I remember one time when I stupidly filled my HD and opened a bunch of memory-consuming apps (PS, DW, Classic, etc.) and OS X freaked and logged out on me. No room for VM so it just quit everything.
I was hired at my current job partly because I knew macs. Unfortunately, the Macs work so I spend most of my time fixing all the PCs at the sites I work at.
Another company I work for part time has all Macs. I have to answer and fix software issues but rarely the OS or computer its self.
I get to go home to my Pismo (500 MHz, 320 mb, 10.2.2) and it just works. I expect it to be even better, and faster once the Ti I ordered yesterday gets here.
Realistically, I think it depends completely on the computer you are talking about. 10.2.2 is just as fast on the Dual 1Ghz DDR machine we have set up at work, as XP is on the P4 2.53 Ghz machine we have set up on the next bench over.
What is the big deal over speed anyway? I realise that most users on this forum are developers/professionals that need some muscle behind their work, but to that average user does it really make a difference?
I have customers who come in looking for a computer to surf the web and check email, and they ask for the biggest baddest mother we have in stock. After asking them if they want to do anything besides the web/email/occasional video download/listen to mp3s, and the say no, I like to ask them if they really think that having a P4 2.53 (or whatever the current big ass system is) will make them type faster, because really, that is a lot of wasted money for un-used processor cycles.
On another note, on our Dual Athlon MP 2000+ machine, XP is no faster than 10.2 is on our Dual 1GHz DDR G4.
<strong>let's get real here...have you tried resizing your browser window? it's pathetic.</strong><hr></blockquote>You think the overall speed of a computer is gauged by how it resizes window? Now THAT is pathetic. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[quote]Originally posted by PosterBoy:
<strong>I realise that most users on this forum are developers/professionals that need some muscle behind their work, but to that average user does it really make a difference?</strong><hr></blockquote>Thanks for the cross-platform observations, PosterBoy. To answer this question, yes, I believe the average Mac user does need more power and that it does in fact make a difference. Remember, Apple's target audience isn't just the complacent web surfer or John Doe who writes the occasional letter or report. Apple's target audience consists of people who do want to dabble in image, sound, and video editing. Why else would Apple be pushing the media iApps and digital hub? As these customers mature, so will their abilities and need to have have the power to do what they want.
Comments
I was hired at my current job partly because I knew macs. Unfortunately, the Macs work so I spend most of my time fixing all the PCs at the sites I work at.
Another company I work for part time has all Macs. I have to answer and fix software issues but rarely the OS or computer its self.
I get to go home to my Pismo (500 MHz, 320 mb, 10.2.2) and it just works. I expect it to be even better, and faster once the Ti I ordered yesterday gets here.
<strong>Can someone please explain what they mean when they say OSX is slow?
I don't get it at all. Are you guys that re sayin g that on older Macs?
I see nothing that I would call slowness on my Mac.
Oh, and I use an XP box everyday at work, yet I still don't see why everyone thinks XP is so much faster than OSX.
Yes, the processors are not as fast, but that's not the OS.
Not trying to argue,just trying to understand what it is you guys are talking about.</strong><hr></blockquote>
let's get real here...have you tried resizing your browser window? it's pathetic.
What is the big deal over speed anyway? I realise that most users on this forum are developers/professionals that need some muscle behind their work, but to that average user does it really make a difference?
I have customers who come in looking for a computer to surf the web and check email, and they ask for the biggest baddest mother we have in stock. After asking them if they want to do anything besides the web/email/occasional video download/listen to mp3s, and the say no, I like to ask them if they really think that having a P4 2.53 (or whatever the current big ass system is) will make them type faster, because really, that is a lot of wasted money for un-used processor cycles.
On another note, on our Dual Athlon MP 2000+ machine, XP is no faster than 10.2 is on our Dual 1GHz DDR G4.
--PB
<strong>let's get real here...have you tried resizing your browser window? it's pathetic.</strong><hr></blockquote>You think the overall speed of a computer is gauged by how it resizes window? Now THAT is pathetic. <img src="graemlins/lol.gif" border="0" alt="[Laughing]" />
[quote]Originally posted by PosterBoy:
<strong>I realise that most users on this forum are developers/professionals that need some muscle behind their work, but to that average user does it really make a difference?</strong><hr></blockquote>Thanks for the cross-platform observations, PosterBoy. To answer this question, yes, I believe the average Mac user does need more power and that it does in fact make a difference. Remember, Apple's target audience isn't just the complacent web surfer or John Doe who writes the occasional letter or report. Apple's target audience consists of people who do want to dabble in image, sound, and video editing. Why else would Apple be pushing the media iApps and digital hub? As these customers mature, so will their abilities and need to have have the power to do what they want.
[ 12-02-2002: Message edited by: Brad ]</p>
:eek: What the hell was in this text file?