Stop making it sound like everyone is going to be able to benefit from Quartz 2D Extreme. Everyone IS NOT going to benefit. You need the recently released iMac G5 or the last PowerBook lineup or a PowerMac released in the last year and a half to get the benefits of Quartz 2D Extreme.
iMac G4, either 17" or 20" after Sept. 2003 also support it as they have a FX5200 Ultra. Last 2 Powerbook lineups (so since Sept. 2003) support CI.
iMac G4, either 17" or 20" after Sept. 2003 also support it as they have a FX5200 Ultra. Last 2 Powerbook lineups (so since Sept. 2003) support CI.
Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
And because most app that use native widgets resize rapidly...the benefits these apps will gain will be marginal. The bigger apps that use tons upon tons of custom widgets and panes such as many of the iApps won't unless Apple tweaks the hell out of them. These are the apps that need resize speed the most and probably won't be getting it through Q2DE.
But Kickaha...please prove me wrong, my friend. Show me iMovie and GarageBand resizing at 60fps and I'll shut up.
These apps resize faster on the latest crop of computers...so the rendering is fairly tied to the CPU...at best, Quartz 2D Extreme will just pass them off to the GPU and free up the CPU for other things...that's good. But is it really going to speed things up? Maybe a little but probably not by much.
Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
And because most app that use native widgets resize rapidly...the benefits these apps will gain will be marginal.
Based on... ?
Quote:
The bigger apps that use tons upon tons of custom widgets and panes such as many of the iApps won't unless Apple tweaks the hell out of them.
Please describe in further detail the workload needed to perform this task such that the phrase 'the hell out of them' is justified. Or are you 'speculating' again?
Quote:
These are the apps that need resize speed the most and probably won't be getting it through Q2DE.
Well at least you said 'probably' this time.
Quote:
But Kickaha...please prove me wrong, my friend. Show me iMovie and GarageBand resizing at 60fps and I'll shut up.
I seriously doubt that. Instead you'll shunt the argument to complain about how 'only ' the latest 4million Macs sold will be able to take advantage of it. (~2years of sales excluding iBooks)
Quote:
These apps resize faster on the latest crop of computers...so the rendering is fairly tied to the CPU...at best, Quartz 2D Extreme will just pass them off to the GPU and free up the CPU for other things...that's good. But is it really going to speed things up? Maybe a little but probably not by much.
If the rendering is done on the CPU currently, then I think it's pretty much a tautology to state that rendering is 'fairly' tied to the CPU. (Ya think?) As for how much it will speed up - GPUs are currently much faster than CPUs for many tasks - rendering just *happens* to be what they're *designed* for. So yes, if the rendering is offloaded to the GPU, rendering will speed up, plain and simple.
I think the point that was being made is that on machines that will have the videocard to support that, they will have had fairly beefy CPU's to handle this for the most part, anyway. So the "improvement" seen on that machine will again end up being "subtle" whether it was done from the CPU or accelerated on the GPU. The legions of Mac users who aren't upgrading every year (maybe haven't upgraded in over 5 years, or maybe maybe even upgraded last year, but still didn't make "the cut") with "lesser" CPU's will still miss out on these seemingly basic GPU-assisted developments. It just seems that Apple could have done it in such a way to ensure a wider group could enjoy the benefits, not just a select group of new purchasers who may have noticed only slight improvement had it not been GPU-accelerated, by virtue of the top-shelf CPU's that will also be in their computer.
I think the point that was being made is that on machines that will have the videocard to support that, they will have had fairly beefy CPU's to handle this for the most part, anyway.
Except that when people started getting G5s, there were a lot of "OMG windows still don't resize in real time!" comments.
60fps window resizing won't be a subtle improvement.
Quote:
The legions of Mac users who aren't upgrading every year (maybe haven't upgraded in over 5 years, or maybe maybe even upgraded last year, but still didn't make "the cut") with "lesser" CPU's will still miss out on these seemingly basic GPU-assisted developments.
Most of them will by default, because the vast majority of users never upgrade their operating systems.
Quote:
It just seems that Apple could have done it in such a way to ensure a wider group could enjoy the benefits, not just a select group of new purchasers who may have noticed only slight improvement had it not been GPU-accelerated, by virtue of the top-shelf CPU's that will also be in their computer.
