Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

DaGuy · Jan 31, 2003, 07:16 PM

No big fanfare on the Apple website about the release of the iLife downloadables... This strikes me as nod that they know this stuff has a lot of rough edges. I suspect they may have wanted to keep it in the oven a bit longer.

They did real good with iPhoto but I iMovie is definitely crude...

cenutrio · Jan 31, 2003, 08:29 PM

I fully agree...

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 31, 2003, 08:32 PM

The part that kills me is that everyone THINKS that making an app Cocoa everthing will be wicked.

So far it seems that porting it to Cocoa makes things slow as all hell.

Developer · Jan 31, 2003, 08:36 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
The part that kills me is that everyone THINKS that making an app Cocoa everthing will be wicked.

So far it seems that porting it to Cocoa makes things slow as all hell.

Cocoa is for faster development. Nobody ever claimed it's for faster execution.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 31, 2003, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by Developer:
Cocoa is for faster development. Nobody ever claimed it's for faster execution.

Are you kidding me? Everyone before 10.2 thought that if the Finder was rewriten in CoCoa is would be super fast!

Oh and....

moss514 · Jan 31, 2003, 09:11 PM

I thought the finder was carbon????

ZackS · Jan 31, 2003, 09:27 PM

The Finder indeed still is Carbon. Good thing too, it is much faster that way.

What it really needs is proper threading. Network operations in the main thread?! Excuse me Apple, I'd rather not beachball the Finder every time my iDisk stalls out, which is quite often. That brings me to another point: why are the .Mac servers so piss poor if we're paying for them now? They go down more than when they were called iTools.....

Get it together Apple!

Anand · Jan 31, 2003, 09:30 PM

I think I am the only one here who really likes the new iPhoto and iMovie. They are not faster but they don't feel any slower. And I like the new look.

Liquidity X · Jan 31, 2003, 09:32 PM

This version is MUCH faster for me. I Love it, i almsot can see myself using this for basic stuff over FCP3 much more now!

it could still use a few tweaks....

Millennium · Jan 31, 2003, 09:32 PM

Originally posted by moss514:
I thought the finder was carbon????

It is Carbon. Before 10.2, everyone eas clamoring for the Finder to be written in Cocoa. A few of the blind Cocoa-for-Cocoa's-sake zealots still do. Mind you, 10.0's Finder really sucked, since it used a framework known as PowerPlant, which at the time was a Really, Really Bad Carbon Port. PowerPlant greatly improved by the time 10.1 was released, and its improvements were reflected in the Finder for that release.

Truth be told, if you stack up Cocoa and Carbon, and put the best developers for each API onto the same task, the Carbon app will generally be slightly faster. But that's only if you really tweak stuff out; for most well-written apps, you'll never see a speed difference. Also, while Cocoa has some great features, certain of those features can be abused (I'm not talking interface stuff from AppKit here; I'm talking the backend stuff from FoundationKit). Use it too much, or use it for the wrong things, and you'll slow your app down big time.

That's likely the problem with Apple's current Cocoa crop; it's quite literally a case of too much of a good thing. Not having access to the source I couldn't verify this, but from what little can be gleaned from property lists, it seems fairly likely that they're using fairly naive methods to program these, almost as though it were done in a hurry. The resulting source code is probably really easy to follow, but there's a big price to be paid in speed.

This is one of the reasons I'm looking forward to the time when Apple finishes the merging of Cocoa and Carbon. Both have their uses, and this will make it easier for programmers to pick the right tool for the right job. For the most part, the best apps in the future will be (except in the simplest cases) neither Cocoa nor Carbon, but a hybrid of the two, each playing off the strengths of the other.

tikki · Jan 31, 2003, 09:39 PM

Originally posted by Millennium:

This is one of the reasons I'm looking forward to the time when Apple finishes the merging of Cocoa and Carbon. Both have their uses, and this will make it easier for programmers to pick the right tool for the right job. For the most part, the best apps in the future will be (except in the simplest cases) neither Cocoa nor Carbon, but a hybrid of the two, each playing off the strengths of the other.

Are you just speculating that this is coming in the future, or have you read that it is definitely coming?

Apple Pro Underwear · Jan 31, 2003, 09:42 PM

Millennium,

are you telling me that OSX for the next few years is gonna be the same ass speed as it is now no matter what hardware we have?

because i'll use os9 till i die dammit!!!! i'm snappy obsessed.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 31, 2003, 10:04 PM

Originally posted by Anand:
I think I am the only one here who really likes the new iPhoto and iMovie. They are not faster but they don't feel any slower. And I like the new look.

I think the new iPhoto is great. The ****ed up on iMovie though big time.

tikki · Jan 31, 2003, 10:08 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
I think the new iPhoto is great. The ****ed up on iMovie though big time.

iMovie not taking up the whole screen anymore is a Good Thing.

Other than that I agree with you.

kcmac · Jan 31, 2003, 10:24 PM

iPhoto is very nice.

I can't really tell that iMovie 3 is slower or faster. Rendering transitions and effects was always slow on my iMac 400 DVSE, 1 gig ram and upgraded 7200 hard drive.

I always try to have several renderings going at once. Can't do a whole lot else when this is going on but I never could.

