image
image

Go Back   macosx.com > Community > Opinions, & Open Letters

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #25  
Old October 8th, 2001, 01:51 PM
ElDiabloConCaca's Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Posts: 12,678
Thanks: 7
Thanked 388 Times in 370 Posts
ElDiabloConCaca is a glorious beacon of lightElDiabloConCaca is a glorious beacon of lightElDiabloConCaca is a glorious beacon of lightElDiabloConCaca is a glorious beacon of lightElDiabloConCaca is a glorious beacon of lightElDiabloConCaca is a glorious beacon of light
10.1 finder cocoa-fied?

To whomever said that Apple is in the process of cocoa-fying the finder, I'd love to know where this bit of information came from... can you provide links or some sort of quote?

I'm not doubting you at all, I would just like to read whatever you've read! I'm a fanatic with keeping up with rumors and late-breaking news, so I'd love to know where you found this out!
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old October 8th, 2001, 03:10 PM
billbaloney's Avatar
House pianist
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Brooklyn, NY
Posts: 509
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
billbaloney is on a distinguished road
Clean installs...aigh

The very fact that you need to clean-install this "upgrade" in order to see any benefits (instead of obvious degradations in performance, as I've seen after 10.0.4 -> 10.1 upgrades) is plenty of evidence that X is not ready for prime time.

People love to post to this server admonitions in the form of "If Apple wants to [goal], than they better [requirement]." So here's another one: if Apple wants to convert OS 9 users to OS X, they better make the upgrade process feasible.

Do you have any idea how much I tweak X after I install it? Jesus, the LAST thing I want to do is do a clean install. I'm actually using this OS! It's a dev server, and file server...why the Bejesus should I have to wipe this completely, do a clean install of what's supposed to be an UPGRADE, and then reinstate all my apps and tweaks? That is just incredibly annoying.

I ditched X once before, because it was hampering my days with poor performance. I might have to do that again soon. Sad, very sad....
__________________
Matt (billbaloney)
1.67GHz "October 2005" G4 Aluminum 1.5 GB RAM, OS 10.5.2
Lots of other things around
Helen Marie
Holford Industries
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old October 8th, 2001, 05:57 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
aled is on a distinguished road
Smile OS X v Win XP and speed

I've installed OS X 10.1 and updated 10.0.4 on my PowerBook G3 500 with 640MB RAM and I am really pleased with all the speed improvements. I have a messed up computer (4 Gig of Apps) - I do everything on it and I do NOT want to re-install. So I didn't - and it is still fab! I've had it running for 3 days now. Classic and all for Photoshop and OE and I've been using the network in college (all Win PCs - bummer!). Anyway... speed is not an issue. No crashes. No restarts. Nothing wrong. Ok, IE 5 for X is really slow even on the fast network - Classic IE is much faster! I think, no, I know, the battery is being drained about 1.5x as fast in OS X compared to 9. But sleep doesn't seem to drain any, I had heard that it would compared to OS 9. I did get some 2hrs out of a battery today - I'd get way over that in OS 9. I did give it a pounding though. (That's far better than my mates Sony laptop - he gets 45 mins MAX!!).
__________________
MacBook Pro 2.4GHz (late 2007) 4GB RAM, 160GB HD. 256MG Graphics. Mac OS X 10.5.2. | PowerMac G5 2GHz DUAL 5.5GB RAM. X 10.5.2 | 500GB HD | RADEON X800 256Mb. | iPod touch 16GB
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old October 8th, 2001, 05:58 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wales, UK
Posts: 45
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
aled is on a distinguished road
OS X v Win XP and speed (more...)

I've also just updated 10.1 on a 7300/200/96MB - works great too as a PHP web server over EtherNet. Finder speed is ok. I'm just dead chuffed that old beast is still useful. It's faster too after 10.1. I'd had it on 10.0.4 previously and 10.1 even kept my PHP / MySQL intact when updating - nice touch!

I've also installed Win XP Pro on a 450P3 320MB. Boy, they've swiped some stuff from Apple! However, the general public are not ever going to know about OS X and because XP "works" and they're just going to use it. It's got quite a lot going for it I have to admit - I think MS have finally got level. Apple are going to need every one of us to shout very loud about X if they're going to get any of that 90% that's left!

I have to say that MS did a fab job with Word for X - it loads really quickly on my 'Book. It has to be one of the best apps on X at the moment.

Just roll on these Apps - I want to kill classic forever ASAP!

Oh, someone was moaning that InDesign was slow in classic - wrong! I've found it to be the same as it is in 9 - pretty good. Not Quark 3.3 but very usable. And with InDesign 2 soon and some thing 17 times faster - I can't wait!
__________________
MacBook Pro 2.4GHz (late 2007) 4GB RAM, 160GB HD. 256MG Graphics. Mac OS X 10.5.2. | PowerMac G5 2GHz DUAL 5.5GB RAM. X 10.5.2 | 500GB HD | RADEON X800 256Mb. | iPod touch 16GB
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old October 8th, 2001, 06:09 PM
ScottW's Avatar
Founder
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Overland Park, KS
Posts: 3,218
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 6 Posts
ScottW has a spectacular aura aboutScottW has a spectacular aura about
I have to agree with Mindbend in response to his first post of this thread...

