Apples are Slow

[sigamy]

I am always surprised with how much more responsive the GUI is on my Windows box. One thing that really bothers me about the Powerbook (and all Macs I've used) is just how terribly it scrolls web pages and deals with java. On my PC I can whip end to end on webpages full of graphics and java crap that my Powerbook chugs through at a snails pace. Its the minor things like this that bug me about Macs - something hopefully that will be resolved in upcoming OS updates.

This is what is so funny about this debate...I have the exact opposite point of view.

 

[Timelessblur]

The 1.8GHz and 2GHz G5's already have FSB speeds above 800MHz. All G5's run a bus speed that is half that of the core (in other words they all have a 2x multiplier). Therefore the new 2.5GHz model has a FSB of 1.25GHz. It's no mystery.

no that 1.25 Ghz has a muliplaer to get there from 200mhz. Like intel say there FSB is 800mzh. No there is a 4x multiplier to get there.

 

[MrSugar]

This is what is so funny about this debate...I have the exact opposite point of view.

Really? I have to agree with the original post, windows does chomp through Javascript and Images on webpages... while my powerbook doesn't nearly as well.

 

[MikeLaRiviere]

I know Flash animations display very slowly on Safari, but I think this may be the fault of the program - either Safari or Flash - and not the fault of the CPU. But for everyone who says that Apples are slower than their Pentium counterparts, I must ask why Virginia Tech and the Army are using the PowerPC and not the Pentium, Itanium, Xeon, Athlon, or Opteron in their supercomputers. These are some of the fastest supercomputers in the world... you can't argue with that.

Mike LaRiviere

 

[SolidGun]

To answer someone's earlier question, my PB has 768 MB RAM. My brother's computer has 512 MB (DDR 2700, maybe 2100 I believe), and our old Dell has 256 MB. But here's the thing. I build what I thought would be a screaming machine: 3.0 GHz P4 Prescott HT, 512 MB PC3200 RAM, Asus P4P800 motherboard, GeForceFX 5950 Ultra, SATA HD, overclocked...
Mike LaRiviere

There could be so many issues with why it isn't running as fast as expected, but the operating system is not the issue. I wouldn't blame the poor performance on Win XP first and look elsewhere. I know that I just recently turned to Mac OS, but I don't see anything wrong with them coexisting in my life. Since you sold it for parts, it may no longer be an issue to you, but I would say the next computer you build you may have better luck, but don't hate Windows if your perfromance isn't what you want it to be.

 

[MikeLaRiviere]

SolidGun, I miscommunicated my grievance. I like Windows XP, too. It's a great OS, just different from OS X. What I meant when I said that there was a problem with the operating system was that the this specific operating system's registry most likely had many problems, resulting from use. Therefore, while I don't like the idea of the registry, I'm not saying I dislike Windows. I'm saying that there is a problem with my brother's specific operating system and its registry, and I meant the same about my PC.

Mike LaRiviere

 

[cslewis]

No one seems to care how fast apples are...

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL

 

[cslewis]

They're coming back....

http://finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=AAPL&t=my&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=

 

[SolidGun]

SolidGun, I miscommunicated my grievance. I like Windows XP, too. It's a great OS, just different from OS X. What I meant when I said that there was a problem with the operating system was that the this specific operating system's registry most likely had many problems, resulting from use. Therefore, while I don't like the idea of the registry, I'm not saying I dislike Windows. I'm saying that there is a problem with my brother's specific operating system and its registry, and I meant the same about my PC.
Mike LaRiviere

Okay, I made a mistake posting my previous post as well. I thought I had read to the end but that was only page 1 and I hadn't noticed anything until now. So if you did post anything else after and I said something to contradict that as well, that's my fault.
Yeah, the registry bothers me as well and I find myself restroring my PC often (thank god for Ghost). I love Mac OS X for many(numerous) improvements and future improvements to come with Cocoa apps, but I think LongHorn may copycat some of Mac OS X improvements.
Now that I know Mac OS, it would be really difficult for me to choose one over the other. Ignorance was bliss at one point.....

 

[NusuniAdmin]

simple reason... they only look at the numbers.

"pfft... your mac is only a 1.0ghz? ha! my PC is a 2.0ghz P4, much faster than yours" when in reality, its not.

its just ignorance. 95% of the people who hate macs have never used one, or just used one at school.

or used old performas

 

[7on]

Mike,

You didn't mention how much RAM you have on your PB. Mac OS X loves RAM. I think that the people who say Macs are slow are only using a Mac for a few seconds in CompUSA. Those machines have the base RAM--sometimes still just 128mb if they are previous generation machines. You are also right about gaming. Much better on the PC.

Most of the people on these forums are power users and have upgrade their RAM and now see excellent performance even compared to much higher clock speed PCs.

There used to be a general rule that G4s could complete with a Pentium that was twice the G4s clock speed. So a 500Mhz G4 could stay up to speed with a 1Ghz Pentium. I'm not sure if this is still true but I'd also add RAM into that mix and say that while Macs love and need RAM, PCs need a bit more RAM (probably not 2x) to be as usable as a Mac.

I agree with you, once you have enough RAM for OS X, Macs blow away PCs for general use apps.

Also I've read that many Stores unplug the fans on the Mac models. I'd think over time it's have ill-effects on the processor - maybe slowing down and/or kernel panics.

On a side note, opening all my apps in my Applications folder, iMovie opened last.

 

[Bruce Lee, PhD]

What's this keyboard repeat rate hack? I had heard of it, but I didn't realize that it affected anything other than the typing rate, i.e., holding down a key and seeing how fast it would repeat. Some explanation? This sounds cool.

Mike LaRiviere

this was something i came across on macosxhints, i think. the idea is that if you want the GUI to be more responsive, you set the keyboard repeat rate faster. thus some UI task needs to poll for keyboard input more frequently, so it gets allocated more CPU time overall. i.e. telling a process to do more work results in the system giving it higher priority. the net effect is that the whole gui becomes more responsive since the task has higher priority and thus the system is less likely to be in another task when you move the mouse or hit a key or whatever. sorry this explanation is vague, but i don't know the details of the kernel or the GUI tasks. i'd really be curious to know if this trick is for real. it does seem plausible, although i tried it and noticed no difference. on my powerbook the GUI pretty reasonable already though.

in any case, this sort of thing would only be expected to decrease latency. i.e. perhaps the dock would start to come up more quickly. but it wouldn't speed up the genie effect, for example.

 

[MikeLaRiviere]

That's interesting. Off-topic, but the database guy in my IT department pointed out another neat trick that of which I'm sure many are already aware: hold down the shift key while minimizing/de-minimizing a window, or during Expose effects... pretty cool. However, I'm not sure of its purpose, other than to show off the GUI.

Mike LaRiviere

 

[cslewis]

coool