Smoothe scrolling...?

Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
Okay... the GUI, in general, has been around long enough that I would hope by now we could have some nice, smoothe scrolling. Am I alone on this...?



Great... we have transparency, drop shadows, and a host of other lovely trinkets... (all of which I LOVE, by the way) But what does it take for scrolling to be smoothe...? I have a few input devices with scroll wheels and I would just LOVE to be able to scroll through a Word Doc, a web page or any OTHER instance where I need to scroll without having jerky, incremental jumps.



Is it an OS thing...? or is it that the application developers do not "tap-into" the right APIs...? Can't they just "buffer" the whole document and allow you to fluently scroll around as if it were just an "open Window" where it doesn't need to redraw...?



I am not a developer... so I have no clue about this stuff... but sitting here using my Wacom 4D mouse with proportional scroll wheel... I can only think: "What a waste... I have a device that's capable of proportionally controlling the movement of the page along the Y-Axis and not a SINGLE program (or the OS?) can or will take advantage of it..."



Anyone have any insight on this topic...?
«1

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 32
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    I noticed also thaat scrolling (manually with the mouse) is very herky jerky also in OSX. I wish Apple would not focus on looks so much(notice that blob in the slide area? and give us a better OS...................
  • Reply 2 of 32
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    steve666:

    Your incessant complaints are getting old and very annoying. If you have something constructive to add, please do, but don't keep whining about your bad experience with OS X.



    Scott F:

    The way drawing is done in Mac OS X is very different than OS9 and even Windows. Everything on the screen is double-buffered, keeping a copy in memory. Scrolling is one of those things that is usually off-loaded onto a GPU, but Quartz and and the standard calls make this a rather difficult task. The GPU is currently very under-used right now because it it impossible to use it for many of Quartz's functions. For one, developers can't draw to the screen directly without doing a little extra work, but it is possible and Apple is working directly with developers such as Connectix to make it easier to do. Apple isn't so close-minded as steve666 makes it sound.



    Remember, Mac OS X is still a *very* young system. Quartz is only than three years old (two years publicly) and still has plenty of room for optimization as you may see with 10.2.



    [ 05-02-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
  • Reply 3 of 32
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    Starfleet:

    &gt;steve666:

    Your incessant complaints are getting old and very annoying. If you have something constructive to add, please do, but don't keep whining about your bad experience with OS X.&lt;



    And your obsessive need to comment everytime someone has a legitimate complaint about OSX is getting very old. Get a life, and get your head out of Steve Jobs' asshole. You're embarrassing yourself.......................................... ........
  • Reply 4 of 32
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member




    At least I am willing to learn and try to explain *why* these things happen. Were you this antcy when System 7 came out with speed hits and incompatibilities? Did you just throw your arms up in the air, say "**** Apple," and go back to System 6?



    Everyone knows this is a far more drastic change and that there are bound to be bumps in the road. Mac OS 9 is a dead system. If you plan to keep using Macs, you'd better learn to use Mac OS X even with its quirks. Some problems are probably to be expected. Do a little investigating and you probably won't be so pissed off if you understand the causes behind the problems. Don't just give up and cry about it like a baby.



    I encourage criticism with regards to Apple. I was angry like you too when the Public Beta was released and then the GM and there were still so many problems. Once I got to know why things were different and why certain things didn't operate the way they did before, I wasn't so angry. There are still many things that upset me about Mac OS X but I'm not about to go around to new users and say, "Yeah, you can't do that in X cuz Apple developers don't give a **** about that feature any more." Neither you nor I can say that Apple developers concentrate more work on one area than another. Have you ever written an operating system? Do you know how hard things things are to accomplish?



    [ 05-03-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
  • Reply 5 of 32
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    Mind you... I'm not bashing Apple or OSX by any means... just curious about the whole "scrolling" thing... In my (uninformed) mind... I think: "well heck, they have translucency and drop shadows... that seems like a quantum leap forward in screen elements in a GUI... but windows still scroll chunkily..." (I know it's not a real word)



    Anyhow... it's just something that I noticed today and didn't know WHY it wasn't up-to-par with the new os yet.



