Mac os 10.2

[Pascal]

Originally posted by vic
exept ther java thing, actually java runs very fast on mac

OK, maybe I shouldn't have included Java in that sentence... but there are so many other aspects of OS X that ought to be faster than they are. Replace the word "Java" with anything else... say "disk browsing in the Finder" for instance !

and the os on the celeron was snappy and fast, but try rendering a movie, or working on digital photos in photoshop at 200 300 megs, trust me you will see why most artists use macs - with os 9 that is!!!!

But rendering images has nothing to do with the OS. Rendering images has only to do with the raw power of the processor, and that is why I found my experience with the Celeron so depressing : despite having such a weak CPU, the WinXP PC was fast, while my machine with a much stronger CPU only manages to limp along under Mac OS X.

that was a f**king snappy os, thats why i'm still using it.

Although you may remember how slow Mac OS 7.5 was. It is sad to see how long it took Apple to optimize its system for the PowerPC. I hope it won't take as long before Mac OS X is optimized !!!

 

[vic]

i can't remember os 7.5, i started with os 9, and let's hope they - for my sake at least - they will make the optimizations and features faster or i may be looking at linux or windows for an option.

 

[Pascal]

Originally posted by mindbend
Hang in there on the speed thing, the wait will be worth it.

I've been told that the future is bright with Apple since the beginning of the 90's with Pink then Taligent then Copland then Rhapsody then Mac OS X... I seriously think Apple should rename its operating system Excalibur.

 

[Krevinek]

Originally posted by vic
i can't remember os 7.5, i started with os 9, and let's hope they - for my sake at least - they will make the optimizations and features faster or i may be looking at linux or windows for an option.

For some reason, I just feel like saying: Comparing two OSes like MacOS 9 and MacOS X is like comparing an apple and a banana. If you feel that you can say they are similar without using 'they are fruits,' then go ahead an continue bashing.

I for one know for a fact that so much has changed with the UI between OS 9 and OS X that it is very difficult for me to say 'X needs to be faster than 9'. Depends on what you mean by faster for one, and it also depends on the complexity of the graphics engine. X introduced a whole new stage in the 2D pipeline that 9 doesn't have. It is almost like asking, 'I want this car that costs more to make, at a lower price.'

If you feel you need to move to another OS to get work done, by all means, do so. I am not going to be stopping you.

 

[Pascal]

Originally posted by Krevinek
I for one know for a fact that so much has changed with the UI between OS 9 and OS X that it is very difficult for me to say 'X needs to be faster than 9'. Depends on what you mean by faster for one, and it also depends on the complexity of the graphics engine. X introduced a whole new stage in the 2D pipeline that 9 doesn't have.

Well all the improvements under the hood (or in fact the new car altogether) is what keeps me from going back to Mac OS 9. Mac OS X is definitely a huge improvement over Mac OS 9 no questions asked. But the computer buyers don't care about true technology breakthrough : they only care about flash and speed. Granted, Mac OS X is very flashy, but it certainly isn't speedy. And as long as it won't be speedy, Apple's market share won't grow. As Mac users, we all pay the price of Apple's shrinking market share...

The truth is this : I don't want to buy a Wintel, I don't want to be a Borg. I want Apple to provide the best computing experience there is so I can say to every one that my platform of choice is the best !

 

[Krevinek]

I was aiming that post at Vic, since his post seemed to be of a mindset that seems rather disturbing to me at this point: "I want what I want, and if it was possible before, then it is always possible."

Consumers have taken on this mindset as a whole, and it seems rather counterproductive to the idea of 'informed consumer' when they make assumptions about a product. I have encountered a similar mindset in a lot of Morpheus/Kazaa users: "If it is on the internet, I should get it for free. If I want it for free, I look on the internet."

I wanted to make a somewhat sarcastic post to point this out, but as usual, my sarcasm misses the mark.

BTW, right now because of the first year of OS X, Apple is slowly GAINING market share, rather than 'shrinking' as you put it. For every one person who jumps ship I see 3-4 come over (IRL), as well as the increase in units sold to consumers overall per year since Jobs came back. How is that a shrinking market share? (Although I personally wish Apple would make the documentation for writing video/3D/DVD drivers public myself)

 

[Pascal]

Originally posted by Krevinek
BTW, right now because of the first year of OS X, Apple is slowly GAINING market share, rather than 'shrinking' as you put it. For every one person who jumps ship I see 3-4 come over (IRL), as well as the increase in units sold to consumers overall per year since Jobs came back. How is that a shrinking market share?

I am very happy to read that (although I think that this is only true in the U.S.A.) and I most certainly wish it is true ! (By the way, what does IRL mean ?)

