[JoshuaZ]

The real reason people will buy Vista.

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

Who cares if it's not shipping yet? Everything that's been discussed about it so far already points to it being way ahead of OS X's system.

Which OS X system are you talking about. Vista should really be compared to Leopard. How much do you know about Leopard?

Chris

[smacintush]

Vista has already changed the way people think. Usually it's just the MS shills that are drooling all over MS products that haven't been released yet and comparing them to Apples technology which was and is years ahead of MS's current best offerings.

Now we have Mac users doing the same thing.

Anyone remember when XP was in beta? There was a lot of talk then too in the PC world about how cool it was and how Apple should truly be worried. What the reality was that "XP is better but MS still blows".

As another said, the proof is in the pudding, and I would add that graphics technology means precisely dick if what you do with it is crap, and MS interfaces are traditionally crap.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

Who cares if it's not shipping yet? Everything that's been discussed about it so far already points to it being way ahead of OS X's system. It's not like there aren't betas floating around everywhere you look, either.

As for you, Tetenal ... denial is a powerful tool. Does Steve's reality-distortion field have you in its grip?

Tomchu you keep making these statements with no facts.

JUST "BECAUSE I SAID SO"

And by the time VISTA DOES GET HERE. 10.5 will be here.

And the gui is being re-done.

So by the time VISTA actually ships in it's FULL form. It will be again behind the times.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

Everything that's been discussed about it so far already points to it being way ahead of OS X's system.

Like what? When Avalon is so great, why can't you name what is so great about it? In your own words tell us a few things it does better than Quartz.

So far you came up with widgets definitions in XML – which isn't a graphics feature at all – and window compositing with alpha channels - which OS X did in Public Beta and DP4 6 years ago. So that doesn't count.

So I ask you again, what makes it being so far ahead of Quartz? When it's so great it shouldn't be so hard to tell us.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Tomchu

Who cares if it's not shipping yet? Everything that's been discussed about it so far already points to it being way ahead of OS X's system. It's not like there aren't betas floating around everywhere you look, either.

As for you, Tetenal ... denial is a powerful tool. Does Steve's reality-distortion field have you in its grip?

Well, at least I don't see what is `lightyears ahead' of Quartz. Can you post a link where the graphics engine and the new UI (Avalon and Aero as opposed to Quartz and Aqua) is discussed?

[Kerrigan]

Originally Posted by Kevin

And by the time VISTA DOES GET HERE. 10.5 will be here.

And the gui is being re-done.

Is that true? Aqua is being replaced?

[Kevin]

Go look up at the link I posted to Ambush

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Is that true? Aqua is being replaced?

I think Kevin overreached with that statement. At this point, we know absolutely nothing about Leopard.

Chris

[Kevin]

We will see.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by Kerrigan

Is that true? Aqua is being replaced?

Aqua ≠ Quartz. Avalon ≠ Aero. Even if Aqua were to be replaced (instead of evolved), the new `UI Theme' (for the lack of a better word) could still be based on Quartz

[Kevin]

Right.. I don't think Quartz will be replaced. I think the LOOK of OS X will be. Probably the workings as well. The layout and such.

Probably a lot like the spotlight open window IMHO.

[theolein]

As is usual on this board, there are loads of people who have little or no idea about what they are talking. The XML UI description language in Vista is very comrehensive and can run in or outside of a browser, IE only of course, but there's even a plug in for Safari (crippled as was WMP for Mac). It makes designing a new UI a lot easier and more powerful than what can be done on the Mac (NIB files are propietry, Apple has never released their specs), and Microsoft is releasing graphical tools to design UI's that are 100% vector based. This is a bit further than what Quartz Extreme can do since QE renders 2D controls as textures in OpenGL, but that's all. There are no easily available handles or hooks in QE today to easily do user defined 3D effects such as in that demo.

Now, whether those effects are useful is another question. I sort of doubt any professional medical database designer is going to use 3D effects like in that demo. He's probably lose his job, because no one would be able to use it or would find it difficult to use at least.

