# Switcher Switched Back - Too Slow They Say



## ScottW (Sep 10, 2002)

Well, I "Switched" to family members to Mac OS X two weeks ago. One has a brand new 17" iMac, the other got a G4 Cube.

Both gave me the same immediate complaint... "It's SLOW". How in the hell do you respond to that? Cause side by side... when using things that these people use every day like IE, it's freak'n slow. My response is scrapping the barrel.. "OS X has move overhead, a better platform, might seem a bit slower than your Windows box, but in raw power, its much faster." "It can wiz by and complete photoshop scripts in half the time as your Windows box." ----- BIG DEAL to people who don't run Photoshop scripts.

Honestly folks... Apple doesn't have a product thats worth switching for... when it comes to internet surfing and the price factor.

So, one family member, the G4 Cube owner is going back to her PII-450mhz which in her opinion was TWICE as fast as the G4/450mhz system, with more than 3 times the amount of ram as her Windows box.

The 17" iMac member... still likes the look of it... the design and attractiveness of the interface outweighed the slowness - thus far.

Anyone want to buy a G4 Cube?

Admin


----------



## Sogni (Sep 10, 2002)

1 Ghz AMD Athlon running Windows XP here at the office... No speed difference vs my Mac at home (dual 533mhz 10.2 Jaguar) and the Server at the office (Dual 1Ghz OS X 10.2 Server) kicks everyone's butt (refering to my computers only).

And this is without even running Photoshop!

I don't understand why people keep saying it's Slow!!!??? 

I'll take the Cube - you did say it was free, right?


----------



## dave17lax (Sep 10, 2002)

maybe they meant that windows is more snappy than osx. the windows just open faster. other than that, what's the difference? i say let them go, your family sucks!


----------



## ~~NeYo~~ (Sep 10, 2002)

LOL! 

Man, i'd love a Cube ... but living in England?!  ... a shame! 

NeYo


----------



## sheepguy42 (Sep 10, 2002)

Also, the graphics card in the cube does not support Quartz Extreme (unless it was upgraded) so Jaguar may be sluggish. I have noticed that while some things are faster on mine, others seem slower or less responsive (more beachball curser action than the rainbow circle ever saw in 10.1). I will post more on this when I havetime, and in a more appropriate forum if there is one.


----------



## themacko (Sep 10, 2002)

It is slow.  I am using Jaguar on an eMac with 128 mb of ram .. and it's workable, but nothing to be proud of.  Compaired to a comprable Windows machine (with only 128 mb) it out-right sucks.


----------



## dave17lax (Sep 10, 2002)

ok I will submit a more thoughtful comment: My girlfriend's compaq has a faster UI than my dual g4, and even sometimes faster web browsing. BUT, if the g4 slows down, the system just feels like a foot has been taken off the gas. When her pc slows down, it feels like the petal is to the metal, but we aint goin nowhere because they packed the miata full of 80 lb bags of sandbox sand. 

Also (OT) one thing I love about OSX is the process viewer app in the utilities folder. This will show everything running, including stuff that's not in the dock. You can see how much ram something's using, as well as the CPU usage. This is awesome - after installing jaguar, one of my menu apps was causing a huge slowdown to the system. It felt like the public beta or something. I opened process viewer and found that that little app was causing the whole thing. i made the offender quit, then relaunched it and all was fine. These are the things that make macs great.


----------



## ulrik (Sep 10, 2002)

there is nothing you can reply. 

Macs are slow compared to PCs, even Photoshop has been lost, current AMDs and Pentiums outperform the Dual 1 Ghz PowerMac.

Everybody who still believes what Apple is telling them is a victim of Apples clever marketing strategies.

The question is: does it matter if it is slower? If my browsers takes one second longer to render a webpage, but due to a more intuitive OS I can find files 30 seconds faster than in windows, doesn't it balance it out? If I don't have to reboot my computer three times a day cause two of my third-party PCI cards can't seem to like each other, isn't that worth anything?

