Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

a-poria · May 7, 2001, 11:36 PM

I have a Pismo 400/128 and am anxious to upgrade to OS X but am not sure if it is the wisest move. I have read various stories of the problems encountered by Powerbook users. Have the recent updates addressed these problems? If I do encounter problems, will I easily be boot on "classic" without any glitches? Anyone who can share their experience I would be most grateful!

a-poria

ctt1wbw · May 7, 2001, 11:52 PM

I use OS X on my Wallstreet powerbook with 128 megs of RAM and I really can't complain. Yeah, it's slower than OS 9.1, but not so much that I hate it or won't use it. I can use Classic with no problems and generally I love OS X. I would recommend it for you Pismo.

seanyepez · May 8, 2001, 02:44 AM

I have a 500-megahertz Pismo with 384 megabytes of RAM. Will window dragging be fluidic or choppy? I need to give OS X a chance. I really do.

DPRoberts · May 8, 2001, 03:14 AM

I'm guessing that you're talking about the problems with the power manager in the public beta, those bugs have been fixed.

I use X on my 500 pismo w/ 128 megs of RAM and it runs pretty nicely. Window dragging isn't choppy at all but sometimes it will take a few seconds to "grab" the window is the system is busy. Window resizing is definatly not fluid in my machine, but its also not slow, I'm very happy with the new resizing features. Other things seem to be very choppy though, like creating a frame around icons so that you can select them all at once.

At first I had doubts about classic, but with 9.2b2, it runs beautifully. Classic doesn't seem to crash nearly as much as just using 9, and it definatly runs programs faster than X on my machine.

siegzdad · May 8, 2001, 07:14 AM

I'm running it on a Pismo 400 w/256 and have no major complaints. The only draw backs are that "official" DVD support isn't there yet (but with VLC I can still watch movies in X), & the brightness/sound hot buttons don't work (the bightness will if I go into the Display CntrlPnl first).

Performance wise it's OK by me. I never have to go into classic (won't let myself -- I'll reboot first), and the window dragging thing ain't too bad.

Now that I have my eyes (thanks Mr_Sonicblue!!!) I'm a happy camper.

------------------
iMac therefor iAm

icruise · May 8, 2001, 10:03 AM

It's certainly usable, if not a speed-demon on my Pismo 400. I would definitely partition your drive so that you have one partition just for OS X (if you want to use classic, install a version of 9.1 on that drive first, and only use a very pruned-down extension set). On the other drive (partition) have your working version of OS 9.1 with all of your normal extensions. This setup has worked well for me, and it allows you to get rid of, or wipe and reinstall, OS X without touching your OS 9.1 system at all. There have been several occasions when I have been very glad that I installed on a seperate partition, trust me.

tomywomy · May 8, 2001, 10:48 AM

What about sleep time. How long does your Pismo/Lombard sleep in X without the battery getting completely drained? I heard many people were having this problem and it is the only thing holding me back from getting X on mine. ( I need it to be able to sleep at least 14 hours on a full battery - in OS 9 it can sleep for over 4 days).

milhous · May 8, 2001, 10:51 AM

I'm running 10.0.2 on my Pismo 500 with 512MB ram and it really doesn't run that bad. As for the genie effect, I recommend the scale effect as it's much quicker than the genie or scale. Expect a G4 upgrade available later down the road so we can take advantage of that Altivec. I really need a good suite of office apps for X because I absolutely refuse to run Classic on top of X because it corrupts classic in several respects such as loss of application icons with the generic application icon, sporadic sound controls, loss of sound, etc. If all goes according to plan this summer, I won't be using Classic at all.

ddiokno · May 10, 2001, 09:50 PM

Originally posted by seanyepez:
I have a 500-megahertz Pismo with 384 megabytes of RAM. Will window dragging be fluidic or choppy? I need to give OS X a chance. I really do.

