OS X is great but the fact that the GUI is slow is still irrating to those of us who like it.
I have a G3-450 G4-500 and G4-800 and in every case moving to OS 9 after having used OS X for a couple of days seem like a 'Shift to light speed'
Yes all the machines are usable but a lot of the fun has been taken out of using these machines. I really hope that when 10.2 is released we see a similar improvement in the GUI.
Incidently last week I installed the iTunes 2.04 update and it trashed the OS X system on my G4-500. There is no way to re-install, I had to re-format the hard disk and re-load everything. That is simply not acceptable situation for business machines. the comment from Apple support was "OS X does that sometimes" And I like OS X, use it 80 hours a week.
<strong>I agree with JYD. I LIKE aqua. I'm more productive with it. You might think transparency is superfluous, but it's not. I can't count how much time I've saved not having to move a terminal window back and forth while trying to follow directions for compiling or installing some program.</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's with this "up time" bollocks? I just checked my MacOS 8.6 web server, it's been up since 22 January 2002 - it was only down to install an update. My desktop 9.2.1 gets shut down every night, but it rarely crashes anyway - maybe once a week, max.
And all this "I like Aqua" crap. Adopting, or not adopting X has next to nothing to do with what the interface looks like - I don't like Aqua FWIW, but if I thought X was a better OS for a production environment I wouldn't hesitate moving.
Fact is, I don't really care about Aqua one way or the other, I can run in "graphite" or I can adopt a theme - job done. Why we're not going there, yet, is because there are things that are just plain missing from the OS right now, it's outright slow, and whatever anyone says it is no more stable than 9.x.
Oh, and the total cost of ownership just went right out the window because there's a bunch of crap on my HDs and nobody knows what the f*ck they are - extensions manager for X anyone?
After looking over my posts from a different perspective (with the help of a little sleep), I've come to realize that much of what I said was narrow, shortsighted BS! <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
From my new perspective on these things, let me rephrase...
Personally, I like Aqua a lot ? it seems very fluid and interactive (although the Dock gets in the way a lot), and in general, Mac OS X is a great OS.
Although it appears that Apple has been concentrating too much on the visual aspect of Mac OS X instead its performance, it's understandable because Apple's most important market right now is the consumer market, not the professional one. Since most professionals will continue to use OS 9 for several months to come because of the lack of important native OS X apps (QuarkXPress and others), TWAIN support, and the general sluggishness of OS X on all but the latest hardware, Apple can work on the consumer aspect of OS X while these other factors come up to speed. As time goes on, we'll see a greater improvement on the performance of OS X due to faster hardware and improved software, and this thread will no longer have much relevance.
I don't know how correct my ideas are, but they may offer some explanation for the way Apple has been dealing with OS X. Let me know what you think, because I'm still unsure of what's going on myself.
I have been using OSX since beta and it has come a long way. But I think it has farther to go. Im still not ready to install it on my moms iBook or my departments computers.
IMO, its speed problems are balanced by its stability and ability to multitask. Even tho my modem will freeze my machine, I dont think there is any one 'show-stopper.'
Its the many quirks and irritations that give me pause. I am counting on 10.2. This week, I submitted a budget for a department wide shift to X by the end of the summer. Its no small task, but all of our apps will need to be upgraded, the designers will have to learn new ways to do things, and I will have to hope that it all works.
I am fully behind OSX. I have faith that Apple will deliver w/10.2 and that things will begin to smooth out in the months ahead.
...and so continues the rehashing of old news and bitching from people that are new to our world... I would love to see the specs on these computers that OS X is SO sluggish on...
A friend of mine said it was a dog on his new G4 867 and it confused me since it runs beutifully on my G3 iBook 500. Turns out... he had 128MB of RAM...
PEOPLE!!! if you have NOT figured it out, in order for OS X to run at a decent clip you NEED RAM! Plain and Simple... We slapped a 512 stick in his machine and vioala! Runs like a champ, he bareley sees said color disk CD icon anymore...
Solution... 256MB + and STFU PLEASE.
