[pat++]

grrrrrrrr

[maxintosh]

I was led to believe it will work on newer ATi cards as well, just not old Rage 128s (like my pismo has )

[iPond317]

I have just officially lost all faith in Apple. Oh well, I'll regain it tomorrow I'm sure... So are we going to see any speed improvements in 10.2?!?!?!?! I have a TiBook 400 with 512MB and OS X should be able to run faster than it currently does! Apple, WHY NVIDIA ONLY?!

[pat++]

Originally posted by maxintosh:
<STRONG>I was led to believe it will work on newer ATi cards as well, just not old Rage 128s (like my pismo has )</STRONG>

It is not possible on older graphics cards like RAGE 128 cards, said Jobs -- that means it'll work on newer iMacs and eMacs, but not on older machines, he emphasized. AGP 2x and 32MB video RAM are required for this new technology. Jobs said this puts Apple two years ahead of "the other guys."


Seems to be clear ! Apple sells hardware and does not support it
My new iBook is already dead....

This puts Apple two years ahead of "the other guys", and this puts Apple customers 2 years behind

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: pat++ ]

[FishDoc]

I find that pretty frustrating too - but there are technological limits that probably play into this. Still, I have heard that Jaguar DOES increase the speed on older macs - it just sounds like it will not be nearly to the degree those with newer cards will get.

On a related note (and in the wrong forum) - I think this bodes well for an iBook update in the near future, with faster cards at least!


Fish

[edited to complain less]

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: FishDoc ]

[BrunoBruin]

This just means that older machines will not get the benefits of offloading Quartz to the GPU. It's hardly surprising that there are minimum system requirements for something that complex.

[BRussell]

Where did you hear it was only nvidia? Jobs said it was 32MB cards on AGP 2X.

[MacLone]

Well...i have a G4 with one of those 4x 32mb cards but i was planning to buy an ibook which will be not supported?
Hmm...tough decision...maybe i shouldn't buy another apple product if they will not be fully supported by apple's systems.
I don't want to buy an already "obsolete" new ibook.

[xi_hyperon]

Maybe a stupid question, but wouldn't it be possible to SHARE some of the Quartz load between the CPU and GPU for older Macs? I'm just wondering if they could arrive at developing some sort of compromise like this for people who can't afford to replace their 1/2 year old TiBook.

[ratlater]

What the hell are you all babbling about? Apple introduces a great new technology and you all complain because not every frickin' Apple product ever made can support it! You are all acting like 10.2 won't work without this new GPU acceleration, when in fact it will be just as fast and probably faster than 10.1 is for us right now.

Sure it's too bad that any old GPU can't do this, but that's the breaks with technology. I have an iBook and dual 500 G4, and neither can support this right now, but I'm not crying about it. I'll probably buy a new vid card for my G4, and well the iBook just won't have that feature. It still runs OS X great, so there is nothing to whine about...jeebus!

-matt

[BusErrorDev]

"Brand new Technology" wich I introduced in GLterm 6 months ago.

[xi_hyperon]

Originally posted by ratlater:
<STRONG>What the hell are you all babbling about? &lt;snip&gt;

-matt</STRONG>

I think the frustration some people have is pretty normal. If I'd bought a 'book that was less than a year old, and found out that the one improvement everyone's been clamoring for - for the last year - is only going to be supported by the newest hardware, I'd be REALLY upset. Luckily, I don't have to feel too shafted, after all my 'book is one year old (12 months!) - a regular dinosaur.

[BrunoBruin]

I'll probably buy a new vid card for my G4, and well the iBook just won't have that feature. It still runs OS X great, so there is nothing to whine about...jeebus!

10.1 is plenty fast on my old tower anyway. But here's a big ol' Cupertino push toward selling my iBook. There's a Ti 667 calling my name...

[pat++]

Originally posted by ratlater:
<STRONG>What the hell are you all babbling about? Apple introduces a great new technology and you all complain because not every frickin' Apple product ever made can support it! You are all acting like 10.2 won't work without this new GPU acceleration, when in fact it will be just as fast and probably faster than 10.1 is for us right now.

-matt</STRONG>

The problem here is that I have the feeling that Apple could use older card to speed-up Quartz (altough I agree it would probably not be as efficient as newer cards). They choose the easy way by only supporting latest video cards. Is this too much to ask for support of current selling hardware ?????

[Mithras]

Originally posted by BusErrorDev:
<STRONG>"Brand new Technology" wich I introduced in GLterm 6 months ago.</STRONG>

which is a great app, but doing this at the system level for every window is admittedly a different bag of beans.

and i agree that we're in no position to ***** about this. A cutting-edge operating system technology has been introduced. it works with some recent Macs, but only those with certain technological capabilities. Why don't you complaint that iDVD doesn't burn DVDs on your iMac Bondi with CD-ROM while you're at it?