Do NOT try to compare Macs and PCs by pure speed, at least not at the moment, no Mac will win to a similar priced PC. Even the xServe has been beaten by Dell PowerEdges and HP Proliants over and over again in any benchmark I have seen, but when it comes to desktop machines, speed isn't everything. I guess if you add up the seconds a PC user has to spend due to lacking drag and drop abilities between some apps, you get the difference back in which an AMD outperforms a Mac in Photoshop at the moment. I'd even say in many circumstances, you can get work done in the same time as on a PC, even though the PC actually runs faster. Not in every case, but in many.

Sadly but truly, I am getting deeper and deeper into the 3D bussiness, and so I spent more time every day on my PC and on my SGI, the Mac is just too slow for similar work.


----------



## ScottW (Sep 10, 2002)

I have to be honest. I see all these new systems coming out and I'm all sad and unhappy that I have this OLD 1999 G4/500 system. With dual monitors and 768meg of RAM, it should be nothing to cry about. But I did cry, until I started playing around with 10.2 or "newer faster" Macs. And in all honesty, I don't feel like my system is almost 3 years old. 

No one on this board can argue that the GUI of Windows is faster. And I am sure the GUI of OS 9 rocks major butt on the newer Mac's. However, for the lay internet user, who has experience using Windows... the first impression they have is "it's slower" and yes it is slower. Sure, the GUI is awesome, and having a UNIX foundation rocks my world, and a few seconds here and a few seconds there comparison might come out in Mac's favor, but all that said, when it comes to first impressions, other than being sexy, it leaves much to be desired.

How many of you have ever eyed a very sexy, attractive woman... only to talk to her for 5 minutes. That is exactly whats happening... Mac OS X is sexy, the cases are sexy... and overall, it has so much to offer if you look behind the slowness of the GUI.

I get mad each time I load a page in Windows using IE in a web browser, cause it rocks, even on a old PIII650mhz. And that system is worth what, $100 if that. I can by a 2.4mhz Dell desktop system shipped with mega memory and anything I could ask for (except firewire, itunes, imovie, bla bla bla) for around $500 or less. No joke.

But as one person said, you can't compare the two. It's true. But it sure makes it hard to "SWITCH" someone when the first 5 minutes of the conversation doesn't do the rest of her justice.

Admin


----------



## bih (Sep 10, 2002)

I don't think the sexy woman thing is a good analogy.  MacOS X is slow, there is no excusing it.  It is super stable, and wakes up from sleep freaking fast, but it's fricking slow as balls.  I hope Apple wakes up from sleep soon.


----------



## cwoody222 (Sep 10, 2002)

At work on my PC I reboot 3-4 x day (8 hour day).

On my OS X (jag) Mac at home I don't reboot hardly ever.

"Fast"?  Try waking up from sleep on your PC.  Try rebooting your PC (which is enevitable).

Plus...OS X is just more "enjoyable". Media Player v9 vs. iTunes.  No comparison.


----------



## dave17lax (Sep 11, 2002)

<b>Admin</b> (and others) I might be a bit jaded, because where I work (one of the top 5 banks in the US) we use OS2Warp. Not X, 2...IBM's old OS. This thing bites so hard that when I get home to my mac, it's like comparing DOS to OS 9. Or Win3.1 to Win XP, or my old 89 toyota corolla to the old guy's lincoln navigator.
Again it comes down to what you are used to vs what people say is better.

-Dave

(yes we know OSX is better and LUCKILY.....we are moving to XP by next year. 
      ....) 

I hope they get the service pack!


