Does Win XP already have a Core Image answer?

2

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 54
    karl kuehnkarl kuehn Posts: 756member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Randycat99

    If the new Windows framework still pulls off the "holy grail"- hardware-accelerated...window...resizing, I'd say they are one step ahead! (Really, worrying about how advanced all this other fancy stuff is seems like folly to me if we still can't even get snappy window resizing on anything but the most robust CPU monster machines- that's just ridiculous, if you think about it)



    How exactly is hardware going to accelerate live window resizing when you still have to have the individual program (that is software by the way) decide how to flow the content? While the current finder's response is a great example of how not to do this, applications that simply declare a large graphics region (which is then inset into a scrolling area) and do not re-flow the content while resizing the window already get hardware acceleration in 10.3 (10.2 also).



    If you actually look at most windows programs when you resize them, they don't keep the content flowed very well at all, and you get a lot of tearing... and the areas that need redraw are just tacky... common... that has to be fixed. There are a few notable exceptions to that, and a prime on is IE on Windows. They have obviously done a lot of tuning to get that fast enough that you don't notice. But if you actually try and do the same things with IE (in its file browser mode) as MacOS X's finder... all of a sudden you start to see the same problems. If you have it fit-to window so that it has to re-flow content, you get a lot of stuttering.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 54
    hobbeshobbes Posts: 1,252member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by webmail

    I've actually played with some very recent builds of longhorn. And despite disliking windows, the avalon stuff blew me away. So fast.... on a 1.8ghz pc with 512 of ram and 64mb video card. I was very very impressed. Hopefully Mac OS X will keep up with rapid pace development in this area... I think Apple should have plenty of time...



    Did you find the Longhorn builds faster than Tiger, on a Mac with similar specs?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 54
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    If Longhorn is actually good enough to spur more aggressive development on OSX, then I'm all for it.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 54
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Karl Kuehn

    How exactly is hardware going to accelerate live window resizing when you still have to have the individual program (that is software by the way) decide how to flow the content? While the current finder's response is a great example of how not to do this, applications that simply declare a large graphics region (which is then inset into a scrolling area) and do not re-flow the content while resizing the window already get hardware acceleration in 10.3 (10.2 also).



    If you actually look at most windows programs when you resize them, they don't keep the content flowed very well at all, and you get a lot of tearing... and the areas that need redraw are just tacky... common... that has to be fixed. There are a few notable exceptions to that, and a prime on is IE on Windows. They have obviously done a lot of tuning to get that fast enough that you don't notice. But if you actually try and do the same things with IE (in its file browser mode) as MacOS X's finder... all of a sudden you start to see the same problems. If you have it fit-to window so that it has to re-flow content, you get a lot of stuttering.




    Thank you.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 54
    randycat99randycat99 Posts: 1,919member




    ...just make it work...(doesn't have to be pretty) Windows has had a "solution" since the late 90's. Oh my, if it tears, if it doesn't reflow with uber finesses- BFD...the bottomline is that it works when it comes to its primary function- resize that window interactively with the mouse pointer w/o sucking down 100% CPU to do it. Can't guarantee every application will do it? BFD! If it was just the Finder to take a first crack, that's still not such a bad thing at all (in fact, that's where I find it to be the most pain, for the way I use my computer). I can appreciate if the task to implement a way to do it "right" is difficult. What I cannot appreciate is the arrogant dismissal that because it cannot be done "right" easily, then it isn't that big of a deal. That's just dense. What's worse is that certain individuals cannot even allow me to say it half in jest w/o getting in my face over their presssssious OS.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 54
    cowerdcowerd Posts: 579member
    then I have just the product for you. from macnn and member piracy, famed rationalist and build number debunker:

    Quote:

    Actually, there are two versions of Tiger that will be shipping, both with the same build number. But in the same vein as Microsoft Windows XP Home Reduced Media Edition (now known as Windows XP Home Edition N), Apple is pleased to make available Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" Reduced Debug Code Edition. It is only recommended for users who wish their systems to be "snappy", a technical term for the performance of the window dragging and resizing portion of the graphics subsystem. Traditionally, these areas have been crippled to fool the unwashed masses into thinking Mac OS X is "slow", since, as we all know, 99% of what people do with their computers in home and corporate settings is frantically moving and resizing windows.



    In any case, I'm happy to be the first to reveal the news about Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" Reduced Debug Code Edition. It's a proud effort, but the team doesn't feel like it's all the way there. Work has already begin on Mac OS X 10.5, codename yet to be determined, which will offer even further enhanced window resizing and dragging. Currently, research being done by Virginia Tech with System X has yielded a 4% increase in scrolling speed in Safari, and a stunning 11% increase in the performance of resizing a Finder window.



    enjoy resizing. i would as well, but accidently loaded a program and found it more fun.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 54
    gene cleangene clean Posts: 3,481member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by fahlman

    In the picture linked to by Henriok notice the Title bar of the Text Writer window. It says "Untitled - Text Writer (Not Responding)". Typical Windows.



    That's because they wanted to show the little red button that lights up when something stops responding or there's a system message.



    I know people enjoy taking a stab at Windows, but this one is dead wrong.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 54
    randycat99randycat99 Posts: 1,919member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by cowerd

    then I have just the product for you. from macnn and member piracy, famed rationalist and build number debunker:



    ...Ok, Mr. April Fools!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 54
    henriokhenriok Posts: 537member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by havanas

    Hmmm... not all that impressive :P



    I'm sure of that IE isn't doing that using an effect from an API in the operating system witch uses programmable shader technology accelerated in hardware by the GPU. I'm pretty sure the effect in Longhorn is doing just that, and that's the whole point of this thread.



