When will OS X get faster?

ScottW

Founder
Staff member
I must admit, although I am the admin around these forums... I don't use OS X all the time. It just seems sooooo slow. I run a top notch Mac system, and it leaves so much to be desired.

I was reading an article today about the Finder and how slow it was, and how it was written in Carbon and that is why it runs at a snails pace.

I think offering Mac OS X on each shipping Mac is great for Apple, but if I was Steve Jobs, I'd be embarrased by such a slow system. OS 9 is faster than OS X.... there is something wrong with that.

Admin
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
I agree with you, and think the Carbon Finder is a bad idea. It come into perspective when I think of the fact that I use two operating systems more than any other MacOS 9.1 and Rhapsody DR2 for Intel (that runs quite fast on a ThinkPad 760ED with a Pentium/133 compared to Windows 98 that came with the system). Considering that there are far more apps for OS X than for Rhapsody (specially the Intel version) I find it hard to believe that I'm using that system almost three times as much as Mac OS X currently. To be fair, I have more than 3 GB of manuals and docs for all the types of systems that I work with (Apple/NeXT, SGI, Sun, Windows, etc.) on that system, which is part of the reason it is used as much as it is. I'm even considering removing the games off that system to keep my fiancee from using it as much as she does. I would say that my personal computing time is divided up as 40% Rhapsody, 15% OS X, 40% OS 9.1, and 5% Irix 6.2 (I haven't touched my SPARC system in almost three months). That ratio should change quite a bit with native versions of VirtualPC, Acrobat 5 and Quake III.

Actually, rereading what I just wrote, speed isn't as much a factor as I originally thought, but it is still distressing to see Rhapsody jump quickly on a Pentium/133 system compared to OS X on a G3/350.
 

VGZ

Registered
WE need a Cocoa Finder, but not just for speed. I would like to be able to use the services in the Finder. How many other features can you think of that are only in Cocoa other than running faster and tying into the system better?
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
I think that this has been answered before but...
what possesed apple to make the finder carbon and not cocoa ??? It doesnt make sense.:confused:


Admiral
 

Magnus Maximus

Registered
I don't know Admin, my gut tells me Apple programmers are running this osX on such fast machines that they don't mind (or notice?) any speed problems.

Apple, please listen - this osX 10.03 is a snail on my top of the line Titanium G4. Hello?

There need be no 1-2 second delays everytime I pull a menu down, or double click on my hard-drive icon. These are just basic frequently used functions for crying out loud.

Magnus
 

PoweMACuser

Registered
Originally posted by RacerX
I agree with you, and think the Carbon Finder is a bad idea. It come into perspective when I think of the fact that I use two operating systems more than any other MacOS 9.1 and Rhapsody DR2 for Intel (that runs quite fast on a ThinkPad 760ED with a Pentium/133 compared to Windows 98 that came with the system). Considering that there are far more apps for OS X than for Rhapsody (specially the Intel version) I find it hard to believe that I'm using that system almost three times as much as Mac OS X currently. To be fair, I have more than 3 GB of manuals and docs for all the types of systems that I work with (Apple/NeXT, SGI, Sun, Windows, etc.) on that system, which is part of the reason it is used as much as it is. I'm even considering removing the games off that system to keep my fiancee from using it as much as she does. I would say that my personal computing time is divided up as 40% Rhapsody, 15% OS X, 40% OS 9.1, and 5% Irix 6.2 (I haven't touched my SPARC system in almost three months). That ratio should change quite a bit with native versions of VirtualPC, Acrobat 5 and Quake III.

Actually, rereading what I just wrote, speed isn't as much a factor as I originally thought, but it is still distressing to see Rhapsody jump quickly on a Pentium/133 system compared to OS X on a G3/350.
Although it is said that Carbon can't fully utilize the advanced tech in OS X, I don't think Cocoa application is faster that Carbon application. because no application is developed as Carbon and Cocoa at the same time, I can't compare them. But just look at OmniWeb and IE, the speed is not different.

Java now has be arround for years. But it is not pop yet except in Javascript. Although it can be used for web application. How about Objective-C? I don't think it is good for software developer.
 

RacerX

Old Rhapsody User
the main reference I have is comparing the speed of the Workspace manager in Rhapsody and Mac OS X Server 1.x and the current speed of the Carbon Finder. The old Workspace Manager (which looked and acted a lot more MacOS 8 like) was a Yellow Box app (Yellow Box became Cocoa), and it runs quite will on both pentium/133 and PPC604/132 systems. That is where most of my perspective is coming from.
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
Yes you heard right.
Javascript is not java!
The proper name for javascript is EMCAScript (I think).
The only thing that this scripting language a java have is that they share the word "java", nothing else.
 

strobe

Puny Member
Cocoa apps run slower in OS X compared to Rhapsody too.

There is no way the Finder would have been a Cocoa app given the sad state of Cocoa. Cocoa can't handle aliases or Finder flags.

Carbon apps which don't use the event manager are just as responsive as Cocoa apps.
 

AdmiralAK

Simply Daemonic
Why does cocoa run slower:confused:
If apple is pitching this technology at us it would make sense for it to at least be .0000% better than carbon
 

thedbp

Frantic Messenger of Hope
Well, I visited the McClean store the day it opened, and as a nice woman who works there confirmed (well sort of, she winked at me when I mentioned the date) as I was checking out an iBook, July 17 is the date that Puma will be released, along with MSOffice for X. And by now we all should know that 10.0.5 is on the way ;) So not too much longer, a tad over a month and a half. And 10.0.5 will speed things up a lot too, i'm sure. so hang in there folks, X is almost as naughty as it wants to be.
 
Top