|
|
Many questions. Please help.
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2012
Status:
Offline
|
|
Will someone please help me? I have a 13-inch MACBook Pro with a 2.26 GHz, Intel Core 2 Duo oerating on MAC OSX Version 10.6.8. The 2GBs of ram I have is not enough, but I have a crap-ton of questions here: 1) is it time to upgrade my OS? 2) Does Lion really suck as bad as I have read? 3) Can I get away with just getting two more GBs of RAM? 4) APPLE store wants to rape me with their prices for $ GBs: is ramjet or crucial reliable? 5) is it just better to get raped by APPLE because their RAM is the best? (that's not what she said). Sigh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Jan 2012
Status:
Offline
|
|
FOr the record, I did read Simon's ORIGINAL post back in 2008 or 2009, but it did not answer my question. I am still lost....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Live-Perth Aus/ Work-Worldwide
Status:
Offline
|
|
2. It is up to you if you want to upgrade or not.
3. I started using Lion at 10.7 and did not like it so I removed it, at 10.7.2 I reinstalled it, now I like it and have had no problems.
4.4GB of ram should be ok for most apps.
|
Aussiemac
iMac 21.5"-2.4GHz i5, 15"-2.66 i7 MacBook Pro, iMac Bondi G3/233 (still working), HTC Desire, Golf V GTI DSG
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Nobletucky
Status:
Offline
|
|
1) is it time to upgrade my OS?
~ Totally up to you. Does the MBP do what you want? I haven't upgraded to Lion, either, and don't really feel a need for it yet.
2) Does Lion really suck as bad as I have read?
~ Obviously, that's up to debate. There are a ton of changes in Lion that many have issues with. Others feel it's a great upgrade. We have a long discussion about it going here.
3) Can I get away with just getting two more GBs of RAM?
~ Are you experiencing performance issues with your MBP? 4gigs should be more than enough for most common use. What are you doing on the MBP?
4) Is ramjet or crucial reliable?
~ Yes.
5) Is it just better to get raped by APPLE because their RAM is the best?
~ No. The only advantage to taking it to Apple for additional RAM is to have them do the work, which they will charge you for. If you're reasonably comfortable with opening your computer, instructions for opening your MBP and adding RAM can be found here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Don't upgrade to Lion, it's a clusterf*ck without any real improvements.
Don't pay Apple's quadruple retail memory prices. 8GB from Crucial is so cheap ($40) it's not worth using 4GB for any period of time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Las Vegas, NV, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
I like Lion and wouldn't want to go back to Snow Leopard. As others have pointed out it's a matter of opinion, but I can promise that Apple is not going back so sticking with Snow Leopard forever is not an option. Everyone who stuck with Classic over OS X got left behind, as did those who stuck with PPC over Intel. The same will be true in a year or two when Lion's successor is released.
Originally Posted by mduell
...it's a clusterf*ck without any real improvements.
Yes, Lion made some changes, so it's different, but not a clusterf*ck. Here is a long list of improvements:
http://www.apple.com/macosx/whats-new/features.html
(
Last edited by chabig; Jan 2, 2012 at 05:54 PM.
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Automatic
Status:
Offline
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by chabig
I like Lion and wouldn't want to go back to Snow Leopard. As others have pointed out it's a matter of opinion, but I can promise that Apple is not going back so sticking with Snow Leopard forever is not an option. Everyone who stuck with Classic over OS X got left behind, as did those who stuck with PPC over Intel. The same will be true in a year or two when Lion's successor is released.
And I'm looking forward to upgrading from SL to 10.8. I'm not a stick in the mud, I was the first in my office to go to 10.6, but I'm saying 10.7 is sh!t.
Originally Posted by chabig
It's a lot of motion but not a lot of progress.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: 888500128, C3, 2nd soft.
Status:
Offline
|
|
Regardless of whether you appreciate the changes (with very few exceptions, I do): a "cluster****" that is not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
I wouldn't call it a cluster*ck, but I do have my gripes.
It seems less snappy than SL on older Macs, and it completely killed Bootcamp for many 2007 and 2008 Macs.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
It did? How so? That's shocking and the first I've heard of anything like that. Isn't Boot Camp pretty basic functionality?
|
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: UK
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by turtle777
It seems less snappy than SL on older Macs,
This is true of pretty much every OS upgrade in history.
|
I have plenty of more important things to do, if only I could bring myself to do them....
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep
This is true of pretty much every OS upgrade in history.
Yes. I guess what I was trying to say is that it is more noticeable than the change from Leopard to SL.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Big Mac
It did? How so? That's shocking and the first I've heard of anything like that. Isn't Boot Camp pretty basic functionality?
Bootcamp is completely dead for the affected Macs. From anecdotal evidence, only 2007 and 2008 models seem affected.
On my iMac (Mid 2007), Bootcamp worked like a champ in SL. Now, since Lion, it just freezes when selecting Bootcamp when booting. The Windows install was fine, I was still able to use it in Parallels.
I wiped my Bootcamp partition and tried to re-instal - no luck. The Windows installer can't even launch.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hella-lame. This is a widespread thing you think?
|
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: planning a comeback !
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Big Mac
Hella-lame. This is a widespread thing you think?
I don't know how wide-spread. I read about it at Apple Discussions, after I couldn't figure out what's wrong with my Bootcamp.
At tis point, it's not even clear if it's just Lion, or the latest EFI firmware upgrade, or a combination.
-t
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Moderator
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Gothenburg, Sweden
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by turtle777
I don't know how wide-spread. I read about it at Apple Discussions, after I couldn't figure out what's wrong with my Bootcamp.
At tis point, it's not even clear if it's just Lion, or the latest EFI firmware upgrade, or a combination.
-t
Well, if you've upgraded EFI, don't you have to redo the boot camp install? Never bothered looking in to exactly what it does, but I know that EFI has to emulate BIOS to make Windows booting work. I also know that Lion has removed support for XP in Boot Camp, but I assumed that that meant that you couldn't make a new install.
Also, have you tried using rEFIt?
|
The new Mac Pro has up to 30 MB of cache inside the processor itself. That's more than the HD in my first Mac. Somehow I'm still running out of space.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: UKland
Status:
Offline
|
|
Lion? It's up to you. On balance I'd say not. Maybe at 10.7.5. SL is leaner and faster.
8GB RAM no brainer. Do it
Crucial RAM - it's fine. Don't go Apple. Waste of money.
|
This space for Hire! Reasonable rates. Reach an audience of literally dozens!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Down by the river
Status:
Offline
|
|
Nice...I just learned a "crap-ton" equals five.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Land of Enchantment
Status:
Offline
|
|
Re memory, it is your choice, but definitely upgrade. My McBook Pro came with 2 gigs, a lot of beachballs. 4 is good, but there is a definite change with 8. No hiccups at all. I use Crucial mostly, no problems.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Status:
Offline
|
|
I put Corsair RAM in my early 2008 MBP a few months after I got it. It's run very well since then and I have stats to show how intensive operations sped up (such as running SETI@home). I've also heard/read good things about RamJet and Crucial RAM.
Hmmm..maybe I'll have to look into upgrading the RAM on my early 2011 MBP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Houston, TX
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by QSilver
I put Corsair RAM in my early 2008 MBP a few months after I got it. It's run very well since then and I have stats to show how intensive operations sped up (such as running SETI@home). I've also heard/read good things about RamJet and Crucial RAM.
RAM didn't make SETI@home faster.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Chicago
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by mduell
RAM didn't make SETI@home faster.
Like I mentioned...I have the stats (just not with me ATM).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|