From the recent switcher... more questions!
Hey,
So, been playing around with the new iBook and OS X for a while now and have come up with a few more questions:
1. How come when I maximize a window, OSX only maximizes the window with respect to the top and bottom of the screen? It doesn't stretch it out fully to the sides. It's very annoying! I'd like to be able to maximize windows to the full length and width of the screen.
2. What's the easiest way to connect the iBook to my PC for file sharing? Do I just enable file sharing on the PC and connect the two via their network cards and the iBook will see the PC?
3. Even though I have a 900MHz iBook with a 32MB card and 384MB of RAM, Aqua is generally not as speedy as I'd hoped. Certainly not as responsive as Windows XP. Are there any ways to speed it up? Also, is Quartz Extreme enabled by default?
4. Apple's Update service seems to download very slowly for me. It seems as if I can download the files much faster if I do it manually from Apple's website. Any ideas?
5. Safari Beta 2 does not show "Estimated Time Remaining" for downloads. Any way to turn this on? It's a very useful feature in IE and other browsers.
Thanks!
Of course, I'm only talking about the things I'm NOT happy with... On the whole, still very pleased with the switch!
So, been playing around with the new iBook and OS X for a while now and have come up with a few more questions:
1. How come when I maximize a window, OSX only maximizes the window with respect to the top and bottom of the screen? It doesn't stretch it out fully to the sides. It's very annoying! I'd like to be able to maximize windows to the full length and width of the screen.
2. What's the easiest way to connect the iBook to my PC for file sharing? Do I just enable file sharing on the PC and connect the two via their network cards and the iBook will see the PC?
3. Even though I have a 900MHz iBook with a 32MB card and 384MB of RAM, Aqua is generally not as speedy as I'd hoped. Certainly not as responsive as Windows XP. Are there any ways to speed it up? Also, is Quartz Extreme enabled by default?
4. Apple's Update service seems to download very slowly for me. It seems as if I can download the files much faster if I do it manually from Apple's website. Any ideas?
5. Safari Beta 2 does not show "Estimated Time Remaining" for downloads. Any way to turn this on? It's a very useful feature in IE and other browsers.
Thanks!
Of course, I'm only talking about the things I'm NOT happy with... On the whole, still very pleased with the switch!
Comments
Originally posted by ahbo
Hey,
1. How come when I maximize a window, OSX only maximizes the window with respect to the top and bottom of the screen? It doesn't stretch it out fully to the sides. It's very annoying! I'd like to be able to maximize windows to the full length and width of the screen.
I think that it only maximizes as much as needed for full viewing at your resolution, at least thats the way safari seems to work on my Powerbook. After getting used to it I actually like it more because it frees up other areas of the screen.
About the other things I have no idea, as I am a recent switcher as well.
Cheers,
Dan
No really, it annoys me crazily when I watch windows users maximize an explorer window on a 1280x1024 screen when there are TWO items in the folder.
Originally posted by chych
Full screen maximize is a windows habit, get over it, quick
No really, it annoys me crazily when I watch windows users maximize an explorer window on a 1280x1024 screen when there are TWO items in the folder.
Haha! No, but seriously, I like it!
For example, let's say I'm viewing a page in Safari and I maximize, and Safari only expands the window so the webpage properly fits. Fine. But, let's say I now surf to another page, which requires a wider screen area. I'm supposed to click maximize again? It is useful, and sometimes just plain aesthetically pleasant, to fill the entire screen with the window you are currently working with.
Originally posted by ahbo
Hey,
So, been playing around with the new iBook and OS X for a while now and have come up with a few more questions:
1. How come when I maximize a window, OSX only maximizes the window with respect to the top and bottom of the screen? It doesn't stretch it out fully to the sides. It's very annoying! I'd like to be able to maximize windows to the full length and width of the screen.
