Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

macthelastredman · Feb 8, 2002, 12:45 PM

or after you use OS X for awhile you think OS 9, 9.1, 9.2 whatever is just retarded, ugly and slow. i used to be so much in love with the old OS but OS X is just too yummy with itunes iphoto the dock and all the other cool apps i have found. just wondering if anyone feels this way...i only seem to use OS 9 for photoshop since its slow running classic on top of X...so tell me...is OS 9 dead to you?

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Feb 8, 2002, 12:57 PM

Well OS9 sure as hell is not "Slow" compared to OSX. Sure classic is a little slower but you should see the Photoshop 7 Beta's compared to the OS9. Now that's slow.

I wish I could ditch OS9 but without Macromedia and Abobe apps I have to keep using it till they are updated.

In 6 months it might be another story though.

Cipher13 · Feb 8, 2002, 01:22 PM

Originally posted by macthelastredman:
or after you use OS X for awhile you think OS 9, 9.1, 9.2 whatever is just retarded, ugly and slow. i used to be so much in love with the old OS but OS X is just too yummy with itunes iphoto the dock and all the other cool apps i have found. just wondering if anyone feels this way...i only seem to use OS 9 for photoshop since its slow running classic on top of X...so tell me...is OS 9 dead to you?

Haha. Good one

Yes, its just you. Seek help.

OldManMac · Feb 8, 2002, 01:25 PM

OS 9 is not dead, but it's gasping for air! Time to move on. This reminds me of a customer who came in today, wanting to know if we could repair an SE30! I sold him a new G4/933.

spectre · Feb 8, 2002, 01:30 PM

Fear not, you are not alone. I too, am really starting to dislike OS 9 compared to OS X. I absolutely hate how IE lags my whole computer when loading a web page... I hate how when I switch windows, they aren't double buffered, and I hate how it manages to crash doing simple things. (Yes, most of these are caused by IE

)

On the other hand... OS 9 feels waay faster, and I can actually listen to mp3's and work at the same time

(Note: I'm on a Rev A iMac). By the time I recieve my new g4.... any time now... I'll be in OS X permanently..

oh.. almost forgot. I also love how I can use Sputnix and Aquisition in OS X

cacarr1 · Feb 9, 2002, 01:45 AM

You lost me on the whole OS 9.2 is slow thing...I agree that OS X is much , much nicer...blah, blah, blah, stability, blah, blha... but faster!?!?!?! Put the bong down for a bit and come back to reality

Oink · Feb 9, 2002, 01:53 AM

If Apple continues to subscribe to the same principle, OS X+1 running on G>5 processor(s) will be 50% slower than OSX running on G4, Aqua will not only have drop shadow, but highlight and lens flare, and punters will think it is way cool staring at the vibrating icons, because that's all it can do, at least until the new codes are optimised or/and the newer faster processors come along...

iTremor at the thought.

Metareye · Feb 9, 2002, 01:54 AM

I jumped on to OS X Public Beta and haven't looked back since. I still gripe at things aren't working properly yet, but I'd never go back to OS 9. OS X has it's shortcomings, but it's the best out there. Having a dual 800 doesn't hurt either.

yukon · Feb 9, 2002, 02:19 AM

I jumped onto DP4

but to be honest, if I could, I'd run 7.1 on my G4. Speed is the issue with me, and a couple of hacks to the finder would constitute all I use OS9 for.

does anyone REALIZE how fast 7.1 would be? I've been working on a few performas lately, and all I miss are a couple finder menu options.

nickm · Feb 9, 2002, 02:30 AM

I agree with you about everything but the slow part. After an initial distrust, I have come to love the dock. I like the way that I can control programs in the background (pausing iTunes for example) without having to switch to them and back. I also like that my main apps are always ready for a a drag and drop, so that I can drag an image out of Omniweb right into Graphic Converter, without even having to create a file for it or anything.

I also love the graphics. I have my screen resolution jacked way up, and so the fonts are smooth and readable. Everything else seems so...20th century now. Seriously, I loved MacOS, but MacOS X is an entirely superior work environment for me.

Now, if only they could solve the $&%@#in' file typing/file extensions mess, I'd be a totally happy loyal mac user.

ratlater · Feb 9, 2002, 03:02 AM

Originally posted by cacarr1:
You lost me on the whole OS 9.2 is slow thing...I agree that OS X is much , much nicer...blah, blah, blah, stability, blah, blha... but faster!?!?!?! Put the bong down for a bit and come back to reality

For me OS X is way faster than 9.2. I've got a dual 500 and OS 9 is always bogging down when I'm working. Let's say I want to convert some quicktime movies to DV format...in 9 I start it and walk away, because the computer is useless while quicktime works. In X I continue to listen to mp3's, browse the net, serve web pages, and do anything else I want to without slow down. Combine this with the fact that 9 crashes all the time, and the fact the X may be a bit slower washes away. Stability and the OS rarely ever making my computer modal is way more important than fast window resizing or any of the other complaints about OS X speed.

