morgan@ooc.uva.nl (Chris Morgan/RIKS) (06/19/91)
Hi all, is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can almost count the characters of a window one by one as the OS builds it up. What I want to know is : Does this mean that the applications will also be running slower under system 7 than there were under system 6 ??? Thanks in advance, Chris Morgan morgan@riks.nl
JXY2@psuvm.psu.edu (Jie Yuan) (06/20/91)
In article <20835@slice.ooc.uva.nl>, morgan@ooc.uva.nl (Chris Morgan/RIKS) says: > >is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can > It seems that all operations are running slower under 7 than under 6xx. I have an LC. Jie
howie@triton.tamu.edu (MATT_K_HOWARD) (06/20/91)
In article <91170.133635JXY2@psuvm.psu.edu>, JXY2@psuvm.psu.edu (Jie Yuan) writes... >>is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can >It seems that all operations are running slower under 7 than under 6xx. I've been experimenting with 6.0.7 and 7.0 on my 5 Mb IIci looking for the setup which maximizes the performance as measured by MacSpeedo 2.5. I have a Micron Cache Card installed, and the 4 256K simms in bank A. I am using the onboard video. In brief, I've found that a cache setting of 384 K gives best performance. This setting pushes my system size over the 1 mb mark so applications are running in Bank B. MacSpeedo numbers are; CPU 7.91 - 8.03, Math 175 - 185 and disk 2.8 (105MB quantum). At this cache setting I obtained the same level of performance using either 6.0.7 or 7.0. I was supprised to find that running under b/w or 256 colors made no difference either. Furthermore, I found that none of my INITS/CDEVS (or EX/CP's if you prefer) made any difference either. Neither SuperClock or Omega-SaneFPU made any measurable difference. The cache card improved CPU and MATH numbers by 12 percent. Given that it cost about 8 percent of the CPU price, its a deal and ALL IIci users should own one. I can't address network printing. I haven't noticed any print slow down on my serial ImageWriter II, but I don't print on it alot. Matt
james@uts.EDU.AU (J Boswell) (06/20/91)
morgan@ooc.uva.nl (Chris Morgan/RIKS) writes: >Hi all, >is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can >almost count the characters of a window one by one as the OS builds it >up. Well I've had pretty bad response too. One thought for you though - have you got "calculate folder sizes' turned on in the Views control panel ? That and one of the other options, (forget which) is known to slow the Finder (tm) down considerably. James
jess@gn.ecn.purdue.edu (Jess M Holle) (06/21/91)
In article <91170.133635JXY2@psuvm.psu.edu> JXY2@psuvm.psu.edu (Jie Yuan) writes: >In article <20835@slice.ooc.uva.nl>, morgan@ooc.uva.nl (Chris Morgan/RIKS) says: >> >>is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can >> >It seems that all operations are running slower under 7 than under 6xx. >I have an LC. > >Jie I just saw System 7.0 on a Classic, and I did not notice any major slowness. This was with file sharing on, but no one "logged on." Jess Holle
picard@sbanet.UUCP (Donald Burr) (06/22/91)
In article <1007@utsmips.csd.uts.EDU.AU> james@uts.EDU.AU (J Boswell) writes: >morgan@ooc.uva.nl (Chris Morgan/RIKS) writes: > >>Hi all, > >>is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can >>almost count the characters of a window one by one as the OS builds it >>up. > >Well I've had pretty bad response too. One thought for you though - >have you got "calculate folder sizes' turned on in the Views control panel ? >That and one of the other options, (forget which) is known to slow the >Finder (tm) down considerably. > >James Another thing I've noticed is that file sharing majorly slows me down. When you first startup, it takes about 5-10 minutes (on my system) of continual disk access, and things just run more sluggishly. Another thing to watch for, is if you've got a custom size and/or font in the Views control panel that you're using for Finder views, if that font and size doesn't exist in Bitmap form, the OS images it from TrueType, and that can get really slow, depending on how complex of a font you're trying to image. If you really can't live without that particular font and size, then I sug- gest you use a program like Bitfont to make a bitmap of that size, and stick that in the System Folder. It saves mucho time. -- +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! Donald Burr, AKA Captain_Picard picard@sbanet.uucp, !...!sbanet!picard ! ! OTHER EMAIL ADDRESSES: dburr@ocf.berkeley.edu, 72540.3071@compuserve.com ! +--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
fratus@niaid.nih.gov (John Fratus) (06/27/91)
bobj@hpindwa.cup.hp.com (Bob Joslin) writes: >/ hpindwa:comp.sys.mac.apps / morgan@ooc.uva.nl (Chris Morgan/RIKS) / 2:41 am Jun 19, 1991 / >Hi all, >>is it just me or has everyone noticed that system 7.0 is very slow. I can >>almost count the characters of a window one by one as the OS builds it >>up. >Yes, it seems much slower to me. Did someone add pauses in the new >finder? And Hypercard 2.1 also seems much slower. FIND takes much >longer than it used to! >Maybe there are pauses put in on faster systems to make the Classics >seem fast? (A joke, I hope! :-) If you're running a ci or si with built-in video, System 7 is _much_ slower than System 6 if you don't raise the disk cache to fill up the first bank of memory. I haven't found a way wround this. Can others with these computers comment? - John (fratus@niaid.nih.gov)
kpottie@icarus.cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Pottie Karl) (06/27/91)
I don't know what you're all talking about. Except for a little slowdown in printing (probably truetype), system 7 at least *seems* to be faster than system 6. Startup is a *lot* faster (extentions load faster). I'm wondering if there are circumstances which cause system 7 to be slow, because I am very satisfied with system 7 (SE/30;5 Mb ram; 40 Mb Quantum; Deskwriter). Karl
bgl6000@zeus.tamu.edu (LEMOINE, BRETT GAVIN) (06/28/91)
I've been seeing many comments saying that system 7 has slowed processing down.
Could some of it be from loading incompatable Inits? After I downloaded sys 7
from apple, my Plus (4/80) seemed to get even slower (yes, I know it's slow
accelerator and a SANE patch. But my plus didn't move this fast with NO
inits pre sys 7. Say what you will... I'm glad sys 7 is here.
}-IvArch-> bgl6000@zeus.tamu.edu steve@violet.berkeley.edu (Steve Goldfield;232HMB;3-6292;;MF62) (06/28/91)
In article <4166@n-kulcs.cs.kuleuven.ac.be> kpottie@icarus.cs.kuleuven.ac.be (Pottie Karl) writes:
#>I don't know what you're all talking about. Except for a little
#>slowdown in printing (probably truetype), system 7 at least *seems* to
#>be faster than system 6. Startup is a *lot* faster (extentions
#>load faster).
#>I'm wondering if there are circumstances which cause system 7 to be
#>slow, because I am very satisfied with system 7 (SE/30;5 Mb ram;
#>40 Mb Quantum; Deskwriter).
#>
#>Karl
I am told that the slowness in printing is caused by the fact
that system 7 sends the complete laser prep file each time it
prints. It does so reportedly to avoid future compatibility
problems as new version come out.
Steve Goldfieldmiyazaki@taichung (Takeshi Miyazaki) (06/28/91)
I also feel my MacKermit is slow under 7.0 It doesn't seem to use TrueType, so I don't know why. Takeshi Miyazaki miyazaki@ee.princeton.edu