Comment some figures (Score 1) 1229
Regardless of how slow Mac OS X does or does not 'feel', applications do have a tendency to respond and startup slowly. Some figures (measured right after logging in on a iBook 700Mhz/384MB/20GB using Mac OS X 10.1.5):
mozilla 1.2 beta startup:
first run: 13s
second run: 6s
chimera (the 'fast' mozilla) startup:
first run: 8s
second: 2s
terminal application (the console):
first run: 11s
second: 2s
MS Word: 6s, XDarwin: 24s, etc...
Even compared to far slower PC's running Windows or Linux, I find those figures nearly unacceptable. Bouncing icons are neat to look at, but they do get boring after a while...
Aside from these figures, there _is_ the subjective OS X 'feel'. I noticed a lot of posts talking about how 'nice' and 'fine' OS X runs (on G4 CPU's with lots of RAM, of course). That's just how OS X feels like: it's responsive 'enough'. When you click something: it almost instantly responds. Almost.
Luckily, while all the eye candy is heavy on CPU load, Apple made sure that Mac OS X gives you feedback enough to make sure that you know it's doing _something_ (the dreaded pinwheel of death excluded).
Mac OS X definitely misses the snappiness of Windows or Linux though... but I guess a lot of users percieve this as a 'stable and solid' feel.
Oh and, Jaguar reportedly cuts off approximately 1-3 seconds of the mentioned startup times. But shelling out more than 100 bucks to make my apps start a sec faster? I don't know about that...
By the way, a very interesting read about the performance in general of the Mac OS X versions can be found here.
mozilla 1.2 beta startup:
first run: 13s
second run: 6s
chimera (the 'fast' mozilla) startup:
first run: 8s
second: 2s
terminal application (the console):
first run: 11s
second: 2s
MS Word: 6s, XDarwin: 24s, etc...
Even compared to far slower PC's running Windows or Linux, I find those figures nearly unacceptable. Bouncing icons are neat to look at, but they do get boring after a while...
Aside from these figures, there _is_ the subjective OS X 'feel'. I noticed a lot of posts talking about how 'nice' and 'fine' OS X runs (on G4 CPU's with lots of RAM, of course). That's just how OS X feels like: it's responsive 'enough'. When you click something: it almost instantly responds. Almost.
Luckily, while all the eye candy is heavy on CPU load, Apple made sure that Mac OS X gives you feedback enough to make sure that you know it's doing _something_ (the dreaded pinwheel of death excluded).
Mac OS X definitely misses the snappiness of Windows or Linux though... but I guess a lot of users percieve this as a 'stable and solid' feel.
Oh and, Jaguar reportedly cuts off approximately 1-3 seconds of the mentioned startup times. But shelling out more than 100 bucks to make my apps start a sec faster? I don't know about that...
By the way, a very interesting read about the performance in general of the Mac OS X versions can be found here.
