[juanvaldes]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>

Something's up then man. I even do Bryce work while FCP renders... I agree you definately notice the hit on the FCP performance, but when you're not actively doing anything else, FCP steals back the CPU time. It takes much longer yeah, but I gotta question how AIM was acting; I've never had any slow down probs.

Always amazed me that FCP could multitask so well...</STRONG>

FCP is the only OS 9 app that I ever had that will co-op even an inch with other apps. Sorry that is how it is under 9. Even then performs sucks ass, and takes 10x longer...even on a dulie that has in effect a dead CPU in 9.

[ 12-27-2001: Message edited by: juanvaldes ]

[scarab]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>

I never claimed it was superior; I claimed I preferred it. That says NOTHING about superiority at all. Assumptions, assumptions...
If I used the word superior anywhere, I apologise.

The reason I like it is because I can control it; there's no doubt in my mind that OSX is superior technically; but I'm afraid that means nothing in the real world.

I'm sorry, but OS9 is indeed a modern operating system. Who defined the term "modern" as meaning "has protected memory, pre-emptive multitasking, and SMP". Got a name? I'd like to see it.

If you were to say that OS9 is ancient; well the fact that in many ways it is superior to its "modern" brethren is quite an insult to OSX indeed.</STRONG>

Oh wait! The thread title says "Why OS X rules!!", not "OS X is better. Discuss." Oh no! Cinderalla went to the wrong ball!

And besides, just who said OS 9 was ancient? We've all just been defending OS X and slamming your points.

[Nonsuch]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>

The reason I like it is because I can control it; there's no doubt in my mind that OSX is superior technically; but I'm afraid that means nothing in the real world.
</STRONG>

On the whole, OS X is much more "controllable" than 9 (and Linux moreso than either of them), and with standard, default tools, not debugging apps that no one but a programmer should have to learn. The only difference is that you don't know how to do it in X as well as 9. That says far more about the user than the OS, eh?

And to say "that means nothing in the real world" ... excuse me? Protected memory means nothing in the real world? Dynamic memory allocation means nothing? This assertion makes no sense to me. Kindly explain.

<STRONG>I'm sorry, but OS9 is indeed a modern operating system. Who defined the term "modern" as meaning "has protected memory, pre-emptive multitasking, and SMP".</STRONG>

Are we splitting hairs now? OK, if you define "modern" as "having been created in the Modern era," then yes, OS 9 is a modern OS, though an argument could be made that it's actually post-modern. I think a more useful definition would be "sharing the characteristics and functionality of other, contemporary products in the same category," in which case OS 9 falls embarrasingly short.

<STRONG>If you were to say that OS9 is ancient; well the fact that in many ways it is superior to its "modern" brethren is quite an insult to OSX indeed.</STRONG>

The only superiority you cite is a faster GUI. Was System 7 inferior to 6 because it was slower? Or did it introduce features and enhancements that offset the loss in responsiveness? And did anyone give a rat's ass by the time they upgraded their hardware and everything ran fine?

[Cipher13]

The GUI is how one interacts with their computer. RIGHT?
Right.

If it is sub-par, so is the rest of the system. As I said; this isn't designed to be a headless server OS. It is a consumer OS.

Forget everything else for the moment.

I was in OSX last night; only when I boot back into it do I realise how incredibly slow and choppy it is.

It is nothing to do with being used to OS9; I have ZERO emotional attachment to OS9; I am not afraid of something new. Obviously none of you are reading all posts, because as I've said; I'd switch to OSX if it wasn't so freaking slow. I love the UNIX side of it; I know that I know practically nothing about UNIX... but I'll get there. Just as soon as Apple makes OSX tolerable for me to use.

Norm - wow... what was I THINKING? I wasn't conforming! Oh dear! I'll give it up Norm, just for you, just because you asked me to...

...or not

Pelorus; life isn't too short to be depending on an OS with no protected memory, but too short to wait on such menial tasks as having a 1 second delay every time you hit the scroll button on a window.

Scarab; seems to me more like you're ignoring the strong points and attacking the weak ones? And yet here we are still, three pages later... hmm...

[Jan Van Boghout]

It is sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo stable

[Jan Van Boghout]

Oh no , it just crashed !
lol , of course not !

[Buzz Lightbeer]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>It is nothing to do with being used to OS9; I have ZERO emotional attachment to OS9; I am not afraid of something new. Obviously none of you are reading all posts, because as I've said; I'd switch to OSX if it wasn't so freaking slow. I love the UNIX side of it; I know that I know practically nothing about UNIX... but I'll get there. Just as soon as Apple makes OSX tolerable for me to use.</STRONG>

I get the feeling Apple could save themselves a hell of a lot of negative publicity (and lost revenue through bad word of mouth) if they simply donated the fastest machine in their lineup to Cipher13 this MacWorld...

