don't "switch"

The Finder is slow in its responsive to the user, especially when access to the volume is bandwidth restricted. This is a legitimate gripe. Apple should continue to work extensively on this problem.

If Illustrator is slow, I'd blame Adobe. Yeah it runs fast in 9 and Windows, it's been tweaked for those OSes for about a decade. I think it's just not tuned for OS X. If Adobe says that OS X is at fault, then let us know, and we'll help you yell at Apple for not keeping their flagship OS up to par.

I just think you're being terribly shortsighted if you are tossing an entire platform because of two unoptimized applications. The OS is wonderful, with Classic apps that run unchanged, carbon apps that allow us to have Illustrator, Office, et al. The cocoa environment and java with so much prebuilt stuff that there's little advantage to higher level languages like RealBasic and their ilk. Admittedly it depends on your workflow, and if you need Illustrator for 9 and the OS 9 Finder right now, and can't wait for equivalent products to mature into OS X, and won't run OS 9 ... well, you've pretty much made your choice already.

Even if I did like a M$ product on technical merit, I'd never use it on moral grounds. It's not their presence that I loathe so much as their ability to take away all choice and competition in whatever market segment they choose. I think M$ is the worst thing about the computer industry today. The RIAA/MPAA are working on a close second though. Switch if you want, it's your soul. ;-) I'll concede that Acrobat is unnecessarily slow, and the Finder needs work though.
 
I have found the Adobe people very willing to talk about where they can/will and can't/won't speed up things for their Mac OS X applications. A good address for information about InDesign is the blueworld mailinglist. You'll find it at http://www.blueworld.com ... Some Adobe reps are active on that list, and I've found it much more pleasing to work among professionals. There's too many warez-kids on Adobe's own forums, which I don't really understand, but hey: It's their decision.

There's a good article about "switching back" at O'Reilly: http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/newsletters/20021108.html
 
I just got done testing Photoshop 7 on the following 2 G4's:

G4 450MHz with 768MB RAM / OS 9.2
VS.
G4 Dual 1GHz with 1 Gig RAM / OS 10.2.2

(ALL TESTS RUN WITH THE SAME RGB IMAGE 22" X 18" 72 dpi [1584 X 1296px])

Filter: Radial Blur - Zoom 10%
450: 30 seconds
Dual: 2 seconds

Filter: Radial Blur - Zoom 30%
450: 89 seconds
Dual: 7 seconds

Filter: Unsharp Mask - 200% - 2.0 - 10 Levels
450: 10 seconds
Dual: under 1 1/2 seconds

There's no denying the raw processing power of the new G4's is impressive. Even though there's a given big difference in these 2 G4's the results were nonetheless amazing. Over ten times faster!
The problem is, when I switch between apps on the slower older G4(running OS 9.2) it's just faster, way faster. I mean, in OSX on the new G4, when I've been working in Dreamweaver for 30 minutes or so, then I suddenly switch over to photoshop, I end up starring at that beachball for 5-8 seconds. That lag is never more then 1-2 seconds on the old G4, and that multitasking and app switching is where I really like to see speed along with HD navigation. Theed, yeah, I will concede that we need time for apps to be optimized for X, but this is a painful and unusual wait. Is it even possible for Apple to write a better version of finder if they haven't already? What could be so hard about it and why would they even release it if it was clearly almost 3 times slower then OS9's and has a higher tendency to crash?
 
Originally posted by habilis
...P.S. - WHY, in all HELL, did they take away labels??!!?!...
Click to expand...
I was soooo unhappy about that too... until I found Labels X...

These are the same folks who make that cool fruit Menu's Apple menu haxie...
 
Originally posted by kalantna
"Anyway, Tormente, how do I find what file system I'm using? I did a search in mac help and came up dry(as usual)."

Since no one has answered this for you, I will. Go to /Applications/Utilities/ and open "Disk Utility."...
Click to expand...
That's just stupid... Didn't this info used to be clearly available under Get Info? I even looked in Apple System Profiler, but it was not there either.

I just sent feedback to Apple requesting that they make this info easier to find. (I dread the day I have to send my Mom to Disk Utility for this...)
 
Originally posted by habilis
I just got done testing Photoshop 7 on the following 2 G4's:

G4 450MHz with 768MB RAM / OS 9.2
VS.
G4 Dual 1GHz with 1 Gig RAM / OS 10.2.2...
Click to expand...
Doesn't Photoshop leverage both CPU's when running under OS 9?

Why not make this fair by simply booting your dual into OS 9 and re-doing the tests on the same box?
 
yes, hard drive format is still easily accessible within get info. Please don't write Apple to fix that, there's enough stuff that really is broken. :)

As for P-shop leveraging both CPU's in 9, well, kinda. Figure it used 1.5 CPU's. Still better than most 9 apps.

