squeak 3.8 slow on intel macs?

It seems to be slow on mine anyway.  Windows take a long time to
appear for example, so maybe its morphic thats slow.  Or maybe its
the entire VM.  Any one else experiencing the same?

Take care,
Mike.

Receive and share.

On 07.03.2006, at 20:17, Mike wrote:

> It seems to be slow on mine anyway.  Windows take a long time to
> appear for example, so maybe its morphic thats slow.  Or maybe its
> the entire VM.  Any one else experiencing the same?
>

Which Version of the VM are you using?

           Marcus

This may or may not be relevant as my experience is in Windows land.
However on windows I was in the habit of launching squeak by double
clicking on the squeak.exe then it would go off and find the image and
load. Talking with some others one day I discovered the delay was
related to the vm looking around for the image. If i launch form
command line with image name or launch by dropping image on the vm exe
it loads almost immediatley..

Robin

On 3/8/06, Mike <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi,


Am 07.03.2006 um 20:17 schrieb Mike:

> It seems to be slow on mine anyway.  Windows take a long time to
> appear for example, so maybe its morphic thats slow.  Or maybe its
> the entire VM.  Any one else experiencing the same?

No.

Even in rosetta emulation the intelmac vm was at least as fast as my
powerbook g4.

Try a different image.

If you want to try an intel binary, see:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/squeak/message/103433

Make sure that the image you use is set to:
-32 bit colors; set monitor to 32 bit for best performance
-fullscreen off; the intelmac VMs can't do fullscreen

-karsten

Ok, first I have to thank Karsten Wolf for running strange and  
interesting VMs on his  Mac Intel to get us started on the conversion  
process.

Second I'd like to thank Impara GmbH  for not only producing Plopp  
(http://www.impara.de/project_painter.htm) with Squeak, but also for  
giving me a Mac Mini Core Solo to help in the conversion  process,  
because of that machine and a sleepless night or two, we now  
understand why we have the 16 bit screen depth conversion issue, and  
why full screen did not work.

Later tonight after some rest, reflection and a bit more testing I'll  
post a 3.8.11b2 Mac Carbon Universal Squeak VM for regular  
distribution as we are seeing
more macintel squeak users.

As earlier mentioned I still have some plugins to recompile, so the  
effort will be ongoing for a few weeks.

1 tinyBenchmarks shows on my old PowerBook 17inch 1.5Ghz.

'113,274,336 bytecodes/sec; 5,111,787 sends/sec'

On the Mac Mini Solo (also 1.5Ghz)  that VM running under Rosetta does
' 43,301,759 bytecodes/sec; 2,056,941 sends/sec'
As you can see the performance is 1/2 speed of the powerpc, not bad  
for emulation, but ugly for general usage.


A universal VM does
'226,548,672 bytecodes/sec; 5,811,339 sends/sec'
and Karsten reports the graphics performance on his Core Duo is stellar.


On 7-Mar-06, at 2:45 PM, Karsten Wolf wrote:

--
========================================================================
===
John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
========================================================================
===

Ok, first I have to thank Karsten Wolf for running strange and  
interesting VMs on his  Mac Intel to get us started on the conversion  
process.

Second I'd like to thank Impara GmbH  for not only producing Plopp  
(http://www.impara.de/project_painter.htm) with Squeak, but also for  
giving me a Mac Mini Core Solo to help in the conversion  process,  
because of that machine and a sleepless night or two, we now  
understand why we have the 16 bit screen depth conversion issue, and  
why full screen did not work.

Later tonight after some rest, reflection and a bit more testing I'll  
post a 3.8.11b2 Mac Carbon Universal Squeak VM for regular  
distribution as we are seeing
more macintel squeak users.

As earlier mentioned I still have some plugins to recompile, so the  
effort will be ongoing for a few weeks.

1 tinyBenchmarks shows on my old PowerBook 17inch 1.5Ghz.

'113,274,336 bytecodes/sec; 5,111,787 sends/sec'

On the Mac Mini Solo (also 1.5Ghz)  that VM running under Rosetta does
' 43,301,759 bytecodes/sec; 2,056,941 sends/sec'
As you can see the performance is 1/2 speed of the powerpc, not bad  
for emulation, but ugly for general usage.


A universal VM does
'226,548,672 bytecodes/sec; 5,811,339 sends/sec'
and Karsten reports the graphics performance on his Core Duo is stellar.


On 7-Mar-06, at 2:45 PM, Karsten Wolf wrote:

--
========================================================================
===
John M. McIntosh <[hidden email]> 1-800-477-2659
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
========================================================================
===

Mike wrote:
> It seems to be slow on mine anyway.  Windows take a long time to
> appear for example, so maybe its morphic thats slow.  Or maybe its
> the entire VM.  Any one else experiencing the same?

Define "slow"...

I'm using a fairly basic Squeak 3.8. A browser in Morphic takes between
1 and 2 seconds to pop up; most other things are quicker. If I jump into
an MVC project, browsers appear instantaneously. Umm... I'm using the
refactory browser with Shout on an AMD XP 2000+ running Linux.

Apparently that's normal and its been that way for quite a few releases.
I can't really complain, because my code is usually even slower :-}.

Michael.