I have to say that Vista WILL have a lot of very impressive features and will be better than OSX in some matters, exactly the same in others (the areas where they copied OSX features, such as iSync and spotlight), and worse in others. For Microsoft it's only important that they stop losing users to OSX, and Vista will definitely be seen as good enough by lots of people. The real test will come in the security area, whether or not Vista is just a load of gimmicks or whether security really is better, deep down. I think it will be a mixed bag. I don't think the entire user base is going to switch overnight as many will obviously still be using XP (and 2k and Win98 for that matter), but it will probably be very close to OSX or slightly better.

And I think it's fantastic. It gives Apple impetus to compete and make 10.5 a REALLY good release. I don't see why so many here panic everytime someone says something good about a Microsoft product.

[Kevin]

I would say it didn't really matter what it can DO. What MS DOES do with it will probably suck. Seeing the history of MS's GUI design and "rules" or lack of them.

But then again. Apple hasn't been the best at consistency either.

My only guess is they are trying different ones out for later usage.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Well, at least I don't see what is `lightyears ahead' of Quartz. Can you post a link where the graphics engine and the new UI (Avalon and Aero as opposed to Quartz and Aqua) is discussed?

I talked about one example at the end of page 1.

[Kevin]

On paper maybe. XP was supposed to be light years ahead of OS X too.

It didn't live up to it's hype. Nothing MS does ever seems to.

But I will wait till it actually comes out. And compare it to OS X at the time.

MS has nothing to really fairly compare it to. They have no idea what Apple is up to. For good reason.

They are just attempting to play catch up now. They have been the past 6 years.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by theolein

Now, whether those effects are useful is another question. I sort of doubt any professional medical database designer is going to use 3D effects like in that demo. He's probably lose his job, because no one would be able to use it or would find it difficult to use at least.

This is also very true.

Personally I think the integration of DirectX is very nice and clean compared to OS X's integration of OpenGL, but the examples Microsoft gives are a little useless. That said, there are still probably many other areas where such things are useful, but not for displaying 2D graphs.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

MS has nothing to really fairly compare it to. They have no idea what Apple is up to. For good reason.

They are just attempting to play catch up now. They have been the past 6 years.

Honestly Tiger was an attempt to catch up with Vista. Microsoft releases a beta of Vista running Avalon and WinFS. Now suddenly we have Apple announcing Spotlight and Quartz Extreme 2D. Spotlight beat WinFS to market but WinFS is still superior. Apple promised Quartz Extreme 2D in Tiger and it never really arrived (yes I know you can enable it, no it's still buggy and incomplete). Apple has been the one playing catch up, and they still haven't caught up to Vista in these two areas. Microsoft released these features into beta, and then Apple releases one half-a$$ed implementation of one and a broken implementation of another. Microsoft didn't copy us. Apple copied them. And then accused Microsoft of copying them.

I don't like Windows for plenty of reasons, but that doesn't mean I always have to be blinded by the RDF.

[Kevin]

And it's a clever way to get people to stop using Firefox. Or am I incorrect in the assumption that it will only work "right" in IE?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by goMac

Honestly Tiger was an attempt to catch up with Vista.

Actually it wasn't. Such features were being worked on before Vista's announcement of said features.

Microsoft releases a beta of Vista running Avalon and WinFS. Now suddenly we have Apple announcing Spotlight and Quartz Extreme 2D. Spotlight beat WinFS to market but WinFS is still superior. Apple promised Quartz Extreme 2D in Tiger and it never really arrived (yes I know you can enable it, no it's still buggy and incomplete). Apple has been the one playing catch up, and they still haven't caught up to Vista in these two areas. Microsoft released these features into beta, and then Apple releases one half-a$$ed implementation of one and a broken implementation of another. Microsoft didn't copy us. Apple copied them. And then accused Microsoft of copying them.

I don't like Windows for plenty of reasons, but that doesn't mean I always have to be blinded by the RDF.