As for habilis's app switching time, I'm not sure what to say. maybe you have too much RAM allocated to P-shop? Perhaps a faster HD is a solution? It does seem odd the way you describe it. I don't know. ... And why the Finder isn't better ... ummm, I figured it was a proving ground for Carbon. It sure proved a lot of things to me about Carbon. ;-)
 
I think you can find out what file system you are using by opening the Disk Utility application (under /Applications/Utilities). Then, select your disc and it should give you info about what file system it is using.

And, yes, I have tried the Unix file system once, when I first upgraded to 10.1, and the GUI speed really did suffer. I'm sure it would be handy for a headless server, but for us desktop users there is really no point.
 
Also, you can use the Terminal command diskutil. Enter it without parameters to get some help on it.
 
I'm just going to say this as a user of both the PC and the Mac.

There's no denying that Macs are slow as hell. I think we've determined this already. The most common response to someone saying Macs are slow here is 'get more ram' which doesn't really improve the speed anyway. The way people respond on this board, you'd think you need 64 GB of ram to get Mac OS X to be as quick as XP.

However, as much as I like the PC's speed, the reason I prefer my Mac is because everything FEELS like it's supposed to be there. There's no denying Photoshop is essentially faster on the PC or that games are made for the PC first or that browsing is faster, but XP never feels like it smoothly integrates onto the PC, no matter what PC you buy.

When you get a Mac, and it is advertised as being able to sleep, you can be sure it'll sleep and wake up. If it is advertised as being able to recognize most digital cameras and load pictures from one, you can be sure it'll be able to do it. With XP, you're never sure whether what's advertised will actually work.

I've been a PC user for a very long time (over 10 years) and when using Windows, I can never be sure if anything will crash or not when I'm shutting down. I never know if the speed of my programs will be as good as it was before the computer went to sleep. I can never be sure that a program won't crash a few seconds before I plan on saving the work I'm doing. With a Mac, I can.

So what it all boils down to is what your priorities are. As excrutiatingly slow as the Mac might be, it does exactly what it advertises and it is reliable and stable as I would want a computer to be. The PC isn't, and I don't think it ever will be. You get far superior performance for a lower price, but you do not get the stability and reliability the vendor and Microsoft promise you. You don't get a guarantee of anything.

If 600 mhz macs sold at the same price as 600 mhz PC's, all Apple hardware right now would cost in the hundreds and not the thousands. As a result, many more PC users would make the switch and never look back. The only thing stopping PC users, regardless of what Apple and Apple users might think, is that it costs a ridiculous amount for what you get. Some don't care about the money so long as they get what they are promised but most people, especially in this cost-conscious era, will rather suffer through a Microsoft operating system than pay the premium.
 
Originally posted by Sirtovin

5. Mac OS is 128-bit... Windows is still at a pathetic 32-bit cross platform system... (Meaning it still wants to read 16 & 8 bit programs...)
Click to expand...

Mac OS is NOT an 128-bit OS. No.
It is also "pathetic" 32-bit as Windows. The G4 is a 32-bit Processor just like the P4. Only Altivec is 128-bit.

There is a 64-bit version of Windows for the Itanium processor (Since August 2001), and Apple will have Mac OS X with 64-bit as soon as they go 64-bit processorwise.
 
I'm not going to argue on a lot of cases about the mac being as fast or faster than the PC. But it's usually fast enough, and I find that I am faster on it. In the end, that's what matters to me.

It boils down to "the right tool for the job." When interfacing with me is one of the primary concerns of the computer, the Mac is usually more efficient overall at the task. If you are different, then think differently. ;-)

I am very interested in the $200 Lindows computers I read about. I am also interested in a $1400 iBook. I am ecstatic about my old Dual 450 G4. If all you need to do is surf the web and send e-mail, it's hard to justify a $1000 markup for ease of use. Digital video and creative work; it becomes real easy to justify.

And yeah, they're all 32 bit OSes and architectures that we're talking about here. If you have a 4G RAM minimum requirement in your application, you're not talking about MacOS and Windows in this forum. You're probably hiring consulting from Sun or IBM.
 
Originally posted by cellfish
when using Windows, I can never be sure if anything will crash or not when I'm shutting down. I never know if the speed of my programs will be as good as it was before the computer went to sleep. I can never be sure that a program won't crash a few seconds before I plan on saving the work I'm doing. With a Mac, I can.

So what it all boils down to is what your priorities are. As excrutiatingly slow as the Mac might be, it does exactly what it advertises and it is reliable and stable as I would want a computer to be. The PC isn't, and I don't think it ever will be. You get far superior performance for a lower price, but you do not get the stability and reliability the vendor and Microsoft promise you. You don't get a guarantee of anything.
Click to expand...

