Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

OS X is LAME

K

krohde

macrumors member
Original poster
May 29, 2002
74
0
Europe, UK
Alright, Apple better have a speedy response time ready for their Panther release. I'm using a 12" PB and under Jaguar the response time is redicolous. It takes about 1.5 seconds for me to bring to front Entourage and iTunes, and I don't even wanna talk about PhotoShop. At work I have a 1.8Ghz P4 with Win2000. The programs are instantly displayed and ready for action. In OS X that is clearly not the case. I've been a mac user for 3 years now, even managed to convert some friends. I have a cube, and my PB 12. I am going to give OS X one more chance, if it doesn't speed up, I'm going to switch the "wrong" way - it's going to be cheaper too.

Is your system slow too (I'm not referring to those of you with dual 1 or 1.42 ghz systems)?

KR
 
how much ram do you use?


I had an iBook 800 with 384 mb, I always ran Mail, Safari, and iChat, i would usually run atleast two of the following also Dreamweaver, MSWord, Elements 2.0, or iTunes. Things popped up instantly and in some cases it was better than the 1.6ghz p4 i'm using at the moment.
 
add more ram.

;)

What much memory do you have in it?

arn
 
I have an iBook 700MHz and the whole interface seems very snappy under Jaguar. It's on a par with the office's brand new Athlon 1.6 Ghz running XP.

If you haven't installed more RAM than comes as stock in that model of PowerBook, I really recommend adding more. It'll make things a lot faster.
 
:eek: - you're losing 1.5 seconds 20-100 times a day.

Obviously, you should have bought a PC...

If the 1.5 seconds you save in Window's GUI far outweighs the other abilities of OS X, please sell your Mac.

The way Unix handles memory, the programs will be spun back out to the hard drive if you don't have enough physical memory in the computer. It'll take a second or two to swap active applications. (Seen in page swap count)

But the Unix approach to memory also doesn't limit you to physical memory or the amount you've specific as VM -- like OS 9 did.

But it's also easier for you to buy a PC than find out why the GUI isn't always instantly responding, plus you may save a minute or two a day.

That's up to two extra minutes you can spend taking a dump, getting coffee, or wasting time.

Please sell the Mac, you'll be soo much happier with the PC
 
i have a 12" PowerBook and after maxing out the RAM it feels great. no lag or wasted seconds out of my day at all. just a question, how many seconds a day do Windows users spend reading and clicking popups that say "Are You Sure?", just curoius.
 
Its always annoying reading these "If OSX doesn't....I'm switching...!!!" threads...Do the extensive research for your computer purchase...If you don't like OSX, leave now bro.In the end it just one less person trying to vent thru these LAME threads...
 
Ill be happy to assist you to switch back...

how much for the cube?anyway Im running Jaguar on my iMac 400 DV with 1G ram, since the last upgrade(10.2.6) the system was running sluggish, both connection speed and apps took too long. I went to Apple Support discussions and did the following recomendations;
In directory access i turned everything OFF, not if you are connecting to a windows network though.
In System preferences>Sharing I left only personal sharing and printer sharing on.
I turned off sharing in iTunes.
used Cocktail, used Jaguar Cache cleaner.
deleted cookies in Safari, emptied cache.
I deleted extra language folders using Delocator.
In terminal I did the following commands
sudo periodic daily
sudo periodic weekly
sudo periodic monthly
deleted mp3 Sushi application.
deleted apple.quicktime.plugin.plist
com.apple.finder.plist
in user>library>preferences
deleted cookies folder in user>library>preferences.
Firmware reset, zapped pram.
made sure ownerships in pictures library was set to correct user, I have observed that 10.2.6 does not take kindly to transferred files from different computers ,preferences and ownerships. also enabled root user. before this I had tried repairing
permissions, Norton's Utilities, restart etc
even creating a new user, went to OS X hints got good hints there aswell, went to discussions I got some more, I did all this
and it worked, now everything is fast no delay no sluggishness. although this might seem a little bit of work I feel like I have learned a lot, I have even repaired a sleep issue that was buggin my iMac, and I wouldnt trade my OS or my computer for any wintel out there not even under the pangs of torture. And please folks there has to be a better way of requesting help or expressing fustration other than proposing exodus of the use of these systems, many here are indifferent
to outcries of desperation, if you have an issue just post it, no one here is threaten
by someone going back to using the Wintel contraptions, the only person that would loose it the "back-switcher" we all know that! now if you wish to get rid of your equipment let us now, WE will be HAPPY to assist you in your ample departure. most generous M.L
 
Re: OS X is LAME

Originally posted by krohde
. It takes about 1.5 seconds for me to bring to front Entourage and iTunes, and I don't even wanna talk about PhotoShop. At work I have a 1.8Ghz P4 with Win2000. The programs are instantly displayed and ready for action. In OS X that is clearly not the case.
Click to expand...

Explain what you mean by "bring to front". Are we talking maximize/minimize, hide/show, app switching via command-Tab, or actually initially opening programs? Secondly, are you running any "haxies" such as WindowShade? (Yes, everybody asks this, because they do effect system performance) To respond, though, I have a 1 sec lag with maximizing/minimizing, but no lag with hide/show. On the other hand, I am using the Minimize In Place hack as well as WindowShade and a plethora of others, and my computer has been having some "issues" lately as well (one of them being that it seems to take FOREVER for the proper desktop to be displayed after the screen goes to sleep for an extended period of time. What happens is this: it flashes on, briefly showing the old desktop, then it turns to either (can't remember which) blue or gray, and the pinwheel spins. After a minute or two, the desktop/etc flashes up. ) So my computer, at this point in time, probably would not be the best benchmark...sorry.
 