I'll end up doing a horrible job of explaining this, but yes it will only maximize to the amount that it will need to fit the information presented on-screen. The maximize as done in Windows often wastes space, and is generally not needed in most instances. If you're using Safari, just manually open up the window to full-size after you open the app, and don't worry about it afterwards.
2. What's the easiest way to connect the iBook to my PC for file sharing? Do I just enable file sharing on the PC and connect the two via their network cards and the iBook will see the PC?
If you have Windows XP on your PC (which I assume since you reference Win XP in #3), then I personally would use Remote Desktop Connection available at http://www.microsoft.com/mac and allow local disks on your mac to be available on the PC (the option is under one of the tabs). When you do this, your Mac HD will show up in "My Computer". If you open up the Mac HD, it'll dump you in the root directory, so you'll have to navigate to Users-->your name IIRC to get into your folders i.e. Movies, Music, Docs, etc. Note, you have to have remote connections enabled in Win XP (control panel --> system, either advanced or remote tab, can't remember exactly)
If you don't have Win XP, if you activate some shared folders on the PC and try connecting to it via SAMBA in the finder (Go--> Connect to Server), that most likely should work. This will also work with Windows XP as well.
3. Even though I have a 900MHz iBook with a 32MB card and 384MB of RAM, Aqua is generally not as speedy as I'd hoped. Certainly not as responsive as Windows XP. Are there any ways to speed it up? Also, is Quartz Extreme enabled by default?
Quartz Extreme is enabled by default. You could add more memory (max it to 640MB), although I don't know how much of a performance increase you would see.
4. Apple's Update service seems to download very slowly for me. It seems as if I can download the files much faster if I do it manually from Apple's website. Any ideas?
Eh, they should be about equally fast, but if Apple's website is faster, use that. You can also try using the "Download checked items to desktop" in Software Update if you haven't done so (I believe it's in the File menu)
5. Safari Beta 2 does not show "Estimated Time Remaining" for downloads. Any way to turn this on? It's a very useful feature in IE and other browsers.
No clue on this one, not sure if there's a way to do so.
I found patching osx to 10.2.5 improved a lot of my performance niggles, espicially it seems in Office X.
Let's see if I can answer any of these:
maximize
The issues you're having with the 'maximize' function might be less significant if you think of the widget by its real name, the 'zoom' widget.
Maximize is the proper term in windows because this is what the button does. Windows culture and GUIs are built around the tradition of using applications in full screen.
Mac applications and culture are based on the philosophy of using multiple applications at once, with none of them taking up the entire screen. There are advantages and disadvantages to both but I'll leave that another thread since it is an age old, heated debate. However, I will say this: With system wide copy-paste and drag-and-drop of nearly any image, text, or icon, it is common for Mac users to use a multi-window workflow.
Give it a shot, you'll find that you can drag from iTunes onto a docked application, into the terminal, or into another CD burning program. You can drag pictures straight from iPhoto or Safari, straight into iChat. And the icon next to the document title... it can be dragged just about anywhere too. The list could go on and on!
interface responsiveness
Unfortunately, on your iBook, things will probably never be as snappy as winXP. However, I think that most people are satisfied with responsiveness after installing additional RAM. Your iBook will be much more enjoyable if you double your existing amount of memory. 384 is enough to let you work, but still results in swapping to disk, especially when switching applications or using a menu whose representation has been relegated to disk. Quartz eats through memory quickly but with ram so cheap now, it is easy quench its appetite. Then, with QE, its almost like you get all the eye-candy for free, with no performance hit.
software update
I haven't heard too many reports of SU being slow on downloads. Keep in mind that the progress bar also includes the installation and pre-binding stages. The download is finished prior to the bar reaching completion.
cross platform file sharing
There are many ways to do this and the easiest method is usually determined by a user's prior experience. SMB, ftp, apache, firewire... There are entire threads devoted to this so a search of this forum would probably turn up all the info you need (and more).
