resizing

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Why is window resizing so slow on MacOSX, even with a Dual Core iMac G5? On Windows, resizing windows is smooth and fast, even on slower computers.
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 29
    Smooth and fast even on this ol' Mac mini with 512Mb and 1.42GHz, maybe you could elaborate further?
  • Reply 2 of 29
    Because it's in your head?



    Apple displays only refresh 60 times per second... if you're hoping for it to go faster than that, well, sorry.
  • Reply 3 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dacloo

    Why is window resizing so slow on MacOSX, even with a Dual Core iMac G5? On Windows, resizing windows is smooth and fast, even on slower computers.



    I agree that resizing is slow. And it's also only possible from the lower right corner of a window which is sort off anoying.



    I have a G4..
  • Reply 4 of 29
    bergzbergz Posts: 1,045member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by zygomatic

    I agree that resizing is slow. And it's also only possible from the lower right corner of a window which is sort off anoying.



    I have a G4..




    Window Dragon



    drag / resize windows by clicking anywhere.



    --B
  • Reply 5 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dacloo

    ...even with a Dual Core iMac G5?



    I think that's your problem. Take that Dual Core iMac G5 back where you bought it because you've been gypped...they don't exist.
  • Reply 6 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by bergz

    Window Dragon



    drag / resize windows by clicking anywhere.



    --B




    Very cool! Thanks..
  • Reply 7 of 29
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    In most of the PCs I use (admittedly not many), not as much is happening while window resizing as in OS X.
  • Reply 8 of 29
    lundylundy Posts: 4,466member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by BRussell

    In most of the PCs I use (admittedly not many), not as much is happening while window resizing as in OS X.



    Exactly.



    It's straight 2-D blitting, no double-buffering, and no compositing. Even a 166 mHz Pentium on Windows NT 4 resizes "like buttah".



    OS X now with the faster machines and post-Panther OS is ALMOST fast enough in window resizing. Launch iCal and try to resize the window fast, and tell me you can't outrun the window corner with your cursor - of course you can.



    I'll bet Vista will show the same sluggishness or worse if they added all the capabilities that Quartz has had since the beginning.
  • Reply 9 of 29
    dacloodacloo Posts: 890member
    Bergz; good tip! Thanks!

    I think it should be supported nativly though.



    And guys who say I've been tricked with the G5: its just slow compared to Windows, admit it :-)



    Yes, I guess the 2d blitting vs fancy Quartz way of doing it is the problem here, funny that this hardware acceleration in the end makes resizing slower
  • Reply 10 of 29
    Well, "Windows Dragon" resizes like buttah.. kinda.



    I love that thing.. I am going to try some of their other products.. http://www.unsanity.com/products/
  • Reply 11 of 29
    dacloodacloo Posts: 890member
    Strange, it doesnt resize very well here....The window size seems to fluctuate, every graphics update cycle my window has a different size, as if the bottom tries to do something that Windragon wants to correct....very weird effect.

    I have a 12" powerbook, 1.5 ghz
  • Reply 12 of 29
    bergzbergz Posts: 1,045member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dacloo

    Strange, it doesnt resize very well here....The window size seems to fluctuate, every graphics update cycle my window has a different size, as if the bottom tries to do something that Windragon wants to correct....very weird effect.

    I have a 12" powerbook, 1.5 ghz




    On my machine the dragon (get it?...window draggin') is really glitchy with MS programs. Word trips out. Also, although you can supposedly resize background windows, there's a strange "hide others" effect when I try to do so.



    --B
  • Reply 13 of 29
    pbpb Posts: 4,232member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by dacloo



    Yes, I guess the 2d blitting vs fancy Quartz way of doing it is the problem here, funny that this hardware acceleration in the end makes resizing slower




    Quartz is not executed directly on hardware, if this is what you do mean. Only the Quartz Compositor runs like that through OpenGL (Quartz Extreme).



