Interesting Observation...

Even with the recent OS X v10.0.1 upgrade, we're at a rather early point in the life of OS X. We can expect a bit of additional speed with each minor upgrade Apple releases, I'd wager. But I was surprised to note that, in working with my NeXTSTATION Turbo Color workstation (68040 @ 33Mz, 32MB RAM, running NeXTSTEP v3.3) this weekend, NeXT applications and the OS in general do indeed feel significantly snappier on this machine than OS X and its apps do on my b&w G3 400 (256MB RAM, UltraWide SCSI). This is especially interesting to me given that I've recently been working with a PowerMac 6100 (PowerPC 601 @ 66MHz, 32MB RAM, 1MB L2 cache, running MacOS 8.6) which just feels super-sluggish. And it's CPU is much faster than a 33Mz 68040, and OS 8.6 is far less complex than NeXTSTEP--one would think individual apps would feel faster, but they do not.


OS X has its sluggish Aqua, NeXTSTEP has it's sluggish Display PostScript. They both run a Mach-based BSD implementation. Lots of interesting angles here. Perhaps in relative terms, the NeXT hardware was more on-target.


What do you think about that?

Popular Stories

Google Assistant

Google I/O 2016: Assistant, Home, Allo, Duo, Android N, and More

Wednesday May 18, 2016 11:51 am PDT by
Google hosted its annual I/O developers keynote at the Shoreline Amphitheatre in Mountain View, California today, announcing multiple new products and services related to Android, search, messaging, home automation, and more. Google Assistant Google Assistant is described as a "conversational assistant" that builds upon Google Now based on two-way dialog. The tool can be used, for example,...