[graphics84]

ok, I love how X looks but I only have a PB 300 /128MB... I want to save up for a PB G4 and still beable to use this untill then...

what do you guys think? or do you think any of the updates will give older G3's speed improvements?

[Scott_H]

A "visualy simplified OS X"? No chance at all. I'm still not convinced that all of OS X speed problems can be blamed on Quartz. I still think there's more going on there.

[This message has been edited by Scott_H (edited 05-21-2001).]

[RichardET]

I agree with you. The seti test client is much faster than the darwin text client. There has to be design flaws in the kernel.

Originally posted by Scott_H:
A "visualy simplified OS X"? No chance at all. I'm still not convinced that all of OS X speed problems can be blamed on Quartz. I still think there's more going on there.

[This message has been edited by Scott_H (edited 05-21-2001).]

[Lord Kronos]

Originally posted by RichardET:
[...] There has to be design flaws in the kernel.

Can you prove it ? SETI is not a reliable benchmark.

------------------
"Sing you fools ! But you got it wrong..."

[RichardET]

I meant the seti text client in linux as compared to the darwin version!

[RichardET]

Originally posted by Lord Kronos:
Can you prove it ? SETI is not a reliable benchmark.

I can't "prove" it to you, but my average time is shrinking.

[Lord Kronos]

I know . But it doesn't mean that Darwin is slow, buggy or anything. SETI developers don't consider optimization as an option, I still don't understand why, their explanation isn't good enough. So, it runs better on Linux because it runs better on Linux, but not because Linux is better than Darwin.

------------------
"Sing you fools ! But you got it wrong..."

[This message has been edited by Lord Kronos (edited 05-21-2001).]

[RichardET]

Originally posted by Lord Kronos:
I know . But it doesn't mean that Darwin is slow, buggy or anything. SETI developers don't consider optimization as an option, I still don't understand why, their explanation isn't good enough. So, it runs better on Linux because it runs better on Linux, but not because Linux is better than Darwin.

Something is different with respect to the developer tools in OSX over linux. A simple twin primes I have compiles flawlessly on linux and won't
on OSX. Funny how that is, since they both a GNU compilers.

[edddeduck]

From memory I remember reading that the linux kernel does alot less memory check to improve speed this damages the stability and memory management.

Basically the linux core is designed for speed...

Darwin is designed for memory management and stability.

btw the kernel panics is due to the extra stuff tweaked by apple and not yet fixed.

Darwin is far more than BSD and mach kernel.

Its based on the above mut alot of the kernel was rewritten as with the bsd section....


Also the darwin version is no optimized very well at all.....

This is all my opinion and my knowledge gained from reading around no more than that....

------------------
450DP/448MB/80GB/Rage/Apple 17"/Zip250/ZipCD/Epson740

ICQ 60617180

I Took The Red Pill

[Craig R. Arko]

Re: Seti@home

Don't they say to renice it to 19 in the install docs? But if renice doesn't work because of the (known) scheduler bug in Darwin that would account for this.

It might account for some of the other speed issues too...