a non issue.
The ability of a platform to resize a browser and all of its graphics on the fly is a direct indicator of its overall performance.
The performance of a given application is not an indicator of the performance of the platform, however. Adobe apps come with their own version of Quartz, complete with double-buffering, which is redundant on OS X - as a result, window drawing and resizing is painful. Is this OS X's fault? No. Photoshop and Illustrator are doing twice as much work as they need to be doing.
In fairness to the application developers, the more the frameworks mature, the more incentives developers will have to use them. I could believe that Adobe used their rendering layer because there were tricks it could do that Quartz couldn't. I know that's true of OS X's text handling capabilities. But again, this has nothing to do with performance issues.
That said, there are inefficiencies in Jaguar's Quartz and in QuickTime, and Panther is addressing them (that's how Preview got so much faster). At this point, the G5 isn't done and Panther is still wobbly and unfinished, so any tests done at MWCP are not definitive. But those applications that actually use OS X's underlying technologies should see a real speedup. Whether and how much the apps you mentioned (all cross-platform Carbon apps) decide to use OS X's capabilities rather than reinventing the wheel is up to them.
Quote:
OS X cannot resize windows properly because it is unable to process a graphical environment well in addition to the graphical demands that have already been placed on the CPU by the OS.
Not really.
Window resizing is a test of the efficiency of the application at least as much as it's a test of the underlying system. How efficiently the objects in an application window are stored is up to the application; how efficiently they are reflowed is up to the application. OmniWeb got much more responsive because Omni Group totally redid the display layer - the part of the application that has to handle resizing. Finder is still sluggish because it's a PowerPlant application, and MetroWerks is still busily trying to tame the sheer amount of event spam and class tree crawling required to rearrange on-screen objects. (Again, in Panther it appears to have improved considerably.)
Quote:
That's why iPhoto performs horrendously on OS X.
I think you'll see iPhoto speed up somewhat in Panther (when it's all done, and QuickTime has all the redundant colorspace conversions removed, and its API is made reentrant) and far more in a subsequent version of iPhoto (when they optimize it). I doubt that iPhoto is running at anywhere near maximum efficiency.
Any application that can't resize smoothly on a dual 2GHz G5 will be in need of work (or maybe it'll be displaying an insanely complex document ). If nothing else, the crazy bus bandwidth on the G5 will seriously help with shoving all those big window buffers around.
Any application that can't resize smoothly on a dual 2GHz G5 will be in need of work (or maybe it'll be displaying an insanely complex document ). If nothing else, the crazy bus bandwidth on the G5 will seriously help with shoving all those big window buffers around.
I'll take that as an authoritative AI opinion -- let's hope you're right.
If one has nothing but praise for any of mans creations he has lost his objective eye. The only creations of man that will ever satisfy an individual are those made with his own hands. Everyone else has a differrent yardstick against which they measure the world, some of those sticks are a little longer than others.
As far as performance goes there is a lot of evidence (from Apple even) that they will only be performing on a par with intel hardware that is already on the market. That isn't a bad thing by anymeans, but there will be situations where they will not be the fastest PC available. So yeah I could see alot of people being let down if the performance of these machines is based entirely on contrived bakeoffs. On the other hand absolute performance is not the reason to buy these machines.
It will be very interesting to see just what the machines can do when they are released. Those with high expectations should really moderate those expectations to elimnate disappointment. What every body should be happy about is that Apple has a platform that should see significant performance increase relatively quickly.
Dave
Quote:
Originally posted by pscates
Ahhh, it's a lot of hype and bullshit.
I'll bet any of you $20 that when the G5s ship and some of you start getting them, you're still going to bitch and be let down at the performance.
I'll be genuinely shocked if I hear some of you have nothing but praise for it, upon receiving it.
It's a different kind of "praise", Dave. You know darn well what I'm talking about. Don't get too intellectual or zen about all my posts. It isn't worth the effort.
There is a segment of Mac users (some here, in fact) who are never happy with anything ever that Apple does. That's who I'm referring to.
Yeah, I too don't blindly accept things, nor do I believe Apple is perfect. Far from it: read my numerous complaints about their poor, ineffective marketing strategies for proof of that!
But some people base their entire lives on bigger, faster, more, etc. and are NEVER satisfied with any machine Apple puts out. EVER. Not once. It's weird, frankly. I just want to buy them an Etch-A-Sketch and send them on their way so they'll leave us alone.
Do you know, in my time here at AppleInsider, I've seen new gear released and THAT DAY read a post from someone saying, in effect, "yeah, but it doesn't have [fill in the blank]...I'm waiting until next year...".
I think some people just aren't wired to EVER be content or satisfied. Meanwhile, I - and most others - seem to be happily chugging along on 800MHz and so forth and *gasp* using G3-based Macs to illustrate, retouch, surf, etc. (my old tangerine buddy).