I beg to respectfully differ:
It's true, in the past, windows was buggy, glitchy, crashy, clunky and all around a pain in the ass. Just navigating around windows, doing normal stuff was fearful, literally, I remember those days. You never knew what to expect. Macintosh was a breathof fresh air, simple(not TOO simple), elegant, and yes, everything was guaranteed to work.

But as of today, the tables have clearly turned. In OS9, navigating around folders, having explorer open and a few other programs up at once was not at all a problem, no fear whatsoever. In OSX however, I once again know fear. And it's the terrible kind of fear that travels up your spine and into your soul because you know you just spent over 4 grand on this tower and a few programs (Illustrator 10, Photoshop 7, Office X, and Macromedia MX studio. and 512MB Apple RAM) and your stuck with it.

So I've thought it was everything including my chair or the way I was seated that made osx so bad, I've run the gambit on this dog. Come full circle. I've been heavy in to OSX for the last 2 months now and the following is sadly, depressingly, undeniably true: It's buggy, glitchy, crashy, clunky and all around a pain in the ass. Just navigating around folders, doing normal stuff is fearful, literally. And Apples Dumbing Down campaign has reached an all time low that they think were not even smart enough to use spring loaded folders, labels, memory allocation, changing appearances, create a folder heirarchy of our own, or system view fonts without the aid of third party hacking software that costs more money. Yeah I know all about Labels X and Tinker Tools and it's ilk. I don't want more crap on my system to glitch it up, nor SHOULD i want it...

People can easily make fun of me for not researching my products well enough, cuz I didn't, and yeah i was gullible to trust Apple, I never will again. But people need to hear the real truth, and take a stand against this corporate political nightmare machine that Apple has become. We don't have to take this. If every person that views this would send as many emails to Apple as I have, things would be changing for the better. We could have our Mac back. Todays Macintosh is a perfect example of how things really can be too simple...

Op Ed by A. Sadofsky
 
Originally posted by habilis
So I've thought it was everything including my chair or the way I was seated that made osx so bad, I've run the gambit on this dog. Come full circle. I've been heavy in to OSX for the last 2 months now and the following is sadly, depressingly, undeniably true: It's buggy, glitchy, crashy, clunky and all around a pain in the ass. Just navigating around folders, doing normal stuff is fearful, literally. And Apples Dumbing Down campaign has reached an all time low that they think were not even smart enough to use spring loaded folders, labels, memory allocation, changing appearances, create a folder heirarchy of our own, or system view fonts without the aid of third party hacking software that costs more money. Yeah I know all about Labels X and Tinker Tools and it's ilk. I don't want more crap on my system to glitch it up, nor SHOULD i want it...
Click to expand...

I'm not going to deny that what you are saying is quite easily true. I ran up to a lot of problems with OS X also until I updated to X.2.2. Before then, OS X was a pile of sh*t to be honest. I can't really speak about the contrast of OS 9 to OS X because I'm not familiar with anything below OS X, nor do I really want to be. However, I find that OS X, albeit troublesome in some areas, is all-around effective. The lack of defragmenter bothers me to some extent and I had to buy PlusOptimizer (didn't want to shell out 70$ USD for Drive 10). The fact that certain programs, like iPhoto, require 256 megs ram to me is kind of ridiculous too. I don't want to return to Windows despite it because I'm sick of constantly repairing problems. I'm sick of turning on the computer one day and having my brand-spanking new motherboard tell me that the CMOS battery is dead, only to have it run fine after reconfig for months at a time. I'm sick of trying to figure out why a CD-ROM will load fine one day, and not the next day. I'm sick of the screen redraws, the constant threat of new spyware and viruses, the third-party cookies and the conflicts between programs. There's so much to hate about the PC that the small problems that I have (the lack of defragger and the ridiculous requirement of RAM) with the Mac mean nothing overall. I willingly bought a Mac, despite having a powerful PC (Athlon XP 2000+) simply because I couldn't stand the noise of the computer, the problems, the viruses, the spyware and the fact that no Windows 'feature' will execute without sacrificing another.

People can easily make fun of me for not researching my products well enough, cuz I didn't, and yeah i was gullible to trust Apple, I never will again. But people need to hear the real truth, and take a stand against this corporate political nightmare machine that Apple has become. We don't have to take this. If every person that views this would send as many emails to Apple as I have, things would be changing for the better. We could have our Mac back. Todays Macintosh is a perfect example of how things really can be too simple...
Click to expand...

