 |
 |
Photoshop 7 runs faster under Classic in OS X
|
 |
|
 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
I discovered the way to start Photoshop in Classic inside Mac OS X.
All you do is Right click on the Photoshop.app, select "Show Package Contents" and go to the MacOSClassic folder. Inside you will find the Photoshop 7 Classic program. Just drag it to your dock and double click it.
Photoshop 7 classic is much faster than the PS 7 native app. Isn't this weird? I have tried all the suggestions about renicing, optimizing, etc. But PS 7 native is excruciatingly slow still, and working with it after a few hours becomes tiresome.
I guess Adobe did something wrong, because this just is very funny.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: europe
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by 970:
I discovered the way to start Photoshop in Classic inside Mac OS X.
All you do is Right click on the Photoshop.app, select "Show Package Contents" and go to the MacOSClassic folder. Inside you will find the Photoshop 7 Classic program. Just drag it to your dock and double click it.
What about Get Info on Photoshop in the Finder, then check "Open in Classic Environment"?
Yes, I too guess Adobe did do something wrong.
|
|
Nasrudin sat on a river bank when someone shouted to him from the opposite side: "Hey! how do I get across?" "You are across!" Nasrudin shouted back.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Photoshop 7 for OSX is a piece of ****.
Whenever I have to use it, I boot back to OS9. Anyone that tells you PS7 on OSX is decent is either lying, or in some sort of time warp.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: columbus, oh
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Cipher13:
Photoshop 7 for OSX is a piece of ****.
Whenever I have to use it, I boot back to OS9. Anyone that tells you PS7 on OSX is decent is either lying, or in some sort of time warp.

|
|
"Another classic science-fiction show cancelled before its time" ~ Bender
15.2" PowerBook 1.25GHz, 80GB HD, 768MB RAM, SuperDrive
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South Detroit
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by 970:
Photoshop 7 classic is much faster than the PS 7 native app. Isn't this weird?
They both seem about the same to me on a new TiBook. Where are you noticing the difference the most? I think PS7 is nice and fast all the time actually, and I use it every day.
|

I love the U.S., but we need some time apart.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by mrtew:
They both seem about the same to me on a new TiBook. Where are you noticing the difference the most? I think PS7 is nice and fast all the time actually, and I use it every day.
The only thing that is bothering me the most is it took few seconds for the Effect window to come up.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Livermore, California
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Cipher13:
Photoshop 7 for OSX is a piece of ****.
Whenever I have to use it, I boot back to OS9. Anyone that tells you PS7 on OSX is decent is either lying, or in some sort of time warp.
What's so bad about it? I use it all the time for making webpages. It's fine to me.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Ambrosia - el Presidente
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Rochester, NY
Status:
Offline
|
|
Well, there are two main things at work here. First is perceived speed. Mac OS X's windows are buffered, and as such, it adds another copy step for anything that needs to be displayed in a window on screen. This makes the GUI in graphics-intensive apps feel slower. Do a timing test on, say, filters, and you won't see as much of a difference as the feel of Photoshop 7 would seem to warrant.
This is what Photoshop under Classic feels faster than the native version.
The other issue, which you'll only notice when running OS 9 (not Classic) is that OS 9's lack of pre-emptive multitasking allows Photoshop to hog the CPU, which it can't do under OS X.
I'm sure there is room for optimization, too, but your average app will be somewhat slower under Mac OS X than OS 9 -- because of the buffered windows.
Since it is likely that Adobe is using the same code under OS X as OS 9 (being a carbon app) one could also argue that Apple needs to address some of the speed issues, too...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Sep 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Scrolling is a joke in OS X, especially in Photoshop. Dragging layers is especially faster in 9, too. I agree, though, Apple and Adobe should address the issues. Both of them need to work on things; I certainly don't blame Adobe only. I'm sure Panther will ease many of my complaints, scrolling included.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by moki:
Since it is likely that Adobe is using the same code under OS X as OS 9 (being a carbon app)
The Classic version of Photoshop 7 is not a Carbon app.
Adobe had problems with the Carbon version under Mac OS 9, and they chose to make two versions - one 'real' Classic app and one Carbon app for Mac OS X.
|
|
JLL
- My opinions may have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Junior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by mrtew:
They both seem about the same to me on a new TiBook. Where are you noticing the difference the most? I think PS7 is nice and fast all the time actually, and I use it every day.
I work on an iMac DV G3 400 I got for $500. The difference is in everything about PS 7. It just is much faster in classic on my iMac. Looking forward to getting a TiBook 667 too, in maybe a year when they come down under $1000.
Originally posted by moki:
Well, there are two main things at work here. First is perceived speed. Mac OS X's windows are buffered, and as such, it adds another copy step for anything that needs to be displayed in a window on screen. This makes the GUI in graphics-intensive apps feel slower. Do a timing test on, say, filters, and you won't see as much of a difference as the feel of Photoshop 7 would seem to warrant.
This is what Photoshop under Classic feels faster than the native version.
I did run filters and they are faster. Even the Gaussian Blur is instant under classic, but in OS X g.blur is lagging. Copy Selection/New/Paste is way faster too. I think though you are correct about the buffered windows making it slower.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Forum Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Status:
Offline
|
|
i guess your perception of speed depends on what you're using photoshop for. It performs well for layouts, typography, filters,techie stuff, but boy, screen updating can really laaaag behind your wrist flicks if you're actually trying to hand draw stuff on a decent sized canvas.
that's why those filter speed bake offs were such a gip, sure 'their' altivec-ed but every thing else in PS runs just as fast on a similar mz G3 ( pretty sure i'm right about that, but if i'm not, correct me, it'll be a relief!)
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Bluebomber21XX:
What's so bad about it? I use it all the time for making webpages. It's fine to me.
GUI speed is shocking. It's disgraceful. And in a graphics app, that counts much more than rendering speed...
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Chicago
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Cipher13:
GUI speed is shocking. It's disgraceful. And in a graphics app, that counts much more than rendering speed...
PS7 blows for OS X. it used to make mad having to make webpages on my mac.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Hi I'm Ben:
PS7 blows for OS X. it used to make mad having to make webpages on my mac.
Indeed... hence using it in OS9.
I'd rather use 5.5 on the PC.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Senior User
Join Date: Oct 2001
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by Cipher13:
Indeed... hence using it in OS9.
I'd rather use 5.5 on the PC.
Actually I am using 5.0 on my iBook. Never saw the need to shove out cash for the update, plus another $200 for the ASN membership so I can recompile my plugins.
No way I'd pay all that for a program that'll be slower than what I have now.
|
Stink different.
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: May 2000
Location: San Jose, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hmmm. There's nothing slow about my Photoshop 7 on my TiBook with a Gig of Ram. I don't run a ton of filters though. I use it everyday too for Web, collateral, and tradeshow graphics.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: North Hollywood, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by stew:
Actually I am using 5.0 on my iBook. Never saw the need to shove out cash for the update, plus another $200 for the ASN membership so I can recompile my plugins.
No way I'd pay all that for a program that'll be slower than what I have now.
Ah, you're a basic Photoshop user?
PS 7.0 is absolutely necessary for professionals.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Boston
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally posted by craigthomas:
Hmmm. There's nothing slow about my Photoshop 7 on my TiBook with a Gig of Ram. I don't run a ton of filters though. I use it everyday too for Web, collateral, and tradeshow graphics.
i have to agree... my TiBook easily handles Photoshop 7 with 768 ram....my iBook choked when it tried to run PS7 on 600+mb of ram in OSX
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|

|
|
 |
Forum Rules
|
 |
 |
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
|