MAC OS X Performance

V

Verres

Registered
Hi Everyone,

many of you seem to be quite excited about the new OS from Apple. I admit, it has a lot of great features and advantages compared to the classic version.
Nevertheless, I have the impression that it is quite slow in some aspects. For some applications I still prefer classic MAC OS because they are not useable under X (like Office X)

My Question: Must I have an 1Ghz G4 with 512 MB of RAM to enjoy MAC OS X? Currently, I have an G4/400 with 192 MB of RAM and MAC OS 10.1.2 running. I do not plan to tune it in next time, because Macintosh hardware isn't cheap at all.

It is possible to gain more performance by changing some system configurations?

The (simple) TextEditor (and the Terminal, too) that is included in the OS needs 4 seconds to start up. Is that normal?

Thanks in advance,

Verres
 
boost your ram to a minimum of 512 and you will see some immediate jump. do a site search here for 'optimize' and you should find several little tricks to boost it some more. there are some aspects that you will still not see appear to be as fast as os 9. but the stability of not having to reboot because of freezes and other crashes saves a lot of time in the overall picture.

100x2 secs = 200 secs = a little over 3 minutes

typical os 9 reboot = 3-5 mins.
 
Office x is not unusable in os x! I have a 500mhz g3 ibook with 256 mb of ram and it runs fine. 10.1 is fast. Not as fast as os9 but other than that it runs great. I also had a 450mhz g4 that I just sold and it ran office x perfect. the only application I have seen that runs bad is vpc5 and that runs bad in os 9 too.
 
posted by Verres
For some applications I still prefer classic MAC OS because they are not useable under X (like Office X)

and

The (simple) TextEditor (and the Terminal, too) that is included in the OS needs 4 seconds to start up. Is that normal?
Click to expand...

I don't know, has anyone else here noticed Office X running faster in Mac OS 9 than Mac OS X (think about the question very hard!).

4 seconds to start up the (not so simple) TextEdit, which is quite the feature full word processor doesn't seem slow to me. What would you compare it to? This little app takes advantage of services, has both speech and spell checking abilities, and works nicely with fonts and images. I think it opens a little faster than Word X and AppleWorks, but slower than WorldText (the Mac OS X version of SimpleText).
 
I have the iMac listed below, and it runs OS X.1 fine, not as fast as classic obviously but I dont find it slow (maybe I've been desensitized by the 200Mhz wontels at college?). But if anyone gets me a G4 I'll do a speed check.
 
Over at http://www.macosxhints.com there was a recent post on how to speed up Mac OS X on G3's close to the performance in Mac OS 9. To get that kind of performance you need to get the latest version of TinkerTool 2.11 from http://www.versiontracker.com/macosx . The steps include:

1. Reducing color from Millions to Thousands.

2. Disable all font Smoothing (with TinkerTool).

3. Disable Dock animations, magnification, and hiding.

4. Change genie effect to scale effect.

5. Log out, then log back in, or restart if you have to.

I was rather surprised that the article was right. Font smoothing is a heavy load on the processor. However, if you load up your system with enough RAM, it should do pretty well. I have 768MB and I have my system set to millions of colors with all of Mac OS X's default settings except that I prefer the scale effect. It only gets a little slow when iTunes, Netscape, and AOL Instant Messenger are running simultaneously. See my specs below.
 
chemistry_geek, what's wrong with your!? use Adium, not AOL IM? :)
As for speed, my TiBook runs it fine, and my Wallstreet has acceptable performance. My biggest problem with OSX is that if the Finder locks up, the dock locks up, and then they bring the system down :(
 
I enjoy os X on my 266 iMac. I think I maxed out my ram at 256 megs which is a great improvement over 190. Every meg counts in X. I would enjoy having a new machine but honestly I am perfectly productive with what I have. I have the genie effects and font smoothing on because without them I don't feel like I'm getting the full experience. I might be embarrassed to show off my OS X to a PC person because the scrolling is pretty jerky and windows stick in place but I remember when I was about 8 on the mac plus how I could type faster than it. Then on the Quadra I remember word perfect loading in 6 and a half minutes. Its mostly lifestyle that determines whether you can stand the speed of it, for me I love it.

