OS X 10.1 complaints... STRAIGHT FROM APPLE

Thois guy isn't geting flamed for installing pre-release builds, he's getting flamed for complaining about them. This is the type of stuff that really hurts Apple. They dont need the bad press, especially when the real thing comes out in two days. This isn't even worth talking about.
 
the seybold speech, 10.1 is FAST!!!! running on their dual 800 with a lot fo ram i am sure. that's why 10.1 in the speech is so fast.

i have the 5g27 10.1 on my single G4/450 with 512mb ram. everything opens in one bounce after the first time it's opened.
IE takes 2 bounces first time you open it, one after. QT is 2 bounce, 1 after. etc etc.
 
all my apps open in at most two bounces except for BBEdit, it takes like 6. Ridiculous for a text app. But my retail version of OSX gets installed tomorrow. Not that it matters anyway since i keep all apps open from first use till restart.
 
Hi,

Originally posted by besson3c
SMB is built into the "connect to server" component of the Mac OS X GUI (if that makes sense). Were you not aware of this?
Click to expand...

No, actually not. And, this doesn't work for me. All i see is "Local Network" and "Apple Talk". Nothing like "Windows Network"... Giving smb://some.ip.add.ress doesn't do it either :(
Am i missing something? This should be in some sort of control panel. Choosing the workgroup, the netbios name etc. Do you have this?

cu:Stray
 
Originally posted by kilowatt


I think all they had to do was put these programs into a ram disk and give the poor computer +1gig of ram. And the menu's can be pre-loaded into the memory (in gnome you can configure this).
Click to expand...


That's going a bit over board, you just need to launch the app once and it will stay in memory to cache the next time. For those of you that don't know, caching is a standard practice in software demoing. It's obvious that what your seeing with Job's demo is relaunches, not launches. We do this all the time, with product demos, and web designs. Load it into memory, and it will seem like it's much faster than it really is initially. It's not very misleading, because it can load that fast.


For all we know, Jobs sits in fount of the computer, and a tape is played back on the lcd and the big screen.
Click to expand...

I've never known any developer to do this, it's just to risky and stupid to bother with.
 
swizcore:

I also thought that a swapdisk should only be needed when you're low on ram...but allthough I can't understand it, believe me, app launch times where reduced when I set up the swapdisk. I can't back that up, but I think the swapdisk is used even if you have much RAM. And if you read the benchmark results on ResExcellence.com, the guy also had some RAM in his machine and it speeded it up.

I can't explain it, but I tried turning it back to the physical disk where OS X resides on, and when I restarted, app launch times where longer!

Try it, it's not a big deal! Set up a second PHYSICAL disk (another partition on the same disk won't help), write down it's device name under which it is mounted (just enter df in the terminal) and edit two config files, the /etc/fstab and the /etc/rm...it takes about five minutes to do this. If you can't feel an improvement, change it back.
 
Whine whine whine whine whine!!!

You all didn't realise that (1) The version Jobs was using WAS NOT a final release, (2) He was using a top of the line G4, and (3) his machine was probably started up fresh with OS 10.1! They probably reformatted the HD. If that doesn't explain why his 10.1 is faster than yours I don't know what will. Remember, they were trying to increase speed over ALL platforms, not just YOUR machine. You get it now? :rolleyes:
 
I've been using the VMometer dockling to see when my computer writes to VM. I've got 768MB of RAM and I was curious to see if I ever pageout. In 10.04 the only time that OSX writes something to VM is when launching applications and when I'm printing very large files in Classic. So it's feasible that you would see an increase in application launch times. When I moved my VM onto my 2nd HD I didn't notice any difference (that was in 10.03).

10.1 was supposed to improve the speed of VM so moving the swapfile will make less improvements.
 
Have had the same experience as Ulrik... I cannot explain this either. But it's true and I did it on my main desktop (G4/733 w/ superdrive, 3 60gig HDs, 768MB RAM). Can someone w/ more hardcore tech knowledge elaborate/explain??? I really am curious as to WHY this works.