The new transitions, sounds, and titles are very nice. Implementation of iTunes and iPhoto into iMovie is something I have been waiting a long time for. And I really like how easily you can now adjust the volume of a track.

It also seems to export to QT a little faster.

I am really interested to see how much better my 12" PB will make iMovie work. I get it sometime next week. I really am not expecting earth shattering differences however.

I think we have all been waiting so long for a revision that some of us got our hopes way out of wack. I am just a laymen but it seems to me that this works pretty dang easy and lends great results.

I can accept that it will be slower than making a text document or some of the other less complex things we do. This is a fairly complicated application after all. I don't think Hollywood would try to do what some of us expect iMovie to do and on machines like mine.

Angus_D · Feb 1, 2003, 03:36 AM

Originally posted by tikki:
Are you just speculating that this is coming in the future, or have you read that it is definitely coming?

Actually, Apple made it a lot easier to use one from the other in 10.2, for example you can get a Carbon WindowRef from an NSWindow (that wasn't created using initWithWindowRef), and you can call a function to make the main instance of NSApplication from within a Carbon-based application, etc.

As for Apple's silence on announcing the downloads, has anybody thought that it's because they want people to BUY the damn things?

Gul Banana · Feb 1, 2003, 05:06 AM

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:
Millennium,

are you telling me that OSX for the next few years is gonna be the same ass speed as it is now no matter what hardware we have?

because i'll use os9 till i die dammit!!!! i'm snappy obsessed.

It's already really fast on recentish hardware (read: dual gig and above, in my opinion, for "really fast"). I also fail to see how you read that into any of Milennium's posts.

kovacs · Feb 1, 2003, 05:43 AM

Originally posted by Liquidity X:
This version is MUCH faster for me. I Love it, i almsot can see myself using this for basic stuff over FCP3 much more now! it could still use a few tweaks....

Yep iPhoto 2 is beast on my little iMac, iPhoto was a dog, I love it, haven't used iMovie yet...

typoon · Feb 1, 2003, 06:40 AM

Someone suggested removing the laguage options from the iApps that DOES make them load a bit faster. I did it in both iPhoto and iMovie. Both load a bit quicker.

iPhoto2 isn't bad. I haven't had enough time with iMovie to tell. If you get info onthe file then click on language you will see it loads a whole buch of them, Uncheck the ones you aren't using and it should speed up your iApps.

tikki · Feb 1, 2003, 09:11 AM

Originally posted by Gul Banana:
It's already really fast on recentish hardware (read: dual gig and above, in my opinion, for "really fast"). I also fail to see how you read that into any of Milennium's posts.

I agree. Especially the newest Powermacs.

Most of the iApps are sluggish on all laptop hardware though, which is sad. For instance, the 12" AluBook I played with the other day struggled with resizing iTunes, but the Powermac laughed in my face at such a trivial task.

Apple Pro Underwear · Feb 1, 2003, 09:59 AM

from Mil's post i gathered that Cocoa or Carbon running OSX software is just slow

i figured that Apple programmers would eventually program it to be better and faster but from what he said it will never be fast

ok, so i guess we should shut up about OSX being slow and that the only way to get it fast is to get a dual gig and above? since dual gig machines are only available for the mid powermac config, snappiness won't come standard for OSX for a long time since imacs, powerbook and ibooks are slower than dual PMs

tikki · Feb 1, 2003, 10:01 AM

Originally posted by Apple Pro Underwear:

ok, so i guess we should shut up about OSX being slow and that the only way to get it fast is to get a dual gig and above? since dual gig machines are only available for the mid powermac config, snappiness won't come standard for OSX for a long time since imacs, powerbook and ibooks are slower than dual PMs

iMacs arent slow when it comes to OS X. iBooks are, and the last powerbook I used (G4 800) ran OS X like a champ.

I guess its different for different people.

JLL · Feb 1, 2003, 10:05 AM

Originally posted by DaGuy:
No big fanfare on the Apple website about the release of the iLife downloadables...

There was a big fanfare when the apps where announced.

It just seems that they want to market new Power Macs and new displays instead of free downloads.

xi_hyperon · Feb 1, 2003, 10:20 AM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
I think the new iPhoto is great. The ****ed up on iMovie though big time.

I haven't played with iMovie 3 yet. Is lack of speed the main issue, or is it buggy too?

Millennium · Feb 1, 2003, 11:00 AM

Originally posted by tikki:
Are you just speculating that this is coming in the future, or have you read that it is definitely coming?

It's definitely coming.

It makes sense, too. Among other things, this should help eliminate some of the more blatant incinsistencies between Cocoa and Carbon apps. That's what I think will be the best thing to come outt of this: it will force them to give Cocoa greater access to system functionality, while at the same time forcing them to write better automatic system integration into Carbon. They'll both be improved by this.

As another bonus, this should help get rid of a whole lot of duplicate code, which should make the raw size of the OS somewhat smaller (assuming they don't negate that by adding in more features). This will also make it much easier to optimize in the future, since they don't have to keep hunting down duplicates, and that should help the current speed issues, if not immediately then over the long term.

Like I said in another post, rushing Apple is Not A Good Idea. The results can be summed up in four letters: 4K78.