Mac Guru
Sorry to be so grumpy but really people like stated earlier, OS X is NOT OS 9 with a new UI... OS X is a whole new beast, the Mac OS didn't just appear one day in it's finished form... from day one it was pretty much a dog, but it was revolutionary... by working on it and refining it over the years Appl got it to the state called OS 9... and it was pretty good. What you're bitching about here is a brand spankin new OS Apple has given us, sure there are kinks, but then again that's why we're at 10.1.3 and not just 10.0. It's called polishing, STFU and let them do it.
<strong>and whatever anyone says it is no more stable than 9.x.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's BS and you know it. It's not that Mac OS 9 is very unstable, but it does go down a couple of times a week when you tend to use the computer.
[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>Oh, and the total cost of ownership just went right out the window because there's a bunch of crap on my HDs and nobody knows what the f*ck they are - extensions manager for X anyone?</strong><hr></blockquote>
What on Earth does TCO have to do with extensions? (and try to learn a little about Mac OS X before asking for an extension manager)
[quote] extensions manager for X anyone <hr></blockquote>
Ummm are you really that blind? OS X is NOT, I repeat, NOT an upgrade to OS 9. OS X is a NEW OS and UNIX is it's primary base... if you took the TIME to use the OS for what it is, appreciate how it's put together and HOW it is structured you'll see why there is no extensions manager for OS X.
Apple has done nothing but promise the moon and deliver short for almost 10 years now.
The PPC was supposed to be the RISC from heaven and we'd never worry about performance again.
OSX was supposed really fast and instead you need a lot of patience and a $3000 computer (and that's without the monitor!).
Now Apple is all about "marketing secrets and surprises." How can I plan _my_ business when I don't know what's in the pipe, don't know the specs of upcoming equipment, or anything else. How about 6 months of silence on when Photoshop, arguably the single most important piece of Mac software, is coming out, and then you only get a statement that its coming in a few more months.
Good thing the consumer market is important to them, 'cause there's a lot of pissed off pros.
Mac were my first several computers. The love is gone, and that probably one of the most important things a company that has a 4% share of the market can hope to have had.
Anyone ever notice that people with less than 100 posts generally make the most assinine assertions and complaints to be found on this board? It's like a right of passage or something...lol...most have to be told to get a freaking clue several times before they understand the average user in here knows their arguments to be baseless, pointless and generally useless.
Here's a hint: millions of people who use Macs on a professional basis are GLAD to be using OS X in its current state vs. what they were using a year ago. If the product sucked anywhere NEAR as bad as you think it does, NO ONE would use it. People have enough problems in life without intentionally adding one more by using a system they hate.
[quote] OSX was supposed really fast and instead you need a lot of patience and a $3000 computer (and that's without the monitor!). <hr></blockquote>
Ummm so that's why my $1799 iBook runs OS X perfectly... Hmmm I'm surely confused now...
[quote] How can I plan _my_ business when I don't know what's in the pipe, don't know the specs of upcoming equipment, or anything else. <hr></blockquote>
It's called Development. If Apple told us what was coming, what was in it and what speed it was at then they'd have competitors working to one up them before said product was released... YET, with a working knowledge of what's in the "pipe" from Motorolla, and parts manufacturers, a LOGICAL person can deduce what Apple is working on. Just buy what you need and don't worry if something new is in the works... if you worry about becoming obsolete you'd better get used to being out of business, cause you'll never have any computers to work on.
[quote] How about 6 months of silence on when Photoshop, arguably the single most important piece of Mac software, is coming out, and then you only get a statement that its coming in a few more months. <hr></blockquote>
You're trying to pass off a stupid blunder from Adobe as a fault of Apple's. Your reasoning is faulty YET AGAIN. Contrary to "your" reasoning Apple does not control the Development of such apps as Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, Quark etc. These are what is called 3rd Party... Controlled by someone other than Apple. It's an amazing concept.
[quote] Good thing the consumer market is important to them, 'cause there's a lot of pissed off pros. <hr></blockquote>
Where are they? I'm a pro, I'm happy... Everyone I have talked to in my area of expertise is excited at where Apple is... and adopt new apps as soon as they become available. It's called upgrading.