AHAHHA VISTA IS STILL BETA!!1

How many people do you know that has a beta of 10.5?

10.4 was what Apple was working on many years ago. 10.5 has been in the works for a long time.

Sorry, It's a known fact MS has been trying to play catch up.

And how many of these "Finished" features will actually make it into the 1st release?

They keep dropping every month.

MS is KING of promising GREAT COOL features in the beta stages, even having them implemented in said stages in a crud way.

But somehow they never make it in the release. And they always claim it will be in FUTURE releases. But it never does, but MS then REDOES it's whole concept!

It's been going on for well over 20 years. And the Windriods eat it up every time.

I call it being "Coplanded"

Which MS ALSO copied off of Apple.

Longhorn/Vista etc is MSs Copland. The difference? They have more money to throw at it. It's still as big of a mess. And still lots of vapor.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

And it's a clever way to get people to stop using Firefox. Or am I incorrect in the assumption that it will only work "right" in IE?

Ummmmm.... Avalon will work with everything.

.Net forms is an open spec and can be implemented in anything. The Mono project implements it on Linux and OS X(?).

It's XML. Therefore it's open. Whether Firefox wants to implement it or not is their choice.

[Kevin]

goMac again, looks good on paper. MS wont say otherwise. But will do other things to sabotage it.

You do realize this right? They haven't "changed"

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Actually it wasn't. Such features were being worked on before Vista's announcement of said features.

And you know this how?

Originally Posted by Kevin

AHAHHA VISTA IS STILL BETA!!1

How many people do you know that has a beta of 10.5?

10.4 was what Apple was working on many years ago. 10.5 has been in the works for a long time.

Sorry, It's a known fact MS has been trying to play catch up.

And how many of these "Finished" features will actually make it into the 1st release?

They keep dropping every month.

10.4 was what Apple was working on many years ago? 10.5 has been in the works for a long time? Do you have a direct line to god who told you these things or something? Usually when you develop software you work on releases in order. Not to mention, Apple didn't even finish 10.4 on time as they had to drop features.

Longhorn is already in the final betas. I think any feature we see in Longhorn now is going to ship with it.

[iomatic]

DirectX is, I believe, proprietary, yes?

So: if Microsoft insists on using a flavor of standard XML to output graphics descriptors, only to be used by proprietary-Windows-only DirectX—that's hardly open, is it? Or am I misreading? Thoughts?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by iomatic

DirectX is, I believe, proprietary, yes?

So: if Microsoft insists on using a flavor of standard XML to output graphics descriptors, only to be used by proprietary-Windows-only DirectX—that's hardly open, is it? Or am I misreading? Thoughts?

MS would NEVER DO THAT!

It's sad when one has to compare an OS that isn't out yet, with one that has been for over a year.

I'd love to see what Apple has up it sleeve. Too bad they can't show us because MS are full of thieving magpies!

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by theolein

As is usual on this board, there are loads of people who have little or no idea about what they are talking.

I have been asking questions about Avalon and what's supposedly so great about it.

Originally Posted by theolein

The XML UI description language in Vista is very comrehensive

So? Is this a graphics feature? No, it isn't. Who cares how the UI is described? Carbon-Nibs are XML as well. Firefox also uses an XML UI description and runs fine on Macs. Nothing there that isn't here.

Originally Posted by theolein

and can run in or outside of a browser

Which by the way turned out to be Firefox' most serious security problem.

Originally Posted by theolein

Microsoft is releasing graphical tools to design UI's that are 100% vector based.

Nibs are "100% vector based". The groundwork for resolution independence is seeded in Tiger and if you want to you can design all the graphics in your application in (vector based) PDFs today. While it's not known whether 10.5 will reach full resolution independence, Quartz has been designed to be resolution independent right from the beginning.

Originally Posted by theolein

There are no easily available handles or hooks in QE today to easily do user defined 3D effects such as in that demo.