None of the information in this thread talks about what Apple has or hasn't done for older hardware. All we know is that they're implementing this feature, and for the machines that qualify it provides a significant and long-awaited responsiveness. We don't know that this is Apple's only answer to the question. But even if it is, given that a distinct minority of Apple's customer base installs major updates, it won't matter that much in the grand scheme of things. Older Macs will be running Panther, or Jaguar, or (God help them) Puma. Or OS 9.
I get the point, I just realize that there are a lot of unvoiced assumptions that lead to that conclusion... and those unvoiced assumptions are being presented without basis or substance. Let me try to list a few here:
0) A Quartz 2D Extreme-ready card is roughly equivalent to a CI-ready card. ie, only CI-ready cards will be Q2DE-ready.
1) The relative speed of rendering will be negligible between a higher end CPU and a CI-ready GPU.
2) Apple has willfully chosen to lock out perfectly capable graphics cards that could be CI-ready.
3) The developer work needed to enable a custom-UI-widget-laden application to take advantage of Q2DE is substantial.
I disagree with every point above.
0) We do not have a Q2DE-ready card list. Q2DE, from the sounds of it, is taking advantage of 2D acceleration in a nifty way that merges it with the 3D pipeline. I could be wrong, of course, but unless they're shunting all rendering through the 3D pipeline, period, this is the only way to accomplish this. Most graphics cards since about 1990 have had a 2D acceleration engine of some sort. CoreImage, OTOH, is a way of programming specific highly advanced engines within the GPU (shaders, matrix sets, etc) to perform incredibly fast homogenous calculations on large datasets. It's essentially making AltiVec obsolete for many image-based tasks.
1) Think about what that last sentence said: a modern GPU (within the last two years) outperforms AltiVec on most tasks, and utterly blows it away on graphics-oriented tasks. Now, someone who still wants to claim that there will be a negligible difference between a CPU renderer and a GPU renderer is going to have to convince me with hard data, because the hard data to this point directly contradicts that assertion.
2) I don't for a second believe that this is the case. GPUs are advancing much more rapidly than CPUs, and the extra graphics engines they are bringing to the table are impressive. It is entirely possible that CoreImage *does* need the latest and greatest generation of cards to do its work effectively. Luckily, what we've seen has indicated that CI scales down beautifully on cards that are less efficient. Note that I'm talking about CI here, not Q2DE. See item #0.
3) kim kap sol keeps tossing this out there with absolutely no data to back it up, and apparently no experience with the development environment either. The work done in optimizing the redrawing system used during window resizing has been ongoing for over a year now, and much of it exists in 10.3. And you know what... it's not that hard to take advantage of. Really. It's not trivial, but it's not onerous. It *appears* that what Apple is doing is ensuring that that workflow is hardware accelerated on the back end, unlike now. If that is indeed the case, then many developers are ready to go, and their apps will see a drastic speedup in resizing. Until now, that work has had only a small benefit. WIth what we can see of Q2DE so far, a little extrapolation points to that work being rewarded with a *substantial* benefit.
Pick any one of those points as being false in the original assertions, and the argument being put forth starts to look weak. With all four being in contention, it starts to look like swiss cheese.
1) The relative speed of rendering will be negligible between a higher end CPU and a CI-ready GPU.
This is the only one I have issue with. Who knows- maybe it will be negligible, maybe it will still be significant. The fact remains that on lesser CPU's (anything not a G5), it will be that much more significant. Hence, that is the area that seems ripe to gain the most benefit, in userbase and degree of improvement.
0) We do not have a Q2DE-ready card list. Q2DE, from the sounds of it, is taking advantage of 2D acceleration in a nifty way that merges it with the 3D pipeline. I could be wrong, of course, but unless they're shunting all rendering through the 3D pipeline, period, this is the only way to accomplish this. Most graphics cards since about 1990 have had a 2D acceleration engine of some sort. CoreImage, OTOH, is a way of programming specific highly advanced engines within the GPU (shaders, matrix sets, etc) to perform incredibly fast homogenous calculations on large datasets. It's essentially making AltiVec obsolete for many image-based tasks.
Thanks for clarifying this point. I was wondering where Q2D Extreme and CI requirements are related comes from. Guess what, it comes from nowhere. We simply don't know at this point if the two are, and in what extend, related.
