Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

OS Performance — Snow Leopard, Windows 7, and Ubuntu 9.10

Posted by ScuttleMonkey on from the but-how-do-they-run-as-vms dept.

BeckySharp writes "With the nearly simultaneous release of Apple's Mac OS X 10.6 'Snow Leopard' (available right now) and Microsoft's Windows 7 (available Oct. 22), you get the inevitable debate: Which is the better operating system, Windows 7 or Snow Leopard? To help determine that, Computerworld's Preston Gralla put both operating systems through their paces, selected categories for a head-to-head competition, and then chose a winner in each category." Relatedly, Phoronix has posted Snow Leopard vs. Ubuntu 9.10 benchmarks. They ran tests from ray tracing to 3D gaming to compilation. Their tests show Ubuntu 9.10 winning a number of the tests, but there are some slowdowns in performance and still multiple wins in favor of Snow Leopard, so the end result is mixed.

17 of 688 comments (clear)

  1. Dock/Taskbar design by alain94040 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The most thoughtful article I read that truly explains what the technical tradeoffs are with dock/taskbar design: here.

    On a similar topic, if you want to work on the home page GUI for Android, there is an on-going project as well.

    The good news for consumers is that both Windows 7 and Snow Leopard are great-looking OS. Computerworld is just wrong to give a point to Apple on price :-)

    1. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Well, the price of either is a matter of what you already have :).

      If I have the immediate previous version of the software:
      Leopard-->Snow Leopard: $30.
      Vista Home Premium-->Win7 Home Premium: $120 (if you want Ultimate, then $220)

      If I have the second-previous version:
      Tiger-->Snow Leopard: $170 (bundled with a couple other items)
      XP-->Win7 Home Premium: $120 (Ultimate is $220)

      Even earlier version (rare):
      Mac: you're SOL
      Windows: $200 ($320 for Ultimate)

      If I have a very recent computer:
      Leopard-->Snow Leopard: $10
      Vista (any) --> Win7 (same): $0

      If you're getting a new computer:
      Generally bundled; pricing delta is defined by hardware prices of Apple vs any OEM that will bundle Windows, which in turn depends on your precise needs.

      If your current computer is anything other than a Mac: you need to buy a Mac to be legal, or do hackintosh (at which point you could throw in that you can get illegal copies of either OS free, but maybe your personal ethics permit a breach of law in one case but not the other).

    2. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by Mononoke · · Score: 5, Informative

      Don't forget that Apple charges for it's service packs

      No. They. Don't.

      --
      NetInfo connection failed for server 127.0.0.1/local
    3. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by caerwyn · · Score: 4, Informative

      Tiger->Snow Leopard does not actually require the bundle- it's been confirmed that the $29 SL upgrade installs just fine.

      --
      The ringing of the division bell has begun... -PF
    4. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not really. It wasn't a fair fight. QUOTE: "Windows 7 Ultimate.....with 1GB of RAM and Snow Leopard.....with 2GB of RAM." I have no great love for either MS or MAC, but we all know Windows on just 1 gig is going to lots of hard-drive caching and slower performance. He should have either upgraded the Win-PC to 2 gig, or downgraded the Mac to 1 gig, in order to make the test as identical as possible.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    5. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Then there is this shiny bit:

        The common response is to use the notification area (often incorrectly called the "system tray") to provide ready access to these running-but-windowless applications.

      Orly? You DO know that the it was called the "system tray" up until Windows XP, don't you? It was even instantiated by a process called systray.exe. Even MSDN is littered with its own references to it being the "system tray", like here.

      That's wrong.

    6. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 5, Informative

      Win7 actually runs fine on 1Gb - like Vista, it will use the RAM that is there, but unlike Vista, it doesn't insist on it.

      Anyway, this is pretty irrelevant here, because the comparison wasn't about performance at all (despite the title of the Slashdot summary). It was just one person's very subjective opinions on certain aspects of OS X and Win7, without any attempt to quantify. There's not a single objective measure in the whole review.

    7. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      "An application doesn't need a window AT ALL. For ANY REASON. Windows are used for GUI I/O, and occasionally, message passing."

      You write that an application doesn't need a window, at all, for any reason (in all caps yet), then immediately give two reasons why an application needs a window.

      Yeah, I know what you mean. I can decipher it if I try. But you're being needlessly dense regarding what the author was getting at too. An app in Windows needs a window for another reason - to display a menu bar. An app in OS X does not - the menu is displayed at the top of the screen. So when you start Word in Windows it pops up an empty window (or a window filled with useless stuff) just so it can give you a File | Open menu. On the Mac it doesn't need to open a window until it's got a document to display in it.

    8. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by DannyO152 · · Score: 5, Informative

      I would add that past costs, having been paid, are irrelevant. No matter whether you sunk $1,000, $500, $5,000 into that system, it will cost you $29 to upgrade that Mac and $100 to upgrade that Windows system. Let us not forget that while one may find Wintel pcs that have a lower price than a Mac, one can also find ones that are more expensive. Let's assume that there's an implicit basic satisfaction with the system's value if its owner is considering an upgrade.

      That said, here's my bone to pick. I've been using Photoshop CS2 on Leopard. My $29 upgrade will mean either no Photoshop or another few hundred bucks additional cost in order to get CS4. Only Thursday did we start to get reports of incompatible software and, of course, all the reviews overlooked real world considerations in favor of revealing the same features we could have seen on Apple's web site. Nothing was really said with regards to the real reason we run operating systems: so we get stuff done with the software that runs on top. I don't care whether OS X boots faster than Win7 - I've made my choices. But if an upgrade means purchase of hardware or software, than that is a lot more important to me than the interface of QuickTimeX.

    9. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by Gr8Apes · · Score: 4, Informative

      >>>Don't upgrade if you don't think it's worth it!

      You can't do that with Macs. They'll stop running the latest software. For example I wouldn't be able to run Firefox 3 or 3.5 on my G4 Mac's original OS (10.1). I had to upgrade.

      I'd like to run Office 2008 on WinME... wait, I can't. Not in Win2K either. Oh no!!!! How about that DX10 game on XP? Nope, can't do that either.... Gosh darn it!

      FYI - there were major changes in OS APIs between 10.1-10.6. Something designed for 10.6 won't run on 10.3 or before. A little thing about binary compatibility due to physical architecture and system API support.

      --
      The cesspool just got a check and balance.
    10. Re:Dock/Taskbar design by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The Mac Pro is a Xeon. Your newegg config is almost certainly a Core i7. Nehalem is an architecture codename, not a single product. Intel prices accordingly.

      Nice troll though.

  2. Performance, where? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The article linked to in the quote block is a terrible little summary of Snow Leopard and Windows 7, split unnecessarily over 5 pages, with nary a benchmark to be seen. Most of the comparisons are subjective, vague, and really not very useful to anyone.

  3. Re:30? Try 130. by bonch · · Score: 5, Informative

    Its only 30 if you forked out 130 for the last one, so you could really call it 160.

    Apple has confirmed that you can install the $30 upgrade version on top of Tiger.

  4. Re:30? Try 130. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    At an Apple store I asked if the $30 dollar was an upgrade or a full install disk. I was told it was a full install disk and no copy of leopard or even tiger was required. I installed it successfully on my sisters computer AFTER wiping it clean (Read: no previously purchased OS installed.) It is a full blown OS for only $30 (not an upgrade disk.) They do sell a more expensive copy that comes bundled with iLife and iWork.

  5. The problem is by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Informative

    Apple doesn't have an in between system. You have their all-in-one, but if you want to go past that, the next thing is a high end workstation. So suppose you want a quad core with a reasonable graphics card. Bare minimum price from Apple is $2700 for a quad with 3GB RAM, a 4870, and a 640MB HD. So if you want a similar thing from Dell you get a Core 2 Quad, 4GB RAM, a 4870 and a 750MB HD for $1150, less than half the price. Now you'd be correct in pointing out that the Mac Pro has hardware the Dell doesn't, like a second CPU slot. Ok, but what if you don't need that? Well too bad, you have to pay for it anyhow.

    That is a big problem you get in to with Mac prices. In a very large segment of the market, they have no good offerings. You have to buy much higher end hardware which drives the price way up. You can argue all you like that it isn't "equal" it doesn't matter. If those extra features aren't needed or wanted, then all you are doing is driving the price up.

    1. Re:The problem is by log0n · · Score: 4, Informative

      Apple does have an in-between system, it's the iMac. It may not be your desired in-between system, but in that case Apple really isn't catering to you.

      Mac Pro CPUs are Xeons, not Core 2. Spec a Dell w/ Xeons and you've got Mac Pro price. Spec a Dell w/ Core 2 and an LCD, you've got iMac price.

      Most people who buy Macs don't want to futz around w/ tweaking or repeatedly adjusting their system - they just want it to work well and reliably. For a high end user, you get that w/ the Mac Pro. Vis a vis, the iMac with it's intermediate audience.

      Build a hack if you really want a system that caters exactly to your wants.

  6. Re:30? Try 130. by Ma8thew · · Score: 4, Informative

    Under section C.