[quote] Mac were my first several computers. The love is gone, and that probably one of the most important things a company that has a 4% share of the market can hope to have had. <hr></blockquote>
Umm last time I checked Apple had more than a 4% grasp on the market... and while where on the subject of marketshare... it's a REALLY hard thing to measure since it depends on WHAT market you are talking about. In the Art and Design area their marketshare is more like 56% or something around there...
I'm normally a nice guy and easy to get along with, it's just topics like this that bring out the asshole in me.
Ever notice how people with 100 posts think they are God or something. Start thinking they know everything. Must be the water.
Seriously, I muck rack more than I need to because there are too many pimple faced Apple is heaven sent apologist sheep out there.
Apple tries and I give them that. I've had Macs going back to the IIci and I'm just making my observations known.
I try hard to use OS X, but end up going back to 9 after a week or so. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
PS I think I had 100 or so posts over at MacNN before they went lame or stillborn or whatever happened over there. <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
It's called Development. If Apple told us what was coming, what was in it and what speed it was at then they'd have competitors working to one up them before said product was released... YET, with a working knowledge of what's in the "pipe" from Motorolla, and parts manufacturers, a LOGICAL person can deduce what Apple is working on. Just buy what you need and don't worry if something new is in the works... if you worry about becoming obsolete you'd better get used to being out of business, cause you'll never have any computers to work on.
Mac Guru</strong><hr></blockquote>
So not the problem. But if a G5 is coming out, maybe I sell my dual 800 on e-bay before hand. If a G5 comes out, I lose hundreds. If a dual 1GHz comes out (like it did) I'm screwed and have to buy a shit dual 1GHz when I thought 1.4GHz G5s were gonna be available.
It's catty and I don't like it.
Who are Apple's competitors? Compaq? Get real.
They can keep their silly fru fru case designs secret, just tell me what the friggin specs are gonna be. It's called a roadmap and Apple's all over that road.
Nobody else is even stupid enough to use the G4 chip in a computer anyhow.
<strong>If I'm Apple, I'm giving Adobe as much support as they need to help get Photoshop out the door.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is, by all indications, doing exactly that. They're working very closely with Adobe engineers on the display layers, for example.
Nevertheless, porting (and enhancing) Photoshop is an immense project that has to be done right the first time. It'll come out when Adobe is happy with it, and no sooner.
[quote] If I'm Apple, I'm giving Adobe as much support as they need to help get Photoshop out the door. <hr></blockquote>
Thing was Apple DID offer to help, Adobe said they had it under control and that they were waiting to see how other devs responded to the OS. Adobe took thier sweet ass time and if you saw it at the MWSF keynote, Steve was not too pleased with Adobe.
Adobe has Apple by the balls, not the other way around.
[quote] That was tame asshole work <hr></blockquote>
I didn't say I was at 100% but I didn't say that to scare you. Just letting other people know why I'm acting like this.
[quote] because there are too many pimple faced Apple is heaven sent apologist sheep out there. <hr></blockquote>
I'm HARDLY a sheep or an Apple Apologist. Apple is FAR from perfect in MANY ways, it's just when people make claims about the performance of the OS that are completely unfounded and untrue. (Claiming the OS is a dog on anything under $3000 is completely untrue when I make a living in OS X on an iBook 500 and OS X runs perfectly)
[quote] I think I had 100 or so posts over at MacNN <hr></blockquote>
That's nice... MacNN is pretty lame and explains your issues very well... NN is about 85% bitching/whining teenagers.
Sorry if you can't seem to get OS X running. But hey, at least I can open 3 or 4 apps at once, read my email while they're opening. Can't do that and MANY other things with OS 9.
[quote]mmm so that's why my $1799 iBook runs OS X perfectly<hr></blockquote>How delightful for you. The OS also runs fine of my DP1GHZ, but app performance sucks. Positively atrocious. Or are you going to tell me that things like VPC, Illustrator, Word actually run faster in OSX.
