Either way, window resizing should hardly be such a sticking point- far less demanding than something fancy such as, oh let's see, an entire window warping and scaling into the dock when you minizmize it (which actually manages to stay enabled on a mere ATI Rage 128, albeit lacking a few frames of smoothness).
Actually, no. It's comments like this that belie a lack of graphics experience.
Massive warping, scaling, etc, are downright trivial in comparison to on the fly dynamic re-arrangement/clipping/rendering of live content in a generic document window. Seriously. The former is limited only by bandwidth and raw computation power - which the modern GPUs are bulging with. The latter requires highly specialized rendering hardware for everything from simple lines drawn off-angle (you'd be shocked at how hard that simple task is to get right), to full anti-aliased and properly kerned typography. A 'simple window resize' has to do *all* of that... all the while adjusting what is shown, how it is shown, and possibly where it is shown. It's a bitch.
Wintel machines have gotten away with what looks like smooth resizing for so long for two reasons:
1) they're actually using the 2D hardware. Seems obvious, no? Macs don't use the 2D hardware almost at all. Why? Quartz Extreme - it pumps everything through the 3D system and bypasses the 2D almost entirely. Why? Because it unifies the imaging model and simplified it *DRASTICALLY*. It's been obvious now for a couple of years that the hardware was coming down the pipe to make 2D-on-3D hardware a snap. Well, it's finally getting here... and Apple is ready for it. MS is not. (And not until Avalon ships in Longhorn... whatever year that will be.) This means that future Mac cards can be *SOLELY* 3D accelerators. Which will mean less R&D, less cruft, and less voodoo under the hood. Any optimizations made to a generic 3D environment in the future will benefit *every* application that draws to the screen. Slick.
2) Their algorithms are brain-dead. They don't actually *do* much of anything, so they can do it fast. Apple's dynamic resizing is quite extensive and is doing a *HELL* of a lot behind the scenes. It's really a daunting task.
Window resizing seems simple - and you can *make* it simple if you choose not to do much. Apple took another route, and we're just now starting to see the payoff. Personally, I think it's more than worth it. They've established a graphics engine base that will last them for years.
Of course, it is doing a lot. However, if it is doing too much as to hamper useability (which seems to be the case for anything but the absolute latest hardware), then they should make a way for it to scale back and do less, but faster. To the user, it is really an academic point whether it is being done more fancy in OSX than in Windows. What matters, is that one seems to have a workable solution at this time and the other does not. I mean, it is nice and all that Apple is reaching for the stars for these basic functions, but that is all fanfare unless you have something that actually works well in existing hardware. I don't care if it is in 3D or in 2D or if it uses 64-bits when it is doing it (I even mentioned, I don't care if it defaults to a blank or static window when I do it, if that is what it will take). I just want the window corner to be where I dragged the cursor as I drag it, not half a second later, after which I have decided I have over-corrected and have moved yet again.
Of course, it is doing a lot. However, if it is doing too much as to hamper useability (which seems to be the case for anything but the absolute latest hardware), then they should make a way for it to scale back and do less, but faster.
It does already. I think people are going to pleasantly surprised by Q2DE and CoreImage... they're a couple of the final pieces in the puzzle.
Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
Would somebody please pass me the 10 pound Get-Over-It brick, somebody needs a SMACK!
KKS,
You are fretting your entire life away over a single feature in an OS that's still at least 6 months away from shipping. My gosh good man don't you have ANYTHING more constructive you could be doing with your time?
Nobody had a DVD burner when the SuperDrive and iDVD was first introduced in Mac OS. Did you bitch about that too?
Nobody had a firewire based Mac when the first FW capable Mac OS first came out did you bitch about that too?
Nobody had an Airport equipped Mac when the AirPort drivers were first introduced in the OS did you bitch about that too?
Nobody had an ADC display when the first ADC Macs first came out did you bitch about that too?
When Quartz 2D Extreme is finally available to us (six or more months from now) MOST if not ALL the currently shipping Macs will support it. Something that wasn't the case with any of the technologies I've listed above.
What EXACTLY would you have Apple do?
- Kill Q2DE all together because your current machine doesn't support it?
- Hold back on Q2DE until Apples records indicate every Mac still in operation can use it?
- Hold back until Microsoft ships their OS update?
Give me one GOOD reason why your panties are in such a twist over this silly freakin feature - just one. Oh and a 'good' reason does NOT include 'whahh - cause my machine won't support it'
No...like I said many, many times, Apple should keep working on it. I have no problem with Q2DE...I'm simply saying most people won't be able to use. That...is...all...I...am...saying.
Let me repeat. I am only saying most people won't be able to use it and the bitching will continue. That is all...nothing more, nothing less.
