Damn fast here, and that's on an old DP 500 with DSL. I work all day on a P4 3.2 connected to an Internet2 backbone and I don't have any feelings of inadequacy or slowness frustration when I get home. The Dull box is a little bit quicker but we are only talking a couple eye-blinks difference.
Is it me or is OS X 10.4 Tiger sloooooow resolving web sites?
You don't have an OS problem, you have a DNS (domain name server) problem. It is most likely the fault of your ISP. DNS problems are unusual for me with commercial ISP's, but we seem to have jaw-dropping DNS issues at work.
OSX is slow in general but your right surfing is down right abysmal. Solution, you need a G5 2GHz plus. OSX, though extremely cool and full of OS goodness it?s not efficient; it?s a down right resource hog.
OSX is slow in general but your right surfing is down right abysmal. Solution, you need a G5 2GHz plus. OSX, though extremely cool and full of OS goodness it?s not efficient; it?s a down right resource hog.
What a load of bollox!
How the hell can you tell someone they need at least a G5 to surf the web?
I have used windows,Linux,FreeBSD and Solaris on a regular basis and how on this earth you can say OS X is a resource hog is beyond me
If your having problems with yur internet it aint your comp or OS but as Mr me has saidis down to your ISP, Line Conditions and /or your router. And making sure your not actually using 56k helps.
How the hell can you tell someone they need at least a G5 to surf the web?
I have used windows,Linux,FreeBSD and Solaris on a regular basis and how on this earth you can say OS X is a resource hog is beyond me
If your having problems with yur internet it aint your comp or OS but as Mr me has saidis down to your ISP, Line Conditions and /or your router. And making sure your not actually using 56k helps.
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
1: your are comparing 5 completely different machines and OSes against each other and that is no comparison or benchmark for an operating systems responce
2:Well i guess you need to have engineers check your line. I am surfing this on a mac mini with just a mere 512 adsl line and it's the snappiest it's been.
3:To get the most out of OS X, as in core image yeah your properly right about needing a G5 and a decent GFX card but i can quite assure you G4's are just as efficient as a G5 on most tasks, seeing as most apps don't take advantage of 64 bitness and proberly won't for a couple of years to come.
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
As a general proposition, it is an indication that certain information is being withheld when a poster lists his/her experience with other OSes. Declarations of love for the MacOS X only add to the mystery. There are a lot of Mac users out here who did not wait until the G5 was released to get on the Internet. My 500 MHz PowerBook G3 has only 384 MB RAM. However, it more than holds its own against my dual 2 GHz G5 when both are connected to the Internet. In fact the two computers communicate over the 'Net at essentially the same high speed.
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
This dude clearly has no idea what hes talking about. i only have a G4 Emac with 512 RAM and my internet is very fast. and OSX is much faster than my 2.6Ghz 512 windows pc
Oh, that's why Macintosh developers were saying that surfing with their new shiny Pentium 4 Xeon's was much faster than with dual 2.7 Ghz PowerMacs.
The mystery is solved here gentelmen. eMac rulez!1111!1!!!
Let's see the evidence then. Like the souce of that conversation? and is this just a gut oh that loaded faster instinct or a propper controlled benchmark enviroment?
Theres lots of things to consider oon a network especially on the inet
I could connect to a site on my dual core athlon and say shit this site loaded quick and then 30 mins later connect to the same site at peak hours while it's being updated on my mini and go shit, OSX suckorz at web
Truth is having a G5 and dual xeons is not going to make web sites render more quickly on your screen
Oh, that's why Macintosh developers were saying that surfing with their new shiny Pentium 4 Xeon's was much faster than with dual 2.7 Ghz PowerMacs.
The mystery is solved here gentelmen. eMac rulez!1111!1!!!
FWIW, at work I have eMacs sitting side-by-side Dells of approximately the same vintage. They are connected to the same hub. The eMacs do very well, thank you.
As a general proposition, it is an indication that certain information is being withheld when a poster lists his/her experience with other OSes. Declarations of love for the MacOS X only add to the mystery. There are a lot of Mac users out here who did not wait until the G5 was released to get on the Internet. My 500 MHz PowerBook G3 has only 384 MB RAM. However, it more than holds its own against my dual 2 GHz G5 when both are connected to the Internet. In fact the two computers communicate over the 'Net at essentially the same high speed.
A G3 500 MHz holds it own against a dual 2 GHz G5 Seriously, sometimes I think you people would take a bullet for your Mac.
A G3 500 MHz holds it own against a dual 2 GHz G5 Seriously, sometimes I think you people would take a bullet for your Mac.
Why are you guys still arguing about this? Go up, read my post about DNS cache, and do it. Really, web surfing is not very processor intensive - if you can tell the difference between a G5 tower and a mac mini, then there is something wrong with your setup.
Why are you guys still arguing about this? Go up, read my post about DNS cache, and do it. Really, web surfing is not very processor intensive - if you can tell the difference between a G5 tower and a mac mini, then there is something wrong with your setup.
Comments
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Is it me or is OS X 10.4 Tiger sloooooow resolving web sites?
What browser are you using?
How are you connecting to the internet?
Originally posted by DHagan4755
Is it me or is OS X 10.4 Tiger sloooooow resolving web sites?
You don't have an OS problem, you have a DNS (domain name server) problem. It is most likely the fault of your ISP. DNS problems are unusual for me with commercial ISP's, but we seem to have jaw-dropping DNS issues at work.
Originally posted by Relic
OSX is slow in general but your right surfing is down right abysmal. Solution, you need a G5 2GHz plus. OSX, though extremely cool and full of OS goodness it?s not efficient; it?s a down right resource hog.
