You bring up a good question (and thanks for pointing out that Activity Monitor does this--I just assumed that Apple completely removed the CPU monitor dock utility with the release of Mac OS X v10.3).
The main reasons I like LoadInDock better than Activity Monitor (I just tried out AM to compare the two):
1) Customizability -- LoadInDock has more configuration options than AM
2) More Visually Appealing -- LoadInDock looks much better than AM
3) Percentages In Dock -- AM doesn't show in numerical form the total CPU percentage (or kernel, user, or nice percentages) in the dock
4) Longer CPU History -- History stays longer in LoadInDock's icon than AM's
5) Less CPU Load -- LoadInDock uses much less of the CPU than AM does, according to the command-line utility 'top' (even when the main AM window is closed)
How's that for several good reasons to use LoadInDock instead?
Existing users, log in. New users, create a free account. Lost password?
More customizable & visually pleasing - Tee Jay
You bring up a good question (and thanks for pointing out that Activity Monitor does this--I just assumed that Apple completely removed the CPU monitor dock utility with the release of Mac OS X v10.3).The main reasons I like LoadInDock better than Activity Monitor (I just tried out AM to compare the two):
1) Customizability -- LoadInDock has more configuration options than AM
2) More Visually Appealing -- LoadInDock looks much better than AM
3) Percentages In Dock -- AM doesn't show in numerical form the total CPU percentage (or kernel, user, or nice percentages) in the dock
4) Longer CPU History -- History stays longer in LoadInDock's icon than AM's
5) Less CPU Load -- LoadInDock uses much less of the CPU than AM does, according to the command-line utility 'top' (even when the main AM window is closed)
How's that for several good reasons to use LoadInDock instead?
Reply to This
Monday, November 21 2005 @ 11:09 PM PST