Come on Santa-Steve, how about putting something that makes OS X kick ass in Cipher's stocking this MacWorld Christmas! He lives in Sydney Australia, just look for the smoke from the bushfires.

Then you might get 10,000 posts on how nice Mac OS X is to use, instead of "What a steaming pile of dingo s*** this sad excuse for a s*** OS really s***ing is." (Getting a hang of this Aussie lingo!)

[Cipher13]

Nah, our sentences are shorter...
But you've almost got it!

Meh. When I get my G5 I might stop complaining a little bit... though I'll still be shitty that it doesn't run well on machines it SHOULD run on. But oh well, that's life.

How appropriate the gift would be for Christmas; after all, a machine that can run OSX well would indeed be a miracle of sorts...

[wadesworld]

I was in OSX last night; only when I boot back into it do I realise how incredibly slow and choppy it is.

Translation:

I don't use OS X much. Therefore, I can't get comfortable with it and everything frustrates me because I want it to work like OS 9. So, I boot back into OS 9 and then head to the message boards to write ridiculous messages about how stable OS 9 is and how much I prefer its very broken VM system.

Wade

[chris v]

A couple thoughts unrelated to Cipher's (valid) ramblings.

I've found myself booting into OS 9 a lot the last couple days to do things OS X can't do. Like run GoLive, or ANY audio apps. I've found all three applications made by mankind that will record audio thru the USB interface, and all three have crashed, hung, (ESPOD-- eternal spinning pizza of death) and caused kernel panics, and corrupt files. X is definitely still in its infancy, as far as quality development goes.

That said, There ARE some things about the OS X environment which I've become enamored of lately, and which make me sad to have to boot into OS 9.

1) in 9, when you drag a window by the title bar, towards the top of the screen, and overshoot, it pops back to its original position, and you have to grab it again. In OS X, when you drag a window by its title bar, it'll butt up against the menu bar, and stay there, even if you overshoot. I REALLY like this.

2) you don't have to bring windows to the front in order to shut them, if you can see the traffic lights. Just click the red button on a window in the background, and it'll close. No need to click it once to bring it to the front, then again to close it. This is a pretty nice convenience.

3) How did I ever live without column view?

4) I like being able to copy/paste files. I use command+c and command +v all day doing work in apps-- why not for file management?

5) I prefer being able to minimize file windows into the dock. Having five or six widows open, and window shaded in 9 is maddening anymore. You've got to click on the bar to bring it to the front, then click on it again to get it to expand, and the clutter really bugs me. With dock in show/hide mode, there's no clutter, and Tinker Tool's "suck" is pretty fast.

It sure will be nice when we've got some real work applications to go along with this really nice interface Apple has created. But to use Job's clock analogy, I don't think it's much past 9 in the morning, yet.

CV

[BannanaFiend]

Cipher, have you bothered to put half as much effort into customizing X as you have on 9? Off the top of my head I can think of a few hacks which speed things up such as removing the drop shadows and enabling compression of the window buffering. Turning off animated launching and magnification helps as well, as does using scale instead of genie. I am sure there are countless other things that can be used as well as 3rd party utilities that you could use as well. As for 3rd party stuff you could easily add an old style application menu, tabbed folders, etc. There is even a finder replacement. I have not bothered with most of this is X runs just fine on my system, but it may be worthwhile to try some of these things on yours.

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by BannanaFiend:
<STRONG>Cipher, have you bothered to put half as much effort into customizing X as you have on 9? Off the top of my head I can think of a few hacks which speed things up such as removing the drop shadows and enabling compression of the window buffering. Turning off animated launching and magnification helps as well, as does using scale instead of genie. I am sure there are countless other things that can be used as well as 3rd party utilities that you could use as well. As for 3rd party stuff you could easily add an old style application menu, tabbed folders, etc. There is even a finder replacement. I have not bothered with most of this is X runs just fine on my system, but it may be worthwhile to try some of these things on yours.</STRONG>

Done all of them... no improvement noticed except with the minimisation effect. The window compression might have fixed things up a bit too.

[pelorus]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>
Forget everything else for the moment.
I was in OSX last night; only when I boot back into it do I realise how incredibly slow and choppy it is.

It is nothing to do with being used to OS9; I have ZERO emotional attachment to OS9; I am not afraid of something new. Obviously none of you are reading all posts, because as I've said; I'd switch to OSX if it wasn't so freaking slow. I love the UNIX side of it; I know that I know practically nothing about UNIX... but I'll get there. Just as soon as Apple makes OSX tolerable for me to use.

Pelorus; life isn't too short to be depending on an OS with no protected memory, but too short to wait on such menial tasks as having a 1 second delay every time you hit the scroll button on a window.
</STRONG>

You misunderstand. You have a considerable investment in emotion and time with Mac OS 9 (and earlier). You said yourself how you construct your system by hand and how you craft your extension sets and run little tools to monitor the system. All of that knowhow is chucked out the window with Mac OS X and your unwillingness to accept the "new thing" is based totally in your unwillingness to admit that there's more to life than extension alchemy.

