On 2003/01/25 05:56 PM or thereabouts, Matthew Hindson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> intoned:
> My 2c, for what they're worth... > > I agree, it is generally slower. OS 9.2.2 on a G4/800 is heaps quicker than > OS X 10.2.3 for just about every task. Actually, the benchmarks don't bear that out -- certainly not on a dual G4/800 (if that's what you have). As far as actual number-crunching goes, (Photoshop or digital audio filters, mathmatics apps, ripping MP3s, etc) OS X is generally faster (or at least even) with OS 9, especially on more recent hardware (especially dual processor machines). Unfortunately, the GUI is *much* slower, and this creates the (incorrect) perception of general all-around sluggishness. Unfortunately, the slowness in GUI also extends somewhat to graphics apps (really, anything that involves screen redraws), so while most Photoshop filters are faster, scrolling, etc is slower. Hopefully this is something that will improve with time, and of course ever-faster hardware will make this less and less of a problem. > I also agree with many of your points about the system software and areas of > lost functionality. Part of the problem is that there are so many great > third-party extensions in OS 9 that haven't been translated across. Action > Files, Action Go-Mac and TurboKeys are three examples of extensions that I > can't do without. On the other hand, OS X has built-in Windows-style full keyboard access to menus, and I believe that AppleScript is more powerful and flexible in OS X (not 100% sure on this since I never used it in OS 9). And... *no bloody extension conflicts!* > The greatest thing (IMHO) about OS X is the anti-aliased text. Once you get > used to the anti-aliased text in web browsers such as Omniweb or Internet > Explorer, going 'back' is almost a painful experience. Oh yeah, going back to OS 9 induces a real visceral "ouch!" > Similarly with the > anti-aliasing in Microsoft Word. It's so much easier on the eye as well as > aesthetically very pleasing. > > I really, _really_ hope that Finale is going to make use of anti-aliasing in > its OS X version of Finale. I'm sure it will have this enabled as a preference, as in MS Office. Since 10.1, enabling Quartz in Carbon application is a piece of cake. > I can imagine that the speed of Finale OS X, or > rather, lack thereof, is going to cause a lot of complaints, as it's bound > to be slower. Well, especially if you turn on Quartz -- that's where the real speed hit will come. I'll probably leave it on regardless, as the aesthetics are just so much better with Quartz on. It makes everything easier on the eyes, and (most advantageously) it makes smaller point sizes much more legible. > Just about every other OS X application certainly is - just > think about the complaints when the OS X version of Virtual PC first came > out. On the other hand, Virtual PC 6 runs like a dream in OS X -- from all reports, it's the best version ever. I expect the first version of Carbonized Finale will have some kinks to work out, but hopefully by Fin2005 [sigh] we'll have a mature, (relatively) zippy OS X app. > I could only imagine that it will be a Carbonized version, and thus we > should be able to run it in 9 and X. As Johannes pointed out, even though it will be written with Carbon, not Cocoa, there will almost certainly be two different applications, one for OS 9 and one for OS X, sharing much of the same code base but also containing optimizations for each OS. - Darcy ------ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Boston, MA _______________________________________________ Finale mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale
