Women in Technology

Article:		12 Steps to Improving Your Mac's Performance
Subject:		classic applications perform marvelous
Date:		2004-07-21 05:07:29
From:		Dr.Michael
The tip not to use classic applications is useless in my opinion. Once the classic environment is started my old applications like Photoshop or MS Office have dramatically shorter startup times compared to the OS X versions. They also perform very well. MS Office 2001 for example is definitely faster than Office X. Looking at performance I highly recommend to go on using classic applications.

Showing messages 1 through 4 of 4.

• classic applications perform marvelous
  2004-07-22 08:46:13  tlaurenzo1 [View]
  
  
  I can't speak for the classic apps being faster than the OS X versions (since I came to the Mac "post classic"), but it did always bother me that while classic is running (and not doing anything apparent), the CPU usage increases by 15-20%. Obviously, this is machine dependent, and those of you with new G5's wouldn't care. Those of us with old G4's though can't afford for a background process to hog that much processor time.
• classic applications perform marvelous
  2004-07-23 07:52:00  Dr.Michael [View]
  
  
  I cannot confirm that classic constantly consumes cpu power.
  
  If you do not run applications (exept a cpu monitor) and let the hands from your keyboard my cpu usage goes down to only a few percent with classic running.
  
  The only flaw I found is that classic sometimes (very rarely) hangs and then consumes 100% of cpu. This is surely a bug.
  
  Michael
• classic applications perform marvelous
  2004-07-23 05:26:03  ronosxspt [View]
  
  
  Have you checked out Itunes lately. It runs in the background and will normally consume about 10 to 15 percent without blinking. Turn on the visualizer and the CPU jumps to 40 to 50 percent without winking. This is all done in the background. I run with Mac OSX G4 1GHz processor and I don't really notice a hit in performance until CPU usage is roughly 80-90 percent. If you using something, then expect to pay for it in CPU usage. Classic will cost CPU usage to rise, itunes will cause CPU usage to rise, so will Safari and every other program. The question is do you want to pay the CPU cost for what you are doing? If not, then do run the program.
  
  10% CPU usage for an application depending on what it is doing maybe quite reasonable. You need to look at the functionality of the application with respect to CPU usage. Don't say hey my CPU usage has increased by 10-15% for this application and therefore my CPU is being hogged. This is just not true since you are the one deciding to pay for the cost of using the program. Nothing is for free in this starved CPU environment.
  
  The biggest hog on CPU usage that I am aware of is Applescript. If you run an Applescript for a long task, i.e for several minutes, then Applescript will consume 70-80% of the entire CPU resource. Now this is a CPU hog in my book! But I will happily pay the CPU price since I am automating a process and it frees up my time to do something else.
  
  thx
  RLC
• classic applications perform marvelous
  2004-07-23 05:51:26  ronosxspt [View]
  
  
  Sorry, I was sleepy and tired when I wrote this. What I meant to write was
  
  "...The question is do you want to pay the CPU cost for what you are doing? If not, then do not run the program."
  
  This is a correction in the 1st paragraph, last sentence.
  
  I should be sleeping. aaaaaaahhhh!!!
  
  thx
  RLC