Is it possible for a new OS, such as 10.3, to make older Macs "faster"?

[Mineral]

I love OSX, but I wish it was faster than it is.. Is there any way it will actually run FASTER on older Macs, or will it be a push for people to upgrade to newer Macs??

[Doctor Q]

There are competing forces in effect as an operating system like OS X matures and evolves.

1. Tuning. The first version of a product usually has bottlenecks that weren't known in advance. The developer (Apple in this case) can streamline, fine-tune, optimize, rewrite sections of code, or change designs to lessen these bottlenecks. Because of the work involved, these changes are not made globally. They are applied only where there is likely to be a noticable payout from a performance improvement.

2. Bloat. Each new version of an operating system will support new interfaces and standards and add new facilities. For compatibility, old ones are maintained as well. This increases the size of the operating system, making it take more disk space, more time to download and install, and, unless designed carefully, more RAM, even if you aren't using the new features. It can also add to the overhead of performing common tasks.

Effect #1 may make older Macs run faster under Mac OS X 10.3. Effect #2 may make older Macs run slower, or not at all, under Mac OS X 10.3.

[Flynnstone]

Lets assume a IBM 970 will live in the next generation Apple computers and 10.3 supports the 970. Apparently the 970 will run faster if the compiler optimizes for the 970. Assuming the 970 has no new instructions, then the optimized 970 code should still run on G3s and G4s.
I wonder how much it will slow down ?

[rainman::|:|]

The simple answer is no, however the system can theoretically use less resources, thereby allowing more for programs. This is the reasoning behind Quartz Extreme. And the system itself can get snappier, tuned as Dr. Q says, making it *feel* faster-- but your photoshop renders will not take less time, your iTunes visuals will still run at an absurdly low frame rate. Basically the only thing to do is buy a new one... i'm in the same (obsolete) boat, have an iMac 400 sitting here that needs to be swapped out soon. Kind of sucks, but that's the computer world for ya :rolleyes:

:)
pnw

[Mineral]

Originally posted by paulwhannel
The simple answer is no, however the system can theoretically use less resources, thereby allowing more for programs. This is the reasoning behind Quartz Extreme. And the system itself can get snappier, tuned as Dr. Q says, making it *feel* faster-- but your photoshop renders will not take less time, your iTunes visuals will still run at an absurdly low frame rate. Basically the only thing to do is buy a new one... i'm in the same (obsolete) boat, have an iMac 400 sitting here that needs to be swapped out soon. Kind of sucks, but that's the computer world for ya :rolleyes:

:)
pnw

Well, I'm not obselete at all.. I just bought this in December. (17" G4 iMac).. but still, I'd like to see a snappier OSX in the next release.:rolleyes:

[cb911]

Mineral, i doubt that Apple would release 10.3 and not having it run a bit better on a comp as recent as yours. i think for sure that they will make 10.3 a bit "snappier" on G4s that they are still making.

[ibookin']

Well, 10.2 made my 500MHz iBook seem much faster than it used to, even though it did not have Quartz Extreme.

I think that Apple will have some speed improvments in 10.3. There were improvments in 10.1 AND 10.2, so it's a safe bet.

At least I hope so...

[AppleMatt]

I'm POSITIVE that there will be various speed improvements in 10.3, it's the main complaint with 10.2, and each iteration of X has improved in speed. Also Apple need to sell 10.3

AppleMatt

[nickgold]

I would guess 10.3 will be an improvement, as was 10.2 over 10.1, and as was 10.1 over 10.0, and as was 10.0 over the public beta. These improvements will mostly be noticed in Finder, which can stand any optimization it can get. :)

[job]

I'd like 10.3 to bring back the "snappiness" in general tasks in the Finder, like opening a new window, or even scrolling.

On any machine, compare the overall *system* speed in general and you will find that OS 9 blows past OS X.

Or maybe it's because I'm also on an iMac DV (400Mhz) and have never been on anything faster. ;)

[type_r503]

What you have to realize is that OSX was never meant to run on G3's or less. This was forced by MOT's ineptitude. We should have G5s at 2.5GHz+. Imagine how snappy the finder would be then.

[jholzner]

Anyone else notice how Apple NEVER referes to Panter as 10.3? Maybe it won't be...maybe it'll be 10.5 or something. In any case, it's interesting.

[jholzner]

Originally posted by type_r503
What you have to realize is that OSX was never meant to run on G3's or less. This was forced by MOT's ineptitude. We should have G5s at 2.5GHz+. Imagine how snappy the finder would be then.

No, it was meant to run on G3's. I remember when Steve Jobs returned and they announced thier road map for X and they specifically said that it would only run on a G3 or better.