[quote]It's called Development. If Apple told us what was coming, what was in it and what speed it was at then they'd have competitors working to one up them before said product was released...<hr></blockquote>Uh you mean all the other OS developers on the PPC platform. FYI Micro$oft doesn't give a snot about OSX, they have their own path to world domination mapped out and its called .NET. Being silent is a VERY bad way to entice people to move to your future OS. There are lots of Apple's core market that are still running very old machines, and are loath to upgrade because stuff just works. Stuff has to work much better for them to move on.
[quote]Everyone I have talked to in my area of expertise is excited at where Apple is... and adopt new apps as soon as they become available. It's called upgrading.<hr></blockquote>Good for you. Now go to Adobe's support forum and read about all the people that are very sceptical of OSX and are still VERY HAPPY running all versions of Illustrator less than v9, or PS less than v6.
[quote]You're trying to pass off a stupid blunder from Adobe as a fault of Apple's.<hr></blockquote>You think its Adobe's f*ck up that they wouldn't develop for v10.0. They waited til 10.1 for good reason.
for Moogs: [quote]Here's a hint: millions of people who use Macs on a professional basis are GLAD to be using OS X in its current state vs. what they were using a year ago.<hr></blockquote>From my anecdoctal experience [though I know many less than your millions], none of the shops I know have switched, and that includes a couple of big multi-national design agencies.
That's nice... MacNN is pretty lame and explains your issues very well... NN is about 85% bitching/whining teenagers.
it's just when people make claims about the performance of the OS that are completely unfounded and untrue. (Claiming the OS is a dog on anything under $3000 is completely untrue when I make a living in OS X on an iBook 500 and OS X runs perfectly)
Mac Guru</strong>[/QUOTE
Kind sir,
1. I was on MacNN when this site was dead sea, so where was everybody forced to hang for a while? Thank you. Like I'm so MacNN, I'm so sure.
I'm actually here trying to solve a problem with my OS9 folders being shared across partitions since I have to run two copies (one for X on its own partition)
When I run OSX, it's on a dual 800 and a dual 450 and I ain't wit' it'. Oh, I never said I can't get it to work, it works as well as it should. Just that dog slow interface puts me to sleep and ruins my flow.
Comments
that product is out there, it doesn't sell that well to consumers...
I have a G3-450 G4-500 and G4-800 and in every case moving to OS 9 after having used OS X for a couple of days seem like a 'Shift to light speed'
Yes all the machines are usable but a lot of the fun has been taken out of using these machines. I really hope that when 10.2 is released we see a similar improvement in the GUI.
Incidently last week I installed the iTunes 2.04 update and it trashed the OS X system on my G4-500. There is no way to re-install, I had to re-format the hard disk and re-load everything. That is simply not acceptable situation for business machines. the comment from Apple support was "OS X does that sometimes" And I like OS X, use it 80 hours a week.
<strong>I agree with JYD. I LIKE aqua. I'm more productive with it. You might think transparency is superfluous, but it's not. I can't count how much time I've saved not having to move a terminal window back and forth while trying to follow directions for compiling or installing some program.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Ever thought of getting a bigger monitor?
And all this "I like Aqua" crap. Adopting, or not adopting X has next to nothing to do with what the interface looks like - I don't like Aqua FWIW, but if I thought X was a better OS for a production environment I wouldn't hesitate moving.
Fact is, I don't really care about Aqua one way or the other, I can run in "graphite" or I can adopt a theme - job done. Why we're not going there, yet, is because there are things that are just plain missing from the OS right now, it's outright slow, and whatever anyone says it is no more stable than 9.x.
Oh, and the total cost of ownership just went right out the window because there's a bunch of crap on my HDs and nobody knows what the f*ck they are - extensions manager for X anyone?
From my new perspective on these things, let me rephrase...
Personally, I like Aqua a lot ? it seems very fluid and interactive (although the Dock gets in the way a lot), and in general, Mac OS X is a great OS.
