What Amount of Slowness is Acceptable?

[dzhiurgis]

Hi All,
I have OpenCPN running with CM93 maps on OS X 10.8, SSD, 16GB RAM, Dedicated GPU machine and it is slow. So slow it is nearly unusable. Zooming out and in is slow (don't even get me started with the lack of multitouch support). Dragging is slow. Went thru couple of posts before and played with quilting and map detail settings without too much of a help. Removing text does help a little more but still, it seems you are using something that was made in 90s.
I am just wondering is that the desired design feature?
Or is it just not very compatible with OS X?
Perhaps memory allocations could be increased?
Should I blame Java?


OpenCPN is great alternative, but ... it could improve.

[cheoah]

Good to read this post. I've been considering openCPN for my MacBook Pro, but I've not heard from anyone that it works great. Your machine has more memory than mine and a solid state drive so if it is sluggish on yours......

[bdbcat]

Folks...

More detail, please. Exactly what OS, hardware, and OpenCPN version?

For me, the current OpenCPN Version 3.2.2 is acceptably snappy on Mac Mini, 2007 vintage, standard configuration. We have lots of happy Mac users, and few recent reports of problems.

There were some initial problems with performance on Mac, but seems corrected in current releases.

Are you on some kind of tablet? Don't understand the comments re multi-touch and Java....

Thanks
Dave

[seandepagnier]

I know someone else with a mac and it is very slow. Maybe you can run windows or linux in mac and get better results?

[bdbcat]

Mac Fans...

I have recorded and uploaded a 3 minute live time screen capture video of an OpenCPN session on a Mac Mini. This is Version 3.2.2, as currently downloadable from opencpn.org.

OpenCPN On Mac - YouTube

If your performance is substantially slower than this sample, I'd like to hear about it. There is nothing special about my old Mac Mini. IMHO, this is certainly snappy enough for daily use, even with cm93.

Enjoy
Dave

[CarCode]

Dave,
you have noticed the clock pointer in your video?

Try Mountain Lion instead of Snow Leopard, use GPS attached, and use also a navobj file of about one MB. You will see OCPN is unusable with modern Macs as @dzhiurgis has with solid state drive, 16 GB RAM and of course Mountain Lion (10.8).

My solution is to use wx 2.9.5 (not 2.9.4), strip some unnecessary code and compile for x86_64 to have a running OCPN. Last daily build of wx 2.9.5 has some bugs removed.

Gerhard

[bdbcat]

Carcode....

What do you mean by "clock pointer?"

Are you saying the the "problem" is running 32 bit OCPN on Mountain lion? That is, if I try ML, I will go slower with the current OCPN 32 bit release?

Or are you saying that my video proves (IYHO) that O is too slow to be usable on SL, 32 bit?

Dave

[CarCode]

Dave,

your mouse pointer shows a clock in your video.

You have not seen that?

In Mountain Lion you will get a rotating wheel and wait, wait, wait...

Gerhard

[bdbcat]

Carcode...

I see the little watch pointer sometimes. On SL, 32 bit, 3.2.2, I see it about the same amount as I see it on Windows or Linux.

I am presently downloading ML, and I will install dual boot on my Mini. So we shall see.

Thanks
Dave

[CarCode]

Don't forget to attach a GPS and use a navobj file also in your next video.

Gerhard

[sbfreddie]

Dave:
Hi, its been awhile since I chimed in, and I have to say He is correct. I use Lion (10.7.5)on a Quad core Mac Pro with 10G of Main Memory. I have the same problem and also it crashes if I try to move to fast.
I believe that using wxWidgets 2.8 on 10.7 and 10.8 is a no-go because some of the underlying Apple API's no longer support some of the wx2.8 code.
Just my $.02 worth.

Thanks,
Freddie

PS I have tried the latest beta and it also does the same thing.

[cheoah]

bummer. maybe it'll run on an old XP machine I have...

[dzhiurgis]

bdbcat, thanks for the video.
I must say it is quite similar on my work Mini Mac, which is only 4GB RAM. Yesterday I have tried to run it side by side on Windows 7 VirtualBox (I think it's 64Bit) and it was significantly faster on Windows 7. However my test might be inaccurate, as 1GB RAM for Windows, left me tight with memory on OS X side.
I will try to do similar video recording at home during the weekend. Will try it on Windows 7, XP, Ubuntu, OS X 10.6 (32bit 1st gen Air) and OS X 10.8.
Thinking now there isn't really a big issue to run on VM.
In regards of multitouch - for the past 7 years all MacBooks come with multitouch trackpads which gives you smoother zoom in and out. Nothing really important, but otherwise scrolling is a bit jittery.

[CarCode]

dzhiurgis,

regard your activity monitor of the OS. OpenCPN should not use more than 2% CPU when in idle and GPS is working and as well several plugins are installed.

Gerhard

[bdbcat]

Mac users....

OK, I'll admit that I am Mac stupid. Maybe I just don't get it.

But....

I loaded 10.7 Lion on my mac Mini 2 GB, 2 GHz Core 2 Duo. My mac Mini will not run 10.8 ML.

I downloaded the current 3.2.2 DMG from opencpn.org, and installed it.
I connected a network (UDP) live GPS data stream, including live AIS.
I loaded cm93 and NOAA RNCs.
I loaded a fairly large (100KB) navobj set.
And I find:

Substantially the same performance as my youtube video...

I never see spinning wheel. I rarely see little watch cursor.
Idle CPU load of OpenCPN is 2-4%.

So, I ask:
What should I do to reproduce the reports of poor performance on a Mac?
Do I need 10.7.5 to make OpenCPN go slower?
Do I need to download and install the special Prolific USB-Serial driver to make it slow down?
Should I squirt some 5200 into the disc slot?

If the performance bottle-neck as reported relates to attached GPS and large navobj set, which is the more significant factor?

How about chart types? Is cm93 or S57ENC slower than RNC, as compared to, say, Windows performance? Does it slow down only when the ownship icon is on-screen? Does it speed up if route/tracks/marks are made invisible?

How about the various PlugIns? Is there one or more that break the camel's back?

Will someone check these factors, and report, please?

Or, maybe I'm barking up the wrong tree. Maybe Mac users find the performance of OpenCPN as indicated on the youtube video to be very slow compared to other Mac applications, and actually too slow to be usable...Is that the problem?

I'd like to make progress on this issue, but frankly, I'm stumped just now.

Thanks
Dave