[ratlater]

Originally posted by pat++:
<STRONG>
Is this too much to ask for support of current selling hardware ?????
</STRONG>

Have you stopped to think that this isn't current selling software? In late September it is very likely that all current Apple hardware will support this, the only thing that doesn't right now is the iBook. I'll bet that at MWNY they release an iBook with a 32mb vid card.

-matt

[k2man]

I concur: what are you all complaining about? It's not as if X won't work on your machines. It's just that a new technology, that obviously takes a lot of hardware firepower, won't work on older and lower-end models.

WELCOME TO THE COMPUTER INDUSTRY, GUYS!

Do you really think Apple can snap its fingers and make this stuff magically work for everyone? If it can't work on an ibook or old iMac (which are low-end machines--you're not entitled to everything when you only spend $1400 on a computer), then would you rather see Apple simply hold the technology back and not implement it for anyone?

What's the problem here? Again, it's not like OS X isn't going to work. You'll have the same **functionality** as anyone else.

I for one am glad Apple is pushing limits like it is...

[cheerios]

Originally posted by ratlater:
<STRONG>

Have you stopped to think that this isn't current selling software? In late September it is very likely that all current Apple hardware will support this, the only thing that doesn't right now is the iBook. I'll bet that at MWNY they release an iBook with a 32mb vid card.

-matt</STRONG>

Or sooner... they seem to be enjoying those quiet system updates, lately...

[awaspaas]

Is this too much to ask for support of current selling hardware ???

If this new technology is as revolutionary as they lead us to belive, then sure, thats too much to ask! Considering what they're proposing, I think a 32MB minimum is very reasonable.

And for those of you with iBooks and what not - you can't expect somebody to work miracles on systems with 8MB of vram. Technological limits are technological limits! Get over it.

I just bought an iBook in January and you don't see me throwing a tantrum about it. Im sure 10.2 will bring an overall improvement to the speed of that machine, just probably not on the scale that the newer systems will see. Big deal - I didn't buy the iBook for its fantastic graphics performance!

[Aqua OS X]

With Quartz Extreme, calls to Quartz's compositing engine go through a wrapper which is backed by OpenGL.

I'm not at all shocked to see high system requirements for this wrapper. This is low latency emulation taking place.. you need phatty-boom-batty hardware in order for everything to function properly.

Some here proposed the idea of spiting the burden between both the CPU and the GPU. Ya, theoretically that could be done... however it would be a software development nightmare for Apple and 3rd parties. It's not worth it...trust me.

All in all I am very happy to see this technology come to life. A lot of graphic designers are going to be very very very happy now. Working with high res monitors in OS X huuuurt. At least older iBooks, iMacs, and Powerbooks phisically can't switch into resolutions that become utterly painful in OSX. Don't forget that.

[Todd Madson]

Simple but expensive to correct:

I'll buy a new Gforce3 at a computer show for PCs
(to keep the cost down) ...then burn the rom for a
Mac (via a friends' PC) and use that instead of my
ATI Rage 128 Pro (16 megs of pure, puking un-Quartz
Extreme non-performance).

I was hoping on getting a CPU acclerator but a better
video card would be cheaper.

By the time I decide my machine is too slow it will
be G5 time.

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: Todd Madson ]

[::maroma::]

The problem here is that I have the feeling that Apple could use older card to speed-up Quartz (altough I agree it would probably not be as efficient as newer cards). They choose the easy way by only supporting latest video cards. Is this too much to ask for support of current selling hardware ?????

Remember, this puts Apple at least "2 years ahead" of the competition. That means that this is an ADVANCED technology. And advanced technologies work on advanced hardware.

B!tch and moan all you want about this, but this is a GOOD thing for Apple AND it's customers. When it comes time for you to buy a new machine, you wont be crying (well, maybe tears of joy). You now have a choice....you know that this will be out in September. You have about 4-5 months if you want to be able to use this new technology. Either buy a new vid card or machine, or just use your current hardware and benefit from ALL of the other improvements 10.2 will bring. You just wont have the FULL speed improvement that others will.

That's life in the techno world people. Get used to it. What you buy today, just might not be fully compatible with everything else tomorrow. Its a risk you take. If you don't want to take it, don't buy anything new.

[Norm1985]

What about 550 and 667 PowerBooks with no Level 3 cache, are their graphics chipsets not support by Quartz Extreme? My 550 is only 6 months old and is a professional class laptop! It has 4x AGP (over 2x) a RADEON (over a Rage 128) but yet 16MBs of DDR RAM (not 32)

Come on! You just released these DVI PowerBooks Apple! What about the Combo Drive PowerBooks?

[hmurchison2001]

Fix these damn boards..!

[theolein]

Actually, I still think Apple could have gone about this differently, although I appreciate their desperate need to watch the bottom line. If they had implemented a "light" version of Aqua without live dragging, resizing etc system wide, the whole "snappy" debate would have been less pronounced. On the other hand MS announced redently that they will be doing exactly this same thing with the next version of Windows, and Apple cannot but get in there ahead of MS if they want to keep up in this very uneven game.