Thanks for clarifying this point. I was wondering where Q2D Extreme and CI requirements are related comes from. Guess what, it comes from nowhere. We simply don't know at this point if the two are, and in what extend, related.
The initial CoreImage requirements list actually is posted at Apple, but there is no such public list for Q2DE. Also, the Quartz Extreme that finally shipped supported more cards than the developer releases did, which makes sense: target the proof-of-concept cards first. "If it doesn't work on this kick-ass hardware, it won't work on anything" Then you work your way down, seeing where the benefits gained drops below the work needed to get it running on some card. The slower the card, the harder it is to get it to work effectively. I wouldn't be surprised if we see the same with CoreImage and/or Quartz 2D Extreme.
What would be really cool is if Q2DE would have the same hardware requirements as Quartz Extreme, basically only being a more advanced version of the latter.
I have a question though. Do you think Q2DE would speed up scrolling? I have always felt that scrolling was slow in OS X versus Windows.
[B]I'm sure someone will find a way to get Q2DE to work on the unsupported graphic cards..... if not fully, then particially working....
I believe some aspects of Quartz 2D will be hw accelerated on some older video cards.
But, older video cards simply do not support the functionality needed by Quartz 2D Extreme in Tiger.
It's not a matter of being clever and making it work. It just won't work. It's like asking a Quadra 800 to run Mac OS X. The only alternative is to do it in software (which is what Tiger will do).
Originally posted by Randycat99 these seemingly basic GPU-assisted developments. It just seems that Apple could have done it in such a way to ensure a wider group could enjoy the benefits
You really have no idea at all what Quartz 2D Extreme is all about do you?
seemingly basic? Are you nuts? There's nothing in the world like what Apple is doing with Q2DE (except for maybe some specialized workstations and video cards where the prices start at $100K for a setup).
I can't believe the ignorance in this forum. You think that Apple can 'magically' make older video cards that don't support programmable shaders (not to mention maybe not even supporting any kind of shader at all!) all of a sudden support them? Come on. Think about it for just ten seconds.
Apple DID implement Q2DE in a way to support everyone else... it falls back to software mode. (Yeah, so maybe that's not so extreme.). And at least in Tiger they have further optimized the software paths. So even without hw accell, those on older video cards WILL see better overall 2D performance in Tiger.
Quote:
not just a select group of new purchasers who may have noticed only slight improvement had it not been GPU-accelerated, by virtue of the top-shelf CPU's that will also be in their computer.
Again, I have to ask. Are you nuts?
Do you have any idea how much faster the GPU can draw things than the CPU? Orders of magnitude faster in many cases.
Doesn't matter how fast your G5 is... the GPUs in the latest cards are blindingly fast at graphics. Partially because of the awesome bandwidth these GPUs have but more fundamentally because of the parallel nature of graphics.
Got that list of cards supporting CoreImage handy, do you?
No?
Here, let me help:
Heh.
It sounds exciting. Apple has got Core Image, Core Video. Quartz Extreme. Makes sense a verson for 2D acceleraton was on the cards (hee...)
'Tiger' seems like it is shaping up to be the best Mac OS 'X' ever.
Me? The thought of me doing scripting care of 'Pipeline' is amazing. Visual Scripting. How cool is that?
The real question for me...is considering Apple built 'Funhouse' demo in one week with one programmer...then what implications do Quartz Extreme 2D and Core Image have for Adobe's Photoshop..? For years they've optimised PC versions of their software.
Will their real politics show if they don't optimise Photoshop 9 for CoreImage/QE2D for the Mac to blow the PC version out the water? In theory, Apple should have the best OS AND the best version of Photoshop by some margin? All those crappy old Photoshop filters should/could be done in real time? Complete with a blazingly fast OS 'X' verson of Photoshop with the 'snap' of the OS 9 version?
Exciting stuff. I can't wait to get my hands on 'Tiger'. I've even got a PC die hard asking (YEP!) ASKING when 'Tiger' is going to hit!