Originally posted by dfiler
Oh yeah, your other questions:
software update
I haven't heard too many reports of SU being slow on downloads. Keep in mind that the progress bar also includes the installation and pre-binding stages. The download is finished prior to the bar reaching completion.
Brilliant! That's why!!
Thank you. That answers that one.
This is because the operating system is based on a microkernel design, where everything works in components- XP and OS 9 for that matter, is macro kernel(one big hunk of cheese). This makes it generally a lot faster, but has its own disadvantages. The main disadvantages are that it is more difficult to produce a bug free os (case in point) the security is not as good (once again, case in point), and the software development of the OS is trickier. This is all second hand knowledge that ive picked up from other web sites and such, so take it with a grain of salt- i do
The bottom line is that for the mac, the OS is years ahead of the hardware. for the PC, the hardware is years ahead of the OS.
one of the greatest things about having a mac is the community you become a part of. Welcome!
OS X will never be as responsive as XP for comparable hardware.
This is because the operating system is based on a microkernel design, where everything works in components- XP and OS 9 for that matter, is macro kernel(one big hunk of cheese). This makes it generally a lot faster, but has its own disadvantages. The main disadvantages are that it is more difficult to produce a bug free os (case in point) the security is not as good (once again, case in point), and the software development of the OS is trickier. This is all second hand knowledge that ive picked up from other web sites and such, so take it with a grain of salt- i do
The bottom line is that for the mac, the OS is years ahead of the hardware. for the PC, the hardware is years ahead of the OS.
one of the greatest things about having a mac is the community you become a part of. Welcome!
Except perhaps for the first sentence, the entire post is misinformed. Bug free os/security/software development have nothing to do with whether an OS has a micro/macro kernel. Look at linux (monolithic kernel) as an example (or OpenBSD). OSX 'feels' slow because of an advanced screen drawing layer that has a performance hit, as well as a slow harddisk filesystem, and weak processor/FSBs. Add to that the relative youth of OSX and it feels much slower than Windows.
However microkernels in their current forms are in fact slower by design, and the reason for the stability of linux has more to do with its maturity rather than it being a monolithic os.
Also, *aqua* does make things slower, but quartz extreme overcomes most of that. And the disk I/O problems do add to the mix, but my new mac has 1gig of ddr ram and it is still way slower than my old pc in many ways.
When you want to blame mac's poor responsiveness on hardware like FSB, remember that OS 9 has no responsiveness issues.
"microkernel<operating system> An approach to operating system design emphasising small modules that implement the basic features of the system kernel and can be flexibly configured. (1999-08-02)
But in reality, the performance of MicroKernel is often poor enough and the implementation is complicated enough that still today most OperatingSystems are written using MonolithicKernel.
OTOH, the MIT ExoKernel operating system is said to be very fast"
taken from the free online dictionary of computing
The unresponsiveness I speak of is due to Aqua. Quartz Extreme may help, but OSX does not reach the same level is speediness that Windows has. I'm talking about things such as dragging the scroll bar up and down, moving the mouse around, dragging windows around, etc. Much more graphical work is being done which results in sluggishness when compared with Windows.
It's perfectly understandable. And there is always that tradeoff between aesthetics and practicality... and that's about it. Just like I can say that Windows 2000 is more responsive in that regard than XP.
Originally posted by ahbo
...moving the mouse around...
In watching many Windows users manuver a cursor onscreen with a mouse, I have found that many move the cursor very slowly as the mouse tracking is linear; that is, if you move the mouse two inches at .2m/s, and then move the mouse two inches at 1m/s, the cursor will move the same distance onscreen. So most users have the tracking set at a level to where they can navigate the screen in the space of an average-sized mouse pad. This, however, leads to inaccuracy (which is why I detest using graphic editing apps like Photoshop on Windows.)
Macs, on the other hand, have always used dynamic mouse tracking. Move the mouse two inches at .2m/s, and it will move a distance onscreen. Move the mouse two inches at 1m/s, and it will move even further onscreen. It's like having an accelerator pedal for your mouse; with Windows you're on the outside with your hands on the bumper pushing it up a hill.