----------



## hulkaros (Sep 11, 2002)

If you like the speed of scrolling and loading web pages THAT much and you say that OS X.2 is slow, do the following:

-Use Mac OS 9.x 'cause no-one forces you for now (Apple will do just that later on) to use X.2
-Load Classic and under it run IE 5.1.4 or Mozilla 1.1 (YES it can be done and works fast too!)
-Use Chimera for X.2
-Run Windows under Virtual PC

As for the TRUE speed what most of you say is a HUGE lie... Web pages when using Chimera 0.5, IE 5.2 or Mozilla 1.1 under X.2 with an iMac G3/400 with 128 MB Ram, compared to a P4/2GHz with 1GB Ram, load on average 10-15 secs slower at the most... And guess what? On some pages the Mac loads faster (with Chimera)!!! Now, the speed of iMac when you scroll those pages is a whole new matter! THEY ARE DEAD SLOW  even when compared to a P2/350  

However, I am comparing an iMac G3/400 with 128 MB Ram and this occur ONLY under X.2... When you load Classic and its browsers or OS 9 things change A LOT and the iMac seems to perform almost like the P4...

Now, if your thing is to load Flash content or complicated web pages or pages SPECIFICALLY made for IE on the PC side I don't know but I tried the above things with the following sites:
www.macosx.com, www.apple.com, www.mactopia.com, www.microsoft.com/mac/, www.zdnet.com/news/, www.amdzone.com, www.extremetech.com, www.osopinion.com, www.aspyr.com, filmforce.ign.com, www.helmug.gr, www.hotmail.com, www.yahoo.com, www.google.com, www.opuscc.com, www.versiontracker.com/windows/, www.versiontracker.com/macosx/, www.joecartoon.com, www.downloads.com

And many-many other pages but you can see what I'm talking about...

Sorry, fellas but I cannot experience the slow speed that you are ranting about other than the scrolling-part that is  

As for the slow part of Aqua/Quartz in general methinks that this is only for a year or year and a half old machines cause in anything above G3/500 with 256MB Ram everything feels fast. Not as fast as Wintel platform but fast... And keep in mind that Windows GUI is like OS 9: OLD but GOLD (in speed feeling that is). I can't wait for the new OS from Redmond which will look and feel like in X.2 in 2004... For now, I will enjoy the slow speed of X.2, thank you very much


----------



## hazmat (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by cwoody222 _
> *At work on my PC I reboot 3-4 x day (8 hour day).
> 
> On my OS X (jag) Mac at home I don't reboot hardly ever.
> ...



Yes.  It's for the overall experience that I use OS X.  When I go over to Win2k on my PC at home (KVM switch), it is, as others have said, much snappier.  P3-500.  But I still prefer to go back to my Mac.  

As far as having to reboot your PC a few times a day, I have no idea what your problem is.  What, are you running WinME?  I haven't rebooted my PC at home in months, and it's running as fast as it always does.  Same for work.  I have rebooted a few times in the past few months, but only because system updates or driver installs require it.


----------



## fryke (Sep 11, 2002)

If your family members do nothing but surfing the web, writing the occasional E-Mail and maybe some word processing, a Windows machine is the way to go. Simple.

If they don't want viruses in their E-Mails (or at least don't want to care about them), if they have a sense for style, they should switch to the Mac.

But really, a Mac is too expensive a machine for the average "I don't really work on my computer, I just browse and mail" guy. Give them a Walmart noname PC.

The iMac/iBook/eMac, although it claims to be, is not intended for the consumer. It's intended for the CREATIVE consumer. That's where it shines.

And PowerBooks/PowerMacs are intended for graphics professionals, not graphics hobbyists.

Yes, my thinking is elitary and I'm a dumbass. Now go back playing Solitaire with that multiple GHz machine of yours.


----------



## hazmat (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by fryke _
> *Yes, my thinking is elitary and I'm a dumbass. Now go back playing Solitaire with that multiple GHz machine of yours.  *



Hey. give credit where credit's due.  Minesweeper!


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hazmat _
> *
> 
> Hey. give credit where credit's due.  Minesweeper! *



No way! 
My office workstation running Windows XP, 1Ghz AMD Athelon with a brand new nVidia GeForce 4 Ti card has NEVER played Pinball so well!  

I want a PowerBook so bad!


----------



## toast (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Read somewhere earlier in this thread:_
> Also, the graphics card in the cube does not support Quartz Extreme (unless it was upgraded) so Jaguar may be sluggish.



That's making me mad against Apple. I'll need QE to like Jaguar, that's it ? #### off ! I won't buy this cr#p.