Kickaha and Amorph couldn't moderate themselves out of a paper bag. Abdicate responsibility and succumb to idiocy. Two years of letting a member make personal attacks against others, then stepping aside when someone won't put up with it. Not only that but go ahead and shut down my posting priviledges but not the one making the attacks. Not even the common decency to abide by their warning (afer three days of absorbing personal attacks with no mods in sight), just shut my posting down and then say it might happen later if a certian line is crossed. Bullshit flag is flying, I won't abide by lying and coddling of liars who go off-site, create accounts differing in a single letter from my handle with the express purpose to decieve and then claim here that I did it. Everyone be warned, kim kap sol is a lying, deceitful poster.
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
You really have no idea at all what Quartz 2D Extreme is all about do you?
Some people were alluding that the window resizing issue will be finally addressed in Q2D. It is that feature in specific that I refer to, when I made my remarks.
Quote:
seemingly basic? Are you nuts? There's nothing in the world like what Apple is doing with Q2DE (except for maybe some specialized workstations and video cards where the prices start at $100K for a setup).
Yes, window resizing is pretty basic, and no, you shouldn't need a $100K setup to do it. Ironically, you might just be working on a command line to do real work on this $100K setup you premise, anyway.
Quote:
I can't believe the ignorance in this forum. You think that Apple can 'magically' make older video cards that don't support programmable shaders (not to mention maybe not even supporting any kind of shader at all!) all of a sudden support them? Come on. Think about it for just ten seconds.
You need to read more carefully than worry about other people's "ignorance". No one is asking Apple to magically make nonshader videocards support programmable shader operations.
Quote:
Apple DID implement Q2DE in a way to support everyone else... it falls back to software mode. (Yeah, so maybe that's not so extreme.). And at least in Tiger they have further optimized the software paths. So even without hw accell, those on older video cards WILL see better overall 2D performance in Tiger.
I sure hope so, as well, but if window resizing is still choppy will you still be free of any complaint?
Quote:
Again, I have to ask. Are you nuts?
Again, try reading closer.
Quote:
Do you have any idea how much faster the GPU can draw things than the CPU? Orders of magnitude faster in many cases.
Either way, window resizing should hardly be such a sticking point- far less demanding than something fancy such as, oh let's see, an entire window warping and scaling into the dock when you minizmize it (which actually manages to stay enabled on a mere ATI Rage 128, albeit lacking a few frames of smoothness).
Quote:
Doesn't matter how fast your G5 is... the GPUs in the latest cards are blindingly fast at graphics. Partially because of the awesome bandwidth these GPUs have but more fundamentally because of the parallel nature of graphics.
...and a smooth window resize, of all things, should have the least requirement for such awesome hardware to make it happen. That's the point. One only hopes that Apple has the integrity to make all of these basics work in this generation, before moving on to bigger, fancier effects and declaring you'll need videocard xyz to really see the show.
Comments
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Stop making it sound like everyone is going to be able to benefit from Quartz 2D Extreme. Everyone IS NOT going to benefit. You need the recently released iMac G5 or the last PowerBook lineup or a PowerMac released in the last year and a half to get the benefits of Quartz 2D Extreme.
iMac G4, either 17" or 20" after Sept. 2003 also support it as they have a FX5200 Ultra. Last 2 Powerbook lineups (so since Sept. 2003) support CI.
Originally posted by MCQ
iMac G4, either 17" or 20" after Sept. 2003 also support it as they have a FX5200 Ultra. Last 2 Powerbook lineups (so since Sept. 2003) support CI.
Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
And because most app that use native widgets resize rapidly...the benefits these apps will gain will be marginal. The bigger apps that use tons upon tons of custom widgets and panes such as many of the iApps won't unless Apple tweaks the hell out of them. These are the apps that need resize speed the most and probably won't be getting it through Q2DE.
But Kickaha...please prove me wrong, my friend. Show me iMovie and GarageBand resizing at 60fps and I'll shut up.
These apps resize faster on the latest crop of computers...so the rendering is fairly tied to the CPU...at best, Quartz 2D Extreme will just pass them off to the GPU and free up the CPU for other things...that's good. But is it really going to speed things up? Maybe a little but probably not by much.
Originally posted by kim kap sol
Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
And because most app that use native widgets resize rapidly...the benefits these apps will gain will be marginal.
Based on... ?
The bigger apps that use tons upon tons of custom widgets and panes such as many of the iApps won't unless Apple tweaks the hell out of them.
Please describe in further detail the workload needed to perform this task such that the phrase 'the hell out of them' is justified. Or are you 'speculating' again?
