I don't know what else to say. With all the bugs and problems and weird stuff happening, I feel like a rarity. I've only been a mac user for a little over a month, coming from a solid PC background, I bought a Powerbook 800 and loved it. Scrapped my PC on ebay even. 10.2 came out, installed clean, and aside from HP not updating their printer drivers fast enough, I've never run into so much as a graphical artifact or misplaced icon. Everything seems to work as it's supposed to work. Am I alone?
OS X 10.2 works perfectly.
- Thread starter Nosh
- Start date
Dehuti
Electric whale
I'm in quite simmilar situation, but as I observe Jaguar in work I'm still finding little hiccups while, for example, browsing shares of my PC with MAC. Jaguar slows down makes itself almost unusable. It does not make any sense for me while I'm working in 100MBPs enviroment crossed-cable connection. Am I alone?
well, not everything is working okay... I have a all-in-one HP G85 wich worked fine with Mac Os X 1.0.4 But, now that I've upgrade to 1.2 IT does NOT work.
I checked HP website for updating driver but, it just doesn't work. Now I print from system 9 GRRRRR .....
since you said you had a HP printer, I was wondering how you print?
thx for any info.
I checked HP website for updating driver but, it just doesn't work. Now I print from system 9 GRRRRR .....
since you said you had a HP printer, I was wondering how you print?
thx for any info.
I finally tracked down the BIGGEST performance hit for dealing with SMB shares.. I spent a good 4 days trying different things trying to figure out why my connection to SMB shares was so pathetically slow (100K/sec).. it turns out it was because I was using a HUB instead of a SWITCH. I learnt a valuable lesson that 4th day. Apparently SMB is the crappiest protocal out there, and doesn't deal with half duplex connections. The difference between a hub and a switch, is that a hub operates in half-duplex (like a speakerphone - only one side can be heard at a time) mode, whereas a switch operates in full duplex mode (like a telephone - both sides can talk and be heard at the same time). I went a bought a cheapy 5 port linksys workgroup switch, which was $10 more than 5 port linksys hub, and now I get much faster transfers (many many megs per second) over SMB, and in most cases, faster than AFP too.
Dehuti
Electric whale
SMB just got better under Jaguar, see
http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn2002/tn2053.html#TN001105
here is some information about it:
* Socket read size was reduced from the full packet size to improve performance with remote clients (such as Windows, Linux and BSD). (r. 2917352).
* Problems that could occur when reading more than 128K at a time from a file on a SMB share have been corrected. (r. 2797032).
* A problem where the NSL browser could fail with SMB servers having names with no corresponding DNS host name has been corrected. (r. 2787668).
* SMB browsing is only supported on the local subnet. .
Edge100
Registered
No real big problems here, either.
Sherlock 3 has been a little spotty. I've had some disappearing text problems in IE and Word (something to do with text-smoothing). Firewire Target Disk mode doesnt work as well as it did (requires that I unplug then replug the firewire cable from my iBook to get it to see my iMac in TDM).
Other than that, everything seems in order on both machines. The systems are noticeably faster, although that may have something to do with the clean install rather than 10.2 itself.
All in all, I'm fairly happy with Jaguar.
Sherlock 3 has been a little spotty. I've had some disappearing text problems in IE and Word (something to do with text-smoothing). Firewire Target Disk mode doesnt work as well as it did (requires that I unplug then replug the firewire cable from my iBook to get it to see my iMac in TDM).
Other than that, everything seems in order on both machines. The systems are noticeably faster, although that may have something to do with the clean install rather than 10.2 itself.
All in all, I'm fairly happy with Jaguar.
That _was_ under Jag.
Actually, the problem was entirely the fault of SMB itself, because the same problem was replicated across different Samba 2.x <--> Win9x & 2000, and even between Win2k <--> Win2k. The only systems that didn't seem to care were pre-Samba 2.x and Win9x, which apparently had a much looser implemenation of the SMB protocol (and lower performance). It's like the newer SMB protocols had tighter delays between sending and receiving, which had a much lower tolerance for half-duplex connections.
Oh well.
