Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!
  • Did you order new AirTags? We've opened a dedicated AirTags forum.

ls1dreams

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 13, 2009
584
200
I've been using OSX now for around 2.5 years, and while I like the OS, I find that it's never been as responsive as Windows when it comes to launching apps.

I've tried a variety of machines, including the latest haswell macbooks running SSD's.

However, in every instance, I've noticed that apps just take longer to launch than their windows equivalent.

Open notepad on windows? Instantaneous. Notes on OSX? About 2-3 "bounces".

Open Microsoft Excel? On Windows, < 1 second. On OSX? Around 5 seconds or more.

VLC? Way slower on OSX.

As stated, it's not just my machine, but every mac I've tried from friends or in the Apple store.

Any idea why OSX is so slow to open things?
 

vistadude

macrumors 65816
Jan 3, 2010
1,423
1
From what I understand, Windows learns how you use your PC and remembers information from recently used programs intelligently. Mac OS doesn't do this aggressively or at all.

You can try launching a big program that you haven't used for awhile, such as an old game. It will take long the first time, but as long as you use it once a week, it will launch faster.

Windows 7 is also a lot newer than OS X, which has been recoded over and over since the 90s.

Also, some mac notebooks don't run at full speed unless the battery is fully charged and plugged into the AC outlet because it requires more power than the AC adapter alone can provide.
 
Comment

hakuryuu

macrumors 6502
Sep 30, 2007
349
3
Lomita, CA
From what I understand, Windows learns how you use your PC and remembers information from recently used programs intelligently. Mac OS doesn't do this aggressively or at all.

You can try launching a big program that you haven't used for awhile, such as an old game. It will take long the first time, but as long as you use it once a week, it will launch faster.

Windows 7 is also a lot newer than OS X, which has been recoded over and over since the 90s.

Also, some mac notebooks don't run at full speed unless the battery is fully charged and plugged into the AC outlet because it requires more power than the AC adapter alone can provide.

Unless you are counting NeXT as OSX then it hasn't been recoded over and over since the 90s any more than any OS has. Windows 7 is also based on the NT kernel which isn't exactly brand new http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT. Both 7/8 and OSX are iterations of their respective kernels which are both vastly improved versus their original incarnations.

And for what its worth I don't feel that there is a significant difference between the application launch times of OSX and Windows7/8. Though I would actually say that Windows 8/8.1 feels faster than 7 as does 10.9 feel faster than 10.8.
 
Last edited:
Comment

MisterMe

macrumors G4
Jul 17, 2002
10,709
63
USA
From what I understand, Windows learns how you use your PC and remembers information from recently used programs intelligently. Mac OS doesn't do this aggressively or at all.

You can try launching a big program that you haven't used for awhile, such as an old game. It will take long the first time, but as long as you use it once a week, it will launch faster.

Windows 7 is also a lot newer than OS X, which has been recoded over and over since the 90s.

Also, some mac notebooks don't run at full speed unless the battery is fully charged and plugged into the AC outlet because it requires more power than the AC adapter alone can provide.
Wow! Talk about uninformed misinformation. Almost everything posted here is nonsense. I will address one spectacularly uninformed point:

The MacBook Pro uses about 12 W while completing standard computer tasks. Apple's MagSafe adapters supply 72-85 W, depending on the model. This means that each MagSafe adaptor has the capacity to supply enough power for at least six MacBook Pros.
 
Comment

ls1dreams

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 13, 2009
584
200
From what I understand, Windows learns how you use your PC and remembers information from recently used programs intelligently. Mac OS doesn't do this aggressively or at all.

You can try launching a big program that you haven't used for awhile, such as an old game. It will take long the first time, but as long as you use it once a week, it will launch faster.

Windows 7 is also a lot newer than OS X, which has been recoded over and over since the 90s.

Also, some mac notebooks don't run at full speed unless the battery is fully charged and plugged into the AC outlet because it requires more power than the AC adapter alone can provide.

To clarify though, I've also tried comparing system on a completely fresh reboot of both machines. I've also disabled the "office helper" startup apps in windows which load the apps into RAM ahead of time.

No matter what I've tried, Windows will always launch apps quicker, even without any precaching at all. It's ridiculous. Windows XP SP3 on an old P4 machine will open Excel faster than a Haswell i5 OSX.

