Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

clotje · Mar 17, 2001, 03:07 PM

Hi,

We receive last friday a MacOSX CD (box with 3cd: MacOSX - MacOS9 and MacOSX tools). It is fast and stable version, but still some problems in the classic 9.1 app: Quark is not working fine.

And if you ask About... is still saying Build 4k78 ??????

Best regards,
Clotje

APC · Mar 17, 2001, 03:09 PM

mmm... I'm skeptical, ok, but... proof?

a scan of the box or the CDs, dunno... something?

Bye

Lord Kronos · Mar 17, 2001, 03:14 PM

That's odd. I've read several reports that some received the retail version, and that it's still 4k78. Could it be a 'super'-FC, or is it the real thing ? a week early ?

Todd Madson · Mar 17, 2001, 03:18 PM

Any screenshots or photos of the box + packaging might help us determine if you're on the level or not.

johnnylundy · Mar 17, 2001, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by clotje:
Hi,

We receive last friday a MacOSX CD (box with 3cd: MacOSX - MacOS9 and MacOSX tools). It is fast and stable version, but still some problems in the classic 9.1 app: Quark is not working fine.

And if you ask About... is still saying Build 4k78 ??????

Best regards,
Clotje

That sounds like the Release Candidate which developers received on the 9th. It comes from Apple just like that. It is labelled 4K78.

After seeing how slow it still was, I continued to use it. Just like has been reported with the Public Beta, it

1) Refused to launch, hanging on looking for some device
2) Hosed the directory and boot blocks on my OS 9 SEPARATE PARTITION.
3) Thank goodness for DiskWarrior. It was the only thing that saved my OS 9 partition. Disk First Aid, as usual, gave up.
4) Until I zapped PRAM, even the CD would not boot.

If anything proves this is not the GM, this does. If this build gets installed as retail product, you won't believe the nightmares...

>>Johnny

johnnylundy · Mar 17, 2001, 03:21 PM

Sorry - double post. Does this without permission, somebody oughta fix it...

[This message has been edited by johnnylundy (edited 03-17-2001).]

johnnylundy · Mar 17, 2001, 03:22 PM

Originally posted by clotje:
Hi,

We receive last friday a MacOSX CD (box with 3cd: MacOSX - MacOS9 and MacOSX tools). It is fast and stable version, but still some problems in the classic 9.1 app: Quark is not working fine.

And if you ask About... is still saying Build 4k78 ??????

Best regards,
Clotje

When you say "box", you mean a FedEx box, right?

Lord Kronos · Mar 17, 2001, 03:25 PM

Does the dev seed come with 3 CD's ?

Several HL servers claim to have retail version now, a new fake ?

dogzilla · Mar 17, 2001, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by clotje:
Hi,

We receive last friday a MacOSX CD (box with 3cd: MacOSX - MacOS9 and MacOSX tools). It is fast and stable version, but still some problems in the classic 9.1 app: Quark is not working fine.

And if you ask About... is still saying Build 4k78 ??????

Best regards,
Clotje

UPDATE: They set us up the bomb!

Mar 17, 2001, 03:38 PM

No! They set up us the bomb!

krove · Mar 17, 2001, 03:38 PM

Would be nice if this made any sense! This means absolutely nothing: what's he trying to say? This "box" could be anything, a pirated build, final (doubtful), or ....

Stop posting this crap and wait for a few more days!

krove

------------------
*The next sentence is entirely true...
*The previous sentence is most decidedly false...

Mar 17, 2001, 03:42 PM

Originally posted by eVo:
No! They set up us the bomb!

what you say?

(sorry...couldn't resist)

------------------
"It's your music. Burn it on a Mac. Dig?" - George Clinton

[This message has been edited by interactive_civilian (edited 03-17-2001).]

Mar 17, 2001, 03:49 PM

what you say?

You have no chance to survive make your time.

Mac Guru · Mar 17, 2001, 03:51 PM

It's funny watching people complain about how slow X is... but does anyone REALIZE that up untill Apple made it GM it still contained all the Debug code? I'm expecting a total speed boost due to the lack of debug code next Saturday. Untill then...

Mac Guru

------------------
Even though Mac Users may be only 10% of the market, always remember that we are the TOP 10%"

Lord Kronos · Mar 17, 2001, 03:53 PM

Originally posted by Mac Guru:
It's funny watching people complain about how slow X is... but does anyone REALIZE that up untill Apple made it GM it still contained all the Debug code? I'm expecting a total speed boost due to the lack of debug code next Saturday. Untill then...

