I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
If nothing else, just the recompile under the new version of gcc should make things a little faster iirc, factor in core data and the spotlight service, if nothing else it will feel faster.
Based on Apples track record, I cannot imagine it being slower...
I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
STFU...I hope it breaks VPC...I love mac as much as anyone but I am sick and tired of the two faces of the Apple community: when Apple (or anyone else) makes a killer app that is mac only, you all say to windows guys "tough nuts cowboy! buy some hardware you dont really need and you can run this cool os..." but if something cool for windows comes along, you say "well, I will run it in vpc." and b*tch to high hell when open sorce communities try to emmulate mac on PC hardware...or at the faintest mention of Mac os being made availible to those end users who cannot afford botique hardware, that said I would not trade my mini for anything (unless it were a 15 inch PB or a dual g5 ) Apple hardware is amoung the best quality that I have seen, but not everyone can afford or justify it.
BTW: if you want a faster windows experiance, get a cheap 3 year old PC toss 512 more mb ram in there and have at it, it will likely be faster than any update to vpc.
Being a powerbook owner (1.5 15") if those numbers are true that is a real nice increase for portable users. What would be the cause of such an increase, better power management? would the cpu really have been held back by a pbooks energy saver glitches?
STFU...I hope it breaks VPC...I love mac as much as anyone but I am sick and tired of the two faces of the Apple community: when Apple (or anyone else) makes a killer app that is mac only, you all say to windows guys "tough nuts cowboy! buy some hardware you dont really need and you can run this cool os..." but if something cool for windows comes along, you say "well, I will run it in vpc." and b*tch to high hell when open sorce communities try to emmulate mac on PC hardware...or at the faintest mention of Mac os being made availible to those end users who cannot afford botique hardware, that said I would not trade my mini for anything (unless it were a 15 inch PB or a dual g5 ) Apple hardware is amoung the best quality that I have seen, but not everyone can afford or justify it.
BTW: if you want a faster windows experiance, get a cheap 3 year old PC toss 512 more mb ram in there and have at it, it will likely be faster than any update to vpc.
Stay calm...I have to run some software for work on my Mac if I want to use my iBook instead my dell notebook. It is a custom wrote package we have to use on occasion. It would just be nice...
Yup, there seems to be some folks out there that hate VPC because its not as fast as a native PC and the answer is to go buy a cheap PC.
CAN'T DO THAT WITH A POWERBOOK !
Even for desktop use, I don't want to clutter my desk area up. I've already got a PowerMac G4 desktop and 21 inch monitor and then the Powerbook on occasion, I don't want to kludge up another computer and moitor or KVM switch just to run an occasional PC program -- doesn't make sense. Much easier and cleaner to use VPC.
Another thing -- if you are testing PC software, you can enable the VPC Undo Drives function, test to your hearts desire and if something screws up the operating system, just undo the drive and your right back to your "clean" install in seconds versus having to spend 2 hours reinstalling Windows onto a "real" PC.
There are many advantages to using VPC on a Mac, speed just doesn't happen to be one of them.
Being a powerbook owner (1.5 15") if those numbers are true that is a real nice increase for portable users. What would be the cause of such an increase, better power management? would the cpu really have been held back by a pbooks energy saver glitches?
My guess is that their 'benchmark' was done on reduced or automatic energy saving settings. Now, if we assume that their 10.4 test was performed correctly, the scores are an improvements over my PowerBook, but far less so than it appears from that graph.
Tigers creep up on their prey (usually deer, antelope, oxen or pig) by hiding in grass or amongst trees or bushes to get as close as possible without being seen. This is called stalking. When they are close enough they will rush in for the kill and can reach a top speed of about 30-40 miles per hour (48-64 kilometres per hour). But a tiger cannot run fast for very long.
------------
Pumas [[Panthers are sub-speecies of Puma, although the term black panther is more commonly associated with the melanistic variants of leopards or jaguars rather than pumas]] are tawny-colored with black-tipped ears and tail. The puma can run as fast as 30 mph (50 km/h), jump 20 ft (6 m) from a standing position, vertically leap 8 ft (2.5 m), and often weigh more than 150 pounds (70 kg). Their bite strength is more powerful than that of any domestic dog. Puma claws are retractable and they have four toes. Adult males may be more than eight feet long (nose to tail), and weigh about 150 pounds (70 kg). In exceptional cases males may reach as much as 200 pounds. Adult females can be 7 ft (2 m) long and weigh about 75 pounds (35 kg). Puma kittens have brownish-blackish spots and rings on their tails. Their life span is about a decade in the wild and 25 years or more in captivity.
-----------------
so, yes, I guess Tiger will run faster. Although its more of a short distance runner.
I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
Yes and no - Tiger will be faster then Panther:how much faster? Depends on your hardware and perception of what "faster" is - if you own a 500-800 mhz system you probably won't notice a performance increase over 10.3 right away - but it's the little performance tweaks that _will_ make a diffrence - filesystem, finder, etc. Create a file from the command prompt on your desktop and it'll show up right away, or performing massive drive searches won't bring your system to a grinding hault. I've also been told that dual G5 systems operate noticeably faster on 10.4. Of corse, there'll always be the placebo effect, where someone upgrades thier 400 mhz powerbook and goes "OMG - Tiger sOoOo FAST!"
Ummm...today, after my first month of Mac use, I doubled the speed of my mini by repairing permitions...all that installing and deleteing...fixed in 10 minutes...Yay
My new found speed makes me want tiger even worse! faster than panther -- It has to be!!!!
Comments
Originally posted by giba
I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
If nothing else, just the recompile under the new version of gcc should make things a little faster iirc, factor in core data and the spotlight service, if nothing else it will feel faster.
