What? Are you sure? 5-10% seems awful low compared to what I've been reading.
If your right about the speed increase percentage, that sux...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Keep in mind, he's on a dual 800, I'm on a dual gig, X isn't slow for us, so a 5-10% increase for us is huge for you guys. If I see any improvements then you should be happy because it's already fast for me. A lot is already as fast as 9, mostly the finder needs to speed up the most along with anything made by M$. Contextual menus for one, still sux. However, minimizing windows and expanding windows along with spring loaded folders fricking fly. So it's getting there and we have a few more months of tweaking.
The absolute value for the 5-10% speed increase for us Dual 1 GHz users is entirely irrelevant to anybody but Dual 1 GHz users. 5-10% increases for 500 MHz computers amount to half the absolute gains for 1 GHz computers.
5-10% speed gains ware decent at any level though.
[quote]aguar is a lot faster, even if you can't use Quartz Extreme. I only have a Rage 128, so I can't test QE, but the whole damn thing feels a lot faster, much more solid and polished. From my use of it over the past couple of days, it's really getting to the point where you shouldn't be able to complain about speed anymore.<hr></blockquote>
what machine are you using?
They still have 4 more months to work on it, I think we'll all be *Very* surprised by the speed OSX can give us when jag comes along...
OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So, you're saying that 10.1 wasn't any faster than 10.0, that it was just a myth? RRiiggghhtt....
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just one more time...for a person with a doctorate you sure don't know jack f***ing sh!t!
Yeah I did, and I timed it all at the time. Application lauch time was down 40%, the menus were *much* more responsive, resizing the Finder, especially in list view, was order of magnitudes faster, and overall responsiveness improved.
I suggest you read Siracusa's excellent 10.1 review on Arstechnica.
Yeah I did, and I timed it all at the time. Application lauch time was down 40%, the menus were *much* more responsive, resizing the Finder, especially in list view, was order of magnitudes faster, and overall responsiveness improved.
I suggest you read Siracusa's excellent 10.1 review on Arstechnica.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh, I've read it. Application launching isn't really a good indication of OS speed. And considering I leave most of my apps open the whole time, it doesn't really affect me.
Menu responsiveness is an illusion. Apple removed at least one stage of "fade up" as you open a menu (You still see the "fade down" as it closes).
Resizing isn't much improved, it still hangs way behind the cursor, and I certainly haven't noticed an overall improvement in responsiveness. If anything, text input has become slower!
Also, and I realize this enters a whole different argument based along the lines of "stability before speed", but if there are performance improvements to be had, I'd have liked them a year ago, thank you very much.
[Edit: Oh wait, scrolling did get a good bit faster.]
do you remember finder list view resizing in 10.0 at all? It was horrible.
OpenGL has improved, I can testify to this, I can run the UT preview much faster in OSX than on 9. I'm talking close to 20% on a Yikes with stock rage 128.
Heck, even 10.1.2 gave us a speed boost by changing the mathlib to assembly, speeding some operations, such as sqrt(x), by 600%.
All that is well and good, but it just isn't noticeably faster. It's easy to pick out little improvements, but it's still a slow OS and far from satisfactory, and until I have the final release of Jaguar on my Mac to see how it improves my day to day use, I won't be joyous about these revelations of "vast speed improvements".
I'm just being a grouch. Poor scott_h_phd has a history and his comments are often disregarded offhandedly as "trolling". But I feel he's right. People expect huge things from every single OS X update, and not one has lived up to anything near these expectations.
I don't see that Jaguar will be much different.
Same goes for Attack of the Clones. I'm not satisfied with reports from previews, I'll wait until I've seen the movie. Then I can judge whether it's a great movie, a good movie, or just an illusion of a good movie because the first one was so awful. The latter seems to be the case with 10.1.* vs. 10.0.*.
He wouldn't seem like such a troll if he expressed himself a little better. Right now, his attitude is just plain obnoxious all the time. Unfortunately, so are the responses to his comments. That's the difference between you and Scott and lots of others around here.
I should add that I did see a noticeable performance increase between 10.0.x and 10.1.x. Although I found 10.0 to be an exercise in patience, especially with menus and resizing, I didn't find it unusable except for the fact that I couldn't run much of anything natively. 10.1, where by "cheating" or "real" performance gains, was a lot more pleasurable to use on my old iBook, and apps finally started appearing natively.
Getting back to the original post, this entire thread is basically making a guess about something in the future. Obviously many of us have confidence that Jaguar will be a better performer whether by making "real" improvements or by "cheating." A few don't think it will be any better. As always, these discussions always turn into a polarized argument -- all or nothing but never something in between.
We'll find out the answer to this question in September. (Heh, seeing how software is always late, maybe I should say October.)