Can't we *just* get 75% of PC speed ? Please Steve, please ! We're VERY far from 50% of it !

Just one example:
I can see the startup screen in Chimera on X.1.5 and I have G3/500.
I can't see Explorer's splash screen at launch on XP. That's true on a friend's 400 Mhz Pentium

MAD I AM !!! MAD !!! Too bad. I'm a patient guy, a bit rude but patient. I'll wait for Chimera to open. Wait wait w


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *
> 
> That's making me mad against Apple. I'll need QE to like Jaguar, that's it ? #### off ! I won't buy this cr#p.
> ...



Um... there is no splash screen on XP's Internet Exploder... 

I don't think there's ever been a splash screen for Internet Explorer on any Windws version.


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

BTW,
You need a newer video card in Windows XP as well... I was having some major problems witn XP until I replaced my old 3DFX VooDoo2 3000 AGP card for a new nVidia GeForce 4 Ti.

I'm still having other problems which I'll have to build myself a new computer alltogether.

People keep comparing a NEW Apple OS on OLD Apple hardware vs a NEW Microsoft OS on NEW PC Hardware... 
Um... DUH - yeah PC would seem better at this point, no? (altho PCs still have problems)

Like my old Mustang with a NEW motor is giving me problems vs my friend's NEW Mustang.... yeah - no kidding! This is a suprise?


----------



## toast (Sep 11, 2002)

> I don't think there's ever been a splash screen for Internet Explorer on any Windws version.


They don't need one, then, booting's too fast for one to be useful. Even worse for the Mac side, hm ?

PS: sorry the G3/500 I bought Dec. 2001 is already out of date. Then the Mac turnover is just same as PC. Even EVEN worse, hm (bis) ?


----------



## sheepguy42 (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *
> They don't need one, then, booting's too fast for one to be useful. Even worse for the Mac side, hm ?
> *


That's because IE is integrated into the user interface of Windows. Maybe if someone made a Mac browser that was more like an invisible but always running utility, like the menu add-ons or FruitMenu or something, then the browser would load fast like on a PC (because it would really already be loaded, just needs to open a new window). Isn't that supposed to be one of the benefits of OS X over XP: XP can only have great (and required) integration w/ M$ products, while OS X apps (through things like Services and Menu Add-Ons) can have great integration with the OS no matter who makes 'em, and all are optional? I don't know, maybe I'm wrong, or crazy, but I think some Browser programmers should take advantage of this and make an optionally integrated browser or OS X, and then more can show up so that Mac has competition in another area where Windows will probably always have Monopoly.


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> *
> They don't need one, then, booting's too fast for one to be useful. Even worse for the Mac side, hm ?
> *



What do you call the Windows Bootup Screen? It should cover everything built into Windows!

Do any of Apple's iApps have a splash screen? Oh now this wouldn't be fair to PCs and Microsoft because they can't even run any of them! 



> *
> PS: sorry the G3/500 I bought Dec. 2001 is already out of date. Then the Mac turnover is just same as PC. Even EVEN worse, hm (bis) ? *



My April 2001 G4/533 (dual) is doing just spiffy!
My AMD 1Ghz built around early 2001 with WinXP on the other hand... Needs major help!

And the help it will be getting will be in the form of Linux!


----------



## fryke (Sep 11, 2002)

Oh! A flamewar thread! Yay! Let's get right into it!!!

To shutdown my computer on Mac OS, I hit the power key, which is on the screen (the main interface) or the keyboard (on PowerBooks, the other main interface). On Windows, I hit the START button. Hmm... Strange, isn't it? Okay, now on to that speed debate:

I get more work done better in less time on a Mac than on a PC. My Mac is faster than your PC. End of discussion.

Why do you start your Internet Explorer so often? I have enough RAM to keep OmniWeb open all the time... And I only reboot once a month or so. Of course, if IE crashes your Windows system, that's a different story. It's important for Windows apps to start fast, I can see that. In eight hours of work, I only start applications once: At the beginning. I then work for eight hours straight (okay, lunchtime, but my computer's ASLEEP for that hour) without quitting and relaunching anything. So, what does it matter?