This isn't about speed at all. I don't get a "1 second delay" anywhere in this OS and I'm only using a 400 Mhz G3 powerbook. I might get a second delay on my old 233 MHz iMac with it's lowly Rage Pro graphics card but lets not split hairs here.

The issue is that you need to defend your investment by defending OS9 and ragging on OSX. That isn't necessary. OS9 had it's day and it was good enough to work on til something better came along.

[Cipher13]

Originally posted by pelorus:
<STRONG>

You misunderstand. You have a considerable investment in emotion and time with Mac OS 9 (and earlier). You said yourself how you construct your system by hand and how you craft your extension sets and run little tools to monitor the system. All of that knowhow is chucked out the window with Mac OS X and your unwillingness to accept the "new thing" is based totally in your unwillingness to admit that there's more to life than extension alchemy.

This isn't about speed at all. I don't get a "1 second delay" anywhere in this OS and I'm only using a 400 Mhz G3 powerbook. I might get a second delay on my old 233 MHz iMac with it's lowly Rage Pro graphics card but lets not split hairs here.

The issue is that you need to defend your investment by defending OS9 and ragging on OSX. That isn't necessary. OS9 had it's day and it was good enough to work on til something better came along.</STRONG>

Don't try to read me... it really won't work. You are very wrong.

I have no attachment to OS9 except my knowledge of it.
I'll adapt to whatever I'm using within a short time, so I'm really not bothered by moving. I don't run tools to monitor my system; every now and then I use a tool to get a little more control over it.

Extension alchemy is a no-brainer. Anybody can do it, and it takes a minute and a half to clean an entire system.

If you don't get a one-second delay, there's something wrong.

Any psychoanalysis of my motives for my opinions will be in vain; I've told you how it is, there is no subconscious or conscious attachment. Loyalty in this game is a flaw.

[edddeduck]

Dude if I ever get over a one second delay it is in OS 9 when I try so select the menu when in full screen DVD mode.

As someone else said but in a scratched CD it will stall the finder at best if not crash the machine. You like 9 OK we get that but stop trying to make 9 look better and more advanced. The major thing going for 9 over X is gui speed that's it and on my machine that is minor. OK 9 supports more Webcams, scanners etc but this does not a better operating system make.

Cheers Edd

[syvalley]

test

[pelorus]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>
Don't try to read me... it really won't work. You are very wrong.
I have no attachment to OS9 except my knowledge of it.
I'll adapt to whatever I'm using within a short time, so I'm really not bothered by moving. I don't run tools to monitor my system; every now and then I use a tool to get a little more control over it.
</STRONG>

Your knowledge is exactly what I was talking about. Of course you'll adapt.
Splitting hairs on tools used justifies my argument. You use Macsbug and other tools to tweak your experience. Very clever. The fact that you need to do this underlines the weaknesses in OS9 which you refuse to admit.

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>Extension alchemy is a no-brainer. Anybody can do it, and it takes a minute and a half to clean an entire system.</STRONG>

But really we shouldn't have to do it. And is it really a no-brainer when, for example, your CD burner is disabled because you have installed Toast and Disk Burner. Again this sort of nonsense is something we can do without and not within the ability of the average Mac user without some coaching.

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>If you don't get a one-second delay, there's something wrong.
</STRONG>

Yes. But not with my system.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>Don't try to read me... it really won't work. </STRONG>

Why bother posting then?

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>Extension alchemy is a no-brainer. Anybody can do it, and it takes a minute and a half to clean an entire system.</STRONG>

It is only a "no-brainer" once you have spent so much time learning it that you can diagnose problems on sight. You, who sees the need to custom-build his system out of three generations of stock extensions, should know this better than anybody else.

Believe me, getting my CD burner to run under OS 9 is pretty much a quick think and three clicks. But the three hours I had to spend diagnosing before I figured out what the problem was put me off extensions and control panels entirely. After that, I flat-out refused.

And before you say it: my refusal to fight OS 9 is based on twelve years of experience.

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>If you don't get a one-second delay, there's something wrong.</STRONG>

Er. Um. There'd be something *right*, no?

Originally posted by Cipher13:
<STRONG>Loyalty in this game is a flaw.</STRONG>

So whatever became of the test of several system folders that you'd offered?

And do you still run your system in black & white for speed?

-chris.

[Cipher13]

Thanks for the correction... oops

For speed? LOL. I run my monitor in black and white occasionally when my eyes are extremely sore, and when 5400�K still doesn't help enough.

I'm sure the speed difference between 256 greys as opposed to millions of vibrant colours is absolutely phenominal

Re. my system; any stock system can run beautifully; mine is a piece of art, however abstract.

I said if anyone wanted my system to contact me. Hence, if you want it, contact me, and I'll make it available via Hotline.

I only recommend it for use on Sawtooth or Mystic machines however.