What version of X do you have? On that computer it would have probably come pre installed with X.0 which is very very slow. Not usable at all to me or my room mate with 500mhz iBook.

So if the question was can OS X be enjoyable on less than dual ghz processors? Yes. But you'll have to have an open mind. Plus, It's the finder that seems slow to me. Applications are as fast as they would be on any system and where do you spend most of your time? Opening and closing folders?
 
Imagine a user opening and closing the same folder for about 20 times, then turning his head towards you and saying: "Hmm, this is... kinda slow, isn't it?" My answer would be like: "Yes, you're kinda slow."

:)

On-topic: Mac OS X can be used on any G3 faster than 400 MHz with enough of RAM (this really *IS* that important) with decent speed. Although never as fast as OS 9, it usually works out for the user at the end of the day, because every time you reboot OS 9, about a minute (or more) is gone. This adds up, of course, also, because you also have to re-start your applications/documents and keep concentrated on the work you're doing while rebooting.

If you CAN get RAM, do so. There's never too much of it in any Mac at the moment, unless you randomly drop the DIMMs inside the case after you filled the available slots.
 
I have tried X on a variety of systems, here's my report:

For me personally, a G4 450 with 512 RAM is the minimum comfort zone for X. It'll obviously run on lesser machines, but not quick enough for me.

I found X on an iMAc 400 G3 to be functional, but painful in some graphics layer areas (silly things like web browsers).

I would recommend getting more RAM, 512 minimum. RAM is, and always has been the best solution to many computer woes. Especially now when it's cheap.

As for the tricks to speed things up, I had no success with the thousands vs millions of colors. I think there's some wishful thinking in some of these suggestions. Or maybe they're qualifying 1% increases as something noticeable. I have not tried the font smoothing, thanks for the tip! The genie, dick stuff is fine, but it's a local issue, not a global one.

As for application launching, I keep having to remind myself that this is OS X, not OS 9. It is not as necessary to close out applications all the time. Obviously, that will make application launching virtually instantaneous other than the first time. Some things seem to take way to long to launch, even on my DPG4. Like system prefs the first time takes a few seconds. Huh?!
 
I Have also Got a G4 400 ( AGP ) with 512 MB Ram and i have no problems with OS 10.1.3. My system is realy fast :D
 
Apple said that 10.1 is just the first step into the future. They will need 1 f&%$" year to complete OS X! SO JUST WAIT! Nobody forces you to switch to OS X right now! Go to classic and work with it if it works fine for you!:mad: :eek:

Give Apple some time. For me the only classic system that actually rock was OS 9!
9

not 1.1 ok? I'm sure we wont have to wait 10 - 20 years for apple to complete the system. But there is no need to change right now. Wait until 10.2 or even 10.3! GIVE THEM SOME TIME!!!:eek: :mad: :cool: :eek:

BTW -----> WinXPee isn't better with RAM!
see my specs below! IT RUNS JUST FINE!:p

Sorry but this kind of stupid discussions make me mad!
 
Originally posted by Alexandert
Go to classic and work with it if it works fine for you!:mad: :eek:

Give Apple some time. For me the only classic system that actually rock was OS 9!
9

not 1.1 ok? I'm sure we wont have to wait 10 - 20 years for apple to complete the system. But there is no need to change right now. Wait until 10.2 or even 10.3! GIVE THEM SOME TIME!!!:eek: :mad: :cool: :eek:
Sorry but this kind of stupid discussions make me mad!
Click to expand...

Seems like, buddy. ;)

It's called Mac OS X and Steve wants you to pronounce that as a 10. So now that we're at Mac OS 10 10.1.3 I think the major flaws have been ruled out. Faster OS when faster hardware arrives. Not?

The thread was a regular question about what hardware you think is needed for OS X to run nicely. Please keep it on topic.
 
OSX runs fine for me on my WallStreet 350 that I'm using for the next week till I get my TiBook back :p
I just turned off font smoothing and all those other juicy options with TinkerTool. ShadowKiller helps quite a bit also...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top