-matt

miligo · Feb 9, 2002, 03:25 AM

all I have to say is that no one oogled my computer as much as they do now when I was running OS 9. I work in a development group that uses pc's, developing software that runs on Solaris and Windows and the web. When I arrived I convinced them to buy a G4 for me to use as a secondary development machine to write some apps for the Mac, my primary job is to write our streaming server on Solaris. When OS X came out the machine became my primary development box for both Mac and Solaris. I spend all day in OS X, and have converted at least 4 people once they see it's a REAL Unix under there, and once they see Apple's awesome Project Builder and how it integrates with CVS and how you can write build scripts for remote hosts. Cocoa is awesome too

Anyway, I've owned only Macs since 1986, and have been a big supporter and I loved Classic Mac OS, but there has never been a better time to be a Mac user or developer, and I'm NOT GOING BACK, ever.

If I were an artist that uses Macromedia or Adobe products, my opinion may differ.

Just my 2 cents

Technicolor · Feb 9, 2002, 03:26 AM

Let's say I want to convert some quicktime movies to DV format...in 9 I start it and walk away, because the computer is useless while quicktime works. In X I continue to listen to mp3's, browse the net, serve web pages, and do anything else I want to without slow down.

Agreed. I had to boot into 9.2 today and it was an absolute test of my patience. Put a cd in and wait...wait...wait...wait for iTunes to get the names from CDDB, wait for Outlook to finish checking my email before I can launch a browser, wait for the cd to finish burning before I can do *anything*, wait, wait, wait. OS9 is definitely faster as far as the ol'snappy-meter goes so there's no need to have that argument, but I find I work more efficiently in OSX because I can do multiple things at once. I don't care how much ram you have or what overclocked G4 you're running, there are things you can do in OSX that you simply cannot do in OS9.

[ 02-09-2002: Message edited by: Technicolor ]

dvd · Feb 9, 2002, 03:49 AM

umm i have a 466mhz g4 with 640mb of ram and Os x.1 is slow!. I used 10.1 for awhile like 3 months or 2 straight, then started playing tac ops (UT MOD) and stayed. I guess unlike you guys i like windows poping up fast and applications starting up in a snap. =\ Most of your problay have faster machines but for poeple who have older ones, i'm sticking to os 9...well except when i make imovies. I'll just wait till i'm able to use the Platinium theme for os x.1 and hoping it will speed things up.

BTP · Feb 9, 2002, 03:57 AM

Nah, its not just you. I am one of the fortunate few, I have what I need in X and I do not need to go into 9 much, if ever, really.

9 is faster, no doubt, but to all those that would be quick to point that out, you should be fair and recall that 9 has had a LOT more time to develop and X will continue to make progress.

I think of 9 like I do looking back on college; it was a good time but it is over, you can't go back. Though I got comfortable and familiar with the routine during that time, the future lies ahead.

X is better for me and I prefer it. I am sure others won't see it the same.

cacarr1 · Feb 9, 2002, 04:06 AM

Yo Yo Yo dvd, I too have a G4 466 and I wouldn't say OS X is slow..it's just not as fast as 9. Word up! For the record, all I've used since 3/24/01 is OS X. Keepin' it real beeeeaatch!!!

Scrod · Feb 9, 2002, 04:18 AM

If OS 9/8 had true preemptive multitasking and protected memory, it would be an almost perfect operating system. However, once OS X gains more speed and/or starts to run on truly awesome hardware, it will be simply heavenly. OS X really is an OS designed with the future in mind.

Cipher13 · Feb 9, 2002, 05:17 AM

Originally posted by Technicolor:


Agreed. I had to boot into 9.2 today and it was an absolute test of my patience. Put a cd in and wait...wait...wait...wait for iTunes to get the names from CDDB, wait for Outlook to finish checking my email before I can launch a browser, wait for the cd to finish burning before I can do *anything*, wait, wait, wait. OS9 is definitely faster as far as the ol'snappy-meter goes so there's no need to have that argument, but I find I work more efficiently in OSX because I can do multiple things at once. I don't care how much ram you have or what overclocked G4 you're running, there are things you can do in OSX that you simply cannot do in OS9.

[ 02-09-2002: Message edited by: Technicolor ]

1. You can continue to use any other app while iTunes checks the CDDB. This is an iTunes problem. Does Audion do that when checking the CDDB? No, it doesn't.

2. Outlook sucks.

3. Using Toast Ti you can do whatever the hell you like while you burn...

Let's say I want to convert some quicktime movies to DV format...in 9 I start it and walk away, because the computer is useless while quicktime works. In X I continue to listen to mp3's, browse the net, serve web pages, and do anything else I want to without slow down.