Set the mouse tracking to the highest level and try getting used to snappier mouse movements...the cursor will move go further the faster you move it. This may seem odd, but it allows you to both cover large ammounts of screen real estate and do precision pixel-by-pixel work easily.
And if all else fails, someone here can refer you to some programs that will make your mouse tracking insanely fast.
Originally posted by Spart
In watching many Windows users manuver a cursor onscreen with a mouse, I have found that many move the cursor very slowly as the mouse tracking is linear; that is, if you move the mouse two inches at .2m/s, and then move the mouse two inches at 1m/s, the cursor will move the same distance onscreen. So most users have the tracking set at a level to where they can navigate the screen in the space of an average-sized mouse pad. This, however, leads to inaccuracy (which is why I detest using graphic editing apps like Photoshop on Windows.)
Macs, on the other hand, have always used dynamic mouse tracking. Move the mouse two inches at .2m/s, and it will move a distance onscreen. Move the mouse two inches at 1m/s, and it will move even further onscreen. It's like having an accelerator pedal for your mouse; with Windows you're on the outside with your hands on the bumper pushing it up a hill.
Set the mouse tracking to the highest level and try getting used to snappier mouse movements...the cursor will move go further the faster you move it. This may seem odd, but it allows you to both cover large ammounts of screen real estate and do precision pixel-by-pixel work easily.
And if all else fails, someone here can refer you to some programs that will make your mouse tracking insanely fast.
Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I realize I wasn't being very specific. I was referring to the mouse "report rate" (refresh rate) rather than the actual speed of mouse tracking.
What you did talk about, however, did take me a little while to realise and adjust to when I first got the iBook. It's strange at first for Windows users. : )
actually that would be pretty tough because he just bought a new dell laptop, so i dont think he'll be making another computer purchase for a while.
Its really funny tho, he's one of those guys that thinks he'll catch a disease if he touches a mac, like everyone that see's my new PB 17 is like ooo aaa holy craap the keys light up, the screen is so big thats like 30"! wow thats pretty how this works ...cool cool... and this one is like, "its only got a 440go? im getting a laptop with a 4200, its the fastest chip you can put in a laptop right now. Mine cost 3000 bucks, but i got it for 2 because i got it from some dude off ebay"
you can guess that this dude is a pretty serious computer gamer, by the way he stresses graphics cards. nevermind the fact that its only a 15" nearly 2" thick, plastic computer that lasts an hour on battery and has absolutely no warranty do to the fact that he got it from some random dude, no wireless net built in, no bluetooth, no gigabit ethernet no firewire 800... the list goes on, but the biggest thing is that it doesnt run the best OS.
sorry for the rant
Ashan
Originally posted by Imergingenious
you have a degree in CS? cool, maybe you can help me switch one of my good friends who is currently majoring in CS.
actually that would be pretty tough because he just bought a new dell laptop, so i dont think he'll be making another computer purchase for a while.
Its really funny tho, he's one of those guys that thinks he'll catch a disease if he touches a mac, like everyone that see's my new PB 17 is like ooo aaa holy craap the keys light up, the screen is so big thats like 30"! wow thats pretty how this works ...cool cool... and this one is like, "its only got a 440go? im getting a laptop with a 4200, its the fastest chip you can put in a laptop right now. Mine cost 3000 bucks, but i got it for 2 because i got it from some dude off ebay"
you can guess that this dude is a pretty serious computer gamer, by the way he stresses graphics cards. nevermind the fact that its only a 15" nearly 2" thick, plastic computer that lasts an hour on battery and has absolutely no warranty do to the fact that he got it from some random dude, no wireless net built in, no bluetooth, no gigabit ethernet no firewire 800... the list goes on, but the biggest thing is that it doesnt run the best OS.
sorry for the rant
Ashan
I think a lot of comp sci majors at my school would have the same viewpoint. They see the Mac as a platform with weaker software/hardware aimed at computer illiterates. While there is some truth to this argument at least as far as core hardware is concerned (until the 970, perhaps), the rest is bull. A true computer scientist is going to want a UNIX variant on hand, and OSX is a perfect way to achieve this without having to dual-boot with linux. iBooks/Powerbooks are packed full of features for their respective price points. Size/weight/battery life is better than industry average, though this is now waning with the advance of Centrino notebooks.