15" TI book 667 MHZ with 768MB memory. When programs are already open I have no delay in switching between program windows. Now if you are opening a program from scratch then there is a couple of seconds delay but no delay when the programs are already running here.
 
Man, he has two of the most beautiful computers Apple has ever made and he wants to switch to a PC! Please, give me your Cube! Please! I swear, I have never seen such a drool-worthy computer in my life than that 8 inch cube suspended in clear plastic. It's amazing how such a simple design can be so beautiful yet so functional. But yes, there are simple maintainence things you can do to speed up your system, but if you'd like to part with your Cube, I can give it a good home...
 
uh, my 12" PowerBook with 384mb of ram, running on battery power with reduced processor performance, with 8 apps running takes very little time to launch iTunes.

I've seen no PC that was fast or snappier enough to make me want to use it.

Although panther should help quite a bit...

And titling your post "Mac OS X is LAME" is no way to get help around here. It will just get you sarcastic responses and flames...
 
Originally posted by Sun Baked
:eek: - you're losing 1.5 seconds 20-100 times a day.

Obviously, you should have bought a PC...

If the 1.5 seconds you save in Window's GUI far outweighs the other abilities of OS X, please sell your Mac.

The way Unix handles memory, the programs will be spun back out to the hard drive if you don't have enough physical memory in the computer. It'll take a second or two to swap active applications. (Seen in page swap count)

But the Unix approach to memory also doesn't limit you to physical memory or the amount you've specific as VM -- like OS 9 did.

But it's also easier for you to buy a PC than find out why the GUI isn't always instantly responding, plus you may save a minute or two a day.

That's up to two extra minutes you can spend taking a dump, getting coffee, or wasting time.

Please sell the Mac, you'll be soo much happier with the PC
Click to expand...
it's always nice to hear the voice of reason in posts like this. thanks for that entertaining post, man.

gosh, i thought that we all knew better than to feed the trolls. can we take bets on how long it takes to wasteland this?

on a sidenote, i've never seen any computer on any platform load photoshop instantly. i don't think it's pentiumly possible.
 
a complex argument... I have a 12" powerbook and I have a 1.9GHz P4 XP... but guess what, both are nice system... but I use the 12" more, not because is faster... is because is alot more stable... but I have to admit... I feel either the OSX or the 12"PB is not very good at control memory managment because sometimes my book is very SLOW and I mean it.. I see the busy disc instead of mouse pointer... and blieved me.. 640MB ram... not many applications open as well.. and dont tell me to take the book back to apple because I done that as well... something does not feel right...
 
The age old question...

My girlfriends P4 1.6GHz Dell, is a piece of crap. She absolutely detests running anything on it, not only does it decide to just cut a program when ever it wants in the middle of rendering, it is a pain in the ass to use, and it isn't any faster than my 800Mhz powerbook.

This guy can continue to use his pc. However, lets see. It takes you 1 hour to do something in photoshop, but 5 times before it works, that is what 4 hours lost a day compared to what, a minute or two in his calculation.

If you don't like stability, speed, and ease of use. Don't even waste your money, but a pc.

Give me the cube
 
guys, jesus! it's no wonder he's not responding, you guys are totally ganging up on the poor soul. maybe it's because i am completely drunk but i completely empathize with him. (i really am drunk, despite my excellent command of the engilsh language at the moment). i'm a recent switcher coming from a three year old 1.2 ghz pentium with 256mb ram athalon to a 17" pb w/ 1gig ram. honestly, i love my powerbook. it is beautiful and the OS is the most beautiful thing i have ever had the pleasure to work with. BUT. it is slow. seriously, i am more than a little disappointed with its performance. for example, i was stitting in the Soho mac store today making some simple changes in dreamweaver mx and just took FOREVER! in my windows version it took a second. but in general, i find the mac os to be a little sluggish. sure, it's stable but come on. i spend close to $4000 on a machine i expect it to run at a pretty damn snappy pace. i think a lot of you guys are overly defensive and are too anti-windows to see that yes, the mac os is slow (at least on PB's). if course the os is better and more reliable, i don't think anyone is contesting that. are there any reliable pc>mac comparison tests that are online? i will never trade in my pb EVER but you know... i just wish it was friggin faster. seriously.

love,
Peter


p.s. - am i the only one that think shadowfax is completely amazingly beautiful? wow.

p.p.s. - so drunk right now.
 
OS X *is* slow. Hopefully Panther will help with this. Hopefully a lot. OS 9 was crap in many ways, but it was darn snappy, even with much older machines.

Let's not be so defensive that we can't agree to that simple point.

Does the increased stability make it the best OS out there? Yes. Is it attractive? Yes. Is it easy to use, yet also very advanced due to its unix features like Terminal? Yes.

OS X is probably the best thing that ever happened to the Mac, but the original poster kinda has a point. It's not responsive enough, at least not with Jaguar.

Just pointing out Windows' flaws isn't really helpful, nor is mocking the guy. What is helpful is offering ways to make the system more responsive, as many people have done. But honestly, he has a point, and this is a valid topic, IMHO.
 
From the few available reports of people experiencing the G5 'in person' it seems reasonable to conclude that Jaguar is not slow, just very very (RAM, bus speed, ...) hungry...

But I think it's a given that Panther will be even faster, and if some reports are to believe on older machines as well.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back