Some of you are blowing this up out of proportions and putting words into my mouth.
No...like I said many, many times, Apple should keep working on it. I have no problem with Q2DE...I'm simply saying most people won't be able to use. That...is...all...I...am...saying.
When it ships most every Mac sold in the past 2 years (or more) will have the hardware to support it. I assume you're not happy with that? It still beats the hell out of the SuperDrive and iDVD introduction. NOBODY, not a single Mac user had the hardware it took to support that when it was announced... By your criteria Apple shoulda delayed that too.
As for Apple should keep working on it?
Your right, they SHOULD and WILL but not to support OLDER cards - I want Apple doing the best they can to support 'todays shipping Macs' and TOMORROWS technology - with a STRONG SLANT on favoring the future. Where as you want Apple to what, bust their nuts on getting HISTORIC hardware to work as well as present day stuff AND work on TOMORROWS technology? Sorry but it just ain't gonna happen most of us have only TWO nuts to bust!
Yesterdays Hardware SUCKS
Todays Hardware is 'OKAY'
Tomorrows Hardware is 'GREAT'
"Tomorrows Hardware" becomes "Yesterdays Hardware" before you can blink... I've got a closet full of what was once 'Tomorrows Hardware'!
Why the heck does Windows XP manage to have silky-smooth resizing on a GF2MX, while it's barely useable on a 9600 Pro?
There are many reasons for this.
First, I believe the Windows equivalent of OS X's WindowServer runs in the NT kernel. That's one of the reasons why you see more BSOD's there.
Switching between kernel space and user space is a surprisingly expensive context switch.
Another reason is that Apple's WindowServer syncs to the retract rate of the screen. That's why you never see tearing on OS X, but you see it on the PC all the time.
The PC also doesn't fully double-buffer the way OS X does. Ever notice how much "white" or "blank" space you see when manipulating windows on a PC?
Another factor has to do with how text is composited on screen. Apple's rendered (which continues to evolve) has a very advanced anti-aliasing built-in. This means a LOT more pixels are being touched when text is drawn on a mac than on a PC. That takes time.
Another reason is that many (most?) Windows apps are built on MFC and the basic fact is that Microsoft has had a decade to highly optimize this drawing path.
Another reason is that, until Panther, carbon apps (not sure about Cocoa) did not have "compositing" windows. That means a LOT more drawing than is really needed.
So, basically, slow window resizing is a combination of many factors. Fortunately, I believe most of them are on Apple's side of the fence which means they can continue to optimize and improve the performance independently of developers doing anything at all.
well, if Q2DE doesn't run on your GPU, then go buy one that does. This is what most PC gamers do whenever a new generation of games come out. Even most cheap PC folks don't complain about that and does spend even more money on the entirely new PC than just a graphic card upgrade. I've seen more people building a new PC to play doom3 than people just upgrading the GPU. Maybe some mac folks should learn from the PC folks....?
Q2DE unsupported hardware can still run, but without the the feature being fully accelerated. Which is fine. I would be complaining when it stops running, though.
Heh, it's almost like some people have seen the relevant WWDC sessions and are now intentionally trying to look foolish...
Not sure what you mean exactly, but... it's not that hard really.
Never seen the slides. I was there.
But, go read any article at ExtremeTech, AnandTech, etc. where they dissect the capabilities of the latest GPUs. Do you not believe that GPUs can do graphics faster than the G5????
Or, perhaps you should take a look at the slides. The ones on Quartz in particular. I seem to remember impressive numbers for how much faster primitives were like drawing one line or groups of lines. Even in software mode.
Who says? Your super secret build of Tiger or your crystal ball?
Damn. It seems like the entire point of your argument is to be pissed off at whatever possible.
We don't even know the hardware requirements for QE2D. While many coreimage effects won't run on old hardware, 2D acceleration is available, but untapped, on even non-CI-capable cards.
Apple is simply providing scalable APIs so that our software will make full use of availabe hardware.
Misplaced aggression it seems. Pop some pills and enjoy the fruits of hardworking engineers' labor.
Life can be good... no really. Don't pull the rest of us down into your 'everything sucks' rut.
Damn. It seems like the entire point of your argument is to be pissed off at whatever possible.
We don't even know the hardware requirements for QE2D. While many coreimage effects won't run on old hardware, 2D acceleration is available, but untapped, on even non-CI-capable cards.
Apple is simply providing scalable APIs so that our software will make full use of availabe hardware.
Misplaced aggression it seems. Pop some pills and enjoy the fruits of hardworking engineers' labor.
Life can be good... no really. Don't pull the rest of us down into your 'everything sucks' rut.
Take your own advice and take a deep breath. Nothing sucks here...except maybe you.