Well, I have to be honest with you in saying that as bad of a corporate machine as Apple might be, it's still better than Microsoft. I don't hate Microsoft. I actually love Office and MSN Messenger and think IE is the best browser for the Mac. However, as much as I like their products, I don't like their OS'. The OS, while quite good, is the reason I got out of the PC world. It offered me everything except what I value the most -> functionality. I like that they have a preview program for JPG's and faxes, I like how they now offer drivers for most hardware and I like just plugging my digcam in there and it being seen, but I hate putting the computer to sleep and having it still make tons of noise and not wake up properly on-demand. Plus, one of my friends is now an employee of Microsoft. When he came to town last weekend, I told him why I bought my Mac (he got me Office X for 50$ USD). I told him that I was worried about how Motorola was no longer making processors and hoping that Apple would find a way out of their clock speed hole. He then said 'you mean Apple no longer has new processors? They might die?' and I said that I don't think so but it can only hurt the company. He then laughed and said 'Yes! There goes the competition!' ... My friend was never that way and his sudden interest in killing the competition was actually worrisome. He insisted that Microsoft does everything it can to make sure its clients are happy with their product and says the employees work hard, but his attitude showed me the opposite.
 
Originally posted by habilis
But people need to hear the real truth, and take a stand against this corporate political nightmare machine that Apple has become. We don't have to take this.
Click to expand...

I am going to have to respectfully differ with you on this. While I am sure that you are having the problems you say you are, I do not believe that you are truly representative of all Mac OS X users. You may wish to believe that all of us are having your same problems, and you may think that we are not telling the truth when we say that we aren’t, but the simple fact is that if everyone was having your problems, then no one would be able to get any work done. We, who live and die by the productivity of our computers, would be starving now if Mac OS X was as bad for us as it seems to be for you.

Beyond working in a system that I feel productive in, I use my PowerBook as a representative system of how I can keep systems up and running for my clients to see. I was using Rhapsody on that system ever since I got it because I could not afford to have it be buggy, glitchy, crashy, clunky and all around a pain in the ass in front of a client. The only way 10.2 earned it’s place on my PowerBook is by impressing the hell out of me. Believe me, if my PowerBook was acting like you say your system is, I would have Mac OS X off that thing so fast it would make your head spin!

The fact is that Mac OS X is, for me and a majority of others, doing it’s job and a very good job at that.

Please contact Apple as much as you can. You should have a system that works. But don’t try to rally people to a cause that is not representative of a majority of Mac OS X users. You, personally, are having problems with Apple. You, personally, need to work with Apple to resolve these problems. Your personal problems are not the real truth for every one, no matter how bad they seem to you personally.
 
Have to second here, too.

I have been on the bandwaggon since Rhapsody DR 2. I've tried to move my productive work to Apple's NeXT operating system several times and finally managed with 10.0.3. Although there were some issues with software in Classic, I haven't looked back much. When 10.1 appeared, I had to applaud Apple. And when I finally got rid of the last Classic apps, I got rid of the Classic environment altogether. Mac OS X has been my productive operating system for years now, and the hardware went very well with it. I'm also in charge for some other Macs that are all running Mac OS X 10.2, and they do work fine and are all used for production of graphics design.
 
Originally posted by habilis
...If every person that views this would send as many emails to Apple as I have, things would be changing for the better. We could have our Mac back. Todays Macintosh is a perfect example of how things really can be too simple...
Click to expand...

If I were to send an email to Apple it would address the following things.

A) I love Mac OS X, especially Jaguar.

B) I love my iBook far more than any PC notebook I've ever owned.

C) Keep up the good work.
 
Even better: I've switched two of my female friends to iBooks, and THEY have written Apple with their switchers' stories. ;)

If *I*'d write Apple an e-mail, it'd contain the 3 points of itanium (but with PowerBook instead of iBook) plus the following:

D) Please make a clean, translucency-free, professional theme for the next version of Mac OS X. I don't want to hack the OS by installing themes. I want an original, Apple-made theme I can use for work without distraction.

(That said, I actually _do_ replace Aqua with Rhapsodized. Can't say it enough...)
 
Originally posted by fryke
D) Please make a clean, translucency-free, professional theme for the next version of Mac OS X. I don't want to hack the OS by installing themes. I want an original, Apple-made theme I can use for work without distraction.
Click to expand...

I'll second that. I may like Aqua, but it would be nice to turn it off by using something that is native to the OS.
 
You know what really hits me here on this forum?
That once somebody comes with just slight criticscism of mac os x, somebody just slaps him or her in the face this standard story of how good this OS really is and how much Microsoft sucks.

Hey, I like MacOSX, but I can still see it´s faults and and always think of better ways to do things.
(What annoys me right now is the lack of a web-browser that has all the features of IE6, a lot of technology on the web is oddly enough designed with only the PC user in mind)

But to all you die-hard mac fans who refuse to tuch a PC because you´re afraid you might catch a nasty disease, think of this:

Microsoft has designed an OS that runs smooth on biilions of different configurations, video cards, motherboards, memory, around the globe.

Apple still has problems getting their OS to work perfectly on their own customized machines.


I have little expierience with windows,
I´ve used a mac all my life, and love it.
But, hey, don´t get brainwashed by Apple,
Think Different you know!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top