Hi Sean,
I'd say "go for it"... I have OS X on my TiBook 500, and on my Wife's Pismo 500 and it has passed my "wife doesn't complain" test. She is very happy with the performance and tends to use it for 95% of her daily tasks (she is a a teacher). She only switches back to boot into 9.1 when she runs a few programs that won't run under X. Her machine is a Pismo 500, 20GB, 320MB Ram. OS X 10.0.3 . Dragging and general use is very fluid.
good luck
dave

j aske · May 10, 2001, 11:12 PM

I am running OS X on a Pismo 400/512 meg. I think it runs pretty well, certainly better with each update. The only complaint I have is how miserable ALL the browsers are that run natively. They all run terribly. Classic runs very well, and the reduction in speed is noticeable, but tolerable. Over all it crashes less frequently, and it's cool just having it, and being able to show it off.

Wait. I have OS X and OS 9.1 on one partition and I have had no problems. I don't know though..some people feel this is problematic.
Anyways, I'd say give it a go, and good luck.

Jennings

Macfreak7 · May 11, 2001, 12:19 AM

This is all that you need..

and it works perfectly on my pismo 400 w/ 320MB RAM(mind you, RAM is an issue).

Kestral · May 11, 2001, 03:22 AM

Installed retail Mac OS X on my Pismo 400 w/320 megs RAM and 6 gig HD and it was dog slow. Had a really tough time taking it off because of the sound problem someone here mentioned and for awhile, refused to boot off my OS 9.1 CD. I use my Pismo (my only computer) to do work so it could be quite awhile before I try that again! Wake me up when OS X has VirtualPC, Office 2001, Logic Audio Plantium, Reason, Toast Titanium, IQChart, and a fully functional Explorer.

Kestral

ddiokno · May 11, 2001, 06:01 AM

The issue of browers being slow isn't an issue of the pismo and OS X, rather more of an issue with OS X itself...
dave

typoon · May 11, 2001, 05:33 PM

I also use OS X on my PISMO and have no problems with it. I have the 500 MHz and 20 Gig HD with 256 Megs of RAM and OS X seems to work quite fast. I use OS X 10.0.3 for about 99% of my work. I LOVE it. You should take the Dive.

j aske · May 11, 2001, 08:43 PM

Originally posted by ddiokno:
The issue of browers being slow isn't an issue of the pismo and OS X, rather more of an issue with OS X itself...
dave

Yeah, you're correct. My post was poorly written. Hopefully, this shortcoming can, and will, be addressed sometime soon. When I have actual research to conduct, I run IE or Netscape in Classic. They seem to run better, especially when I'm stuck with 56kbps access.

[This message has been edited by j aske (edited 05-11-2001).]

May 14, 2001, 07:48 PM

I found it impossible to use for any graphics stuff:
My Wacom Intuos tablet does not work and I need not go any further, without that forget it.
Printer: no, Scanner: no.
Everything is slower, so forget it.
I did not buy the fastest laptop in the world only to then slow it down. I expected a speed IMPROVEMENT, I though Unix was fast.
Hardly any application I use is supported (or the other way round, but it does not matter if I cannot use them).
I have 10.0.3 installed, but I have not done ANY work on OS X.
Even worse, when switching back to 9.1 (seperate partition), I need to reset the PRAM 2-3 times before I get the sound to work again.
So while I am sure some are having a great time with OSX, I can tell you that graphics work is impossible.
This is on a Pismo 500, 20GB HD, 640 MB RAM.

I like the interface though and it looks very slick.
BUT unless the speed gets to be on par with OS 9.1, I will never use it on this machine.
I can live with some crashes and the familiar 9.1 interface and all my customization.
Unless I can improve my work and efficiency, I see no reason to upgrade.
I buy a new computer because it is faster, not prettier but slower.
My guess is that this will be the case for many.

typoon · May 15, 2001, 03:19 PM

Originally posted by JTVD1:
I found it impossible to use for any graphics stuff:
My Wacom Intuos tablet does not work and I need not go any further, without that forget it.
Printer: no, Scanner: no.
Everything is slower, so forget it.
I did not buy the fastest laptop in the world only to then slow it down. I expected a speed IMPROVEMENT, I though Unix was fast.
Hardly any application I use is supported (or the other way round, but it does not matter if I cannot use them).
I have 10.0.3 installed, but I have not done ANY work on OS X.
Even worse, when switching back to 9.1 (seperate partition), I need to reset the PRAM 2-3 times before I get the sound to work again.
So while I am sure some are having a great time with OSX, I can tell you that graphics work is impossible.
This is on a Pismo 500, 20GB HD, 640 MB RAM.