Ulrik:
nice explanation of the HOW-TO of it. I actually had forgotten how I did it and was going back through old posts to find it so I could do it on my other machines. Thanks for saving me the time.


And, yeah, why is this STRAIGHT FROM APPLE?!
 
Originally posted by apb3
Have had the same experience as Ulrik... I cannot explain this either. But it's true and I did it on my main desktop (G4/733 w/ superdrive, 3 60gig HDs, 768MB RAM). Can someone w/ more hardcore tech knowledge elaborate/explain??? I really am curious as to WHY this works.
Click to expand...


It's simple math, two heads are better than one, think RAID. When you dedicate a drive for your swap file there is no fragmentation to deal with, and the OS can launch the app on one HD and access the swap file on the other at the same time. When it is on the same drive, one head has to do both, and most likely deal with fragmentation causing the head to jump around. HD's have a lot to do with your computer speed, a lot of people are not aware of this. This is why RAID was invented, HD's are not fast enough with one head to keep up with the bus and cpu speeds today. A Raid setup with three or four drives is going to smoke a non RAID setup. I installed 4 IBM 18Gig drives in a stripped array in my machine in OS9 using SoftRaid2.2, my machine was twice as fast, at least. Most people don't realize how often the disk is accessed in a work session, or in a game, but it adds up. I was little bummed when I found out that OSX didn't support SoftRAID. It does support hardware RAID though: http://www.fantomdrives.com/macosx/

BTW, Most apps loaded instantaneously in OS9 with this setup. Needless to say, I plan on switching back to RAID ASAP.

NOTE:My machine also has two very good UW SCSI cards each controlling two of the drives. This makes it even faster, but you can use one UW SCSI card, but you tend to max out your speed at two HD's with SoftRaid.
 
Thanks.

I knew about the two heads are better than one thing but was just surprised at the improvement just moving the swap file gave the system. Even with a lot of RAM...

I meant more along the lines of - even with a ton of ram, why would moving the swap file make that big a difference? Why would the sys need to access the swap file with all that ram? Stuff like that.

But, thanks anyway.
 
Just for the record, most apps on my iBook (2usb) launch in 2-3 bounces at most. This of corse is not the first time I have launched the apps, as I have not rebooted my laptop in days :D

(I love the way it just works moving between my Office Lan, and my home DSL connection WITHOUT EVER changing my network settings.. I am still using the defaults from the install. It has just always worked as is)

Any how, 2-3 bounces/seconds is more than good enought for me, as I see it, this as an OS built for tomorow.

Think about it, how well would a IIci run OS9? (if at all) the OS is built to match the capabilities of the existing systems.

Rightfully so, systems shiped 1 - 2 years ago SHOULD be the bottom line of what OSX runs well on. I would be disapointed in Apple if they where to limmit the capabilities of my NEXT mac so as to maintain compatability with old systems.

In 2-3 years from now, ALL apps wil launch in a micro bounce (up and running befor your finger is off the mouse) So this will all be mute.

Microsoft has always handicaped itself (untill XP that is) by maintainig backward compatibility with legacy hardware. When Jobs came back to Apple, he made it clear Apple would not do the same. Apple abandoned compatability with legacy devices such as serial and ADB in favor of enbracing the future with USB and FireWire. Apple was first computer maker to use 100 megabit ethernet, and then out did themselves with gigabit, (befor others had even got up to 100)

I for one praise Apple for having the corage to take the FUTURE head on! With OSX as the base to build the next 15 years on, and Apple moving forward as fast as it can, whe rest of the computer industry will be hard pressed to keep up.

CHANGE IS GOOD.
 
So I come back to this thread I started a couple days later, and there's over 50 replies, and I'm being flamed up the ass so hard it's shooting out my eyeballs.

What the hell is this shit?

To all who told me I'm a whiner, a complainer, you can go screw yourselves. How dare you even think about saying that. You don't know where I'm from!! I was about to ABANDON macintosh, before 0S X beta came out. I was tired of OS 9 constantly crashing. Windows was stable. And it had tons of little time saving subtleties, more apps, and flash animations are not slow as molasses on Windows. And I've been with mac since 1989, a damn 10 year old kid.