Based on Apples track record, I cannot imagine it being slower...
Originally posted by giba
I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
See here. Or directly here.
Originally posted by aplnub
It would be nice if VPC 7 got a little boost.
STFU...I hope it breaks VPC...I love mac as much as anyone but I am sick and tired of the two faces of the Apple community: when Apple (or anyone else) makes a killer app that is mac only, you all say to windows guys "tough nuts cowboy! buy some hardware you dont really need and you can run this cool os..." but if something cool for windows comes along, you say "well, I will run it in vpc." and b*tch to high hell when open sorce communities try to emmulate mac on PC hardware...or at the faintest mention of Mac os being made availible to those end users who cannot afford botique hardware, that said I would not trade my mini for anything (unless it were a 15 inch PB or a dual g5
BTW: if you want a faster windows experiance, get a cheap 3 year old PC toss 512 more mb ram in there and have at it, it will likely be faster than any update to vpc.
Originally posted by PB
See here. Or directly here.
Being a powerbook owner (1.5 15") if those numbers are true that is a real nice increase for portable users. What would be the cause of such an increase, better power management? would the cpu really have been held back by a pbooks energy saver glitches?
Originally posted by a_greer
STFU...I hope it breaks VPC...I love mac as much as anyone but I am sick and tired of the two faces of the Apple community: when Apple (or anyone else) makes a killer app that is mac only, you all say to windows guys "tough nuts cowboy! buy some hardware you dont really need and you can run this cool os..." but if something cool for windows comes along, you say "well, I will run it in vpc." and b*tch to high hell when open sorce communities try to emmulate mac on PC hardware...or at the faintest mention of Mac os being made availible to those end users who cannot afford botique hardware, that said I would not trade my mini for anything (unless it were a 15 inch PB or a dual g5
BTW: if you want a faster windows experiance, get a cheap 3 year old PC toss 512 more mb ram in there and have at it, it will likely be faster than any update to vpc.
Stay calm...I have to run some software for work on my Mac if I want to use my iBook instead my dell notebook. It is a custom wrote package we have to use on occasion. It would just be nice...
CAN'T DO THAT WITH A POWERBOOK !
Even for desktop use, I don't want to clutter my desk area up. I've already got a PowerMac G4 desktop and 21 inch monitor and then the Powerbook on occasion, I don't want to kludge up another computer and moitor or KVM switch just to run an occasional PC program -- doesn't make sense. Much easier and cleaner to use VPC.
Another thing -- if you are testing PC software, you can enable the VPC Undo Drives function, test to your hearts desire and if something screws up the operating system, just undo the drive and your right back to your "clean" install in seconds versus having to spend 2 hours reinstalling Windows onto a "real" PC.
There are many advantages to using VPC on a Mac, speed just doesn't happen to be one of them.
Originally posted by gsxrboy
Being a powerbook owner (1.5 15") if those numbers are true that is a real nice increase for portable users. What would be the cause of such an increase, better power management? would the cpu really have been held back by a pbooks energy saver glitches?
Those numbers are shonky as hell.
Note the 10.3.8 scores for a 1.67Ghz 15":
http://www.mactouch.com/IMG/gif/Tige...s_MacTouch.gif
Now look at the CPU/thread scores for my 1.5Ghz 15", also running 10.3.8:
http://ladd.dyndns.org/xbench/merge.xhtml?doc2=101650
My guess is that their 'benchmark' was done on reduced or automatic energy saving settings. Now, if we assume that their 10.4 test was performed correctly, the scores are an improvements over my PowerBook, but far less so than it appears from that graph.
------------
Pumas [[Panthers are sub-speecies of Puma, although the term black panther is more commonly associated with the melanistic variants of leopards or jaguars rather than pumas]] are tawny-colored with black-tipped ears and tail. The puma can run as fast as 30 mph (50 km/h), jump 20 ft (6 m) from a standing position, vertically leap 8 ft (2.5 m), and often weigh more than 150 pounds (70 kg). Their bite strength is more powerful than that of any domestic dog. Puma claws are retractable and they have four toes. Adult males may be more than eight feet long (nose to tail), and weigh about 150 pounds (70 kg). In exceptional cases males may reach as much as 200 pounds. Adult females can be 7 ft (2 m) long and weigh about 75 pounds (35 kg). Puma kittens have brownish-blackish spots and rings on their tails. Their life span is about a decade in the wild and 25 years or more in captivity.
-----------------
so, yes, I guess Tiger will run faster. Although its more of a short distance runner.
Originally posted by giba
I remember when Panther was introduced there was a big deal about Panther's performance boost over Jaguar. Can we expect to see the same kind of result in Tiger?
Yes and no - Tiger will be faster then Panther:how much faster? Depends on your hardware and perception of what "faster" is - if you own a 500-800 mhz system you probably won't notice a performance increase over 10.3 right away - but it's the little performance tweaks that _will_ make a diffrence - filesystem, finder, etc. Create a file from the command prompt on your desktop and it'll show up right away, or performing massive drive searches won't bring your system to a grinding hault. I've also been told that dual G5 systems operate noticeably faster on 10.4. Of corse, there'll always be the placebo effect, where someone upgrades thier 400 mhz powerbook and goes "OMG - Tiger sOoOo FAST!"
Originally posted by semi-fly
Of corse, there'll always be the placebo effect, where someone upgrades thier 400 mhz powerbook and goes "OMG - Tiger sOoOo FAST!"
My iBook already feels faster just knowing the release date...
Originally posted by aplnub
My iBook already feels faster just knowing the release date...
Originally posted by aplnub
My iBook already feels faster just knowing the release date...
My new found speed makes me want tiger even worse! faster than panther -- It has to be!!!!