 

[Krevinek]

In Real Life.

It is a term normally used when the younger generation wants to show the difference between online experiences/sights and offline experiences/sights.

 

[vic]

Originally posted by Krevinek


For some reason, I just feel like saying: Comparing two OSes like MacOS 9 and MacOS X is like comparing an apple and a banana. If you feel that you can say they are similar without using 'they are fruits,' then go ahead an continue bashing.

I for one know for a fact that so much has changed with the UI between OS 9 and OS X that it is very difficult for me to say 'X needs to be faster than 9'. Depends on what you mean by faster for one, and it also depends on the complexity of the graphics engine. X introduced a whole new stage in the 2D pipeline that 9 doesn't have. It is almost like asking, 'I want this car that costs more to make, at a lower price.'

If you feel you need to move to another OS to get work done, by all means, do so. I am not going to be stopping you.

that's the point. they ARE similar. they ARE both fruits. in other words - a computer is a tool, you don't eat soup with a hammer because it is not appropriate, but you don't nail with a plastic hammer either. i need to earn a living with a computer - not compare the os's. it's as simple as that.


--- and i'm not bashing, i'm communiacationg my frustration

 

[Pascal]

Thanks for your explanation !

By the way :

Originally posted by Krevinek
I have encountered a similar mindset in a lot of Morpheus/Kazaa users: "If it is on the internet, I should get it for free. If I want it for free, I look on the internet."

This mindset cannot be found amongst Mac users since there are no Kazaa/Morpheus clients on the Mac in the first place !

 

[Krevinek]

Why use Morpheus now when you can use Limewire, Aquasition or Mactella and get the same result? Morpheus is now a Gnutella client since their removal off the FastTrack network.

Plus Hotline, KDX, Carracho, etc all fall under the same category of file sharing apps commonly used to pirate MP3s.

 

[vic]

Originally posted by Krevinek
I was aiming that post at Vic, since his post seemed to be of a mindset that seems rather disturbing to me at this point: "I want what I want, and if it was possible before, then it is always possible."

Consumers have taken on this mindset as a whole, and it seems rather counterproductive to the idea of 'informed consumer' when they make assumptions about a product. I have encountered a similar mindset in a lot of Morpheus/Kazaa users: "If it is on the internet, I should get it for free. If I want it for free, I look on the internet."

I wanted to make a somewhat sarcastic post to point this out, but as usual, my sarcasm misses the mark.

BTW, right now because of the first year of OS X, Apple is slowly GAINING market share, rather than 'shrinking' as you put it. For every one person who jumps ship I see 3-4 come over (IRL), as well as the increase in units sold to consumers overall per year since Jobs came back. How is that a shrinking market share? (Although I personally wish Apple would make the documentation for writing video/3D/DVD drivers public myself)

you think i'm a consumer? believe me, if everyone was as consumer as me the nation would be poor. - i use my computer for personal and work/money making reasons -granted little at thsi point, but i'm working on it, and i though buying a mac would help, and it has, it has, but the jump to os x is sttaring to make me ffel like i'm being forced to be a consumer. i need to buy more hardware, i need to wait and be told what to do, cuz apple sais so, i need to stick with them becasue they are good and MS is evil, - in case you havent noticed os x was built for consumers, apple is trying to expand it's market share, it's starting to make me feel like it's becoming another windows, a consumer product. as i said many times before i LOVE the *promises* os x brings on the Mac platform, and i LOVE the hardware beyond any pentium, BUT what is is and no faith will undo science - so to speak.

 

[Krevinek]

True, but there is also the fact that Apple followers have be complaining and asking for the next-generation MacOS for almost a decade now. Now that it is here, Apple followers start complaining at the fact that it is such a departure from the accepted norms. I personally laugh at both sides of this issue (Apple and their customers).

Give it a bit of time. MacOS 7-9 was not developed in a single year, and MacOS X will not be perfected to the degree of MacOS 9 in a single year either. However, I am fairly amazed at the amount of progress the programming team has put forth. Somewhere between 50-150 bugs squashed in the 10.1.2 update alone (fairly hard to find ones too). 10.2 will prove to be a fairly large step up from 10.1.

Heck, MS is having problems getting their customers to adopt WinXP for similar reasons. They switched to the NT kernel completely, and my friend is now complaining that MechWarrior 3 doesn't work anymore, but a very old DOS game works perfectly. Shows you that MS is in the same boat as Apple because they chose to do a fairly drastic departure from the Windows norm with XP.

 

[serpicolugnut]

despite having such a weak CPU, the WinXP PC was fast, while my machine with a much stronger CPU only manages to limp along under Mac OS X.