Comments
Originally posted by bryanzak
So? Progress should just stop because Apple sold some computers that won't take advantage of whatever new thing Apple is working on?
Such a stupid attitude.
Did I say that? Nope. I think someone has a stupid attitude around here but its not me.
Either way, window resizing should hardly be such a sticking point- far less demanding than something fancy such as, oh let's see, an entire window warping and scaling into the dock when you minizmize it (which actually manages to stay enabled on a mere ATI Rage 128, albeit lacking a few frames of smoothness).
Actually, no. It's comments like this that belie a lack of graphics experience.
Massive warping, scaling, etc, are downright trivial in comparison to on the fly dynamic re-arrangement/clipping/rendering of live content in a generic document window. Seriously. The former is limited only by bandwidth and raw computation power - which the modern GPUs are bulging with. The latter requires highly specialized rendering hardware for everything from simple lines drawn off-angle (you'd be shocked at how hard that simple task is to get right), to full anti-aliased and properly kerned typography. A 'simple window resize' has to do *all* of that... all the while adjusting what is shown, how it is shown, and possibly where it is shown. It's a bitch.
Wintel machines have gotten away with what looks like smooth resizing for so long for two reasons:
1) they're actually using the 2D hardware. Seems obvious, no? Macs don't use the 2D hardware almost at all. Why? Quartz Extreme - it pumps everything through the 3D system and bypasses the 2D almost entirely. Why? Because it unifies the imaging model and simplified it *DRASTICALLY*. It's been obvious now for a couple of years that the hardware was coming down the pipe to make 2D-on-3D hardware a snap. Well, it's finally getting here... and Apple is ready for it. MS is not. (And not until Avalon ships in Longhorn... whatever year that will be.) This means that future Mac cards can be *SOLELY* 3D accelerators. Which will mean less R&D, less cruft, and less voodoo under the hood. Any optimizations made to a generic 3D environment in the future will benefit *every* application that draws to the screen. Slick.
2) Their algorithms are brain-dead. They don't actually *do* much of anything, so they can do it fast. Apple's dynamic resizing is quite extensive and is doing a *HELL* of a lot behind the scenes. It's really a daunting task.
Window resizing seems simple - and you can *make* it simple if you choose not to do much. Apple took another route, and we're just now starting to see the payoff. Personally, I think it's more than worth it. They've established a graphics engine base that will last them for years.
Originally posted by Randycat99
Of course, it is doing a lot. However, if it is doing too much as to hamper useability (which seems to be the case for anything but the absolute latest hardware), then they should make a way for it to scale back and do less, but faster.
It does already. I think people are going to pleasantly surprised by Q2DE and CoreImage... they're a couple of the final pieces in the puzzle.
Originally posted by Kickaha
It does already. I think people are going to pleasantly surprised by Q2DE and CoreImage... they're a couple of the final pieces in the puzzle.
Who says? Your super secret build of Tiger or your crystal ball?
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
Would somebody please pass me the 10 pound Get-Over-It brick, somebody needs a SMACK!
KKS,
You are fretting your entire life away over a single feature in an OS that's still at least 6 months away from shipping. My gosh good man don't you have ANYTHING more constructive you could be doing with your time?
Nobody had a DVD burner when the SuperDrive and iDVD was first introduced in Mac OS. Did you bitch about that too?
Nobody had a firewire based Mac when the first FW capable Mac OS first came out did you bitch about that too?
Nobody had an Airport equipped Mac when the AirPort drivers were first introduced in the OS did you bitch about that too?
Nobody had an ADC display when the first ADC Macs first came out did you bitch about that too?
When Quartz 2D Extreme is finally available to us (six or more months from now) MOST if not ALL the currently shipping Macs will support it. Something that wasn't the case with any of the technologies I've listed above.
What EXACTLY would you have Apple do?
- Kill Q2DE all together because your current machine doesn't support it?
- Hold back on Q2DE until Apples records indicate every Mac still in operation can use it?
- Hold back until Microsoft ships their OS update?
Give me one GOOD reason why your panties are in such a twist over this silly freakin feature - just one. Oh and a 'good' reason does NOT include 'whahh - cause my machine won't support it'
Dave
Let me repeat. I am only saying most people won't be able to use it and the bitching will continue. That is all...nothing more, nothing less.
Some of you are blowing this up out of proportions and putting words into my mouth.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
No...like I said many, many times, Apple should keep working on it. I have no problem with Q2DE...I'm simply saying most people won't be able to use. That...is...all...I...am...saying.
When it ships most every Mac sold in the past 2 years (or more) will have the hardware to support it. I assume you're not happy with that? It still beats the hell out of the SuperDrive and iDVD introduction. NOBODY, not a single Mac user had the hardware it took to support that when it was announced... By your criteria Apple shoulda delayed that too.
