On Aug 17 2002, Martin Costabel wrote:
> Rog�rio Brito wrote:
> > Just another note: is XDarwin quite slow in full screen mode?
>
> Yes. But it's even slower in rootless mode ;-) It uses the already
> slow quartz graphics routines without any hardware acceleration. You
> cannot do anything about it.
Now, that's sad. :-( I'm not with my iBook here, so I can't
experiment with it in rootless mode, but it is slow and makes
the use of the Emacs/xterm especially hard in disconnected
situations (read: the battery drains quite fast).
If I only could use an Emacs for Aqua that understood latin1
characters well and that allowed me to map the little enter
key as a control...
> > Is it a configuration problem on my particular system or is it
> > an intrinsic problem with the way XDarwin works? BTW, I'm
> > using an iBook2, 600MHz, combo, 128MB of RAM, MacOS X 10.1.5.
>
> You have very little memory for OSX. It is possible that in addition to
> the slow graphics performance of XDarwin, you are seeing the effect of
> swapping. You can see whether swapping happens by running "top" and
> looking if the "pageouts" value increases; also how many swapfiles are
> created in /var/vm. Again, you can't do much about it besides buying
> more memory.
Well, basically, I don't have more memory because the iBook
itself was already quite expensive when I got it here in
Brazil. In fact, while it seems that iBooks are a good choice
of a notebook for people living in the US and Europe, I think
that it was a bad thing to buy it here.
As I'm a graduate student, I have little money right now and
the exchange rates for purchasing more memory are in an
all-time high, with 256MB of RAM for the iBook costing 25%
more than the minimum wage here. :-(
> > I'm basing my comparison of speed on Linux with X and the same
> > programs (Emacs 20, latex, Window Maker) on the same system.
> > The iBook is quite a lot faster running Linux than running
> > MacOS X and I'd like to get a bit more of performance with
> > XDarwin, as I plan to use MacOS X more from now on.
>
> You can hope that future versions will be faster, in particular with
> faster quartz implementations.
Again the monetary reasons here. Unfortunately, I won't be
purchasing Jaguar in the near future. :-(
(And of course I won't be signing .Mac, which may be a good
business for people inside the US).
> When I run "x11perf -scroll500", I see that linuxppc is an
> incredibly 50 to 200 times (!) faster than XDarwin. (This is on an
> iBook 466MHz; on a G4 with a faster graphics card the problem is
> less important).
Well, I'll also do those comparisons with x11perf just for fun
(which I didn't do at first, since the speed difference
between Linux with X and XDarwin were quite visible).
Thanks for your comments, Roger...
--
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Rog�rio Brito - [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://www.ime.usp.br/~rbrito
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-------------------------------------------------------
This sf.net email is sponsored by: OSDN - Tired of that same old
cell phone? Get a new here for FREE!
https://www.inphonic.com/r.asp?r=sourceforge1&refcode1=vs3390
_______________________________________________
Fink-beginners mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/fink-beginners