But some people base their entire lives on bigger, faster, more, etc. and are NEVER satisfied with any machine Apple puts out. EVER. Not once. It's weird, frankly. I just want to buy them an Etch-A-Sketch and send them on their way so they'll leave us alone.
Do you know, in my time here at AppleInsider, I've seen new gear released and THAT DAY read a post from someone saying, in effect, "yeah, but it doesn't have [fill in the blank]...I'm waiting until next year...".
I think some people just aren't wired to EVER be content or satisfied. Meanwhile, I - and most others - seem to be happily chugging along on 800MHz and so forth and *gasp* using G3-based Macs to illustrate, retouch, surf, etc. (my old tangerine buddy).
the reason those people are never happy is because they can't appreciate anything...they are sad pathetic people
Third...
Retouchign in a G3...PLEASE at least tell me you have a wacom pad?! Haha i imagine you sitting there in photoshop trying to use ur track pad to correct
Nuerokid, you need to chill them synapses out and just have a little faith. Panther running on a G5 is likely to TROUNCE anything any of us are using right now, including my G4/1GHz upgrade-beast. A machine which is sluggish only insofar as the Finder cannot display large numbers of items in column view quickly. I have to wait 2+ seconds for my damn applications folder to load into view...which is annoying, but hardly damning as I do generally have the two seconds to spare.
That said, HEY PAUL... whenTF did you up and move to hicksville Tennessee? I thought you were ona dem Caleefornia boys.
I actually have a job where I'm paid to scroll, re-size, etc. all live long day, so how's THAT for irony?
Moogs, oh about 8-9 months ago. I'm from here. I'm was only in CA as a decade-long outsider.
But MUCH happier now in every single way, so it's cool. I think that state might actually be - what's the technical term? - on a bobsled to hell? Just seemed like a good time to get out, do to many little factors.
Comments
Shoot, I use 10.2.6 on a 450MHz G4 and I don't have any real reason to complain about window resizing. sure, it's a bit laggy, especially if the document's complex, but I hardly ever do it, and otherwise the OS purrs along just as nice as you please. As Programmer said, at least it lags when I expect it to, rather than pausing or becoming unresponsive at random times for unknown reasons the way Win2K and XP do.
Anyway, moving to General Discussion...
Originally posted by Amorph
Is there a gig I can get that'll pay me to resize windows? I'll take it!
Shoot, I use 10.2.6 on a 450MHz G4 and I don't have any real reason to complain about window resizing...
I think a point has been missed in all of this. The ability of a platform to resize a browser and all of its graphics on the fly is a direct indicator of its overall performance. OS X cannot resize windows properly because it is unable to process a graphical environment well in addition to the graphical demands that have already been placed on the CPU by the OS. That's why iPhoto performs horrendously on OS X. That is also why PShop, and Canvas, and Illustrator also perform poorly relative to their performance on Windows machines.
My assumption was that all of this would be taken care of with the advent of the G5....that it was just a matter of time before Apple would have the kind of hardware needed to run this, admittedly beautiful, graphics-bloated OS.
Maybe that will still happen.
I think a point has been missed in all of this. The ability of a platform to resize a browser and all of its graphics on the fly is a direct indicator of its overall performance
In "Your" Opinion it is. You simply cannot apply that generalization to everyone. Expose alone allows you to keep windows on Full Size with no penalties for window switching.
OS X cannot resize windows properly because it is unable to process a graphical environment well in addition to the graphical demands that have already been placed on the CPU by the OS. That's why iPhoto performs horrendously on OS X. That is also why PShop, and Canvas, and Illustrator also perform poorly relative to their performance on Windows machines.
Fluff and Puffery. OSX buffers EVERY window on the screen. Even under heavy processor utilization you don't get the redraw errors of Windows 2000(Haven't tried XP to see if it's better yet). I happen to think Quartz Extreme is pretty amazing and getting better. Nothing to worry about.
Maybe that will still happen.
Count on it or at the least count on Expose obviating the need to resize windows since running windows at max size won't comprise switching that much. This is rapidly becoming a non issue.
Originally posted by neurokid
The ability of a platform to resize a browser and all of its graphics on the fly is a direct indicator of its overall performance.
The performance of a given application is not an indicator of the performance of the platform, however. Adobe apps come with their own version of Quartz, complete with double-buffering, which is redundant on OS X - as a result, window drawing and resizing is painful. Is this OS X's fault? No. Photoshop and Illustrator are doing twice as much work as they need to be doing.
In fairness to the application developers, the more the frameworks mature, the more incentives developers will have to use them. I could believe that Adobe used their rendering layer because there were tricks it could do that Quartz couldn't. I know that's true of OS X's text handling capabilities. But again, this has nothing to do with performance issues.
That said, there are inefficiencies in Jaguar's Quartz and in QuickTime, and Panther is addressing them (that's how Preview got so much faster). At this point, the G5 isn't done and Panther is still wobbly and unfinished, so any tests done at MWCP are not definitive. But those applications that actually use OS X's underlying technologies should see a real speedup. Whether and how much the apps you mentioned (all cross-platform Carbon apps) decide to use OS X's capabilities rather than reinventing the wheel is up to them.
OS X cannot resize windows properly because it is unable to process a graphical environment well in addition to the graphical demands that have already been placed on the CPU by the OS.
Not really.
Window resizing is a test of the efficiency of the application at least as much as it's a test of the underlying system. How efficiently the objects in an application window are stored is up to the application; how efficiently they are reflowed is up to the application. OmniWeb got much more responsive because Omni Group totally redid the display layer - the part of the application that has to handle resizing. Finder is still sluggish because it's a PowerPlant application, and MetroWerks is still busily trying to tame the sheer amount of event spam and class tree crawling required to rearrange on-screen objects. (Again, in Panther it appears to have improved considerably.)
That's why iPhoto performs horrendously on OS X.
I think you'll see iPhoto speed up somewhat in Panther (when it's all done, and QuickTime has all the redundant colorspace conversions removed, and its API is made reentrant) and far more in a subsequent version of iPhoto (when they optimize it). I doubt that iPhoto is running at anywhere near maximum efficiency.
Any application that can't resize smoothly on a dual 2GHz G5 will be in need of work (or maybe it'll be displaying an insanely complex document
Originally posted by Amorph
Any application that can't resize smoothly on a dual 2GHz G5 will be in need of work (or maybe it'll be displaying an insanely complex document
I'll take that as an authoritative AI opinion -- let's hope you're right.
As far as performance goes there is a lot of evidence (from Apple even) that they will only be performing on a par with intel hardware that is already on the market. That isn't a bad thing by anymeans, but there will be situations where they will not be the fastest PC available. So yeah I could see alot of people being let down if the performance of these machines is based entirely on contrived bakeoffs. On the other hand absolute performance is not the reason to buy these machines.
It will be very interesting to see just what the machines can do when they are released. Those with high expectations should really moderate those expectations to elimnate disappointment. What every body should be happy about is that Apple has a platform that should see significant performance increase relatively quickly.
Dave
Originally posted by pscates
Ahhh, it's a lot of hype and bullshit.
I'll bet any of you $20 that when the G5s ship and some of you start getting them, you're still going to bitch and be let down at the performance.
I'll be genuinely shocked if I hear some of you have nothing but praise for it, upon receiving it.
There is a segment of Mac users (some here, in fact) who are never happy with anything ever that Apple does. That's who I'm referring to.
Yeah, I too don't blindly accept things, nor do I believe Apple is perfect. Far from it: read my numerous complaints about their poor, ineffective marketing strategies for proof of that!
But some people base their entire lives on bigger, faster, more, etc. and are NEVER satisfied with any machine Apple puts out. EVER. Not once. It's weird, frankly. I just want to buy them an Etch-A-Sketch and send them on their way so they'll leave us alone.
Do you know, in my time here at AppleInsider, I've seen new gear released and THAT DAY read a post from someone saying, in effect, "yeah, but it doesn't have [fill in the blank]...I'm waiting until next year...".
I think some people just aren't wired to EVER be content or satisfied. Meanwhile, I - and most others - seem to be happily chugging along on 800MHz and so forth and *gasp* using G3-based Macs to illustrate, retouch, surf, etc. (my old tangerine buddy).
Originally posted by pscates
But some people base their entire lives on bigger, faster, more, etc. and are NEVER satisfied with any machine Apple puts out. EVER. Not once. It's weird, frankly. I just want to buy them an Etch-A-Sketch and send them on their way so they'll leave us alone.
Do you know, in my time here at AppleInsider, I've seen new gear released and THAT DAY read a post from someone saying, in effect, "yeah, but it doesn't have [fill in the blank]...I'm waiting until next year...".
I think some people just aren't wired to EVER be content or satisfied. Meanwhile, I - and most others - seem to be happily chugging along on 800MHz and so forth and *gasp* using G3-based Macs to illustrate, retouch, surf, etc. (my old tangerine buddy).
First Paragraph...
Second...
Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Sronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger, Harder Better Faster Stronger,
the reason those people are never happy is because they can't appreciate anything...they are sad pathetic people
Third...
Retouchign in a G3...PLEASE at least tell me you have a wacom pad?! Haha i imagine you sitting there in photoshop trying to use ur track pad to correct
This was a slot-loading DV iMac I owned until last year.
That said, HEY PAUL... whenTF did you up and move to hicksville Tennessee? I thought you were ona dem Caleefornia boys.
Originally posted by pscates
I scroll, open, re-size all live long day
And they say there's nothing to do on the mac?
Moogs, oh about 8-9 months ago. I'm from here. I'm was only in CA as a decade-long outsider.
But MUCH happier now in every single way, so it's cool. I think that state might actually be - what's the technical term? - on a bobsled to hell? Just seemed like a good time to get out, do to many little factors.