I beg you: Use a browser that DOESN'T crash half of the time. Internet browsing is entertainment, too, so don't consider it an important thing, really.

And I have no time for this, so, laters.


----------



## toast (Sep 11, 2002)

My point was just: Windows machines I find much more faster. That's my general user opinion.

As a designer, I prefer Mac, of course: I get more job done in less time. I agree with fryke on this point: my Mac is "faster" in this way 

But to the general user, PCs are faster than Macs. My example wasn't very good, maybe. Compare startup speed, then.


----------



## edX (Sep 11, 2002)

> Maybe if someone made a Mac browser that was more like an invisible but always running utility, like the menu add-ons or FruitMenu or something, then the browser would load fast like on a PC (because it would really already be loaded, just needs to open a new window)



like fryke, my first thought is we already have that. we open the browser and leave it open all the time. I keep a window open just for this site all the time. another window for another forum, another window for surfing.  i don't even have to open new windows. i just reload them. sometimes i have 2-3 different browsers launched with multiple windows open.

i often have 6-7 apps open as well. i use whichever one i need and then switch to another while leaving them all up. sometimes i even remember to close them when i'm done.


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by toast _
> * My example wasn't very good, maybe. Compare startup speed, then. *



Starup speed for ? Apps launching or OS Bootup?

Both are pretty quick to me (OSX and WXP)... I just hate watching the PC's BIOS think about stuff for a while not knowing if it locked up at BIOS or not (it happens) 

App launching does not seem faster or slower on either system either, except for Internet Explorer on th PC wich might be a fraction of a second faster, but like sheepguy said, it's integrated into the OS itself so that's not a fair comparision.

I honestly belive that once you are at or break 1Ghz there is no real speed difference on anything on any OS except whatever might  use up a lot of Frame Rate. 
RAM is also a major issue, none of my systems are to be cought dead with anything under 512MBs of RAM.

But maybe I feel this way and I do not feel your and a few other's pain because I feel I really chose wisely when I bought my computer. It took me about 2 weeks of research before I decided on my Dual 533. And I really felt I made the BEST choice when I bought it and only until now that the Dual 1Ghz/DualOptical DDR systems came out (and using one as a Server at the office) do I feel that it's now finally starting to feel slower.

G3s where 100% out of the question in my research (altho I didn't know if or what the real difference was vs a similar G4), and I felt that both the lower priced AND the higher-priced G4 towers at the time where going to quickly feel outdated (altho now I don't recall what they where, I belive both where single G4s).

And even though I'm still paying for my Dual 533 (I was supposed to be done paying ages ago but I lost my job in September '01) I don't regret buying it at all! 
Yeah the new Duals are making me VERY jealouse - but I would not have been able to wait THAT long to get a Mac!


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Ed Spruiell _
> *
> 
> i often have 6-7 apps open as well. i use whichever one i need and then switch to another while leaving them all up. sometimes i even remember to close them when i'm done.  *



LOL! 
Ed! I wish I would get out of the habit of always CLOSING apps! 
On the PC (XP 1Ghz) I always have to remember to close apps or else It'll become too unstable and have to reboot... and I forget I don't have to do that when I get home to my Mac!


----------



## Javintosh (Sep 11, 2002)

When installing Mozilla on Win2K, I was asked if I wanted to enable FastStart (I think that's what it was called). Basically, this would make mozilla load faster by always keeping it in memory.

Of course, the word "load" should have been in quotes since an app that's in memory is already loaded.

I think that MS seems faster because IE and Office are implemented using the fast start feature.

By that standard, Chimera loads incredible fast... You can try this to. open chimera (put it in your startup items) and then close all of chimera's windows. then click on the chimera icon and tiem how long it takes for chimera to load....


----------



## hazmat (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tormente _
> *
> 
> Um... there is no splash screen on XP's Internet Exploder...
> ...