These are the apps that need resize speed the most and probably won't be getting it through Q2DE.
Well at least you said 'probably' this time.
But Kickaha...please prove me wrong, my friend. Show me iMovie and GarageBand resizing at 60fps and I'll shut up.
I seriously doubt that. Instead you'll shunt the argument to complain about how 'only ' the latest 4million Macs sold will be able to take advantage of it. (~2years of sales excluding iBooks)
These apps resize faster on the latest crop of computers...so the rendering is fairly tied to the CPU...at best, Quartz 2D Extreme will just pass them off to the GPU and free up the CPU for other things...that's good. But is it really going to speed things up? Maybe a little but probably not by much.
If the rendering is done on the CPU currently, then I think it's pretty much a tautology to state that rendering is 'fairly' tied to the CPU. (Ya think?) As for how much it will speed up - GPUs are currently much faster than CPUs for many tasks - rendering just *happens* to be what they're *designed* for. So yes, if the rendering is offloaded to the GPU, rendering will speed up, plain and simple.
Originally posted by Randycat99
I think the point that was being made is that on machines that will have the videocard to support that, they will have had fairly beefy CPU's to handle this for the most part, anyway.
Except that when people started getting G5s, there were a lot of "OMG windows still don't resize in real time!" comments.
60fps window resizing won't be a subtle improvement.
The legions of Mac users who aren't upgrading every year (maybe haven't upgraded in over 5 years, or maybe maybe even upgraded last year, but still didn't make "the cut") with "lesser" CPU's will still miss out on these seemingly basic GPU-assisted developments.
Most of them will by default, because the vast majority of users never upgrade their operating systems.
It just seems that Apple could have done it in such a way to ensure a wider group could enjoy the benefits, not just a select group of new purchasers who may have noticed only slight improvement had it not been GPU-accelerated, by virtue of the top-shelf CPU's that will also be in their computer.
None of the information in this thread talks about what Apple has or hasn't done for older hardware. All we know is that they're implementing this feature, and for the machines that qualify it provides a significant and long-awaited responsiveness. We don't know that this is Apple's only answer to the question. But even if it is, given that a distinct minority of Apple's customer base installs major updates, it won't matter that much in the grand scheme of things. Older Macs will be running Panther, or Jaguar, or (God help them) Puma. Or OS 9.
0) A Quartz 2D Extreme-ready card is roughly equivalent to a CI-ready card. ie, only CI-ready cards will be Q2DE-ready.
1) The relative speed of rendering will be negligible between a higher end CPU and a CI-ready GPU.
2) Apple has willfully chosen to lock out perfectly capable graphics cards that could be CI-ready.
3) The developer work needed to enable a custom-UI-widget-laden application to take advantage of Q2DE is substantial.
I disagree with every point above.
0) We do not have a Q2DE-ready card list. Q2DE, from the sounds of it, is taking advantage of 2D acceleration in a nifty way that merges it with the 3D pipeline. I could be wrong, of course, but unless they're shunting all rendering through the 3D pipeline, period, this is the only way to accomplish this. Most graphics cards since about 1990 have had a 2D acceleration engine of some sort. CoreImage, OTOH, is a way of programming specific highly advanced engines within the GPU (shaders, matrix sets, etc) to perform incredibly fast homogenous calculations on large datasets. It's essentially making AltiVec obsolete for many image-based tasks.
1) Think about what that last sentence said: a modern GPU (within the last two years) outperforms AltiVec on most tasks, and utterly blows it away on graphics-oriented tasks. Now, someone who still wants to claim that there will be a negligible difference between a CPU renderer and a GPU renderer is going to have to convince me with hard data, because the hard data to this point directly contradicts that assertion.
2) I don't for a second believe that this is the case. GPUs are advancing much more rapidly than CPUs, and the extra graphics engines they are bringing to the table are impressive. It is entirely possible that CoreImage *does* need the latest and greatest generation of cards to do its work effectively. Luckily, what we've seen has indicated that CI scales down beautifully on cards that are less efficient. Note that I'm talking about CI here, not Q2DE. See item #0.
