Linked by Jordan Spencer Cunningham on Wed 13th May 2009 01:18 UTC
Benchmarks Phoronix, known for their various speed tests and reviews, compared the latest in Ubuntu and what, until recently, used to be the lastest in Mac OS X with 29 different benchmarking tests. Some of the results were rather interesting.
Thread beginning with comment 363438
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
DavidSan
Member since:
2008-11-18

" Pardon? nothing is slow to me; maybe it takes a second to load up the window to display the contents of the drive, or it takes a couple of seconds for an application to load by clicking on the dock but what I am talking about is smoothness when running 3-4-5-6 applications at the same time. For me, I couldn't care less about the speed of one application all by its lonesome self; what I am talking about is a system under a reasonable load and getting some decent responsiveness from it.


Funny, as repsonsiveness is one of my biggest gripes about Mac OS X. I've used the most powerful Macs you can imagine, and even those that herald the coming of the starborn ones (to paraphrase Yahtzee) have noticeable delay when launching applications or interacting with them (buttons, menus, etc.).

This is absolutely intolerable. Mac OS X is smooth, yes, but not when it comes to responsiveness.

Before I get the usual group of Mac fans on my bum: the above does not imply, in any way, that Windows does this any better.
"

I believe you are confusing things. Responsiveness has nothing to do with launching Apps. It has to do with how the system take care of your requests and events.

A slow application, does not mean the system is not responsive enough, or a slow launching.

However, if the menu bar that does not appear when pressed it is a responsiveness issue. That is particularly true in Applications written in Java, but they are unresponsive in every platform, even Windows.

Windows, and Linux are very fast, but when you have your processors at top capacity, both systems get very unresponsive, especially Windows. Mac OS X, usually keeps receiving and behaving properly under the same circumstances.

Reply Parent Score: 2

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

I believe you are confusing things. Responsiveness has nothing to do with launching Apps. It has to do with how the system take care of your requests and events.


Exactly.

So when I click a launcher, the app needs to be there instantly to receive brownie points. When I press the close button, it needs to disappear instantly for brownie points. When I press a menu button, the menu should appear instantly. Etc. Mac OS X simply does not perform optimal when it comes to responsiveness.

I'm from a BeOS world, and anything less than instant responses is evil and bad and should cause people to be fired.

Mac OS X totally sucks in this department, even on very powerful machines. Windows XP and esp. vista sucked balls here too, but Windows 7 seems to have nailed it pretty good (still not good enough though). Sure, it needs tricks like SuperFetch and such to get there, but I'd rather have tricks getting me there than not getting there at all.

On 7, all the applications I use appear instantly - Chrome, Office, Miranda, you name it.

Except for blu though. blu's a ridiculously beautiful Twitter client written in WPF, but it's goddamn heavy on resources. In fact, it's my most memory intensive app ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 1

WereCatf Member since:
2006-02-15

I don't count application loading times as "responsiveness." It's how responsive the system remains while loading something that matters. Caching apps in memory does not and will not work in every case so when the system does need to start loading something, possibly even a really heavy app, it should do it in a way that the rest of the system stays responsive and useable.

Reply Parent Score: 2

DavidSan Member since:
2008-11-18



Exactly.

So when I click a launcher, the app needs to be there instantly to receive brownie points. When I press the close button, it needs to disappear instantly for brownie points. When I press a menu button, the menu should appear instantly. Etc. Mac OS X simply does not perform optimal when it comes to responsiveness.


It is true. Mac OS X is not as responsive as it should on the user interface department.


I'm from a BeOS world, and anything less than instant responses is evil and bad and should cause people to be fired.


That's not true. BeOS was very responsive, I used it, but it was not that responsive, especially considering how old the graphic interface in BeOS was. BeOS was not as responsive as Mac OS 9, for example. Mac OS 9 has its problems, but responsiveness was not. All the time the user was first (Except when the system hanged itself).

Preemptive operating systems, are not as responsive as cooperative multitasking systems, for obvious reasons, but you gain robustness.

BeOS display technology, was not either even 1/10 of the sophistication Mac OS X or Vista has. BeOS was pixel related, very similar to what Mac OS 9 was and Windows XP is. Everything was a bitmap.

Mac OS X, in contrast, is PDF-vector related, heavy transparent (everything has alpha channel, even if it is not used), double buffered. (It has to be slow, because everything is written on the screen twice), heavy anti-aliasing, etc. How do you think those animations are made? Vista is similar to Mac OS X in that respect.

Reply Parent Score: 1