Now, once cached in RAM, I find that they are a lot closer in launch time, but OSX is still usually around a 1 sec delay time vs. instantaneous in Windows.
 
Comment

ls1dreams

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 13, 2009
584
200
Unless you are counting NeXT as OSX then it hasn't been recoded over and over since the 90s any more than any OS has. Windows 7 is also based on the NT kernel which isn't exactly brand new http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT. Both 7/8 and OSX are iterations of their respective kernels which are both vastly improved versus their original incarnations.

And for what its worth I don't feel that there is a significant difference between the application launch times of OSX and Windows7/8. Though I would actually say that Windows 8/8.1 feels faster than 7 as does 10.9 feel faster than 10.8.

If you don't think there's a launch difference, I'd be happy to make a youtube video comparing the different launch times of a few simple apps on current machines. It blew my mind when I went home and used my parent's desktop running a sempron 3400 (around 1/10th the speed of current cpu's) on windows XP. It launched office apps faster than macbook pros running haswell with SSD's.

Maybe I'm exaggerating slightly, but has no one else noticed this difference? It's ridiculous.
 
Comment

Lone Deranger

macrumors 68000
Apr 23, 2006
1,821
2,009
Tokyo, Japan
I don't have Excel, but I did try TextEdit and VLC and both where about 1 bounce. Notes was about 1.5 bounces.

Late 2013 13"rMBP/2.6/16GB/1TB.

So yes, you are probably exaggerating a bit. :)
 
Comment

kappaknight

macrumors 68000
Mar 5, 2009
1,585
83
Atlanta, GA
I've been using OSX now for around 2.5 years, and while I like the OS, I find that it's never been as responsive as Windows when it comes to launching apps.

I've tried a variety of machines, including the latest haswell macbooks running SSD's.

However, in every instance, I've noticed that apps just take longer to launch than their windows equivalent.

Open notepad on windows? Instantaneous. Notes on OSX? About 2-3 "bounces".

Open Microsoft Excel? On Windows, < 1 second. On OSX? Around 5 seconds or more.

VLC? Way slower on OSX.

As stated, it's not just my machine, but every mac I've tried from friends or in the Apple store.

Any idea why OSX is so slow to open things?

Sorry, calling BS on this entire thread.

I have an early 2011 MBP running an SSD, which is probably slower than the SSD's used in Haswell's. Excel and VLC both came in at one bounce. They certainly did not take 5+ seconds.

Yes, do your scientific tests and record them on video. Your gut is wrong.
 
Comment

835153

Guest
Aug 5, 2013
116
1
I have a 27" iMac 3.4Ghz i7 with SSD and 12GB RAM and 2GB VRAM. Most apps open pretty much instantly save for things like Photoshop and Indesign which take a bounce or two (3 or 4 seconds tops).

Before I used to wait for the computer, now it waits for me. I get a lot less sips of coffee nowadays.

EDIT: just tried opening a few things on my work iMac standard 21" with no SSD. Most apps open and ready to use before the first bounce even finishes.
 
Comment

Irishman

macrumors 68030
Nov 2, 2006
2,744
617
I've been using OSX now for around 2.5 years, and while I like the OS, I find that it's never been as responsive as Windows when it comes to launching apps.

I've tried a variety of machines, including the latest haswell macbooks running SSD's.

However, in every instance, I've noticed that apps just take longer to launch than their windows equivalent.

Open notepad on windows? Instantaneous. Notes on OSX? About 2-3 "bounces".

Open Microsoft Excel? On Windows, < 1 second. On OSX? Around 5 seconds or more.

VLC? Way slower on OSX.

As stated, it's not just my machine, but every mac I've tried from friends or in the Apple store.

Any idea why OSX is so slow to open things?

Do you have any data to support your assertion? Maybe a video showing comparisons of the difference you're seeing? Plus, you do realize that every Mac app doesn't have a Windows equivalent, and vice versa.

----------

Wow! Talk about uninformed misinformation. Almost everything posted here is nonsense. I will address one spectacularly uninformed point:

The MacBook Pro uses about 12 W while completing standard computer tasks. Apple's MagSafe adapters supply 72-85 W, depending on the model. This means that each MagSafe adaptor has the capacity to supply enough power for at least six MacBook Pros.

