Any chance of OSX Lite for G3's
Given the less than stellar performance of OSX on a G3 (debatable I guess), what's the chance of Apple coming out with a "lite" version. One that perhaps doesn't have all the bells and whistles but runs faster (is this possible?)
Or should G3's be relegated to running 9.2 if we want a snappy performance. But if most apps go OSX, it's then pointless.
My guess it'll be more a matter of waiting till eventually all iBooks are upgraded to G4's.
Or should G3's be relegated to running 9.2 if we want a snappy performance. But if most apps go OSX, it's then pointless.
My guess it'll be more a matter of waiting till eventually all iBooks are upgraded to G4's.
Comments
Also, regular osx should be like "lite"... every OS should be "lite" imho..
Any idea how many millions of users Windows XP leaves behind? And those with a G3 too slow to run OS X satisfactorily still have the traditional Mac OS.
And taking out the "bells and whistles" that slow down performance would make OS X a very different beast altogether, and one that wasn't capable of half the tasks we need it to do.
[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: Belle ]</p>
<strong>Why should they bother? Apple wants you to buy a new iMac. OS X works fine on the iBook too. </strong><hr></blockquote>
However, Apple also wants you to buy a ton of iBooks.
Speed is subjective and like I said, that's debatable. Personally, I'd like the performance on a G3 to be that of what is currently on a G4.
I really wonder how much more tweeking can be done that would make OSX run faster on G3's.
Does one really expect future OSX (say 10.8) with even more features but actually run faster?
Speed is subjective and like I said, that's debatable. Personally, I'd like the performance on a G3 to be that of what is currently on a G4. <hr></blockquote>
I guess you're right, it is subjective. I have a G4/450 cube and i feel its too slow. Of course, i thought that when i only had 10.0.4 running, and i thought it was too slow then too
<strong>
Does one really expect future OSX (say 10.8) with even more features but actually run faster?</strong><hr></blockquote>
I sure don't. OS X is as fast as it's going to get. There's no speed up out there.
<strong>I sure don't. OS X is as fast as it's going to get. There's no speed up out there.</strong><hr></blockquote>Man, it seems like everything you say is so cold you can see your breath as it comes out of your mouth. You say it with such certainty but you just don't know.
Whether you noticed it or not, there was a speed boost from 10.0 to 10.1. No one thought this was possible until Jobs demo'd it at MWNY01. Everyone kept swearing the hardware "couldn't handle it" and that OS X was "as fast as it's going to get." Well it wasn't true and there's a very good chance what you're saying isn't true as well.
10.2 doesn't have any speed increases yet. Obviously it might not get that boost but we don't... we can't know.
However, there are things that can be done to make it seem faster, like getting rid of the crappy Finder and replacing it with something multi-threaded.
[ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: Belle ]</p>
One of the biggest complaints that people have about OSX responsiveness is related to slow windows resizing. Couldn't somebody write a hack that would allow the user to turn off the real-time screen re-draw when resizing (and maybe even when moving) a window? It could allow the user to choose the old OS9 style of window resizes, where you see a dotted outline of the window's new location, and when you let go of the mouse button the window re-draws all at once.
Something like that would make a big difference to OSX res ponsiveness.
<strong>Man, it seems like everything you say is so cold you can see your breath as it comes out of your mouth. You say it with such certainty but you just don't know.
Whether you noticed it or not, there was a speed boost from 10.0 to 10.1.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I didn't see any speed up except from the update prebinding deal. We all know about how fast OS X is on stage.
OS X is slow and it's not getting faster.