But I stuck with mac for OS X. And it was slow. And buggy. And I needed to use Classic 95% of the time. But I saw the pre-emptive multitasking, the protected memory, the NON-CRASHING. While everyone was flaming the public beta I was on these boards telling people my machine hadn't crashed for over a month and that is pretty damn good for a freakin' BETA!

I'm a graphic designer and web developer. I use Photoshop, Flash, Dreamweaver, etc. etc.... and I've put up with the quirks of adopting OS X. I never even booted back into 9. I stuck with apple because they updated their product (the OS). I only boot into OS 9 to run Flash 5 because in Classic it crashes Classic every 2 minutes for some reason.

While most of the other early adopters complained and booted into 9 constantly and just used X as a toy, I STAYED in X, almost ALL THE TIME, and DID MY WORK in X. I gave up outlook / entourage, spring loaded folders, faster photoshop, quick finder, and much more.... instead I put up with Apple Mail, quirky column view (although I saw this was 100000000000x better than any thing OS 9 ever had), slow photoshop and a quirky classic environment..... all for one thing. A stable machine that doesn't crash, and works more like Windows. (Like being able to click on the desktop while another app is launching.)

Now here I am finally getting OS X 10.1, with all the promised improvements. And I notice my version is slower than the demo version. HELL YEAH I'M GONNA ASK WHY!!!!! Who said I was complaining?????

First of all, some people are telling me here that I have a pirated build. Go screw yourself. 5G64 is the GM. There is no 5G68, there is no NOTHING else. This "pirated" version is the GM. I have the release version. It's not pirated either you morons. I paid $30 and received my beta on March 24, 6 months ago. Then I got the $100 special price on the release version. So I paid my full $130. And I'm STILL going to pay another $20 to get the new disks, just to have the official copies, cuz I'm down with the Apple. So toss my salad, yeah?

Second, people are telling me here that the apple demo at Seybold is a quadruple Xeon processor Beta-Apple (Orange Pear Hybrid) with 18 TB of RAM, a 55 GB Bus, and has ten 999 Yottabyte GigaQuad Hard drives on a ULTRA-SUPER-HYPER 999999 SCSI RAID array running 999999999999999999999999 RPM, and all the apps were launched 100 times in a RAM disk with the pre-bindings hard coded into custom RAM chips, and the SWAP file was moved into a temporal vortex so that the electrons only have to move one chronometer to be read. Well screw off. You don't need that kind of setup to launch text edit in one bounce. Are you freakin' insane??? These are SOFTWARE IMPROVEMENTS... the hardware is irrelevant. The Apple VP guy at Seybold said these improvements are benefit across the ENTIRE product line.

Oh, and by the way my TiBook G4 is 400 Mhz with 384 MB RAM. An Apple tech said that it is WAY faster than a similar Cube (400 Mhz). There's NO reason this 3000 dollar laptop shouldn't be able to open TextEdit in One MOTHER of a bounce!!!!!!!!!!

So let me summarize this, and shoot down all the moron-flamers one more time (and thanks, Tie, for sticking up for me).

1. I have the GM. The final 10.1 is Build 5G64, which is what I have, and there's only one version of it. And it's free to update. And I paid for 10.0. So I am not pirating jack shit. When I get the official CD, there will be NO differences. So I'm not giving Apple a bad name either. I wouldn't "complain" if I knew this was NOT the GM!!!!!!!!

2. I have stuck with Mac during the hardest of times. I have stuck with Mac while all my partners use Windows and deride Macs every damn day, and I was ready to switch to Windows, and ONLY OS X kept me. Screw anyone that tells me to move to windows for "complaining".