    I know OSX is in its' infancy and there's much more to come. I'm just being curious. Thanks for your response(s).
  • Reply 6 of 32
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    Hi Scott,



    There's no harm in being curious. Sorry we probably lost the original spirit of this thread in that little argument. That happens a lot around here...



    Anyway, the short answer is that scrolling is usually hardware accelerated but that isn't as available as it was with OS9. Mac OS X 10.2 is rumored (key word here is "rumored") to have more Quartz optimizations that may make things like scrolling quicker. Of course, take this kind of conjecture with a grain of salt.
  • Reply 7 of 32
    scott f.scott f. Posts: 276member
    Well... quicker is one thing... smoother is another. I notice how menus "fade" away... sheets slip & stretch into place... emails crossfade between them when switching mailboxes... windows do the "genie" suck-thing... all of that is to enhance the visual experience.



    What I would love to see (more than speed) is the SMOOTHNESS of it improved... Such as acceleration and slowing to a stop (not sure if I'm explaining it correctly) when using the proportional scroll wheel... or if you do a quick flick of the scroll wheel it scrolls quick and slows to a stop... (obviously it should be a preferrence you can turn on & off).



    Thanks for your info.
  • Reply 8 of 32
    jethrojethro Posts: 34member
    [quote]Originally posted by Scott F.:

    <strong>What I would love to see (more than speed) is the SMOOTHNESS of it improved... Such as acceleration and slowing to a stop (not sure if I'm explaining it correctly) when using the proportional scroll wheel... or if you do a quick flick of the scroll wheel it scrolls quick and slows to a stop... (obviously it should be a preferrence you can turn on & off).

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    The reason things scroll in large increments is that OS X doesn't have any hardware (er, well, there's that live dragging a window thing) acceleration for simple graphic tasks like scrolling. So to get decent speed they increase the number of pixels that get scrolled because it's the same basic amount of work to do a line or a page. Since most people don't want to just scroll a line, but a useful amount this is a pretty basic optimization. Unfortunately it can look pretty chunky.



    What you can do, is get a better mouse driver. The Logitech driver has an "accelerated" option for the scroll wheel that adjusts the number of lines moved at a time based on how fast you spin the wheel. With a little tinkering with the curve you can usually get something that works pretty well. Of course the scrollbar still sucks, but I very rarely use them anymore. Viva la wheel mouse! .



    If what you want is something that starts off scrolling by a smaller than 1-line increment, then you'll have to hope for real graphics acceleration because I don't even want to know how scary slow that would be. Well, I don't know, maybe it wouldn't if you had a decent acceleration curve but I'm skeptical.
  • Reply 9 of 32
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    There is nothing wrong with complaining if its legitimate. Apple needs to know about problems with the OS so they can fix it. if we all went around afraid to put down anything related to Apple we would be stuck with a crap OS. So let the thoughts and ideas flow freely and don't try to get people to only say good things about OSX when there are so many things wrong with it. Dare i say its like being too PC....................................
  • Reply 10 of 32
    posterboyposterboy Posts: 147member
    [quote]Originally posted by steve666:

    <strong>There is nothing wrong with complaining if its legitimate. Apple needs to know about problems with the OS so they can fix it. if we all went around afraid to put down anything related to Apple we would be stuck with a crap OS. So let the thoughts and ideas flow freely and don't try to get people to only say good things about OSX when there are so many things wrong with it. Dare i say its like being too PC....................................</strong><hr></blockquote>



    There is nothing wrong with critisim about the OS, after all it is new and if Apple is listening then hey, they'll probably address our concerns because they probably share all of them, and in fact probably more. Constant Bitching is just plain annoying. If you are that unhappy with OS X, go back to 9, or 8.6 or whatever version you were last happy with.



    Instead of bitching, why not post about your problems, and how you have worked around them, or ask how others have worked around them. The free exchange of knowledge and experience with help us all make the somewhat difficult transition to OS X.



    --PB



    [ 05-03-2002: Message edited by: PosterBoy ]</p>
  • Reply 11 of 32
    posterboyposterboy Posts: 147member
    Part of the reason that windows in OS X are sometimes slow, and don't scroll so well is that OS X uses a buffer when it needs to draw all the flashy drop shadows and transparancies we all know and love. Unfortunatly, all of this info gets stored in RAM, so if you have a lot of windows open it can really bog you down. Fortuneatly there is a way to enable buffer compression, which will speed your system up a little or maybe a lot depending on your system and configuration.