As for Apple should keep working on it?
Your right, they SHOULD and WILL but not to support OLDER cards - I want Apple doing the best they can to support 'todays shipping Macs' and TOMORROWS technology - with a STRONG SLANT on favoring the future. Where as you want Apple to what, bust their nuts on getting HISTORIC hardware to work as well as present day stuff AND work on TOMORROWS technology? Sorry but it just ain't gonna happen most of us have only TWO nuts to bust!
Yesterdays Hardware SUCKS
Todays Hardware is 'OKAY'
Tomorrows Hardware is 'GREAT'
"Tomorrows Hardware" becomes "Yesterdays Hardware" before you can blink... I've got a closet full of what was once 'Tomorrows Hardware'!
Do I really need to be telling you all this?
Dave
Originally posted by DaveGee
Do I really need to be telling you all this?
Not really...you've wasted a few minutes of your life doing so.
Originally posted by Placebo
Why the heck does Windows XP manage to have silky-smooth resizing on a GF2MX, while it's barely useable on a 9600 Pro?
There are many reasons for this.
First, I believe the Windows equivalent of OS X's WindowServer runs in the NT kernel. That's one of the reasons why you see more BSOD's there.
Switching between kernel space and user space is a surprisingly expensive context switch.
Another reason is that Apple's WindowServer syncs to the retract rate of the screen. That's why you never see tearing on OS X, but you see it on the PC all the time.
The PC also doesn't fully double-buffer the way OS X does. Ever notice how much "white" or "blank" space you see when manipulating windows on a PC?
Another factor has to do with how text is composited on screen. Apple's rendered (which continues to evolve) has a very advanced anti-aliasing built-in. This means a LOT more pixels are being touched when text is drawn on a mac than on a PC. That takes time.
Another reason is that many (most?) Windows apps are built on MFC and the basic fact is that Microsoft has had a decade to highly optimize this drawing path.
Another reason is that, until Panther, carbon apps (not sure about Cocoa) did not have "compositing" windows. That means a LOT more drawing than is really needed.
So, basically, slow window resizing is a combination of many factors. Fortunately, I believe most of them are on Apple's side of the fence which means they can continue to optimize and improve the performance independently of developers doing anything at all.
Q2DE unsupported hardware can still run, but without the the feature being fully accelerated. Which is fine. I would be complaining when it stops running, though.
Again, I have to ask. Are you nuts?
Do you have any idea how much faster the GPU can draw things than the CPU? Orders of magnitude faster in many cases.
Doesn't matter how fast your G5 is... the GPUs in the latest cards are blindingly fast at graphics.
Heh, it's almost like some people have seen the relevant WWDC sessions and are now intentionally trying to look foolish...
Originally posted by John
Heh, it's almost like some people have seen the relevant WWDC sessions and are now intentionally trying to look foolish...
Not sure what you mean exactly, but... it's not that hard really.
Never seen the slides. I was there.
But, go read any article at ExtremeTech, AnandTech, etc. where they dissect the capabilities of the latest GPUs. Do you not believe that GPUs can do graphics faster than the G5????
Or, perhaps you should take a look at the slides. The ones on Quartz in particular. I seem to remember impressive numbers for how much faster primitives were like drawing one line or groups of lines. Even in software mode.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Who says? Your super secret build of Tiger or your crystal ball?
Damn. It seems like the entire point of your argument is to be pissed off at whatever possible.
We don't even know the hardware requirements for QE2D. While many coreimage effects won't run on old hardware, 2D acceleration is available, but untapped, on even non-CI-capable cards.
Apple is simply providing scalable APIs so that our software will make full use of availabe hardware.
Misplaced aggression it seems. Pop some pills and enjoy the fruits of hardworking engineers' labor.
Life can be good... no really. Don't pull the rest of us down into your 'everything sucks' rut.
Originally posted by dfiler
Damn. It seems like the entire point of your argument is to be pissed off at whatever possible.
We don't even know the hardware requirements for QE2D. While many coreimage effects won't run on old hardware, 2D acceleration is available, but untapped, on even non-CI-capable cards.
Apple is simply providing scalable APIs so that our software will make full use of availabe hardware.
Misplaced aggression it seems. Pop some pills and enjoy the fruits of hardworking engineers' labor.
Life can be good... no really. Don't pull the rest of us down into your 'everything sucks' rut.
Take your own advice and take a deep breath.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Take your own advice and take a deep breath.
Heheh. That's the first thing you've posted that I agree with.
*deep breath*
Ah... now isn't that better?
Not sure what you mean exactly, but...
When Tiger is out and/or the NDA for the WWDC sessions is no longer relevant, remind me to revisit this thread and explain what's so funny