Although it appears that Apple has been concentrating too much on the visual aspect of Mac OS X instead its performance, it's understandable because Apple's most important market right now is the consumer market, not the professional one. Since most professionals will continue to use OS 9 for several months to come because of the lack of important native OS X apps (QuarkXPress and others), TWAIN support, and the general sluggishness of OS X on all but the latest hardware, Apple can work on the consumer aspect of OS X while these other factors come up to speed. As time goes on, we'll see a greater improvement on the performance of OS X due to faster hardware and improved software, and this thread will no longer have much relevance.
I don't know how correct my ideas are, but they may offer some explanation for the way Apple has been dealing with OS X. Let me know what you think, because I'm still unsure of what's going on myself.
IMO, its speed problems are balanced by its stability and ability to multitask. Even tho my modem will freeze my machine, I dont think there is any one 'show-stopper.'
Its the many quirks and irritations that give me pause. I am counting on 10.2. This week, I submitted a budget for a department wide shift to X by the end of the summer. Its no small task, but all of our apps will need to be upgraded, the designers will have to learn new ways to do things, and I will have to hope that it all works.
I am fully behind OSX. I have faith that Apple will deliver w/10.2 and that things will begin to smooth out in the months ahead.
BTW, I love Aqua.
A friend of mine said it was a dog on his new G4 867 and it confused me since it runs beutifully on my G3 iBook 500. Turns out... he had 128MB of RAM...
PEOPLE!!! if you have NOT figured it out, in order for OS X to run at a decent clip you NEED RAM! Plain and Simple... We slapped a 512 stick in his machine and vioala! Runs like a champ, he bareley sees said color disk CD icon anymore...
Solution... 256MB + and STFU PLEASE.
Mac Guru
Sorry to be so grumpy but really people like stated earlier, OS X is NOT OS 9 with a new UI... OS X is a whole new beast, the Mac OS didn't just appear one day in it's finished form... from day one it was pretty much a dog, but it was revolutionary... by working on it and refining it over the years Appl got it to the state called OS 9... and it was pretty good. What you're bitching about here is a brand spankin new OS Apple has given us, sure there are kinks, but then again that's why we're at 10.1.3 and not just 10.0. It's called polishing, STFU and let them do it.
<strong>and whatever anyone says it is no more stable than 9.x.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That's BS and you know it. It's not that Mac OS 9 is very unstable, but it does go down a couple of times a week when you tend to use the computer.
[quote]Originally posted by Clive:
<strong>Oh, and the total cost of ownership just went right out the window because there's a bunch of crap on my HDs and nobody knows what the f*ck they are - extensions manager for X anyone?</strong><hr></blockquote>
What on Earth does TCO have to do with extensions? (and try to learn a little about Mac OS X before asking for an extension manager)
Ummm are you really that blind? OS X is NOT, I repeat, NOT an upgrade to OS 9. OS X is a NEW OS and UNIX is it's primary base... if you took the TIME to use the OS for what it is, appreciate how it's put together and HOW it is structured you'll see why there is no extensions manager for OS X.
BIG DUH on that one.
Mac Guru
Apple has done nothing but promise the moon and deliver short for almost 10 years now.
The PPC was supposed to be the RISC from heaven and we'd never worry about performance again.
OSX was supposed really fast and instead you need a lot of patience and a $3000 computer (and that's without the monitor!).
Now Apple is all about "marketing secrets and surprises." How can I plan _my_ business when I don't know what's in the pipe, don't know the specs of upcoming equipment, or anything else. How about 6 months of silence on when Photoshop, arguably the single most important piece of Mac software, is coming out, and then you only get a statement that its coming in a few more months.
Good thing the consumer market is important to them, 'cause there's a lot of pissed off pros.
Mac were my first several computers. The love is gone, and that probably one of the most important things a company that has a 4% share of the market can hope to have had.
Here's a hint: millions of people who use Macs on a professional basis are GLAD to be using OS X in its current state vs. what they were using a year ago. If the product sucked anywhere NEAR as bad as you think it does, NO ONE would use it. People have enough problems in life without intentionally adding one more by using a system they hate.