Mac Guru

I totally agree

.

No one believes me when I talk about debug code

.

Mar 17, 2001, 03:58 PM

I've been convinced that debug code is still in all available builds, but does anyone know for sure to what extent graphics cards are being utilized, that is, how the driver sare in these builds? Sorry if this question is redundant with about 50 other threads here, but seems like at least one thing was answered in here so why not a second.

JLL · Mar 17, 2001, 04:01 PM

Originally posted by Lord Kronos:
Does the dev seed come with 3 CD's ?

No, only two.

JLL

lgerbarg · Mar 17, 2001, 04:15 PM

Originally posted by Mac Guru:
It's funny watching people complain about how slow X is... but does anyone REALIZE that up untill Apple made it GM it still contained all the Debug code? I'm expecting a total speed boost due to the lack of debug code next Saturday. Untill then...

Mac Guru

You have no idea what you are talking about it. Yes some of userland had some debug code. Maybe isolated chunks of the kernel did, but certainly they generally do not ship debug kernels, which are the really slow things. I can tell you that the DEBUG build is often broken in the kernel. It tends to be it breaks, nobody cares, they find a bad bug they will not be able to fix without kernel single stepping or profiling, and somebody spends a day or two fixing the code so the debug kernel builds again. If you try to build darwin as DEBUG PPC instead of RELEASE PPC it will almost always fail, try it for yourself if you like. Note that the remote kernel debugger nub (kdp) is often even in RELEASE kernels, since it causes no performance hit (will technically the code for panic has a few extra instructions, but at that point who cares), and only uses a page or two of memory. Just because there is a debugger in the kernel does not make it a debug kernel with all the associated slow down.

Louis Gerbarg
Darwin Developer

Gametes · Mar 17, 2001, 04:24 PM

Guys he really is a developer.

Louis, why are you here?

sCreeD · Mar 17, 2001, 04:28 PM

Originally posted by Joey:
I've been convinced that debug code is still in all available builds, but does anyone know for sure to what extent graphics cards are being utilized, that is, how the driver sare in these builds? Sorry if this question is redundant with about 50 other threads here, but seems like at least one thing was answered in here so why not a second.

FOR IMMEDIATE (FAKE) RELEASE
Monday July 23, 2001
ATI Technologies releases graphics drivers for Mac OS X

MARKHAM, Ontario -- ATI Technologies Inc. (TSE:ATY, NASDAQ:ATYT), a world leader in the supply of graphics, video and multimedia solutions, announced today that it has released version 1.0 drivers for Apple Computers newest operating system Mac OS X. These new drivers deliver unparalleled performance in 2D and 3D applications ...blah blah blah... OpenGL acceleration pending future release...

Screed

[This message has been edited by sCreeD (edited 03-17-2001).]

Mar 17, 2001, 04:36 PM

um, OK, thanks?

Anyway, so the kernel doesn't have debug code? But would apps still have it, does it matter? I took one CS class in college on Pascal. You'll need to spell it out for me, sorry.

bmedina · Mar 17, 2001, 04:43 PM

I wouldn't think the kernel would be the part of OS X to cause the slowness that people are complaining about. Think quartz....

one · Mar 17, 2001, 04:46 PM

Originally posted by Lord Kronos:
I totally agree .

No one believes me when I talk about debug code .

I do! I even tried to say so, but few seem to've read this:
http://forums.macnn.com/cgi-bin/Forum3/HTML/003464.html

It's toward the bottom of the first post.

Lord Kronos · Mar 17, 2001, 04:57 PM

OK, I don't want to be disrespectful but nobody here said that Darwin was full of debug code. My concern is Quartz and video cards drivers, they're clearly not optimized, other than that the OS is FAST in k78.

Petter · Mar 17, 2001, 05:25 PM

clotje:

Umm... a 'friend' of mine got the same 'retail package' a couple of days ago...
Three cd's. The os x is 4k78 and the included 9.1 is localized for UK and Australia!

Is that the same package you got?

So this is it then, 4k78 is probably the release version?! =)

Mar 17, 2001, 11:58 PM

Louis Gerbarg wrote:

You have no idea what you are talking about it�

Was that really necessary?

