Apple's Attention To Graphics

I am seeing that Apple seems to really put a lot into designing graphics. I like the graphics but my question is this. Does all this intense design bring down performance? If not why doesn't windows design like Apple?

Well, Apple has the advantage of knowing the specs for the Hardware that the OS will be running on-- they don't have to design as much general support as MS does. If they are comming out with new enhancements or major upgrades for the OS they can test it on pretty much all the combinations of hardware that it could possibly be used on. With windows there are different motherboards, different chipsets on those motherboards, different graphics cards, etc, etc. Plus all of the old hardware and the new hardware that hasn't seen the light of day yet. Not to mention developers of both hardware and software that don't stick to standards (like MS itself :bomb: ), so that various things end up conflicting. That means more development time and more beta testing. Makes it quite a bit more difficult to throw in all the nice little features that Apple can throw in.

so mac's performance remains high even with all the intense graphics?

Verrminator said:

so mac's performance remains high even with all the intense graphics?

Click to expand...

Not as high as it could be without them, but still high, I wouldn't worry about it.

From what I've seen yes (though I'm fairly new to the current iterations of Apple hardware and software).

The Mini I just bought (with fairly low specs compared to the latest and greatest stuff) and the old iMac G3 I have seem able to handle graphics nicely even though the technology so far as processor speed and the GPUs in each are a bit dated when compared to what you'll need in the PC world.

Verrminator said:

I am seeing that Apple seems to really put a lot into designing graphics. I like the graphics but my question is this. Does all this intense design bring down performance? If not why doesn't windows design like Apple?

Click to expand...

I don't really think OS X is significantly more "graphically intense" than, say, Windows XP. It has a different (and in my opinion, much more pleasing) look, but nothing bloated or extreme.

As an example of how efficient OS X actually is, simply look at the older machines that are running it. Many people, including myself, run the latest version of OS X on Macs that are upwards of 7 years old, without any problems. If one were to try running Windows XP on a 7 year old PC, the results would no doubt be far less positive.

Padawan said:

I don't really think OS X is significantly more "graphically intense" than, say, Windows XP. It has a different (and in my opinion, much more pleasing) look, but nothing bloated or extreme.

As an example of how efficient OS X actually is, simply look at the older machines that are running it. Many people, including myself, run the latest version of OS X on Macs that are upwards of 7 years old, without any problems. If one were to try running Windows XP on a 7 year old PC, the results would no doubt be far less positive.

Click to expand...

good point. i never thought of it that way.