WTFU (ten guesses what the W stands for).
Newbies.
(No offense to those who actually think before they post; I recognize not all newbies are clueless).
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: Moogs ? ]</p>
Ummm so that's why my $1799 iBook runs OS X perfectly... Hmmm I'm surely confused now...
[quote] How can I plan _my_ business when I don't know what's in the pipe, don't know the specs of upcoming equipment, or anything else. <hr></blockquote>
It's called Development. If Apple told us what was coming, what was in it and what speed it was at then they'd have competitors working to one up them before said product was released... YET, with a working knowledge of what's in the "pipe" from Motorolla, and parts manufacturers, a LOGICAL person can deduce what Apple is working on. Just buy what you need and don't worry if something new is in the works... if you worry about becoming obsolete you'd better get used to being out of business, cause you'll never have any computers to work on.
[quote] How about 6 months of silence on when Photoshop, arguably the single most important piece of Mac software, is coming out, and then you only get a statement that its coming in a few more months. <hr></blockquote>
You're trying to pass off a stupid blunder from Adobe as a fault of Apple's. Your reasoning is faulty YET AGAIN. Contrary to "your" reasoning Apple does not control the Development of such apps as Photoshop, Dreamweaver, Flash, Quark etc. These are what is called 3rd Party... Controlled by someone other than Apple. It's an amazing concept.
[quote] Good thing the consumer market is important to them, 'cause there's a lot of pissed off pros. <hr></blockquote>
Where are they? I'm a pro, I'm happy... Everyone I have talked to in my area of expertise is excited at where Apple is... and adopt new apps as soon as they become available. It's called upgrading.
[quote] Mac were my first several computers. The love is gone, and that probably one of the most important things a company that has a 4% share of the market can hope to have had. <hr></blockquote>
Umm last time I checked Apple had more than a 4% grasp on the market... and while where on the subject of marketshare... it's a REALLY hard thing to measure since it depends on WHAT market you are talking about. In the Art and Design area their marketshare is more like 56% or something around there...
I'm normally a nice guy and easy to get along with, it's just topics like this that bring out the asshole in me.
Mac Guru
Seriously, I muck rack more than I need to because there are too many pimple faced Apple is heaven sent apologist sheep out there.
Apple tries and I give them that. I've had Macs going back to the IIci and I'm just making my observations known.
I try hard to use OS X, but end up going back to 9 after a week or so. That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
PS I think I had 100 or so posts over at MacNN before they went lame or stillborn or whatever happened over there. <img src="graemlins/surprised.gif" border="0" alt="[Surprised]" />
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: sodamnregistered ]
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: sodamnregistered ]
[ 04-01-2002: Message edited by: sodamnregistered ]</p>
<strong>I'm normally a nice guy and easy to get along with, it's just topics like this that bring out the asshole in me.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
You don't scare me. That was tame asshole work. You need coffee.
If I'm Apple, I'm giving Adobe as much support as they need to help get Photoshop out the door.
It's gonna get here about 11pm Steve Jobs time and that's a shame.
Instead, I felt a cold war between the two.
<strong>
It's called Development. If Apple told us what was coming, what was in it and what speed it was at then they'd have competitors working to one up them before said product was released... YET, with a working knowledge of what's in the "pipe" from Motorolla, and parts manufacturers, a LOGICAL person can deduce what Apple is working on. Just buy what you need and don't worry if something new is in the works... if you worry about becoming obsolete you'd better get used to being out of business, cause you'll never have any computers to work on.
Mac Guru</strong><hr></blockquote>
So not the problem. But if a G5 is coming out, maybe I sell my dual 800 on e-bay before hand. If a G5 comes out, I lose hundreds. If a dual 1GHz comes out (like it did) I'm screwed and have to buy a shit dual 1GHz when I thought 1.4GHz G5s were gonna be available.
It's catty and I don't like it.
Who are Apple's competitors? Compaq? Get real.
They can keep their silly fru fru case designs secret, just tell me what the friggin specs are gonna be. It's called a roadmap and Apple's all over that road.
