fast cat?
I dunno what to think yet...here are my impressions on the hardware that I've installed 10.2 on:
Blue/White G3 450MHz 1GB RAM, 20GB 5400RPM IDE, stock ATI RAGE 128 card (pretty much a vanilla system except for the RAM)
===
Feels faster and definitely more responsive. Would I consider it to be revolutionary/evolutionary and a whole new machine? Heck no! I'm no troll (credentials up the wazoo including Mac User Group Prez at my university back in the day)but I'm just having a hard time dealing with the fact that my G3 450 (bought in 2000) runs X so poorly! As for the install? Very smooth - use the Archive and Install option and you'll be up in no time - install took about 45 minutes (depends on if you choose to install the 'goodies' like extra languages and fonts, etc.)
no compatibility issues or kernel panics yet but it has only been a day of use. System stays on that new grey Apple logo screen upon boot for a bit longer than I'd like but then the services start up quite fast and then you're prompted for your login screen - faster than 10.1.5 but again, not light years faster.
***
The second piece of hardware is a stock G4 400 (Graphite) with 10GB HD and 320MB RAM (AGP Rage 128). This box too, is pretty much stock except for the RAM.
Quartz Extreme? I'm not sure if it's on or not but when I playback DVDs and change the volume, the overlayed graphic is NOT translucent but rather opaque and from what I hear, this is a test for QE (who knows for sure)
I was actually even less impressed with the performance boost on the G4 than the G3! Could very well be because of less RAM and the fact that the processor is actually 50MHz slower than the G3 (I believe that it's the same Rage 128 vid card only with an AGP bus)
Anyhow, these are just my initial observances with 10.2 and I'm not really looking for feedback or comments...I just wanted to start a thread about various system performance because I haven't been able to find any real info on how Jag runs on various systems.
Again, I am a diehard Mac user but I think it's obvious that you'll need some newer hardware to reap the full benefits of 10.2 (I was just hoping for more for my "ancient" hardware!!!)
Al
Blue/White G3 450MHz 1GB RAM, 20GB 5400RPM IDE, stock ATI RAGE 128 card (pretty much a vanilla system except for the RAM)
===
Feels faster and definitely more responsive. Would I consider it to be revolutionary/evolutionary and a whole new machine? Heck no! I'm no troll (credentials up the wazoo including Mac User Group Prez at my university back in the day)but I'm just having a hard time dealing with the fact that my G3 450 (bought in 2000) runs X so poorly! As for the install? Very smooth - use the Archive and Install option and you'll be up in no time - install took about 45 minutes (depends on if you choose to install the 'goodies' like extra languages and fonts, etc.)
no compatibility issues or kernel panics yet but it has only been a day of use. System stays on that new grey Apple logo screen upon boot for a bit longer than I'd like but then the services start up quite fast and then you're prompted for your login screen - faster than 10.1.5 but again, not light years faster.
***
The second piece of hardware is a stock G4 400 (Graphite) with 10GB HD and 320MB RAM (AGP Rage 128). This box too, is pretty much stock except for the RAM.
Quartz Extreme? I'm not sure if it's on or not but when I playback DVDs and change the volume, the overlayed graphic is NOT translucent but rather opaque and from what I hear, this is a test for QE (who knows for sure)
I was actually even less impressed with the performance boost on the G4 than the G3! Could very well be because of less RAM and the fact that the processor is actually 50MHz slower than the G3 (I believe that it's the same Rage 128 vid card only with an AGP bus)
Anyhow, these are just my initial observances with 10.2 and I'm not really looking for feedback or comments...I just wanted to start a thread about various system performance because I haven't been able to find any real info on how Jag runs on various systems.
Again, I am a diehard Mac user but I think it's obvious that you'll need some newer hardware to reap the full benefits of 10.2 (I was just hoping for more for my "ancient" hardware!!!)
Al
Comments
Since you have a full gig of RAM, that's going to take a while.
<strong>Heck no! I'm no troll (credentials up the wazoo including Mac User Group Prez at my university back in the day)but I'm just having a hard time dealing with the fact that my G3 450 (bought in 2000) runs X so poorly! </strong><hr></blockquote>
Ummm since the B&W G3 was intro'd in Jan99 and DISCONTINUED in Aug99 then aren't you being a little LESS than honest with us? Since the date Apple killed the B&W is a matter of FACT then you must have also known that you were buying YESTERDAYS technology (B&W G3) when you got that G3 in 2000.
Also... you do know what filled the space of the B&W G3 (in Aug 99) yep that 400Mhz G4 you are talking about above...
With the G3... buying yesterdays technology is fine but you can't very well blame Apple when some future OS doesn't run on it... The B&W is OVER 3 years old for goodness sakes. I'm willing to bet XP isn't exactly snappy from an intel box from over 3 years ago either.
As for the G4... That machine is also (just) 3 years old. I know I purchased the G4 450 at the same time (Sept 99).
Dave
[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
The 450 Blue G3 was intro-ed in April 99 - I bought it shortly thereafter - I retract my statement about 2000.
Getting back to the original point of my post, I'm not blaming Apple for anything - merely posting my impressions of 10.2 on the hardware that I've installed it on for the benefit of others that may (or may not) be interested.
Al
<strong>The 450 Blue G3 was intro-ed in April 99 - I bought it shortly thereafter - I retract my statement about 2000.</strong><hr></blockquote>
No pissing war here... I just didn't want people thinking that the G3 was newer than it was... People (including me) seem to forget how long ago things happen.
Name me any past Mac computer that runs a 3 year in the future OS well. I bet you'd have a hard time doing with any computer.
The 9600 is the only one I can find at the moment and I would't exactly say it runs 9.x THAT well. (not without a cpu upgrade and that is cheating). The 9600 shipped in Feb 97 running 7.5.5 and was supported in the OS all the way up to 9.1. That's a pretty good run if you ask me and it sure isn't the norm.
Dave
[ 08-21-2002: Message edited by: DaveGee ]</p>
<strong>Quartz Extreme? I'm not sure if it's on or not but when I playback DVDs and change the volume, the overlayed graphic is NOT translucent but rather opaque and from what I hear, this is a test for QE (who knows for sure)</strong><hr></blockquote>
It wasn't on. Quartz Extreme requires a Radeon or better.