    The point is not that it does a simple blur, it's the way it does it. If it can do GPU-supported blur it might as well do stuff like ripple effects, smoke, magnification, sharpen, emboss, fire, reflections, chrome.. you name it!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 54
    fahlmanfahlman Posts: 743member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Gene Clean

    I know people enjoy taking a stab at Windows, but this one is dead wrong.



    See the humor. It is funny.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 54
    fahlmanfahlman Posts: 743member
    I find it very funny that were a comparing a version of Windows that has been delayed multiple times, and still isn't scheduled to ship until the second quarter of 2006 with a version of Mac OS X that is scheduled to ship in the first half of 2005. Tiger will be a year old by the time Longhorg is released. I'd hope that it would be more advanced!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 54
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    Longhorn is going to be released?



    But seriously, it has been starting to look like longhorn is microsoft's copland.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 54
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    I'm curious what they have up their sleeve, to be honest.



    There were three technologies showcased as 'must-have features' for Longhorn: Avalon (graphics composition engine), WinFS (Spotlight-esque searching), and Indigo (interappcommunication).



    Avalon: backported to XP.

    WinFS: sliced, diced, cut down... and backported to XP.

    Indigo: backported to XP.



    So... what's left to entice people to Longhorn? If they're backporting all the must have features to XP, then what are they planning on to get people to move to Longhorn?



    I posed this question to several friends who are MS developers and quite tightly tied with OS development there for various reasons, and they all just smiled and said "There are still reasons. Good ones." They would not, of course, expand on these comments, and I wasn't going to push. An NDA is an NDA.



    So what's being planned? Any guesses?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 54
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha



    So... what's left to entice people to Longhorn? If they're backporting all the must have features to XP, then what are they planning on to get people to move to Longhorn?




    I thought by backporting, it was just so software written for Longhorn would still work on XP, as opposed to XP taking advantage of those features.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 54
    kickahakickaha Posts: 8,760member
    Hmmm. That's not the way I've interpreted what I've seen, but that may be the case.



    And again, that doesn't really fuel the upgrade cycle for them, does it?



    "I need a new feature in app X, but since it will run on XP, I don't have to upgrade to Longhorn."



    That's not really MS's style. They like massive upgrade churn. In general, upgrading one of their products requires upgrading all of them, across a company. That's how they drive revenue.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 54
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    I don't know if this would add something to the discussion, but here it is:



    Avalon and quartz extreme- what gives?



    From the Battlefront of Ars forums.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 54
    nowayout11nowayout11 Posts: 326member
    I don't think there's any question if MS can port folks to Longhorn. The answer is no, because that's not really their goal. It will take years for Longhorn to become the primary OS anyway due to their market size. They tried converting people to Windows 95 with big campaigns, but that sorta flopped. It's more profitable to let the market come to them through new hardware sales. That's been their tact since Windows 98.



    Apple's market is different. It's smaller and their hardware probably lasts longer on the average, or they at least keep it longer. The OS upgraders become more valuable for the short term.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 38 of 54
    rolandgrolandg Posts: 632member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Kickaha

    I'm curious what they have up their sleeve, to be honest.



    I posed this question to several friends who are MS developers and quite tightly tied with OS development there for various reasons, and they all just smiled and said "There are still reasons. Good ones." They would not, of course, expand on these comments, and I wasn't going to push. An NDA is an NDA.



    So what's being planned? Any guesses?




    Two things that come to my mind:



    - Palladium/NGSCB for digital rights management, although I don't know what implementation they are currently working on (my last information is that they would be utilizing a compartment model similar to having open multiple VirtualPC sessions) or whether it will get axed like WinFS



    - Support for XP running out (this is why the company I work for recently migrated form NT to XP)/software subscription programms
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 39 of 54
    dfilerdfiler Posts: 3,420member
    I'm fascinated by this subject...



    Curiously, a less impressive longhorn release would make me more impressed with longhorn. Less "features" would mean that MS has chosen to overhaul much of their now disjointed and convoluted system architecture.



    It seems that microsoft is caught between a rock and a hard place. The value of windows is derived at least partially from it being "standard". Many businesses rightfully choose windows because they already use windows as well as everybody else already using windows. If microsoft were to start fresh with much of their codebase for longhorn, they would loose much of the appeal to their OS. If longhorn isn't nearly 100% compatible with current windows software, then MS will lose one of the biggest draws to running their OS.



    Yet keeping compatibility means that extending and debugging the OS becomes orders of magnitude more difficult. This truly is a tough time for MS. They need to overhaul their codebase in order to remain competitive in the long term. Yet doing so without breaking compatibility is a monumental task.



    OS X worked out extremely well for apple and MS is now trying to pull off a similar transition. It's important to note that Apple failed more than once before finally getting their next gen OS out the door and adopted...



    Interesting times are ahead for MS. Massive libraries and API and sets don't just die or popup without significant upheaval.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 40 of 54
    pbpb Posts: 4,255member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dfiler



    OS X worked out extremely well for apple and MS is now trying to pull off a similar transition.




    I am not sure if MS can afford a similar transition. That is, breaking anything from the past and providing some kind of "classic" environment for XP or older applications, like the one we have in OS X. The market share they control is too huge to take such a risk. At least that's how it seems to me.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.