So use a better app, like Media Cleaner.

BTW - even when QT is exporting, an mp3 will keep playing...

OverclockedHomoSapien · Feb 9, 2002, 05:55 AM

after you use OS X for awhile you think OS 9, 9.1, 9.2 whatever is just....ugly and slow

Yeah same experience. OS 9 seems slower to me because I'm always waiting for it to finish something, whereas in OS X I never wait on the GUI, because of multitasking. Sure the GUI feels faster in OS 9, but it's a superficial speed, and it starts to feel all herky-jerky to me, with it responding wicked fast and then freezing while the OS thinks about something, then fast, then stop, fast, stop. In constrast OS X is glassy smooth, doesn't have the top speed of OS 9 but it never stops to think either. Yeah, I know, sometimes the finder stops for awhile, but the OS never stops, I can always DO something, and that's cool.

I can't wait for 10.2, if it's as fast as I've heard then this OS X vs. OS 9 speed debate will be put to rest. Based on what I was told, the finder in 10.2 finally screams, and quartz is going to be hardware accelerated, so everything will have that same instantaneous feel that OS 9 has. I can't wait!!1

OverclockedHomoSapien · Feb 9, 2002, 06:10 AM

1. You can continue to use any other app while iTunes checks the CDDB. This is an iTunes problem. Does Audion do that when checking the CDDB? No, it doesn't.

2. Outlook sucks.

3. Using Toast Ti you can do whatever the hell you like while you burn...

Cipher, you know as well as anyone that no matter how many new apps you throw at OS 9, it will never be as good at multitasking as OS X.

But if OS 9 works better for you then go ahead and use it.

dillerX · Feb 9, 2002, 06:17 AM

[brag] X moves quite well on my Dual 1G with 1.5Gig RAM. [/brag]

seb2 · Feb 9, 2002, 06:28 AM

a few days ago, i booted into os 9 for the first time in about two months. it was really scary; no terminal and no *dock*. i don't know how i could live without it and don't understand people at all that complain about it.
sure, it still has a few rough edges that should be ironed out, but in general... sweet!

as far as terminal is concerned: i've used macs since the mid 80s and always thought that clis were something for pale skinned windows users with pimples suffering puberty that had no friends, but i've come to love it and use it at least as much as i use other applications; no separate telnet/ssh clients necessary, quickly upload a few files to an ftp server without having to launch an extra app; do it in terminal.

and yes, os x has crashed on me a few times and i've had two kernel panics, but, hey, compare that to the black-and-white dialog box in pre x systems which you got quite more frequently -- and did that "restart" button ever work for anybody?

Cipher13 · Feb 9, 2002, 07:34 AM

Originally posted by OverclockedHomoSapien:


Cipher, you know as well as anyone that no matter how many new apps you throw at OS 9, it will never be as good at multitasking as OS X.

But if OS 9 works better for you then go ahead and use it.

I know. But it is nowhere near as bad as what people illustrate.

If only Apple fixed the ****ing mouse, I might actually be able to do some work in OSX. But meh. OS9 is so much faster. All I miss from OSX is the "dirty" marker, and the terminal.

The multitasking is just a bonus.

Zadian · Feb 9, 2002, 09:55 AM

Originally posted by Cipher13:

The multitasking is just a bonus.

I guess it depends on the way one uses the computer.

If somebody does a lot of things in many Apps at once the Mac OS X multitasking is not just a bonus. It's the only way to go.
Such a person will get his work done in a shorter time than with Mac OS 9 - for him Mac OS X will be faster.

A person that does only one thing at once will be faster with Mac OS 9 because a single task in Mac OS 9 is faster (because of the kooperative multitasking in Mac OS 9).

Diggory Laycock · Feb 9, 2002, 10:59 AM

I left 9 when the Public Beta was shipped.

At first I disliked the dock and the new finder. Now I love the dock and think it's under-used by developers. Especially Apple - Mail should have a few dock menu items - "check mail", "new message" etc. The Finder icon in the dock should have dock menu items - showing the mounted volumes. System Preferences App should have all the prefpanes in it's dock menu (I currently use Prefling to emulate this, but you end up with two system prefs icons in the dock.)

I find myself reaching for the bottom of the screen in 9 - just like I used to reach for the (then non-existent) apple menu in the public beta.

Once you've re-trained yourself to multi-task as a user OS 9 apps feel like spoiled children - always wanting your attention and refusing to give way when you want to do something else.

I accept that OS X will *never* be as 'apparently' fast as OS 9 on the same hardware. There's a simple reason for this - it's doing more on your behalf - I would never have been completely happy running OS 9 with a web server running in the background, I don't even think about it now.

Of course I hope that later revisions of the OS get more efficient and aqua could do with a bit of a poke in the arse.

The biggest speed differential between X and 9 is the Finder - and since that's the App everyone is guaranteed to use every day people will think of it as the operating system.

