On Mon, 6 Jun 2005 at 14:42 -0600, Bryan Sant wrote: > > I wouldn't hold my breath on that one. Mac OS X has some real warts, > > performance being one of them. > > Yikes, gasp, what! Honestly, I'm sounding like a Mac cheerleader :-(. > I don't even own one. I run Linux on the desktop 100% of the time, > but there is NO COMPARISON of desktop performance between Linux and OS > X.
I do own a mac, and I dual boot linux and OS X on it. It may be that I don't have enough RAM, but there is a very noticeable difference in responsiveness - Linux w/ XFree86 is tons faster than OS X. Does xfree86 do the cool things os x does like transparency and whatnot? No. Does all that cool stuff work well in os x? Yes. Aqua itself is no slower (nor faster) than xfree86, but os x eats so much ram that in my case (256M, and yes I knew it would be this way) linux is the clear winner in performance. > This is mostly a driver issue -- well and the fact that the Linux > threading model (yes NPTL -- the legacy model is worse) is optimized > for servers and royally blows for responsive desktop systems. If you > are lucky enough to have an nVidia card, then you're X11 system will > rock. However, 99% of all laptops run non-nVidia chips. I'm sure > that <insert your favorite *nix here> is faster than OS X at non-GUI > oriented things -- I'm sure the TCP connect throughput just rulez -- > but freakin'-A, I want my GUI screens to paint instantly when I switch > between them. My iBook has an ATI card, not NVidia. -- .O. Hans Fugal | De gustibus non disputandum est. ..O http://hans.fugal.net | Debian, vim, mutt, ruby, text, gpg OOO | WindowMaker, gaim, UTF-8, RISC, JS Bach --------------------------------------------------------------------- GnuPG Fingerprint: 6940 87C5 6610 567F 1E95 CB5E FC98 E8CD E0AA D460
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
.===================================. | This has been a P.L.U.G. mailing. | | Don't Fear the Penguin. | | IRC: #utah at irc.freenode.net | `==================================='