Being the biggest Mac fan their is... being surrounded by my friends who all use other OSs... and being a loner in the world of Mac use... I have always stood proud and glad I used something that is better than the rest.

I tried to use 10.1... and I used it for at least 4 days... before I rebooted back in to OS 9 to use PressReady... and well, I haven't booted back into 10.1.

Sure, it sucks when IE crashes my entire machine and I have to reboot... and how much I enjoy that NOT happening in OS X... but when I switch over to Windows XP to run "one" application that I don't have for Mac... and I lust for the day that my windows would open as fast as it does... my IE to blow chunks out Windows, and for pages to load zippy fast.

I will NEVER convert to Windows... this isn't a message of... Apple is loosing its luster... simply not true. Steve says 10.1 is at 6pm clock wise... so he is saying that its half-way to what it should be, 50% complete... I hope that when it comes noon... that it can be something I am truely proud of... and not stutter around my Windows friends who talk about how slow 10.1 is... and how fast XP is.

Speed comparisons:

Windows XP box: Compaq PIII-650mhz 256mb RAM
Mac OS X box: PowerMac G4-500mhz 256mb RAM

According to the Megahertz Myth, that Mac box should blow chunks over that 650... and yet... that system rocks when it comes to performance.

Admin
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old October 9th, 2001, 01:10 AM
Mac Developer
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Nashville, TN
Posts: 139
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
wadesworld is on a distinguished road
Quote:
Again, I reiterate, I have a very low tolerance for the slightest delay in anything in an OS. By God, when I hit a button I want action, and now! Here’s what it boils down to. I can walk over to my Windows 2000 Server box and get ridiculously smooth desktop level redraws. I know it’s nowhere near as pretty or smartly designed as OS X, but damn is it smooth. How is Apple supposed to convert customers with anything less?
Well, since you indicated your preference for OS 9, I highly suggest that you NEVER, EVER attempt to do anything with multitasking.

If you do, you'll see slow....when compared to either OS X or Win2K.

Wade
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old October 9th, 2001, 07:14 AM
Insanely great person
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: England
Posts: 16
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
bradleysmith is on a distinguished road
Exclamation Cocoafying Finder...

will not make the finder any faster. Programs written in the Cocoa API are not inherently faster than Carbon or any other API come to that. OmniWeb is pure Cocoa and its window sizing is just as crap as the finder. The core window sizing routines are to blame. Optimize them and everything will get quicker. Just take a look at window moving: Fastest thing on the planet man! MUCH faster than MS Windows. Windows 2000 window sizing is faster than Mac OS X 10.1. I've used 3 different Macs running 10.1 and we have a whole rack of Win 2k machines and Win 2k window sizing is faster. Nothing anyone can say will change that. That's not opinion it's a fact. I see the difference every single day.

Mac OS X 10.1 launches programs faster than Windows now though, not that I gave a toss about that. I'd swap the speedier program launches for a fast window resize.

Rant over (for now)
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old October 9th, 2001, 08:08 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Posts: 18
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
robp is on a distinguished road
Finder event handling/thread model needs improvement

It is not so much the overall performance of the finder that is the problem IMHO.

The finder is at least as fast as any windows machine I have seen (once the windows machine has been used for two weeks and has got slow - another discussion!!).

The problem that MUST BE FIXED is that the finder, and other applications appear to 'go out to lunch' far to often. This would suggest that on a "fully pre-emptive multitasking" operation system that there is something wrong with the finder thread model and event handling.

I would expect that even if one window in the finder is having difficulty (and is displaying a wait indicator) that I should be able to switch to another window and continue working. This is not the case, one window unhappy - the whole machine unhappy.

Before anyone says that this is paging or other resource problems, top and vmstat report that I have plenty of available resources.

I have observed this on a variety of platforms, and all releases of X including X.1

Hardware G4/500MHz 512M
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
speed of server 10.1 vs client 10.1??? iknownotwhoiam Apple News, Rumors & Discussion 2 November 5th, 2001 05:50 AM
os x 10.1 server speed vs 10.1 client speed??? iknownotwhoiam Mac OS X System & Mac Software 0 November 5th, 2001 12:59 AM
Scrolling speed in 10.1 Ripcord Apple News, Rumors & Discussion 1 October 21st, 2001 06:47 PM
10.1 : Upgrade from Apple or Retailers? Laurent LaSalle Apple News, Rumors & Discussion 0 September 29th, 2001 10:23 AM
What clock speed for 10.1? Piet Keizer Apple News, Rumors & Discussion 0 August 12th, 2001 06:10 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:16 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.3.0 RC1
Copyright 2000-2010 DigitalCrowd, Inc.