Comments
<strong>
What? Are you sure? 5-10% seems awful low compared to what I've been reading.
If your right about the speed increase percentage, that sux...</strong><hr></blockquote>
Keep in mind, he's on a dual 800, I'm on a dual gig, X isn't slow for us, so a 5-10% increase for us is huge for you guys. If I see any improvements then you should be happy because it's already fast for me. A lot is already as fast as 9, mostly the finder needs to speed up the most along with anything made by M$. Contextual menus for one, still sux. However, minimizing windows and expanding windows along with spring loaded folders fricking fly. So it's getting there and we have a few more months of tweaking.
5-10% speed gains ware decent at any level though.
what machine are you using?
They still have 4 more months to work on it, I think we'll all be *Very* surprised by the speed OSX can give us when jag comes along...
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<strong>
<strong>
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
So, you're saying that 10.1 wasn't any faster than 10.0, that it was just a myth? RRiiggghhtt....
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
that's so ludicrous it's funny!
<strong>
And I suppose 10.1 was no faster than 10.0.4
It is getting faster you are just too busy complaining to look.
Edit: *grumbles about agent302* Damn you and your quick submitting
[ 05-11-2002: Message edited by: Telomar ]</p>
and - 20%!?! jeez, AMD got that when their Athlons went from 1.2GHz to 1.8GHz....
trust flippin Apple to do it in software, wots rong wif dem?
<strong>OS X is not getting any faster. It's a myth. Just like it was 12 months ago and 24 months ago. There is no great speed up out there for OS X. No super PPC gcc that's going to magically make all recompiled apps 20% faster. Apple uis dragging it's feet at every turn.
The only way OS X will get faster is to run it on faster hardware. Apple can't do that either.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Just one more time...for a person with a doctorate you sure don't know jack f***ing sh!t!
<img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
Any response explaining your position would be interesting to hear
Yeah I did, and I timed it all at the time. Application lauch time was down 40%, the menus were *much* more responsive, resizing the Finder, especially in list view, was order of magnitudes faster, and overall responsiveness improved.
I suggest you read Siracusa's excellent 10.1 review on Arstechnica.
<strong>are you kidding Belle?
Yeah I did, and I timed it all at the time. Application lauch time was down 40%, the menus were *much* more responsive, resizing the Finder, especially in list view, was order of magnitudes faster, and overall responsiveness improved.
I suggest you read Siracusa's excellent 10.1 review on Arstechnica.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Heh, I've read it. Application launching isn't really a good indication of OS speed. And considering I leave most of my apps open the whole time, it doesn't really affect me.
Menu responsiveness is an illusion. Apple removed at least one stage of "fade up" as you open a menu (You still see the "fade down" as it closes).
Resizing isn't much improved, it still hangs way behind the cursor, and I certainly haven't noticed an overall improvement in responsiveness. If anything, text input has become slower!
Also, and I realize this enters a whole different argument based along the lines of "stability before speed", but if there are performance improvements to be had, I'd have liked them a year ago, thank you very much.
[Edit: Oh wait, scrolling did get a good bit faster.]
[ 05-12-2002: Message edited by: Belle ]</p>
OpenGL has improved, I can testify to this, I can run the UT preview much faster in OSX than on 9. I'm talking close to 20% on a Yikes with stock rage 128.
Heck, even 10.1.2 gave us a speed boost by changing the mathlib to assembly, speeding some operations, such as sqrt(x), by 600%.
I'm just being a grouch. Poor scott_h_phd has a history and his comments are often disregarded offhandedly as "trolling". But I feel he's right. People expect huge things from every single OS X update, and not one has lived up to anything near these expectations.
I don't see that Jaguar will be much different.
Same goes for Attack of the Clones. I'm not satisfied with reports from previews, I'll wait until I've seen the movie. Then I can judge whether it's a great movie, a good movie, or just an illusion of a good movie because the first one was so awful. The latter seems to be the case with 10.1.* vs. 10.0.*.
[ 05-12-2002: Message edited by: Belle ]</p>
I should add that I did see a noticeable performance increase between 10.0.x and 10.1.x. Although I found 10.0 to be an exercise in patience, especially with menus and resizing, I didn't find it unusable except for the fact that I couldn't run much of anything natively. 10.1, where by "cheating" or "real" performance gains, was a lot more pleasurable to use on my old iBook, and apps finally started appearing natively.
Getting back to the original post, this entire thread is basically making a guess about something in the future. Obviously many of us have confidence that Jaguar will be a better performer whether by making "real" improvements or by "cheating." A few don't think it will be any better. As always, these discussions always turn into a polarized argument -- all or nothing but never something in between.
We'll find out the answer to this question in September. (Heh, seeing how software is always late, maybe I should say October.)
[ 05-12-2002: Message edited by: BuonRotto ]</p>