You can't compare the two. Right now, OS X is a step ahead of the hardware. It's GUI does things that WinXP can not do. First off, it has TRUE antialiasing. Second, the drop shadows on windows take up a little CPU. Also, the transparency aspect also eats up CPU.

WinXP is fast because it uses the same windowing architecture that MS debuted with Win95. There's really little new to it. OS X, on the other hand, uses a completely new engine that allows for all these beautiful enhancements like drop shadows, anti-aliasing, and transparency. The software has taken the next step. In any evolution, when that happens, obviously old hardware will be left behind. I really think the bar for OS X is set at a G4/733 or higher, if you want a completely smooth experience with the Finder. On my machines, I'm plenty satisfied with GUI speed.

On another note, have you tried SNAX? SNAX gives you almost total customization of your file browsing, and allows you to turn off antialiasing on the windows, speeding things up. Couple this with Unsanity's Shadow Killer, and you will probably have a smooth file browsing experience (until you can get new OS X optimized hardware).

 

[Pascal]

Originally posted by serpicolugnut
(until you can get new OS X optimized hardware).

I will certainly give Snax a try, but I cannot accept your last sentence : I consider that currently shipping hardware has to be Mac OS X optimized. I mean, come on : I have a white 500 MHz iBook with 256 MB RAM. It is not even one year old... it was designed knowing that Mac OS X existed and knowing about its hardware requirements. Mac OS X should work on something else than the fastest Macs available... Hey, even Windows isn't as stringent in terms of hardware requirements !

If Aqua is too harsh on my Mac's abilities, it should then be able to scale down gracefully (turning off transparency, removing drop shadows or using a false drop shadow as in Win XP, for instance)

 

[vic]

No s**t! why do i care about drop shadows? is the light coming from my monitor to my eyes or does the sun light up my interface?

 

[rliebsch]

I play my Diablo2 and LoDestruction,
I rip my CDs to MP3
I watch my DVDs
I chomp my SETI units

I have loaded fink and XFree8
now i run Gnome/Sawfish in parallel

My box rocks.

It is a PowerBook G3 500MHz
I can even run Illustrator 10 on it.

I have no performance complaints at all.

 

[googolplex]

vic, changes are hard. If you don't like changes then you don't have to make the change, but you will pay for it later. Most changes require sacrifices and the change to OS X might require a few, but the gains (long term and short term) IMHO outway the sacrifices. Apple had to get rid of OS 9 and they had to make an OS for the future so thats what we've got.

 

[kilowatt]

Originally posted by simX


1. The Finder is actually a Carbon/Cocoa hybrid. One MacOSX.com user pointed this out to me (I'm not sure who), but where do you think the Finder toolbars came from?

I agree with 99.999% of what simx said. But, the finder is not a carbon/cocoa hybrid. I think I started that rumor, so I'll stop it too. I talked with some developers at apple, they said the finder was created in CW in os9.

The parts that look like cocoa were hard coded with snips from the Cocoa API. There's not a scratch of cocoa code in the osx finder though. Its all hard coded. Each tool bar, each sheet, and each drawer. All coded by hand, on a per-object basis.

Just watch the threads the finder creates. 3 I think, and one per contexual menu.

 

[vic]

Originally posted by kilowatt


I agree with 99.999% of what simx said. But, the finder is not a carbon/cocoa hybrid. I think I started that rumor, so I'll stop it too. I talked with some developers at apple, they said the finder was created in CW in os9.

The parts that look like cocoa were hard coded with snips from the Cocoa API. There's not a scratch of cocoa code in the osx finder though. Its all hard coded. Each tool bar, each sheet, and each drawer. All coded by hand, on a per-object basis.

Just watch the threads the finder creates. 3 I think, and one per contexual menu.

WHOA!!!

will they change this in 10.2 ? will the changes effect anything? is it necessary to be like this or can apple port the finder to cocoa? would it be better in cocoa or just the way it is? this mystery is bugging me!

BTW, iam in os x now, and will bbe here for a while i think because i want to become a coder/artist, i want to create programs that do art, like that flash artist that made praystation, exept i want to code my stuff, not do it in flash... proprietary stuff made by big companies is starting to bug me ever since i read slashdot ... hourly.

i want the imput of some lready programers out there, what is the best language to program graphics in? java, cocoa? or something like c c++ in codewarior? can i do it in the apple dev tools? are there any cool unix apps there? i will also want to start working with peripherals like web cams so i need a way to know how to get the data in from such devices, how about the darwin layer... man these questions are really offtopic, i thin ill repost this some other time on it's own...



--- heres to hoping the future of os x is bright!

(i still think it's slow, but i willing to wait till 10.2 before i take drastic measures.)