Yes there has been.  IE has a splash screen under NT4.
At least up to 5.5.  I wouldn't upgrade to 6.  Still haven't under Win2k.


----------



## Sogni (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by hazmat _
> *
> 
> Yes there has been.  IE has a splash screen under NT4.
> At least up to 5.5.  I wouldn't upgrade to 6.  Still haven't under Win2k. *



Really? My bad... Goes to show how often I use Internet Exploder!   
There isn't one in XP.

Windows Update and Site Testing is ALL I use Explorer for... pisses my coworker off that I use Mozilla (she hates Netscape)! hehe


----------



## hazmat (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tormente _
> *
> 
> Really? My bad... Goes to show how often I use Internet Exploder!
> There isn't one in XP.*



Nor in 2k.




> *Windows Update and Site Testing is ALL I use Explorer for... pisses my coworker off that I use Mozilla (she hates Netscape)! hehe  *



In Windows, I happily use IE.  I think it's the best browser for it.  In OS X, I never use it.


----------



## iMacLover (Sep 11, 2002)

I have to say that the main thing that I have found slow on my iMac is web page rendering.  But now with the new chimera everything is quite fast.  It seems like if someone were to buy a computer just the surf the web, which many people do now adays, because they hear how great the internet is, you can do more with a computer!!! Your family members must not have realized how easy everything is to do on a Mac.  How easy is it to download music, copy it to iTunes and burn a CD?  Or how easy is it to check your email with OS X's mail client?  How easy is it to connect a camera via USB and launch iPhoto, make a web page in seconds and post it on .Mac if ya got it? How easy is it to connect a Dig. Video Camera via  speedy firewire and take complete control of the camera with iMovie?  Or how easy is it to organize your life with iCal now?  Look at what  software Apple has to offer against the software Microsoft has.  

OS X may not be the speediest OS but on a G4 processor I know just about anyone can attest can move pretty quick.

I'd rather have an EASY OS install without a call to Microsoft for an activation key.

People have to get over the slight speed difference, give the OS time to grow. And if you're still in 10.1 do yourself a favor and upgrade, it's sure worth it.

Oh one more thing....

There's no Gator for OS X


----------



## Total Konfuzion (Sep 11, 2002)

And if there was a Gator of Osx.....i'd umm...use BeOS? heh


----------



## swizcore (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Admin _
> *I have to be honest. I see all these new systems coming out and I'm all sad and unhappy that I have this OLD 1999 G4/500 system. With dual monitors and 768meg of RAM, it should be nothing to cry about. But I did cry, until I started playing around with 10.2 or "newer faster" Macs. And in all honesty, I don't feel like my system is almost 3 years old.
> 
> No one on this board can argue that the GUI of Windows is faster. And I am sure the GUI of OS 9 rocks major butt on the newer Mac's. However, for the lay internet user, who has experience using Windows... the first impression they have is "it's slower" and yes it is slower. Sure, the GUI is awesome, and having a UNIX foundation rocks my world, and a few seconds here and a few seconds there comparison might come out in Mac's favor, but all that said, when it comes to first impressions, other than being sexy, it leaves much to be desired.
> ...



Maybe you should have explained to the family before they got the Macs that Macs are not for those who just like to surf the web. They are for designing-Print, Video, Web... If they just wanted a system to surf the web then they should have stayed with PC.


----------



## ScottW (Sep 11, 2002)

Well, the one who got the Cube... they wanted it to make importing digital pictures easy and managing all of that. But, I think its a case of being very short-sighted.


----------



## swizcore (Sep 11, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Admin _
> *Well, the one who got the Cube... they wanted it to make importing digital pictures easy and managing all of that. But, I think its a case of being very short-sighted. *



Well, its a hands-down win for the Mac then in this case. It IS much easier to work with digital images on a Mac than PC, especially getting them in the computer. And with a Cube and OSX there shouldn't be any speed complaints.

If your talking OS9 then I have no arguement, I hate OS9.


----------



## dave17lax (Sep 12, 2002)

*Should've told em that Macs are for designing, creative, etc* 

The question is WHY can't they be both? There is no reason that we should not be able to open a window in the finder and not expect it to open right then. RIGHt?