    Some of you may already have seen this one in the April issue of MacAddict. What I am about to describe is how to enable window buffer compression. You will need a copy of <a href="http://personalpages.tds.net/~brian_hill/pseudo.html"; target="_blank">Pseudo</a>*, and TextEdit.



    First, find the file called com.apple.windowserver.plist. It can be found in the preferences folder, in the library folder on your hard drive.

    ( here: HD/library/preferences/com.apple.windowserver.plist). Back the file up by making a copy to your desktop.



    Now, launch TextEdit as root by dropping it onto <a href="http://personalpages.tds.net/~brian_hill/pseudo.html"; target="_blank">Pseudo</a>, and open the file.



    Locate the first &lt;dict&gt; tag. Place a cursor beside it and press return, and add highlighted text from the following image.







    Save your changes and quit TextEdit. Now log out and log back in.



    I have tried this so far on my iBook 600 w/ 384 MB Ram, on a different iBook 600 w 256, a PowerMac G4 800 w/ 256, and on a PowerBook 550 (combo drive) w/ 256.



    Both iBooks were sped up noticably, the PowerBook also was faster, though not as blatantly so as the iBooks, and the PowerMac went from being Hella fast to Blazing Wicked Fast (tm).



    I reccomend this little hack for anyone running a G3, and anyone who is running a G4 and keeps a lot of windows open.



    --PB



    *Psuedo is cool app that enable any other app as root.
  • Reply 12 of 32
    Just a thought but to me you would think that to run a modern OS you need modern hardware. From my point of view the lastest crop of macs are anything but "modern." I think the biggest thing that will help OS X is faster hardware other then that I doubt there is alot they can do to "optimize" other then removing the eye candy witch I don`t see happening anytime soon.
  • Reply 13 of 32
    junkyard dawgjunkyard dawg Posts: 2,801member
    USB overdrive implements a feature called "accelerated scrolling"; some of you who hate OS X might want to give it a try. I sure dig it!



    And yeah, OS X needs new hardware to shine. I suspect that part of the blame falls on Motorola, that the Mac OS X team predicted that Macs would have faster processors at the time of 10.0's introduction, and they planned OS X's requirements accordingly. Remember that G4 development was stalled for 18 months while Motorola dawdled either incompetently or intentionally. If Moto had adhered to Moore's law, then Mac users would all be running OS X on Macs clocked now lower than 1 GHz or so. In such a case I'd imagine there would be far fewer complaints.
  • Reply 14 of 32
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    &gt;Instead of bitching, why not post about your problems, and how you have worked around them, or ask how others have worked around them. The free exchange of knowledge and experience with help us all make the somewhat difficult transition to OS X.&lt;



    Instead of bitching about my bitching, maybe YOU can come up with a solution. If not, then your entire post was meaningless and you really have nothing of interest to say...............................
  • Reply 15 of 32
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    If OSX needs new hardware to shine, then does that mean my less than a year old G4 is now outdated? I don't think Jobs is going to let that happen because it would alienate a lot of Apple fans. I think they are working on a way to get OSX more involved with the graphics card, and possibly a way to lessen the use of excessive eye candy for those with older machines. At least thats what i hope they're doing. i can adjust to the different interface as long as my experience is pleasurable speed wise. (mainly web browsing and scrolling are the main problems)......................................
  • Reply 16 of 32
    posterboyposterboy Posts: 147member
    [quote]Originally posted by steve666:

    <strong>.....your entire post was meaningless and you really have nothing of interest to say.....</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Is there an echo in here?



    Read my second post, it will help. If you dont want to try to fix it yourself, then wait for updates from Apple.



    --PB
  • Reply 17 of 32
    steve666steve666 Posts: 2,600member
    [quote]Originally posted by PosterBoy:

    <strong>



    Is there an echo in here?



    Read my second post, it will help. If you dont want to try to fix it yourself, then wait for updates from Apple.



    --PB</strong><hr></blockquote>



    yep-replied to your first post before getting to the second. Although waiting for an update is much more reasonable........................................
  • Reply 18 of 32
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    Off topic for a sec...