The truth of the matter is, your friend didn't buy his notebook as a computer scientist; he bought it as a gamer! Sure, you can get a 2", 10 pound laptop with the latest P4-M or P-M and Radeon/GeForce4 Ti. To me, that kind of defeats the entire purpose of having a notebook. If you want the fastest game machine, you can customize your own desktop with the latest generation stuff and have it cost a ton less than a notebook. However, if you want mobility, you get a notebook that's designed for it. And yes, that means sacrificing performance.
Your friend is going to have a great time playing games on his Dell, and I hope he's glad he paid thousands of dollars for that. But let's see how happy he is when he's carrying that thing on his back every day.
(and then gets an hour of use out of it)
The PowerBooks are taking over the UNC CS dept, slowly but surely... campus has a requirement that all incoming freshmen have a laptop, and they push IBM like *MAD* as the One Approved Laptop... but some of us made sure that it was *optional* which particular laptop to buy.
So even with:
a $5million Intel grant to our department a couple years ago to embed NT/2000 machines on everyone's desks
the CCI student laptop requirements
MS throwing $ at us like mad
... faculty members are migrating to PowerBooks in ever increasing numbers. Why? Simple. Unix + laptop + Office. Nobody wants to screw around with .NET or Visual Studio anymore, they want simple, straightforward, and rock solid.
Originally posted by ahbo
I think a lot of comp sci majors at my school would have the same viewpoint. They see the Mac as a platform with weaker software/hardware aimed at computer illiterates. While there is some truth to this argument at least as far as core hardware is concerned (until the 970, perhaps), the rest is bull. A true computer scientist is going to want a UNIX variant on hand, and OSX is a perfect way to achieve this without having to dual-boot with linux.
Comp-sci majors who think Macs are 'aimed at computer illiterates' will probably be rather inept at their chosen field. I certainly would not want them working for me. The statement demonstrates a lack of objective, analytical ability. I don?t really consider myself an evangelist and don't hate these people. Rather, I consider them to be ignorant or perhaps of questionable intelligence.
While attending Carnegie Mellon, I observed a surprising number of CS grad-students and faculty to be powerbook users. Macs are actually more common among the uber-geeks than among the general populace. This phenomenon was less pronounced with undergraduates. They tend to give gaming capability more weight when purchasing a computer for personal use. This marries them to the PC hardware and you?ll find them dual booting into linux for some of their course work.
[This post used to contain a funny anecdote about nocturnal, caffeine-guzzling wifi-geeks but an accidental alt-F4 killed my first response.]
Rest assured, super geeks moding kernels in their spare time? its fairly common for them to be powerbook users.
i could never figure out shortcuts for windows-just seems like a hack. I have never seen any of my pc friends use any short cuts other than occasionally alt F4.
In watching many Windows users manuver a cursor onscreen with a mouse, I have found that many move the cursor very slowly as the mouse tracking is linear...
Sorry, I think you misunderstood what I meant. I realize I wasn't being very specific. I was referring to the mouse "report rate" (refresh rate) rather than the actual speed of mouse tracking.
Microsoft fixed both these problems with Windows ME. Older versions of Windows (besides NT) had a cursor refresh rate of 40 Hz with PS/2 mice. In case you're interested in fixing this, there's a program called PS2Rate that you can use to change it to up to 200Hz.
You can also set ME to hide the cursor when you type.
It's nice to see Microsoft ripping off the little things that make the Mac a pleasure to use.