You think that because you didn't look at Tiger's Quartz Composer (not Quartz Compositor, Quartz Composer). You can do everything that was shown in the original video with zero lines of code on Mac OS X Tiger today.

Originally Posted by theolein

I have to say that Vista WILL have a lot of very impressive features and will be better than OSX in some matters, exactly the same in others (the areas where they copied OSX features, such as iSync and spotlight), and worse in others.

Sure Vista will have parts that are better than OS X and sometimes probably impressively so. However for Avalon, I haven't seen yet anything that I haven't seen already on OS X running today.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by goMac

I talked about one example at the end of page 1.

And you were wrong there. Quartz Extreme does window compositing using the GPU.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

And you were wrong there. Quartz Extreme does window compositing using the GPU.

No, it doesn't. Each window is composited on the CPU as a bitmap, and then sent to the GPU. Quartz Extreme 2D sends every widget over as a texture, and then the windows themselves composite on the GPU. Ars has a whole article about this.

This is why OpenGL and Quartz Composer compositing are at best, flaky.

[Millennium]

Originally Posted by goMac

Spotlight beat WinFS to market but WinFS is still superior.

Exactly how?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Millennium

Exactly how?

WinFS is implemented at a file system level. Spotlight is not.

To be fair, Microsoft has already released Spotlight for Windows XP, Microsoft Desktop Search. It stacks onto NTFS like Spotlight and doesn't actually implement WinFS.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by goMac

Quartz Extreme 2D sends every widget over as a texture, and then the windows themselves composite on the GPU.

That's not quite correct. Q2DX has still one window buffer like there is today, but it is doing the drawing using the GPU. The drawing is not done by the CPU in per widget buffer and then composited by the GPU as you describe it. Unless it would be extremely expensive to draw some widget that would be very slow since you would transfer a buffer per widget to the GPU (while today you are just transferring a single completely composited window buffer).

Avalon does hardware accelerated 2D drawing using DirectX. Q2DX does hardware accelerated 2D drawing using OpenGL. Both are currently in beta. Remains to be seen who beats who to market.

[production_coordinator]

Originally Posted by goMac

Honestly Tiger was an attempt to catch up with Vista. Microsoft releases a beta of Vista running Avalon and WinFS. Now suddenly we have Apple announcing Spotlight and Quartz Extreme 2D. Spotlight beat WinFS to market but WinFS is still superior. Apple promised Quartz Extreme 2D in Tiger and it never really arrived (yes I know you can enable it, no it's still buggy and incomplete). Apple has been the one playing catch up, and they still haven't caught up to Vista in these two areas. Microsoft released these features into beta, and then Apple releases one half-a$$ed implementation of one and a broken implementation of another. Microsoft didn't copy us. Apple copied them. And then accused Microsoft of copying them.

I don't like Windows for plenty of reasons, but that doesn't mean I always have to be blinded by the RDF.

IMHO, your logic is seriously flawed. Spotlight and WinFS are both "next steps" for filesystems. Nobody is playing catchup... they all are racing for the same thing... Apple was able to implement it...

I also find it funny that ANYONE would believe that a shipping product is catching up to a beta.

[Kevin]

Yeah goMac has been drinking a bit too much from the MS punchbowl.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by goMac

I talked about one example at the end of page 1.

Yes, I know, the OpenGL-and-Quartz issue. Which is not a big deal for standard applications.
And still no links about the subject.

Originally Posted by goMac

Honestly Tiger was an attempt to catch up with Vista. Microsoft releases a beta of Vista running Avalon and WinFS. Now suddenly we have Apple announcing Spotlight and Quartz Extreme 2D. Spotlight beat WinFS to market but WinFS is still superior. Apple promised Quartz Extreme 2D in Tiger and it never really arrived (yes I know you can enable it, no it's still buggy and incomplete). Apple has been the one playing catch up, and they still haven't caught up to Vista in these two areas. Microsoft released these features into beta, and then Apple releases one half-a$$ed implementation of one and a broken implementation of another. Microsoft didn't copy us. Apple copied them. And then accused Microsoft of copying them.