    Tiger supposedly would change all this with hardware accelerated Quartz 2D (a.k.a. Quartz 2D Extreme), the Quartz component responsible for 2D operations like resizing, but it seems this one is for the moment more than problematic and of course disabled.



    Anyway, the optimisations brought by Tiger in the Quartz technology gave graphics performance a big boost, even if this is still in software. There was an Ars article on the subject with specific numbers. Oh yeah, here it is.
  • Reply 14 of 29
    carniphagecarniphage Posts: 1,984member
    Why is moving a window so slow on Windows? On the Mac is it smooth as silk, regardless of the size of window.



    On XP - background windows have to redraw themselves after the foreground window has trampled on them.



    PS. I don't actually want an answer
  • Reply 15 of 29
    Carniphage, despite your request not to have one, the reason that occurs is because it is not double-buffered
  • Reply 16 of 29
    pbpb Posts: 4,232member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by akheron01

    Carniphage, despite your request not to have one, the reason that occurs is because it is not double-buffered



    Window move in OS X is handled by Quartz Extreme (the hardware accelerated Quartz Compositor), running on almost every Mac from the Jaguar era.
  • Reply 17 of 29
    skatmanskatman Posts: 609member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Carniphage

    Why is moving a window so slow on Windows? On the Mac is it smooth as silk, regardless of the size of window.



    On XP - background windows have to redraw themselves after the foreground window has trampled on them.



    PS. I don't actually want an answer




    That happens only if you're using a graphics driver or graphics card which does not support DirectDraw hardware acceleration. Then you really see the "window redraw effect".

    If the card and the driver support DirectDraw hardware accel., then it's silky smooth and doesn't tax you CPU very much.
  • Reply 18 of 29
    Quote:

    Originally posted by PB

    Window move in OS X is handled by Quartz Extreme (the hardware accelerated Quartz Compositor), running on almost every Mac from the Jaguar era.



    I was talking about windows, heh
  • Reply 19 of 29
    carniphagecarniphage Posts: 1,984member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by skatman

    That happens only if you're using a graphics driver or graphics card which does not support DirectDraw hardware acceleration. Then you really see the "window redraw effect".

    If the card and the driver support DirectDraw hardware accel., then it's silky smooth and doesn't tax you CPU very much.




    Not true - just tried it. And a simple test will prove it.



    Even with the latest Radeon cards 'n drivers - XP still uses a display model written by Fred Flintstone.



    XP does not cache the contents of background windows. So whan an app over-writes a window on screen, the contents are lost forever. When a foreground window is moved, it reveals erased screen. To correct this XP is forced to request all of the affected background apps to re-draw the affected region. Sometimes this is so fast you can't see the re-draw. But slower apps can take a while to get around to servicing the res the request. In the worst case, apps which have swapped out, will need to re-load just to service the redraw request.



    Experiment #1

    On XP - Run Google Earth - fullscreen. Launch Task Manager. Move the Task Manager window around on top of Google Earth. What do you see?

    Now try the same on the Mac.





    Vista's big thing will be to address this. by adopting a display model very similar to OS X.





    C.
  • Reply 20 of 29
    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Carniphage

    [B]Not true - just tried it. And a simple test will prove it.



    Even with the latest Radeon cards 'n drivers - XP still uses a display model written by Fred Flintstone.



    And I'm glad that it does. It works and works well.

    That's like Russian Souz vs. US Shuttle.... Souz maybe old, but it flies a hell of a lot better than the shuttle.



    Quote:

    XP does not cache the contents of background windows. So whan an app over-writes a window on screen, the contents are lost forever.



    No shit! How are you going to cache contents of a page when the contents are chaning?



    Quote:

    Experiment #1

    On XP - Run Google Earth - fullscreen. Launch Task Manager. Move the Task Manager window around on top of Google Earth. What do you see?



    Nothing unusual. It resizes and moves perfectly smoothly without any visible redraw effects.



    Perhaps you're using Fred's computer.



    Haven't tried on a mac, but will shortly.
Sign In or Register to comment.