Or go to a webpage and see it almost IMMEDIAtely!

my own stresses added to the words there.


----------



## swizcore (Sep 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by dave17lax _
> *Should've told em that Macs are for designing, creative, etc
> 
> The question is WHY can't they be both? There is no reason that we should not be able to open a window in the finder and not expect it to open right then. RIGHt?
> ...



I totally agree with you but I have a dual GHz so Im not even close to complaining of speed for any processes including web surfing. With cable internet, a fast hard drive, good graphics card and Chimera I'll put my Mac up against *ANY* PC for web browsing.


----------



## dave17lax (Sep 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by swizcore _
> *
> 
> I totally agree with you but I have a dual GHz so Im not even close to complaining of speed for any processes including web surfing. With cable internet, a fast hard drive, good graphics card and Chimera I'll put my Mac up against ANY PC for web browsing. *



I have a dual g4 500, and I'm not complaining, except that 3-5 year old PC's do outpace 3-5 year old macs when it comes to certain "simple tasks".
I've said other stuff in this thread that relates..unfortunately I am too lazy right now to quote from it.

Of course my final vote comes down to mac for everything, no matter what happens. What a pawn I am  !


----------



## Total Konfuzion (Sep 12, 2002)

I have many pcs, running everything from win98 to 2k to redhat to bsd and you know what?  I use my iBook more often than I use any of my pcs.  If you take a look at my computer stats in my sig, you will see that most of the pcs i have blow away the ibook 700 in terms of specs, but the iBook is just damn fun to use!  And i can accomplish everything i could using both a windows box and a *nix box....under one roof.   Yay@me


----------



## swizcore (Sep 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Total Konfuzion _
> *I have many pcs, running everything from win98 to 2k to redhat to bsd and you know what?  I use my iBook more often than I use any of my pcs.  If you take a look at my computer stats in my sig, you will see that most of the pcs i have blow away the ibook 700 in terms of specs, but the iBook is just damn fun to use!  And i can accomplish everything i could using both a windows box and a *nix box....under one roof.   Yay@me *



Well said. I do have one of the fastest Macs out right now but even if I still have it in 5 years, I'll be happy. There is just no other option for me, If I didn't use Macs I wouldn't use computers at all. Im so serious...


----------



## anrkngl (Sep 12, 2002)

Umm, they are using MSIE. Of course it is slow. It has always been slow on X. In fact, it's slow slow that I exclusively use mozilla now.


----------



## swizcore (Sep 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by anrkngl _
> *Umm, they are using MSIE. Of course it is slow. It has always been slow on X. In fact, it's slow slow that I exclusively use mozilla now. *



Absolutely, IE is horrid on Mac, for anyone who hasn't tried it, give Chimera a shot. It is BY FAR the fastest rendering browser available. It makes every other browser look ridiculous for rendering speed. Since it is cocoa it also looks nicer than any other browser. Tabs are awesome too.
Get it at www.mozilla.org , just look for the chimera link. Dont be afraid to grab the latest trunk version released nightly. They are WAY stable.


----------



## drash (Sep 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by swizcore _
> *
> Get it at www.mozilla.org , just look for the chimera link. Dont be afraid to grab the latest trunk version released nightly. They are WAY stable. *



I'll say. Netscape 7.0 would quit unexpectedly while the Chimera 0.5 has been very solid.

And as far as going back to PCs are concerned, I know there has to be a lot of pissed off people today, and far more than is in the entire Apple camp.  Intel has abandoned RAMBUS in any future upgrades.  Like the VL-Bus (huh, you mean nobody remembers that?), motherboards that support this now orphaned technology will slowly wither and dry up in supply.  All I can say is thank you to the masses of PC users to help Apple figure out which technology was ultimately the best.