Louis Gerbarg wrote:

Yes some of userland had some debug code. Maybe isolated chunks of the kernel did, but certainly they generally do not ship debug kernels, which are the really slow things. I can tell you that the DEBUG build is often broken in the kernel. It tends to be it breaks, nobody cares, they find a bad bug they will not be able to fix without kernel single stepping or profiling, and somebody spends a day or two fixing the code so the debug kernel builds again. If you try to build darwin as DEBUG PPC instead of RELEASE PPC it will almost always fail, try it for yourself if you like. Note that the remote kernel debugger nub (kdp) is often even in RELEASE kernels, since it causes no performance hit (will technically the code for panic has a few extra instructions, but at that point who cares), and only uses a page or two of memory. Just because there is a debugger in the kernel does not make it a debug kernel with all the associated slow down.

How do you? Seriously? Just because you are a new Darwin developer, doesn�t mean you�re privy to the specs and builds of every component in OSX. Actually, it doesn�t mean jack **** for knowing how Apple conducts product builds. Granted your insinuation that no debug code exists in OSX may be correct and you may know the ins and outs of Apple project management. If no debug code exists in those builds, as a developer, I would be extremely impressed. Apparently, the builds that are being discussed do not include a debug kernel, and I would hope not for that matter. But there are a decent number of other dependencies for the responsiveness of the system/application to a user. To discount all other performance impacts of the system components outside of the kernel, which is what you did in a way, is not only a little assumptive, but potentially irresponsible.

Debug code and debugger hooks make a difference in performance. Just because there is a release version of a kernel in OSX doesn�t mean that there isn�t any debug code affecting performance.

I apologize if I�m going off the deep end from misinterpreting your post. Misreading posts happens easily enough. Also, I don�t work at Apple, so you may be completely right for all I know. Unfortunately, I deal with overconfident developers every day. I also have to clean up their mistakes that are direct results of that overconfidence, when they fail. Your post exuded over confidence evident from the first derogatory line to the kernel-exclusive reasoning Again, I apologize if I misinterpreted your post. It just seemed like you may have been speaking out of the scope of your expertise with Apple product builds.

lgerbarg · Mar 18, 2001, 03:37 PM

Originally posted by Past Tense:
Louis Gerbarg wrote:
How do you? Seriously? Just because you are a new Darwin developer, doesn�t mean you�re privy to the specs and builds of every component in OSX. Actually, it doesn�t mean jack **** for knowing how Apple conducts product builds. Granted your insinuation that no debug code exists in OSX may be correct and you may know the ins and outs of Apple project management. If no debug code exists in those builds, as a developer, I would be extremely impressed. Apparently, the builds that are being discussed do not include a debug kernel, and I would hope not for that matter. But there are a decent number of other dependencies for the responsiveness of the system/application to a user. To discount all other performance impacts of the system components outside of the kernel, which is what you did in a way, is not only a little assumptive, but potentially irresponsible.

Debug code and debugger hooks make a difference in performance. Just because there is a release version of a kernel in OSX doesn�t mean that there isn�t any debug code affecting performance.

I apologize if I�m going off the deep end from misinterpreting your post. Misreading posts happens easily enough. Also, I don�t work at Apple, so you may be completely right for all I know. Unfortunately, I deal with overconfident developers every day. I also have to clean up their mistakes that are direct results of that overconfidence, when they fail. Your post exuded over confidence evident from the first derogatory line to the kernel-exclusive reasoning Again, I apologize if I misinterpreted your post. It just seemed like you may have been speaking out of the scope of your expertise with Apple product builds.

I apologize if I am a bit inflammatory sometimes, though you have to understand it is gets to a bit annoying watching a lot of people stating things that they don't understand, and that are just not right, and other people who don't understand take them as fact. Let me answer a few questions and comments that came up one by one. I appreciate you letting me know you think I have gone to far maybe I have, and I hope that my perhaps crass statements do not cause people to entirely discount my statements.

I kind of saw this thread going down the same path as the IA64 port thread (which is a thread where a few people read a few comments in publicly available bug reports, entirely misinterpretted them, and concluded Apple is porting to IA64). Its not that they are incorrect in thinking that Apple may do it at some point, but most of their evidence actually contradicts their conclusion.