    Steve, why do you end every post with ".................."? Is there a point to it?
  • Reply 19 of 32
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    Poster Boy, while you new UNIX people are very helpful, Steve666 is right. OS X sucks. I have enough RAM (so no VM issues) and also no crashes, with my OS 9. OS 9 is still better, in every damn respect.



    I am "baffled" at the need to go into a damn "Terminal" to simply do what Apple should have in OS X 10.0.0. Why the F*CK isn't Window Compression in the System Prefs somewhere? :eek:



    Jeez, this is getting ludicrous! I like the new ways in which we can troubleshoot, and configure things, but be required to use UNIX? NO.



    OS X chokes under heavy use, too, and my iBook has nothing but iTunes and Tinker Tool on it, with no real mods.



    &lt;/rant&gt;



    Except... I used an application called Window Licker to turn on compression. No Terminal for me, no thank you. Although it says compression is on, with my iBook 500 & measly 128 megs of RAM, I don't see any difference. But, just a thought, to anyone wanting to turn it on, and not mess with the Terminal.



    Starfleet X, you have to admit, Apple and OS X are really brilliant in some places, and incredibly stupid in others. This dichotomy is really weirding me out. I think it's late and I need sleep. G'night y'all.



    Oh yeah, and thanks Poster Boy for another way of going about this. I love options I hate having to use UNIX.
  • Reply 20 of 32
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by Aquatik:

    <strong>OS X sucks.</strong><hr></blockquote>That's your opinion. I think overall Mac OS X is excellent and I probably wouldn't be using a Mac today if not for it. [quote]<strong>I am "baffled" at the need to go into a damn "Terminal" to simply do what Apple should have in OS X 10.0.0. Why the F*CK isn't Window Compression in the System Prefs somewhere?</strong><hr></blockquote>Window compression was buggy and potentially unstable and therefore not enabled in previous builds. I believe, however, that Mac OS X 10.1.4 comes with compression on by default, without needing to modify the plist. I think it has been like that for some time, too, but I can't remember which build "officially" enabled the compression. You can check for yourself if you have the developer tools. Simply launch QuartzDebug.app and show the window list. Windows that have 'C' to the right of their size have been compressed.



    Also, you should know that there does not need to be an option to turn it off or on because there are no adverse effects from turning in on; it can only improve upon things. Andrew Welch went into a long discussion about this at MacNN and I will rehash his reasoning if you wish. [quote]<strong>Jeez, this is getting ludicrous! I like the new ways in which we can troubleshoot, and configure things, but be required to use UNIX? NO.</strong><hr></blockquote>Why not? If you're a "Power User" you definitely need to become comfortable with Unix. After all, that's what Mac OS X is. If you don't like it, then you can do exactly the same as you would in OS9: wait for someone else to figure out how to change something and then wait for them to release a GUI utility to configure it.

    [quote]<strong>Although it says compression is on, with my iBook 500 & measly 128 megs of RAM, I don't see any difference. But, just a thought, to anyone wanting to turn it on, and not mess with the Terminal.</strong><hr></blockquote>I suppose I should explain a little about window compression so you don't think it's going to magically make your entire system faster. This compression takes the buffer of windows that have already been drawn and applies an RLE-like lossless compression algorithm on them. So, the windowmanager will need much less RAM to double-buffer everything. The only way you'll see a speed increase if if you had a low amount of RAM and the windowmanager was paging to the disk to store the buffers. If you have enough RAM that it didn't pageout to begin with, then you'll notice zero change. [quote]<strong>Starfleet X, you have to admit, Apple and OS X are really brilliant in some places, and incredibly stupid in others.</strong><hr></blockquote>Oh, I completely agree that there are some very stupid quirks right now with Mac OS X. The difference is, though, that I understand that we are dealing with a 1.1.4 release. Mac OS X is infantile compared to Mac OS 9. Of course there are going to be some odd problems this early on. Hopefully 10.2 will correct a number of our problems, but I am certainly not expecting it to be "perfect" yet. The classic Mac OS is still far from perfect, depending on your point of view, and it is 18 years old.



    [ 05-05-2002: Message edited by: starfleetX ]</p>
Sign In or Register to comment.