I don't like Windows for plenty of reasons, but that doesn't mean I always have to be blinded by the RDF.

Well, Tiger was released in April 2005, that's at least one year and a half before you can buy anything from MS. While Microsoft announced something that went Beta in Q4 2005, Apple was already shipping a product. I don't see how this is catching up exactly.

WinFS will not be released as part of Vista, that should be a sign that it's simply not ready yet and won't be for at least another year.

If you want to compare that to Apple, then you should compare it to the OS that is shipping at the moment of the release (which seems to be 10.5). That is what Vista has to measure up to. (It's amusing that people like Paul Thurrot compare Tiger to an OS that's not even shipping. I would advise you to read them, they are quite informative. To simply claim how much more advanced it is is subscribing to marketing hype.)

Point is that Aero, the GUI on top of Avalon, is not groundbreaking and criticized for many of the things Apple was criticized for (too much use of transparencies, etc.). I have not heard of an equivalent to CoreVideo, CoreAudio and CoreImage on Windows. Although I would be interested if Avalon was capable of such things. It seems to me that one of the most important features which is mentioned in many articles about Vista is the possibility to switch off that new UI for a Win 2k-like interface

[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

That's not quite correct. Q2DX has still one window buffer like there is today, but it is doing the drawing using the GPU. The drawing is not done by the CPU in per widget buffer and then composited by the GPU as you describe it. Unless it would be extremely expensive to draw some widget that would be very slow since you would transfer a buffer per widget to the GPU (while today you are just transferring a single completely composited window buffer).

Avalon does hardware accelerated 2D drawing using DirectX. Q2DX does hardware accelerated 2D drawing using OpenGL. Both are currently in beta. Remains to be seen who beats who to market.

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14

"A huge number of common drawing operations fit this "upload, cache, and reference" mold. For example, nearly every user interface element in Mac OS X is a bitmap: buttons, checkboxes, window widgets, window background textures, etc. The first time these UI elements are drawn, the bitmap graphics are uploaded to the video card and cached in VRAM. All subsequent UI widget drawing commands can then execute as fast as possible, pulling bitmaps from the VRAM cache as needed."

This is what I've been saying this whole time.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by goMac

WinFS is implemented at a file system level. Spotlight is not.

Eeeeh, nope. Not any more.
Apparently it was too difficult to implement. Now WinFS is implemented on top of the filesystem as well. It's strange, but that decision was made in 2003 already

To quote the relevant passage.

"The oft-misunderstood Windows Future Storage (WinFS), which will include technology from the 'Yukon' release of SQL Server, is not a file system, Mark Myers told me. Instead, WinFS is a service that runs on top of--and requires--NTFS. 'WinFS sits on top of NTFS,' he said. 'It sits on top of the file system. NTFS will be a requirement.'"

Originally Posted by goMac

To be fair, Microsoft has already released Spotlight for Windows XP, Microsoft Desktop Search. It stacks onto NTFS like Spotlight and doesn't actually implement WinFS.

True. You can also use Google's Desktop to achieve a similar thing

[goMac]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Yes, I know, the OpenGL-and-Quartz issue. Which is not a big deal for standard applications.
And still no links about the subject.

Well, Tiger was released in April 2005, that's at least one year and a half before you can buy anything from MS. While Microsoft announced something that went Beta in Q4 2005, Apple was already shipping a product. I don't see how this is catching up exactly.

WinFS will not be released as part of Vista, that should be a sign that it's simply not ready yet and won't be for at least another year.

If you want to compare that to Apple, then you should compare it to the OS that is shipping at the moment of the release (which seems to be 10.5). That is what Vista has to measure up to. (It's amusing that people like Paul Thurrot compare Tiger to an OS that's not even shipping. I would advise you to read them, they are quite informative. To simply claim how much more advanced it is is subscribing to marketing hype.)