Technologically it may have been superior on paper, but it was too expensive to implement.  For 256 Mbytes of RAMBUS  RAM, you had to install a pair of 128 Mbyte modules, and there were a lot of cheaper motherboards with only 2 RAM slots like Dells.  And for that price I could easily offer my customers a faster processor along with 512 Mbytes of DDR RAM on one module, and any OS is faster with double the RAM, even if the RAM is marginally slower.  It's too bad 10's of millions of PC users were burned by Intel's decision.  But the good thing that will come out of this, in the long run,  is cheaper DDR prices for Apple computers.


----------



## plastic (Sep 12, 2002)

Thanks for the tips guys. Chimera .0.5 does makes things faster!


----------



## hulkaros (Sep 12, 2002)

While I prefer OmniWeb and still use it as my main browser, in the past few days I'm trying Chimera 0.5 in a few Macs (with X.1.5 as well as X.2) and so far its the best Chimera version!

Its SOOOOOOOOO fast! It beats EVERYTHING else in speed area... And its somewhat stable too!

It seems, that for me, the top 3 browsers are:
-OmniWeb
-Chimera
-Mozilla

Now, if Chimera/Mozilla let me read Greek web sites like OmniWeb does, I could be in browser heaven!

OmniWeb rules because it has built-in capabilities for Greek NOT only for reading the sites but for menus, help, etc!!! And I didn't load a anything but OmniWeb itself... Unlike Mozilla or Chimera or IE which require the user to wrestle with fonts, languages and stuff like that...

OmniWeb, OmniWeb, OmniWeb, OmniWeb.1 rulez!


----------



## swizcore (Sep 12, 2002)

> _Originally posted by drash _
> *
> ...But the good thing that will come out of this, in the long run,  is cheaper DDR prices for Apple computers.
> *



and hopefully some more switchers


----------



## dave17lax (Sep 12, 2002)

yeah I just changed my default to chimera. You can set it to automatically open new tabs whenever you request a page from another app (ie you get a bunch of emails with links...just click on the links and tabs will be made for each serperate one, you dont have to go to browser, hit command +n, go back to app, click link, etc.)


----------



## sjb2016 (Sep 13, 2002)

Firstly, Chimera rocks.  I like it as it will actually open up the NME Radio listening window, however, just as with Mozilla it crashes the entire browser before the music beings.  I don't suppose this has anything to do with the fact that NME radio is broadcast exclusively in Windows Media format.  I'm sure MS has a bit of code that makes all non IE browsers crash when trying to load WM content.  

Anyway, as far as speed goes this is my observation.  My Mac rocks for waking up from sleep.  I sell computers for the darkside everyday and I often wait upwards of 30 seconds for the computers to wake up.  As far as other tasks, my G4 533 kicks a Celeron's ass at everything regardless of the Celeron clock speed.  On AMD Athlons or P4s, similar speeds for most app openings but the XP ui is without a doubt snappier.  Anybody that knows me knows it pains me to say that, but its true.  Will I ever by a PC?  Absolutely not.  I would honestly never buy a home computer again if I had to run Windows.  The way I see it is that my dad has an SE from 1987 and it is still trucking so I should be able to get at least 15 years out of this G4, right?


----------



## Annihilatus (Sep 13, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Tormente _
> *
> 
> Um... there is no splash screen on XP's Internet Exploder...
> ...



Actually, if you install Internet Explorer 4+  on Windows NT or Windows 95, there'll be a splash screen because the program is not part of the OS. For anything since Windows 98, the screen doesn't come up since it is integrated into the OS.

Andre


----------



## Total Konfuzion (Sep 14, 2002)

*gag*@IE 4...that screwed up every single win95 machine i ever saw it touch. hehe.  I think that might have been when the term Internet Exploder actually got popular.


----------



## lasmith05 (Sep 14, 2002)

Just tried chimera .5... Wow what a fcking difference in speed! Web browsing is super fast on my 700mhz LCD imac. I now realize IE blowz on the mac (again)


----------



## plastic (Sep 14, 2002)

Chimera's tab window function ROCKS! I am anal when it comes to multiple windows open on the desktop and Chimera in one neat window! Nice nice nice... love it love it love it!


----------