What a load of bollox!
How the hell can you tell someone they need at least a G5 to surf the web?
I have used windows,Linux,FreeBSD and Solaris on a regular basis and how on this earth you can say OS X is a resource hog is beyond me
If your having problems with yur internet it aint your comp or OS but as Mr me has saidis down to your ISP, Line Conditions and /or your router. And making sure your not actually using 56k helps.
Originally posted by cybermonkey
What a load of bollox!
How the hell can you tell someone they need at least a G5 to surf the web?
I have used windows,Linux,FreeBSD and Solaris on a regular basis and how on this earth you can say OS X is a resource hog is beyond me
If your having problems with yur internet it aint your comp or OS but as Mr me has saidis down to your ISP, Line Conditions and /or your router. And making sure your not actually using 56k helps.
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
One thing that may help is logging in as root and turning on DNS cache:
file: /etc/hostconfig
change
DNSSERVER=-NO-
to
DNSSERVER=-YES-
Originally posted by Relic
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
1: your are comparing 5 completely different machines and OSes against each other and that is no comparison or benchmark for an operating systems responce
2:Well i guess you need to have engineers check your line. I am surfing this on a mac mini with just a mere 512 adsl line and it's the snappiest it's been.
3:To get the most out of OS X, as in core image yeah your properly right about needing a G5 and a decent GFX card but i can quite assure you G4's are just as efficient as a G5 on most tasks, seeing as most apps don't take advantage of 64 bitness and proberly won't for a couple of years to come.
Originally posted by Relic
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
As a general proposition, it is an indication that certain information is being withheld when a poster lists his/her experience with other OSes. Declarations of love for the MacOS X only add to the mystery. There are a lot of Mac users out here who did not wait until the G5 was released to get on the Internet. My 500 MHz PowerBook G3 has only 384 MB RAM. However, it more than holds its own against my dual 2 GHz G5 when both are connected to the Internet. In fact the two computers communicate over the 'Net at essentially the same high speed.
Originally posted by Relic
Well I'm currently running Solaris 10 on a new Ultra Sparc 20 2.6GHz, NetBSD on ThinkPad T43P 2 GHz, Ubuntu Linux on a HP 3.2 GHz Dual Xeon, OSX on a G5 Dual 2.5 GHz and a Powerbook 12inch 1.5 GHz. So I think I have a little knowledge of what is slow and not. Guess what OSX is the slowest OS in the round up, but that being said it's also my favorite. Fact, surfing is slower on OSX with a G4, useable, yes of course but not fast by a long shot and I have a 4mb lease line. To fully enjoy OSX you need a fast processor and a G5 does the trick.
This dude clearly has no idea what hes talking about. i only have a G4 Emac with 512 RAM and my internet is very fast. and OSX is much faster than my 2.6Ghz 512 windows pc
Originally posted by syno
This dude clearly has no idea what hes talking about. i only have a G4 Emac with 512 RAM and my internet is very fast.
Oh, that's why Macintosh developers were saying that surfing with their new shiny Pentium 4 Xeon's was much faster than with dual 2.7 Ghz PowerMacs.
The mystery is solved here gentelmen. eMac rulez!1111!1!!!
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Oh, that's why Macintosh developers were saying that surfing with their new shiny Pentium 4 Xeon's was much faster than with dual 2.7 Ghz PowerMacs.
The mystery is solved here gentelmen. eMac rulez!1111!1!!!
Let's see the evidence then. Like the souce of that conversation? and is this just a gut oh that loaded faster instinct or a propper controlled benchmark enviroment?
Theres lots of things to consider oon a network especially on the inet
I could connect to a site on my dual core athlon and say shit this site loaded quick and then 30 mins later connect to the same site at peak hours while it's being updated on my mini and go shit, OSX suckorz at web
Truth is having a G5 and dual xeons is not going to make web sites render more quickly on your screen
Originally posted by Gene Clean
Oh, that's why Macintosh developers were saying that surfing with their new shiny Pentium 4 Xeon's was much faster than with dual 2.7 Ghz PowerMacs.
The mystery is solved here gentelmen. eMac rulez!1111!1!!!
FWIW, at work I have eMacs sitting side-by-side Dells of approximately the same vintage. They are connected to the same hub. The eMacs do very well, thank you.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
As a general proposition, it is an indication that certain information is being withheld when a poster lists his/her experience with other OSes. Declarations of love for the MacOS X only add to the mystery. There are a lot of Mac users out here who did not wait until the G5 was released to get on the Internet. My 500 MHz PowerBook G3 has only 384 MB RAM. However, it more than holds its own against my dual 2 GHz G5 when both are connected to the Internet. In fact the two computers communicate over the 'Net at essentially the same high speed.
A G3 500 MHz holds it own against a dual 2 GHz G5
Originally posted by Relic
A G3 500 MHz holds it own against a dual 2 GHz G5
Why are you guys still arguing about this? Go up, read my post about DNS cache, and do it. Really, web surfing is not very processor intensive - if you can tell the difference between a G5 tower and a mac mini, then there is something wrong with your setup.
Originally posted by e1618978
Why are you guys still arguing about this? Go up, read my post about DNS cache, and do it. Really, web surfing is not very processor intensive - if you can tell the difference between a G5 tower and a mac mini, then there is something wrong with your setup.
Because it's Sunday and I'm board.
Originally posted by Relic
Because it's Sunday and I'm board.
bored.
Originally posted by Mr. Me
bored.
Sorry, sometimes I get confused since I also post in French and German "boreds"