Point is that Aero, the GUI on top of Avalon, is not groundbreaking and criticized for many of the things Apple was criticized for (too much use of transparencies, etc.). I have not heard of an equivalent to CoreVideo, CoreAudio and CoreImage on Windows. Although I would be interested if Avalon was capable of such things. It seems to me that one of the most important features which is mentioned in many articles about Vista is the possibility to switch off that new UI for a Win 2k-like interface

Ahhh.... but OpenGL DOES come into play in other things. Notice how in Avalon the user was able to drag the DirectX view cleanly? Under OS X at best this would be a messy hack. Ever try layering buttons over a Quartz Composer view? This will usually kernel panic the OS, at least when I've tried it. Try minimizing a QuickTime window to the dock, at least on my machine (I've reinstalled Tiger a few times too) it will freeze that QuickTime menu. Why? Because QuickTime now renders via OpenGL, which can't composite correctly with the genie effect or the dock. If all the widgets on a window were composited with Quartz 2D Extreme, this wouldn't be a problem, and the minimized window would be composited along with it's OpenGL view at the same time.

The reason you don't see these sort of things under OS X right now is because they either cause drawing glitches or for some reason can panic the machine.

The GUI on top of Avalon isn't all that great. However, Avalon itself is pretty damn cool. Apple could do a lot of good things if they had a WM like Avalon.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

Eeeeh, nope. Not any more.
Apparently it was too difficult to implement. Now WinFS is implemented on top of the filesystem as well. It's strange, but that decision was made in 2003 already

To quote the relevant passage.


True. You can also use Google's Desktop to achieve a similar thing

Ahhh. Did not know that. Last I heard only searching WinFS shares over the network was killed.

Well, at least we know WinFS is finished then as it's already out as Windows Desktop Search.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by goMac

Ahhh.... but OpenGL DOES come into play in other things. Notice how in Avalon the user was able to drag the DirectX view cleanly? Under OS X at best this would be a messy hack. Ever try layering buttons over a Quartz Composer view? This will usually kernel panic the OS, at least when I've tried it. Try minimizing a QuickTime window to the dock, at least on my machine (I've reinstalled Tiger a few times too) it will freeze that QuickTime menu. Why? Because QuickTime now renders via OpenGL, which can't composite correctly with the genie effect or the dock. If all the widgets on a window were composited with Quartz 2D Extreme, this wouldn't be a problem, and the minimized window would be composited along with it's OpenGL view at the same time.

The reason you don't see these sort of things under OS X right now is because they either cause drawing glitches or for some reason can panic the machine.

The GUI on top of Avalon isn't all that great. However, Avalon itself is pretty damn cool. Apple could do a lot of good things if they had a WM like Avalon.

This sounds more like a problem of implementation rather than an architecture which is behind Avalon. Again, I would stress to compare Vista to what Apple has to offer when it is released.

PS Minimizing a QuickTime movie (in slow-mo) works flawlessly for me.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by goMac

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14

I'm aware that images are kept in VRAM with Q2DX. That doesn't mean that there is a buffer per widget. That would be a waste.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by OreoCookie

PS Minimizing a QuickTime movie (in slow-mo) works flawlessly for me.

Yes, I tried it. The movie continues playing during the genie effect.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

I'm aware that images are kept in VRAM with Q2DX. That doesn't mean that there is a buffer per widget. That would be a waste.

Right, they're all rendered into a single buffer. But each widget is kept as a texture in VRAM.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Yes, I tried it. The movie continues playing during the genie effect.

Not here. Powerbook G4 1.25. Minimize a movie to the dock and the minimized window just locks up and won't maximize. The OS has been reinstalled a few times due to a failed drive.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by goMac

Right, they're all rendered into a single buffer. But each widget is kept as a texture in VRAM.