If the finder does get faster and some of it's UI components improve in 10.2 ("Connect to..." , the CIFS login panel, spring-loaded dock menus etc...) then I wouldn't be surprised if suddenly the whole OS appeared to become 'much faster' in the eyes of the average user.

[ 02-09-2002: Message edited by: Diggory Laycock ]

Appleman · Feb 9, 2002, 11:52 AM

Originally posted by spectre:
 I absolutely hate how IE lags my whole computer when loading a web page... I hate how when I switch windows, they aren't double buffered, and I hate how it manages to crash doing simple things. (Yes, most of these are caused by IE

)

Why not use the latest Mozilla: it's screaming fast!

cowerd · Feb 9, 2002, 12:10 PM

[brag] X moves quite well on my Dual 1G with 1.5Gig RAM. [/brag]
But not as fast as OS9. Things like boot and app launching are great with a DP1ZGHZ, but the UI lags are still there, and I'm seeing beachballs still. Mostly connecting to servers. The Finder just absolutely blows---but strangely enough Illustrator is much worse.

OSX is great--can do many things at once--but for serious work it's OS9. And right now its just a couple of things--UI suckiness, metadata, font management and the horrific quality of some OSX apps--mainly Adobe's. Would you believe Illustrator 8 in classic is sooo much faster than Illustrator 10.

TheTraveller · Feb 9, 2002, 12:10 PM

OS 9 bites, comparatively. OS X is faster at just about everything - except for the places where responsiveness is most noticed: the Finder and overall window resizing and scrolling. This really needs to be addressed, hopefully in 10.2.

Oink · Feb 9, 2002, 12:39 PM

I just bought a new TV, it now shows drama with much higher emotional contents, comedy shows are funnier, sports programs faster, I swear, way cool!

[ 02-09-2002: Message edited by: Oink ]

yukon · Feb 9, 2002, 06:01 PM

OS X is actually way faster in many ways. It's just how advanced aqua is that brings it down. I'm sure we can forgive apple for not wanting to be trapped the way they were with the "classic" macos.

to me, Aqua is like a death by a thousand cuts (to steal someone elses analogy). fade away, translucency, list view (by kind!), and window resizing are terrible. If it is hardware accelerated soon, that would be awesome.

For the GUI, I prefer OS9 with PowerWindows. for the system, I prefer something fast and powerful. OS 7 was great, but I think that OS X is growing into something much better.

DKeithA · Feb 9, 2002, 06:17 PM

I was a real fuddy-duddy when it came to OS X. I liked the classic OS I damned if Apple was going to force me into using some other candy-coated OS. That was before I used X. Now I dread the occation where I have to open an app in Classic or just use the clasic OS in general. I've completely converted to X, and I'm not looking back.

macthelastredman · Feb 9, 2002, 08:19 PM

ok ok so i am stupid...i realize that os 9 is faster then os x....but x is still better...thank you to all of you who ripped on me and made me feel like a dolt. i can so feel the love on macnn

man0 · Feb 9, 2002, 08:31 PM

Reading this thread i cannot believe there are people not appreciating all the good things that yuo can find in OS X...and i say this not cause it is an Apple product....nut cause OS X, except the ****in' heavy GUI is UNIX BSD.....so there are so many things you can do with it i cannot believe there are still people preferring the 9...anyway probably it is a question of taste...

cowerd · Feb 9, 2002, 10:36 PM

GUI is UNIX BSD.....so there are so many things you can do with it i cannot believe there are still people preferring the 9...anyway probably it is a question of taste...

Maybe its cause many apps people use to make a living on the Mac don't run in BSD userland. And right now OSX userland is more trouble than its worth--not the least of which is the crappy quality of the first gen of apps.

Oink · Feb 9, 2002, 10:54 PM

Originally posted by man0:
cause OS X, except the ****in' heavy GUI is UNIX BSD.....so there are so many things you can do with it i cannot believe there are still people preferring the 9...anyway probably it is a question of taste...

Maybe AQUA GUI is seriously flawed. IRIX on a 10 year old hardware is more usable than current macs running OS X, comparing Unix to Unix.

---
"OS X just started, gotta run and grap some chips and soda! Don't want to miss a magic moment of the genie effects... what a cool computer"

OverclockedHomoSapien · Feb 10, 2002, 02:40 AM

If only Apple fixed the ****ing mouse, I might actually be able to do some work in OSX.

I agree, the mouse control in OS X sucks hard. But I found a solution:

USB Overdrive X, Beta 2. It adjusts both speed and acceleration. Very cool.

I sent feedback to Apple suggesting that they buy USB Overdrive and hire Allesandro to be in charge of USB peripherals at Apple. With him in charge we'd probably get a real two button mouse with scrollwheel as well.

Wishful thinking, but it can't hurt.