3. ANY and EVERY G4 computer should see nearly the same improvements in the OS, in terms of window resizing and app launching. Anyone who thinks that to make TextEdit launch one bounce faster needs two 866 Mhz Chips and double the Bus and gigs of RAM is an idiot, or blinded by hardware sales hype. The DP 866 is good for Rendering a 3D scene quicker, I'll say that much. Not launching TextEdit one bounce faster.

4. STRAIGHT FROM APPLE MEANS GODDAMN WHAT IT SAYS BIIIAAAAAAAAAAAATCCHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!! The VP demo'd these improvements and promised them himself, and showed a mac doing them, and these promises are also all over the Apple Site.

So this thread is titled "OS 10.1 Complaints ... Straight from Apple"

the ellipses in the middle blocks out the phrase "based on promises". So the full thread name is:

"OS 10.1 Complaints based on promises straight from Apple."

Now that 10.1 is officially out, yes... I've just expanded the damn column for you so you can see it. Alright whores?

Thank you,
-solrac-

P.S. I ain't mad at you........... :)
 
Solrac:

Why don't you stop and really think about what you are saying before you write? I mean that in a completely unflamatory way (although I guess it doesn't sound it.. better words escape me). There *are* improvements across the entire product line, and dual 800's *will* do things faster because.... they are faster computers.

As far as Textedit opening in 2 bounces on your computer, I never heard any Apple rep promise us that Textedit would launch in one bounce... is this worth getting worked up over? Just leave Textedit open and you'll thank me for increasing your productivity 10-fold. Now, when you need Textedit open for all your mission critical projects, it will open in *0* bounces instead of 2!!! Then you'll have a really big dick.

What *is* the issue here?

What version of Windows do you have where you can have applications open in the background and not yak (not that it really matters)? Surely not 98...

And yes, technically you have a pirated copy of the GM unless you are a developer that has been seeded this. It doesn't matter if you plan to buy it or have paid for OSes in the past.. it may make it morally viable to you, and I can understand your point, but it is still pirated. In other words, if you were arrested for this hypothetically (not that this is a realistic possibility), the judge wouldn't care about your justifications - the law is pretty black and white, and the definition of "software pirate" is based around these laws. This isn't a lecture, just a correction since this seemed to really set you off half-cocked, and you managed to scare us all.
 
I guess you speak for everybody when you say I managed to scare you all... lol... I think most people would have a laugh at my reply.

Anyway... I am not a robot. I do not quit every app after I use them. Perhaps I will leave them open longer and longer as time goes on.

There really is no reason to quit them in OS X. It's just an OS 9 habit, I know.

But I still really wanna see all the small-to-mid sized apps open in one bounce, seriously. I just do, OK???????

-solrac-
 
Solrac: Who was the crack addict that told you that software improvements have nothing to do with hardware? From your statments it sounds like my biege g3 333 tower should match the 866 g4 tower in app launching speed!

HW has quite a bit to do with how fast your OS seems, its not all of it, but I can tell you its a large part.
 
I'm talking about G4 only

My TiBook G4 is slower than a Dual 866 of course, but they should both open text edit in one bounce but ------

Screw off besson

------ a G3 is way different hardware. No altivec, for the most part.

The hardware, like I said, is very important.

Just not for the difference of one bounce. Unless someone PROVES me wrong on that I won't believe it.

Look at it this way: Flash movies on a 300 Mhz Pentium 2 run MUCH MUCH FASTER WAYYYYY Smoother than on any Mac there is, period.

Mac is screwed for flash. Flash movie playback suffers SO bad on mac. It's really sad.

It doesn't matter what you have. G3, G4, Dual G4, Quad G4 with infinity RAM. No difference. It's all in the software. Macromedia just can't program Flash to work with mac. It's sad. But Macromedia sucks. Their software is shoddy while Adobe software is solid. And it shows, time and time again, on both Mac and PC. Even in beta software. Macromedia Freehand 10 beta crashed nonstop, yet Illustrator 10 beta works fine for the most part.

The app launching improvements in OS X are SO software based. It's the software that was totally revamped.

hardware will help in an overall sense or in hardware specific problems (like number crunching).

-solrac-
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top