No, it's not. Images may be buffered in VRAM, but not each widget. Imagine you have a window with 100 checkboxes. Why would you want to keep 100 buffers in VRAM, when you are drawing 100 times the same image?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

No, it's not. Images may be buffered in VRAM, but not each widget. Imagine you have a window with 100 checkboxes. Why would you want to keep 100 buffers in VRAM, when you are drawing 100 times the same image?

Because the widgets are cached?

This is all explained in the article.

[goMac]

FYI:

http://www.macintouch.com/readerrepo...topic2888.html

"Justin
I've got three computers running Tiger, with QuickTime 7 Pro (two are Dual 2.5GHz G5s, the other a 20" iMac G5).
If I minimize a movie into the dock... I cannot maximize it again! The icon just stis there in the dock, and no amount of clicking will get it to maximize. The only way to get it to maximize is to go back to the Finder, and reopen the file - then it maximizes.
Seems fully reproducible - at least it was on three of the machines I have here!"

Dunno why you guys don't have this bug.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by goMac

Because the widgets are cached?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

"A huge number of common drawing operations fit this "upload, cache, and reference" mold. For example, nearly every user interface element in Mac OS X is a bitmap: buttons, checkboxes, window widgets, window background textures, etc. The first time these UI elements are drawn, the bitmap graphics are uploaded to the video card and cached in VRAM. All subsequent UI widget drawing commands can then execute as fast as possible, pulling bitmaps from the VRAM cache as needed."

Please explain to me why Quartz 2D Extreme would be sending the bitmaps for each widget to VRAM if they weren't being composited on the card. OpenGL is using each widget as a texture and then drawing it properly in place. They are all drawn into the window's buffer, and the buffer is then flushed.

Under the current Quartz Modal, the window is composited on the CPU. All the UI elements are combined into a single texture on CPU, creating a texture for the window. That texture is then loaded into VRAM, composited onto a window, and the window's buffer is flushed. This is quite a bit different than Quartz 2D Extreme.

The problem with Quartz 2D Extreme is because the window is composited together along with any OpenGL content on the window this led to performance declines. A QuickTime movie would only play as fast as it's window could be put together, instead of the QuickTime movie simply being layered on top of the window. Also with all the extra use of the GPU CoreImage performance suffered. But in generally it made the UI much snappier.

[OreoCookie]

Originally Posted by goMac

Not here. Powerbook G4 1.25. Minimize a movie to the dock and the minimized window just locks up and won't maximize. The OS has been reinstalled a few times due to a failed drive.

I have the same PowerBook … (1.25 GHz AlBook).

[theolein]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

I have been asking questions about Avalon and what's supposedly so great about it.So? Is this a graphics feature? No, it isn't. Who cares how the UI is described? Carbon-Nibs are XML as well. Firefox also uses an XML UI description and runs fine on Macs. Nothing there that isn't here.Which by the way turned out to be Firefox' most serious security problem.Nibs are "100% vector based". The groundwork for resolution independence is seeded in Tiger and if you want to you can design all the graphics in your application in (vector based) PDFs today. While it's not known whether 10.5 will reach full resolution independence, Quartz has been designed to be resolution independent right from the beginning.You think that because you didn't look at Tiger's Quartz Composer (not Quartz Compositor, Quartz Composer). You can do everything that was shown in the original video with zero lines of code on Mac OS X Tiger today.Sure Vista will have parts that are better than OS X and sometimes probably impressively so. However for Avalon, I haven't seen yet anything that I haven't seen already on OS X running today.

You should take a look at the video of the sparkle tool for UI design on Channel9 ( http://channel9.msdn.com/showpost.aspx?postid=115387 ). The WPF is very good, and you really can do things there that are not easily possible now with Quartz (It's not because of the XML, but because of the engine). However, GoMac is flamebaiting you because you fall for it so easily. Windows Vista will be good and it will have certain features that OSX doesn't. How important or useful those features are (such as the 3D GUI stuff) is another question.

I'm no fan of Microsoft. I wish I didn't have to worry about Windows, but I do, as Microsoft is still very popular in the enterprise and that won't change in a hurry.