Actually, the range is 45 w to 85 w, depending on the model and screen size.

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/45w-mag...60&skuId=5856526&st=magsafe adapter&cp=1&lp=5

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/magsafe...90&skuId=9954445&st=magsafe adapter&cp=1&lp=1
 
Comment

Benjamin99

macrumors member
Jan 31, 2012
75
0
The Woodlands, TX
Granted the MS Office apps open slower on the OSX than on Windows, but thats not anything interesting…it is a MS application running on a competitor's OS…MS is not going to put more into it than they have to. All the other apps you mentioned I just opened on my iMac and they all opened on 1 bounce, thats nothing to complain about. And thats while this iMac hasn't been shut down in weeks and is currently running handbrake encoding.. I'd also like to see some data and youtube videos to see your comparisons.
 
Comment

jahall05

macrumors 6502
Jul 30, 2013
303
69
I used Windows for many moons before switching to a Mac. While you are correct that some applications open a second or two faster on Windows than on Mac...it is 1 second, WHO CARES.

If it is HONESTLY that big of a deal to you, then bootcamp Windows or go to a PC. Good luck with installing 45 updates upon shutdown and the inconsistent performance across the board.
 
Comment

hamis92

macrumors 6502
Apr 4, 2007
475
87
Finland
Running an Early 2008 MacBook Pro with an SSD and Mavericks. This thing is ancient and should be slow as a snail compared to the newest generation of Apple notebooks. The SSD can only reach a fraction of the speed it is capable of because the SATA1 bus isn't fast enough. Yet the computer is flying like a starship at warp.

Almost everything I tried launched within one bounce (including Excel and Word), with the exception of Photoshop which took two bounces. I was surprised myself – those applications had not been opened since I restarted the computer last night, so they weren't readily stored in RAM.
 
Comment

triplelucky

macrumors regular
Sep 30, 2012
153
0
Tucson, Arizona, USA
I think I do remember that back when I used windows machines…..

They seemed to open hours long anti virus programs quickly, whenever they didn’t have a problem and were unable to start.
 
Comment

elgrecomac

macrumors 65816
Jan 15, 2008
1,161
158
San Diego
Hold on there partner, not quite....

Unless you are counting NeXT as OSX then it hasn't been recoded over and over since the 90s any more than any OS has. Windows 7 is also based on the NT kernel which isn't exactly brand new http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT. Both 7/8 and OSX are iterations of their respective kernels which are both vastly improved versus their original incarnations.

And for what its worth I don't feel that there is a significant difference between the application launch times of OSX and Windows7/8. Though I would actually say that Windows 8/8.1 feels faster than 7 as does 10.9 feel faster than 10.8.

I run Win 7 in a bootcamp partition on a 5 year old MBP and am running 10.9 on the same machine. Here are my observations:

1. All Microsoft apps load in about half the time it takes similar apps on 10.9. It's not even close. I am running the latest versions of the entire MS suite on both systems. The hysterical thing is that I believe the fastest windows laptop machines available are Apple Macs running windows in a bootcamp partition. I've seen this on new MBP's at work. There is definitely some irony there...
And one other thing they have in common is a 'Screen of Death'...Windows of course has the Blue Screen of Death, or BSOD and now OSX 10.9 system lockups are the equivalent. Way to go, Apple....

2. With all that said, Win 7 is remarkably stable, I run Autocad plus several Windows-only apps like Visio, MS Project and it just flat out works well. It took MS 20 years to get there but they did it...and then they phoqued it up with Win 8, which is very stable and faster than 7 but the UI is all FU'd. 2 steps forward and 2 steps back.... (the Win 8 references are based on a winTel PC I use at work).

3. Boot up time on my MBP, windows 7, hands down faster to boot and by more than a few seconds.

4. Shutdown time is not as fast on Win 7. I tweaked the setting on 10.9 per some thread on this board so it shuts down VERY fast now.

So performance wise, Win 7 is a hands down performance winner all things being relatively equal on my MBP BUT from a UI perspective, well, I'm still a OSX kinda guy.
 