Yes userland code may have debugging stuff left in it, and I believe I said as much. That may slow things like Finder down, but it does not slow down the system as a whole, so people who are complaining about Application preformance as opposed to Finder preformance would still not be affected by it. Quartz and Aqua I honestly know nothing about it, but I tend to assume they do not have much debug code left, since unlike the kernel they can be relatively easily debugged at runtime by connecting to them with gdb just by leaving symbols in them. The kernel is special in the respect that it needs special facilities, but everything else can be debugged using more standard tools.

I also stated some sections of the kernel may have debug code. You may notice that in specific sections of the kernel you can turn debug on and off without actually building a debug kernel. For instance, in my random number code (not part of this release) you can set a few debug options so it prints out a lot of diagnostic data. That doesn't slow things down significantly, but there might be individual instances that do. The fact of the matter is that the kernel is the only part that will unilaterally slow down everything, and it does not have much debugging code. I concede that Aqua or Quartz may have some optimizations left that alter most of what people see, or Finder, which is certainly the most visible application.

Its true I don't work for Apple, and have no buisness relationship to Apple. But in my "free time" I have been writing low level code for OS X for the last 9 months or so, have code in the shipping product, and will hopefully have more in the future. I have had occasion to meet various members of the OS X development team to talk about various things, and I have the utmost confidence in their capabilities to deliver a spectacular product. Will it be perfect, no, there are bugs in the shipping version, there always will be. Will it be great, I certainly think so.

Oh, btw, to whoever pointed me out the advogato page, anyone who wants to can associate themselves with any advogato project at any level they want to, provided they have a certain level of trust. A list of the current Darwin Developers is available on Apple's Darwin Developer's web page.

Louis Gerbarg
Darwin Developer

[This message has been edited by lgerbarg (edited 03-18-2001).]

Mar 18, 2001, 04:33 PM

Louis Gerbarg wrote:

apologize if I am a bit inflammatory sometimes, though you have to understand it is gets to a bit annoying watching a lot of people stating things that they don't understand, and that are just not right, and other people who don't understand take them as fact.

I totally understand where you're coming from. That frustrates me, as well. Actually, that's why I reacted the way I did. My post was a little off as well. Sorry about that. I had a long day. I don't like working Saturdays, and it was due in large part to folks, well...developers, acting like they knew more than they did. They can be damn convincing too. Looking at it today, I think I read a little too much into your post, and unfairly made some inappropriate assumptions about your argument and your experiences with Apple and Apple related development. Again, sorry about that. Thanks for the civil response.

Mar 18, 2001, 04:59 PM

Boo frikkin' hoo! Now you boys shake hands and play nice. And while you're at it, quit knocking developers just because a developer put one over on you, but who's fault is that?

Some of us [developers] actually know what we're talking about and don't talk of our arses about things we don't. Do your job [well] and let us do our jobs [well] and we'll all be happy.

lgerbarg · Mar 18, 2001, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by Past Tense:
Louis Gerbarg wrote:
I totally understand where you're coming from. That frustrates me, as well. Actually, that's why I reacted the way I did. My post was a little off as well. Sorry about that. I had a long day. I don't like working Saturdays, and it was due in large part to folks, well...developers, acting like they knew more than they did. They can be damn convincing too. Looking at it today, I think I read a little too much into your post, and unfairly made some inappropriate assumptions about your argument and your experiences with Apple and Apple related development. Again, sorry about that. Thanks for the civil response.

No problem, we all have are off days, I certainly do ;-) The reason why I post here is because I enjoy the discussion, the chance to clarify things, and the chance to see what people think, and the chance to have people tell me I am wrong (or that I am being a jackass ;-). I appreciate the comments, and quite frankly I have enjoyed the conversation.

Louis Gerbarg
Darwin Developer

Mar 18, 2001, 06:09 PM

PresentTense wrote:

Boo frikkin' hoo!

I guess I deserve that.

And while you're at it, quit knocking developers just because a developer put one over on you, but who's fault is that?

Some of us [developers] actually know what we're talking about and don't talk of our arses about things we don't. Do your job [well] and let us do our jobs [well] and we'll all be happy.

I didn't mean it as bashing. I'm a developer as well, and I do know a lot of good developers. They didn't put one over one me. It was on my boss, but I sometimes have to clean up the messes when things are high priority, and high severity. I guess I was whining a bit, sorry. Self pity is an ugly thing.

Anyway, someone mentioned something about receiving a build on Friday or something?