3) kim kap sol keeps tossing this out there with absolutely no data to back it up, and apparently no experience with the development environment either. The work done in optimizing the redrawing system used during window resizing has been ongoing for over a year now, and much of it exists in 10.3. And you know what... it's not that hard to take advantage of. Really. It's not trivial, but it's not onerous. It *appears* that what Apple is doing is ensuring that that workflow is hardware accelerated on the back end, unlike now. If that is indeed the case, then many developers are ready to go, and their apps will see a drastic speedup in resizing. Until now, that work has had only a small benefit. WIth what we can see of Q2DE so far, a little extrapolation points to that work being rewarded with a *substantial* benefit.
Pick any one of those points as being false in the original assertions, and the argument being put forth starts to look weak. With all four being in contention, it starts to look like swiss cheese.
Originally posted by Kickaha
1) The relative speed of rendering will be negligible between a higher end CPU and a CI-ready GPU.
This is the only one I have issue with. Who knows- maybe it will be negligible, maybe it will still be significant. The fact remains that on lesser CPU's (anything not a G5), it will be that much more significant. Hence, that is the area that seems ripe to gain the most benefit, in userbase and degree of improvement.
Originally posted by Kickaha
0) We do not have a Q2DE-ready card list. Q2DE, from the sounds of it, is taking advantage of 2D acceleration in a nifty way that merges it with the 3D pipeline. I could be wrong, of course, but unless they're shunting all rendering through the 3D pipeline, period, this is the only way to accomplish this. Most graphics cards since about 1990 have had a 2D acceleration engine of some sort. CoreImage, OTOH, is a way of programming specific highly advanced engines within the GPU (shaders, matrix sets, etc) to perform incredibly fast homogenous calculations on large datasets. It's essentially making AltiVec obsolete for many image-based tasks.
Thanks for clarifying this point. I was wondering where Q2D Extreme and CI requirements are related comes from. Guess what, it comes from nowhere. We simply don't know at this point if the two are, and in what extend, related.
Originally posted by PB
Thanks for clarifying this point. I was wondering where Q2D Extreme and CI requirements are related comes from. Guess what, it comes from nowhere. We simply don't know at this point if the two are, and in what extend, related.
The initial CoreImage requirements list actually is posted at Apple, but there is no such public list for Q2DE. Also, the Quartz Extreme that finally shipped supported more cards than the developer releases did, which makes sense: target the proof-of-concept cards first. "If it doesn't work on this kick-ass hardware, it won't work on anything" Then you work your way down, seeing where the benefits gained drops below the work needed to get it running on some card. The slower the card, the harder it is to get it to work effectively. I wouldn't be surprised if we see the same with CoreImage and/or Quartz 2D Extreme.
I have a question though. Do you think Q2DE would speed up scrolling? I have always felt that scrolling was slow in OS X versus Windows.
Originally posted by bitemymac
[B]I'm sure someone will find a way to get Q2DE to work on the unsupported graphic cards..... if not fully, then particially working....
I believe some aspects of Quartz 2D will be hw accelerated on some older video cards.
But, older video cards simply do not support the functionality needed by Quartz 2D Extreme in Tiger.
It's not a matter of being clever and making it work. It just won't work. It's like asking a Quadra 800 to run Mac OS X. The only alternative is to do it in software (which is what Tiger will do).
Bryan
Originally posted by kim kap sol
[B]Yeah, so you agree with me that if your Mac is more than a year and a half old, it probably doesn't make the Q2DE cut.
So? Progress should just stop because Apple sold some computers that won't take advantage of whatever new thing Apple is working on?
Such a stupid attitude.
Originally posted by Randycat99 these seemingly basic GPU-assisted developments. It just seems that Apple could have done it in such a way to ensure a wider group could enjoy the benefits
You really have no idea at all what Quartz 2D Extreme is all about do you?
seemingly basic? Are you nuts? There's nothing in the world like what Apple is doing with Q2DE (except for maybe some specialized workstations and video cards where the prices start at $100K for a setup).
I can't believe the ignorance in this forum. You think that Apple can 'magically' make older video cards that don't support programmable shaders (not to mention maybe not even supporting any kind of shader at all!) all of a sudden support them? Come on. Think about it for just ten seconds.
Apple DID implement Q2DE in a way to support everyone else... it falls back to software mode. (Yeah, so maybe that's not so extreme.). And at least in Tiger they have further optimized the software paths. So even without hw accell, those on older video cards WILL see better overall 2D performance in Tiger.
not just a select group of new purchasers who may have noticed only slight improvement had it not been GPU-accelerated, by virtue of the top-shelf CPU's that will also be in their computer.