I like the interface though and it looks very slick.
BUT unless the speed gets to be on par with OS 9.1, I will never use it on this machine.
I can live with some crashes and the familiar 9.1 interface and all my customization.
Unless I can improve my work and efficiency, I see no reason to upgrade.
I buy a new computer because it is faster, not prettier but slower.
My guess is that this will be the case for many.

Sorry you are having problems with speed. I run photoshop in Classic and it seems to run faster than in 9.1 also running 10.0.3 fixed some things and increased speed for me. I am starting to thin OS X has something to do with HD speed as well as RAM and the amount of it. I only have 256 Megs of RAM and an IBM Travelstar 20 Gig HD my 12 gig Apple one was replaced. It seemed slower than this IBM drive I installed. I am also running a PISMO 500. I use OS X fulltime on my Powerbook.

ddiokno · May 15, 2001, 03:57 PM

Originally posted by j aske:
Yeah, you're correct. My post was poorly written. Hopefully, this shortcoming can, and will, be addressed sometime soon. When I have actual research to conduct, I run IE or Netscape in Classic. They seem to run better, especially when I'm stuck with 56kbps access.

I totally agree with your assessment of the browsers run in classic... I much prefer IE 5.0 in classic to IE 5.1 in X. I find it a good bit more lively, my only drawback with this is that my intelliEye Optical Trackball loses it scrolling and second button in classic...
I, too, really can't wait for updated Browsers for X...
thanks
dave

j aske · May 15, 2001, 10:33 PM

An update: since my first post I've made OS X my "full-time" OS. Classic seems more responsive than 9.1 "solo", and I have not had an app crash the system. I'm very happy, all things considered. I mean, I'm sure that the speed issues will never be solved...at least until G4s are a bit faster. That being said, I'll trade speed for stability. The past week I've been editing articles for the American Journal of Law & Medicine, and I'm sure I would've had a few painful set backs if it were not for the stability of Classic under OS X.

And by the way, Dave, have you ever been to a meeting of BMUG? I haven't made one, despite being on the mailing list, because of my course load. Hopefully when the semester is over I'll be able to attend one.
-Jennings

[This message has been edited by j aske (edited 05-15-2001).]

a-poria · May 16, 2001, 09:59 PM

From the responses so far, moving on to OS X is clearly on my summer plans. However, as many of the posts point out (including the links to XLR8, thanks!), a larger HD, not to mention an ample amount of RAM (at least 256) are first steps. On this note, anyone have suggestions as to a HD for a Pismo? I want at least 20G and, if possible, 7200 speed. Looked around but could not find the speed. Also, which is best, IBM, Toshiba, Fujitsu, etc.?

Hope to hear more OS X and Pismo experiences...

bstone · May 16, 2001, 11:17 PM

I installed OS X on my Pismo 400 with 192mb RAM. It seems to just go much too slowly under Classic. I am waiting until more applications are Carbonized. Hopefully once day soon they will all be in Cocoa.

stardoc · May 17, 2001, 08:42 PM

It was mentioned awhile back that the battery level seems to drop rapidly under X while sleeping. I too had this happen (twice) under 10.0.0. After the second time (what can I say, I'm either slow or too trusting of Apple), I don't let it sleep w/o being plugged in for more than several hours max. I'm now at 10.0.3, but haven't the heart to test it...

(FYI: Pismo 500/256MB) I love that the system is as stable as my linux box (no surprise here), but have also experienced all sorts of sound wierdness. Also frustrated that the brightness/sound hot keys don't work.

Summary: I'll trade speed for stability (but I certainly keep a spare partition w/ 9.1!).

stardoc