Post a Comment
OMG that's slow! There are obviously lots of compatibility issues going on, since the processor alone can be the cause (Tiger runs great on my old 466MHz PowerMac G4). Graphic drivers?
Nice hack though - Makes me wonder if Apple is ever going to release a subnotebook to take place of the old 12" iBook/PowerBook.
edit: so, it's not the RAM, at the end of the video it shows 768MB... that leaves the graphic drivers as the most likely suspect
Edited 2006-12-19 23:38
It's both graphics and CPU. OSX can run without Quartz Extreme but everything is drawn in software in such case. Celeron M 900 Mhz is just too slow. I've run OSX without video acceleration on a notebook with Celeron M 1.6 Ghz and unless you want to watch video or do some 3D stuff it's good enough.
"It's both graphics and CPU. OSX can run without Quartz Extreme but everything is drawn in software in such case."
You are right, but this is because of a *major* graphic driver issue, because even on machines that don't support Quartz Extreme, the OS X GUI is still pretty responsive: on my old 466MHz Power Mac G4, for instance. That machine has only an ATI Rage 128 graphics card, with just 16MB of VRAM, and it doesn't even support rectangle textures. Yet, OS X squeezes as much as it can from it, and the machine is an order of magnitude faster than the UMPC shown in the video, despite its 466MHz processor.
Actually, I used Tiger (thanks to XPostFacto) on an old 250MHz PowerBook G3 (upgraded to a 500MHz G3) with a Rage Pro card (4MB of VRAM) and it was slow, yet not *that* slow. And I don't think OS X was able to offload much (if any) graphic processing work to that unsupported card...
RE: Things the world does not need:
RE[2]: Things the world does not need:
Its gotta be the interface of linux, well Gnome actually, i use OSX daily now but i still wish OSX was as usable as Gnome... Dont get me wrong Aqua is a nice GUI but Gnome just cant be beat ... Windows interface just dont even come into it, and i aint tried Vista yet but so far from what i have read it offers nothing that i would consider rushing out to try and that hasnt been done before it seems
This is a great demonstration if for no other reason than it reinforces how adaptable OS X may be made for multiple devices.
But I am still in woe mode upon hearing that MS is pulling VBA out of the next version of office for OS X. I believe this was a deliberate act to thwart defections from Vista to OS X. For most of what I do, VBA is a must. Without it (and AutoCAD for OS X), it just doesn't do me any good. drat
"this isn't about macosx vs linux UI debate. One thing is for sure, while I can get linux to run *well* on my pc, I can't say the same for macosx."
And I couldn't get Windows XP to run on my PPC Mac no matter how badly I'd for some reason wanted to....
Neither way around I'd blame any of the two parties, Apple and Microsoft, since it's their right to make these decisions and if you really want it that bad, buy the appropriate hardware (these days this would be an Intel Mac) ...
So many people seem to blame other people's decisions for their own lack of opportunities, even though in this case it boils down to their own choice and their own decisions ...