Again, I have to ask. Are you nuts?
Do you have any idea how much faster the GPU can draw things than the CPU? Orders of magnitude faster in many cases.
Doesn't matter how fast your G5 is... the GPUs in the latest cards are blindingly fast at graphics. Partially because of the awesome bandwidth these GPUs have but more fundamentally because of the parallel nature of graphics.
Got that list of cards supporting CoreImage handy, do you?
No?
Here, let me help:
Heh.
It sounds exciting. Apple has got Core Image, Core Video. Quartz Extreme. Makes sense a verson for 2D acceleraton was on the cards (hee...)
'Tiger' seems like it is shaping up to be the best Mac OS 'X' ever.
Me? The thought of me doing scripting care of 'Pipeline' is amazing. Visual Scripting. How cool is that?
The real question for me...is considering Apple built 'Funhouse' demo in one week with one programmer...then what implications do Quartz Extreme 2D and Core Image have for Adobe's Photoshop..? For years they've optimised PC versions of their software.
Will their real politics show if they don't optimise Photoshop 9 for CoreImage/QE2D for the Mac to blow the PC version out the water? In theory, Apple should have the best OS AND the best version of Photoshop by some margin? All those crappy old Photoshop filters should/could be done in real time? Complete with a blazingly fast OS 'X' verson of Photoshop with the 'snap' of the OS 9 version?
Exciting stuff. I can't wait to get my hands on 'Tiger'. I've even got a PC die hard asking (YEP!) ASKING when 'Tiger' is going to hit!
Lemon Bon Bon
Such a stupid attitude.
Didn't people make the same complaints about QE3D?
Lemon Bon Bon
Now I guess they should have banned me rather than just shut off posting priviledges, because kickaha and Amorph definitely aren't going to like being called to task when they thought they had it all ignored *cough* *cough* I mean under control. Just a couple o' tools.
Don't worry, as soon as my work resetting my posts is done I'll disappear forever.
Originally posted by bryanzak
You really have no idea at all what Quartz 2D Extreme is all about do you?
Some people were alluding that the window resizing issue will be finally addressed in Q2D. It is that feature in specific that I refer to, when I made my remarks.
Quote:
seemingly basic? Are you nuts? There's nothing in the world like what Apple is doing with Q2DE (except for maybe some specialized workstations and video cards where the prices start at $100K for a setup).
Yes, window resizing is pretty basic, and no, you shouldn't need a $100K setup to do it. Ironically, you might just be working on a command line to do real work on this $100K setup you premise, anyway.
Quote:
I can't believe the ignorance in this forum. You think that Apple can 'magically' make older video cards that don't support programmable shaders (not to mention maybe not even supporting any kind of shader at all!) all of a sudden support them? Come on. Think about it for just ten seconds.
You need to read more carefully than worry about other people's "ignorance". No one is asking Apple to magically make nonshader videocards support programmable shader operations.
Quote:
Apple DID implement Q2DE in a way to support everyone else... it falls back to software mode. (Yeah, so maybe that's not so extreme.). And at least in Tiger they have further optimized the software paths. So even without hw accell, those on older video cards WILL see better overall 2D performance in Tiger.
I sure hope so, as well, but if window resizing is still choppy will you still be free of any complaint?
Quote:
Again, I have to ask. Are you nuts?
Again, try reading closer.
Quote:
Do you have any idea how much faster the GPU can draw things than the CPU? Orders of magnitude faster in many cases.
Either way, window resizing should hardly be such a sticking point- far less demanding than something fancy such as, oh let's see, an entire window warping and scaling into the dock when you minizmize it (which actually manages to stay enabled on a mere ATI Rage 128, albeit lacking a few frames of smoothness).
Quote:
Doesn't matter how fast your G5 is... the GPUs in the latest cards are blindingly fast at graphics. Partially because of the awesome bandwidth these GPUs have but more fundamentally because of the parallel nature of graphics.
...and a smooth window resize, of all things, should have the least requirement for such awesome hardware to make it happen. That's the point. One only hopes that Apple has the integrity to make all of these basics work in this generation, before moving on to bigger, fancier effects and declaring you'll need videocard xyz to really see the show.