Comment

petsounds

macrumors 65816
Jun 30, 2007
1,483
497
Unless you are counting NeXT as OSX then it hasn't been recoded over and over since the 90s any more than any OS has.

Well, to be fair OS X *is* in fact basically a modified version of NeXTSTEP. But Apple has been steadily modernizing it over the years.

One bit of OS X which is far older than NeXTSTEP is the damn filesystem OS X uses, HFS+, which is not much different than the original HFS we used on Macs in the 80s. I know Windows still uses NTFS, but I thought I remembered reading something about advancements around the Win 7 timeframe to speed up disk access of commonly-used apps. Perhaps I'm misremembering.
 
Comment

ls1dreams

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Aug 13, 2009
584
200
I run Win 7 in a bootcamp partition on a 5 year old MBP and am running 10.9 on the same machine. Here are my observations:

1. All Microsoft apps load in about half the time it takes similar apps on 10.9. It's not even close. I am running the latest versions of the entire MS suite on both systems. The hysterical thing is that I believe the fastest windows laptop machines available are Apple Macs running windows in a bootcamp partition. I've seen this on new MBP's at work. There is definitely some irony there...
And one other thing they have in common is a 'Screen of Death'...Windows of course has the Blue Screen of Death, or BSOD and now OSX 10.9 system lockups are the equivalent. Way to go, Apple....

2. With all that said, Win 7 is remarkably stable, I run Autocad plus several Windows-only apps like Visio, MS Project and it just flat out works well. It took MS 20 years to get there but they did it...and then they phoqued it up with Win 8, which is very stable and faster than 7 but the UI is all FU'd. 2 steps forward and 2 steps back.... (the Win 8 references are based on a winTel PC I use at work).

3. Boot up time on my MBP, windows 7, hands down faster to boot and by more than a few seconds.

4. Shutdown time is not as fast on Win 7. I tweaked the setting on 10.9 per some thread on this board so it shuts down VERY fast now.

So performance wise, Win 7 is a hands down performance winner all things being relatively equal on my MBP BUT from a UI perspective, well, I'm still a OSX kinda guy.

Thank you for proving I'm not insane. Microsoft apps launch faster even running in a fricking Virtualbox on my laptop in Windows XP than they do in native OSX.

It's not just MS apps though. Lots of smaller apps would instantaneously snap open in Windows, while in OSX they require at least one bounce. While one bounce isn't really that slow, it's a noticeable delay that makes the entire OS feel laggy compared to Windows for me.

A good example is Cyberduck (FTP client). On my 2011 sandy bridge w/ the stock 5400rpm hard drive, it takes nearly 10 bounces to load. Any ftp client in Windows would open immediately.
 
Last edited:
Comment

josh.b

macrumors regular
Oct 19, 2013
158
0
strange. I find it the other way around with mac os x launching applications much faster than the same ones on Windows.
 
Comment

Prabas

macrumors 65816
Sep 14, 2010
1,011
690
Europe
Every single app opens in about one second, software like Photoshop in about 2-3 seconds. Times are same as windows'
 
Comment

stooovie

macrumors 6502a
Nov 21, 2010
805
298
Maybe I'm exaggerating slightly, but has no one else noticed this difference? It's ridiculous.

Just a little. I agree with you. It's always been like this for me. Even with SSD, launching apps is WAY slower in OSX. When booted to Bootcamp (Win 8) on spinning HDD, Photoshop cs6 takes less than 4 seconds to launch. In 10.8.5 on the same machine WITH SSD, it takes longer.

OSX just manages processes and memory differently. Windows has tendency to clog up and bog down, whereas OSX chugs along smoothly, albeit more slowly.
 
Comment

haravikk

macrumors 65816
May 1, 2005
1,494
21
From what I understand, Windows learns how you use your PC and remembers information from recently used programs intelligently. Mac OS doesn't do this aggressively or at all.
OS X does do this, I believe that's what the warmd process is for which you can usually see in Activity Monitor.


I have to say though, like others I generally find OS X applications open faster, and that's running them from a Fusion Drive while my Bootcamp partition is SSD only. Granted applications I don't use in OS X very often are slower to open, but that's because they've moved off the SSD.

Photoshop definitely is slower, but that's going to be Adobe's fault rather than OS X's.
 
Comment
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.