Nobody else is even stupid enough to use the G4 chip in a computer anyhow.
<strong>If I'm Apple, I'm giving Adobe as much support as they need to help get Photoshop out the door.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is, by all indications, doing exactly that. They're working very closely with Adobe engineers on the display layers, for example.
Nevertheless, porting (and enhancing) Photoshop is an immense project that has to be done right the first time. It'll come out when Adobe is happy with it, and no sooner.
Thing was Apple DID offer to help, Adobe said they had it under control and that they were waiting to see how other devs responded to the OS. Adobe took thier sweet ass time and if you saw it at the MWSF keynote, Steve was not too pleased with Adobe.
Adobe has Apple by the balls, not the other way around.
[quote] That was tame asshole work <hr></blockquote>
I didn't say I was at 100% but I didn't say that to scare you. Just letting other people know why I'm acting like this.
[quote] because there are too many pimple faced Apple is heaven sent apologist sheep out there. <hr></blockquote>
I'm HARDLY a sheep or an Apple Apologist. Apple is FAR from perfect in MANY ways, it's just when people make claims about the performance of the OS that are completely unfounded and untrue. (Claiming the OS is a dog on anything under $3000 is completely untrue when I make a living in OS X on an iBook 500 and OS X runs perfectly)
[quote] I think I had 100 or so posts over at MacNN <hr></blockquote>
That's nice... MacNN is pretty lame and explains your issues very well... NN is about 85% bitching/whining teenagers.
Sorry if you can't seem to get OS X running. But hey, at least I can open 3 or 4 apps at once, read my email while they're opening. Can't do that and MANY other things with OS 9.
Mac Guru
<strong> Apple is, by all indications, doing exactly that. </strong><hr></blockquote>
What time is it?
Out here on the street and don't know what time it is?
bahhhhh
bahhhhhhh
baahhhhhh
[quote]It's called Development. If Apple told us what was coming, what was in it and what speed it was at then they'd have competitors working to one up them before said product was released...<hr></blockquote>Uh you mean all the other OS developers on the PPC platform. FYI Micro$oft doesn't give a snot about OSX, they have their own path to world domination mapped out and its called .NET. Being silent is a VERY bad way to entice people to move to your future OS. There are lots of Apple's core market that are still running very old machines, and are loath to upgrade because stuff just works. Stuff has to work much better for them to move on.
[quote]Everyone I have talked to in my area of expertise is excited at where Apple is... and adopt new apps as soon as they become available. It's called upgrading.<hr></blockquote>Good for you. Now go to Adobe's support forum and read about all the people that are very sceptical of OSX and are still VERY HAPPY running all versions of Illustrator less than v9, or PS less than v6.
[quote]You're trying to pass off a stupid blunder from Adobe as a fault of Apple's.<hr></blockquote>You think its Adobe's f*ck up that they wouldn't develop for v10.0. They waited til 10.1 for good reason.
for Moogs: [quote]Here's a hint: millions of people who use Macs on a professional basis are GLAD to be using OS X in its current state vs. what they were using a year ago.<hr></blockquote>From my anecdoctal experience [though I know many less than your millions], none of the shops I know have switched, and that includes a couple of big multi-national design agencies.
<strong>
That's nice... MacNN is pretty lame and explains your issues very well... NN is about 85% bitching/whining teenagers.
it's just when people make claims about the performance of the OS that are completely unfounded and untrue. (Claiming the OS is a dog on anything under $3000 is completely untrue when I make a living in OS X on an iBook 500 and OS X runs perfectly)
Mac Guru</strong>[/QUOTE
Kind sir,
1. I was on MacNN when this site was dead sea, so where was everybody forced to hang for a while? Thank you. Like I'm so MacNN, I'm so sure.
I'm actually here trying to solve a problem with my OS9 folders being shared across partitions since I have to run two copies (one for X on its own partition)
When I run OSX, it's on a dual 800 and a dual 450 and I ain't wit' it'. Oh, I never said I can't get it to work, it works as well as it should. Just that dog slow interface puts me to sleep and ruins my flow.