|
#17
| |||
| |||
|
Well... OS 9 does one thing... OS X does amny things at hte same time... so it feels slower sometimes, but all the applications are working and you don't feel it! Then, use OS 9 and sometimes you ahve to re-boot... how much time do you waste? Compare it... and you'll see that with OS X it takes less time.... and it feels better! Ciao
__________________ DP 1.25GHz FW800 - 1280MB RAM - 80GB+80GB HD - SuperDrive DVR-105 & ComboDrive - 19" CRT - iSight - Logitech MX500 • 10.3.1 PowerBook 15" 1.25GHz - 512MB RAM - 80GB HD - SuperDrive • 10.3.1 JBL Creature 5GB iPod |
|
#18
| ||||
| ||||
|
Moving this to Opinions... Guess it's where it belongs.
__________________ iMac 24" 2.4 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.2 MacBook Air 13" 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.2 Mac mini 1.83 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.2 MacBook nano (Lenovo S10e white) 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.7 iPhone 3GS 32 GB white. Mac user since 1987, Apple Sales Professional 2009, Apple Product Professional 2007-2009, Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5, Apple Certified Pro Aperture 2 (Level 1) |
|
#19
| |||
| |||
| Sometimes I wish I never upgraded to X
I'm on it right now, at home. It never crashes, networking is a breeze and is overall a great OS. But... I work at home almost as much as I do at work, where I am still running 9.2. Why? Because I work in a hi-speed envirorment, and the window shade-less Os DOES slow you down. And that slight few-second delay to open a file adds up and seriously bogs down any groove you might be in. Besides that, I have several minor/major issues with OS X that I can't seem to resolve at home: -Double-clicking file opens it in Preview or IE, not native App. -Drag and Drop file does not open it in Dreamweaver, Photoshop or Image Ready -Downright slow and sluggish in Dreamweaver, Photoshop, Image Ready and IE -Snapshots are taken as PDF files and go straight to your desktop -A lot of my fonts do not show up (granted, in X I am not using a Font management program) -NO SNOOD!!! I wonder if I only had X installed, would it be faster than it's running? The only program I NEED OS 9 for is Quark Xpress, but it's a major program. I find myself restarting in 9 when I have to work because the above programs all FLY in 9 and as I said, are sluggish in X. Some people might not think these issues are a big deal, but they seriously cramp my working style. I don't know if the problems are because I'm using an older 400MHz G4 with 832MB or if having OS 9 also installed is slowing it down, but if anybody knows how to fix some of these issues, please point my in the right direction!! EDIT BY CHEVY: I moved you post and the following to the Mac OS X System and Software where it will be better placed to be discussed. http://www.macosx.com/forums/showthr...threadid=29294 END EDIT BY CHEVY Last edited by chevy; March 2nd, 2003 at 02:58 PM. |
|
#20
| ||||
| ||||
|
Good answers, RacerX. And I guess Snood is some sort of game that would run in Classic? ![]() And I just have to repeat one of the basic benefits of using Mac OS X: You can keep your applications open. In OS 9, I always had to _decide_ what to work with. I kept two copies of Photoshop, one using 80 MB of RAM, one using 300 MB of RAM (when I had 512), and I always had to quit the big one as soon as I wanted to use either GoLive, Illustrator or InDesign concurrently. Now in OS X, I just open them all. I'm glad that I can tell Photoshop the percentage of RAM it should use, but somehow I'd rather not, as I fear as long as it's opened, it hogs RAM - even in the background and without images open... The most important thing, I think, is that you _HAVE_ to try and adapt to the differences Mac OS X has over Mac OS 9 - and you'll not only SEE the advantages, you'll feel them. And use them. And start to miss the days when you thought OS X was a bad idea. :P
__________________ iMac 24" 2.4 GHz, 4 GB RAM, 320 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.2 MacBook Air 13" 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.2 Mac mini 1.83 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 80 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.6.2 MacBook nano (Lenovo S10e white) 1.6 GHz, 2 GB RAM, 250 GB HD. Mac OS X 10.5.7 iPhone 3GS 32 GB white. Mac user since 1987, Apple Sales Professional 2009, Apple Product Professional 2007-2009, Apple Certified Support Professional 10.5, Apple Certified Pro Aperture 2 (Level 1) |
|
#21
| ||||
| ||||
|
MacOS X is to MacOS 9 what MacOS was to the old Apple II text oriented OS. The text oriented OS is MUCH faster. But you are faster with Mac OS, because the limitating factor in not CPU power, but human reaction, human reflexion, human creativity. That's why I find MacOS X is better than MacOS 9... and my iMac is better than any 4GHz PC. Just do it faster.
__________________ My current machine is an iMac Core 2 Duo 2.16 GHz 24" and a MacBook Pro 13" with MacOS X 10.6. My oldest Apple was born in 1977. GS/P/>SS d-(++) s+: a+ C+(C) U* P L+ E--- W++ N- o+ K? w O-- M++ V PS+ PE+ Y- PGP t+ 5 X+ R tv-- b+++ DI++ D+ G e+++ h---- r+++ y? Time is not changing, I'm just traveling through time. |
|
#22
| |||
| |||
| Re: Sometimes I wish I never upgraded to X Quote:
|
|
#23
| ||||
| ||||
|
This discussion reminds me of the extremely PAINFUL morph my mind had to go through when I switched from 9.2 to 10.2. I trashed Apple up and down over OSX and was ready to mount a terrorist guerilla strike againt their headquarters. Flash forward 6 months, and I finally like osx better then 9, even though it is way slower, in almost all aspects then 9. It's bittersweet. You really do have to change your philosophy entirely. I still use OS9 for 8 hours a day at work and OSX about another 3-6 at home. OSX "Lite" version would be a good idea, bare bones so as to be as fast as OS9. |
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| AppleWorks vs. Office X | qwikstreet | Apple News, Rumors & Discussion | 15 | March 23rd, 2003 01:07 AM |
| Dammit, I HATE Handspring now. | Bluefusion | Hardware & Peripherals | 2 | April 24th, 2002 06:49 PM |
| Bush Pisses Me OFF | Soapvox | Bob's Place | 104 | November 1st, 2001 08:57 AM |