Improve OS X performance by tweaking appearance

Hi Guys,

I was wondering if OS X has an option to tweak appearance (skinning) so that it resources are dedicated to performance rather than appearance: e.g. animations, smooth borders of windows, etc.

In linux one could choose a resource efficient skin as switch off compositing ("compiz"); is there a similar tweak in OSX?

In Vista, one can do this in advanced performance settings (defaults to Windows Classic Appearance).

Just curious...

PS: I still saving up for my first Mac...

 

I know you can disable reflections on the dock and change AA settings. Most of the Macs out will run OS X really nicely, though.

 

yeh as OSX is built for macs

 

I don't know why you would want to do this. OS X runs blazing fast on todays hardware. Switching off the dock reflections isn't going to do much of anything, besides personal cosmetic tastes. You wouldn't buy a diamond and then "unpolish" it.

 

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe that OS X use openGL for its user interface, therefore of set the CPU power. As a result, it doesn't affect the notebook performance unlike Vista. In Vista, the UI actually slowed down the system.

 

Yes, in OS X the entire user interface is accelerated by Quartz Extreme and therefore by the graphics card. It's been this way since 10.2 Jaguar (before SP1 for Windows XP was released). Lowering the UI would only save graphics card usage, but the GPU would be sitting idle anyways so it's not like you gain anything. All animations are GPU accelerated, and many applications use Core Video or Core Image libraries for image and video display and both are GPU accelerated as well. In fact, all this talk about GPGPU and doing processing on the GPU, Apple has already applied this for a while for things like image processing in Aperture and I presume iPhoto as well.

Vista's Aero is supposed to be GPU accelerated too, but it's not as well optimized as Quartz Extreme seeing Apple has had 6 years with this. As well, Quartz Extreme was designed to run on a Geforce2 MX or basically DirectX 7 level hardware while Aero requires DirectX 9 level hardware.

 

I don't think that was a valid comparison. If you tune down the appearance settings the hardwares resources can be used elsewhere. Which is a very reasonable option.

 

Windows dump files all over the hard drive therefore you will require defragging Mac OS doesn't do it that way. Nor does it requires tweaking like PC's does. For almost 20 years now Micrsoft still has no ideas how to manage memories like a Mac could. Pc will die after using multiple applications whereas a Mac thrives on performance and stability.

This is where Mac OS leaves Windows for dead eventhough i am a windows lover i must admit PC users have been had for so many years with sub standard operating systems by Microsoft.

Once you go Mac you won't go back - of course there are exceptions you need autocad2009 or playing games that are only available for Microsoft.

PS: I rubbish Microcrap from very own personal experience. I thought mac was for old people only and stuck with Micrsoft for 20 years believing MAC was Crap. I have recentlu bought a Macbook pro for my eight year old daughter and an iMac for my wife (the wife insisted on a MAC of some kind). Once we have played with the Mac my eyes nearly popped out of my head, I've just now realised I have been had or conned by Microsoft for almost 20 years because of my ignorance.

I am now a true Mac and I wont got back unless i need to use my AutoCad2009 or playing games on a PC.

OSX is not Windows

 

things makes sense; so, by inference, getting a Mac with dedicated graphics is better than one with integrated graphics, performance wise??

 

Obviously you haven't used anything before OS X.......
OS X is a new unix-like OS, completely different.
Compatibility is achieved through a Mac OS "Classic" VM.

 

For the basic stuff done by the UI you aren't really limited by the GMA X3100. The effects aren't that complicated, animations are generally brief, and since the UI is such a critical part of the user experience it's all heavily optimized. So I doubt you'll see major improvement in your desktop experience by moving to discrete graphics.

It's only noticable if you use programs that make heavy use of Core Image such as Aperture. Even scrubbing through Cover Flow with all it's reflections, you'll more likely be limited by your hard drive trying to bring up the file for previews than by the IGP generating the reflection.