[::maroma::]

Come on! You just released these DVI PowerBooks Apple! What about the Combo Drive PowerBooks?

And they haven't released 10.2 yet. By the time 10.2 is released, all current hardware will be able to take full advantage of this.

As for the 'old' hardware, well, you just gotta bite the bullet. I've got an older G4/500 AGP (Sawtooth), and I'll definitely be upgrading my vid card come 10.2 release time.

[Colonel Panic]

what the hell? why only NVidia? where does it say that? the specs given were AGP 2X and 32MB. That kicks out PCI and all portables (rage 128, radeon mobility) except the latest DVI Powerbooks, which are 32MB.

Cube has AGP 2X and with the OEM Radeon 32MB, so it should be supported, based on this early information.

[Norm1985]

Originally posted by ::maroma:::
<STRONG>

And they haven't released 10.2 yet. By the time 10.2 is released, all current hardware will be able to take full advantage of this.

As for the 'old' hardware, well, you just gotta bite the bullet. I've got an older G4/500 AGP (Sawtooth), and I'll definitely be upgrading my vid card come 10.2 release time.</STRONG>

But that's the diffrence! G4 towers can have their graphic chipsets upgraded because they have graphic card slots! And most G4s are AGP! So, you have no problem! But what about me? My graphics chipset is engraved into the motherboard!

[Mr Scruff]

I do have sympathy with the people who have recently bought macs that won't support Quartz Extreme, and who thought that OS X would get better when it became accelerated.

However, if you did this, then you were taking a gamble. Jaguar will run better on your hardware. It just won't run as well as it will on people who have better hardware. I understand how frustrating it may be, but you have no genuine complaints.

To the people who say that why don't they do a split GPU/CPU version, I don't think you understand what is being done. All the window buffer contents are likely to be stored in VRAM for the GPU to do the compositing. If your GFX card doesn't have the memory to do this, you simply can't make it work, however much you try.

To the people who say, why don't they make Aqua lighter for old hardware, well I personally think it would be dumb of Apple to waste developer resources cushioning the blow on old hardware when they should be concentrating on competing with MS (a company who can throw any amount of money at R&D). If Apple did think like this, then they would never advance, and would be left behind overnight.

[poppa kristof]

What makes me really confused is why would Apple reasease, just a week ago mind you, their newly updated PowerBook.

That uses ATI.

Now since these PowerBooks were updated during the development of 10.2, they knew all along these brand new PowerBooks would not be 100% optimized for 10.2 in a few months time.

I guess you can't fault them for doing this since 10.2 is not out yet.

Imagine, 10.2 is realeased and they recommend ugrading your equipment to take full advantage of it.

What would we do?

Buy new hardware as they expect or complan X is still too slow?

I love Apple's business savy, unethical at times yes, but very sly.

[Parvulesco]

Here's the most definitive statement I've seen regarding hardware requirements for Quartz Extreme (from the bottom of http://www.apple.com/macosx/newversion/:

nVidia: GeForce2MX, GeForce3, GeForce4 Ti, GeForce4 or GeForce4MX. ATI: any AGP Radeon card. 32MB VRAM recommended for optimum performance.

[TC]

*nVidia: GeForce2MX, GeForce3, GeForce4 Ti, GeForce4 or GeForce4MX. ATI: any AGP Radeon card. 32MB VRAM recommended for optimum performance.

These are the specs from Apple�s site.

The 32MB is recommended!!
Now does the Powerbook Rev B have a true Radeon AGP or not?

[Norm1985]

The Rev. B (550/667) PowerBook G4s include a 4x AGP ATi RADEON Mobility with 16MBs of DDR RAM.

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: Norm1985 ]

[poppa kristof]

I retract my last post.
I read the foot note on the 10.2 page.
It is supported.

Mental note: check the facts first.

I think this goes for a few others too.

My bad.

[TC]

Originally posted by Norm1985:
<STRONG>The Rev. B (550/667) PowerBook G4s include a 4x AGP ATi RADEON Mobility with 16MBs of DDR RAM.

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: Norm1985 ]</STRONG>

Thanks, but I heard people talk about the latest version as being the first one with a 'true' Radeon with the version in the Rev B being closely related to the Rage 128.

I guess we will know soon enough when someone with the developer CD in hand checks this out.

[timmerk]

Uhhhh, I didn't read all th posts, so it might have been said -

On Apple's page, it says ANY ATI RADEON CARD!!!!!!!!!!!!


The person who started this topic is a retard.

[Loco Bozo]

Translation: Whatever you do, do not buy an iBook until they are updated.

[Norm1985]

Originally posted by TC:
<STRONG>

Thanks, but I heard people talk about the latest version as being the first one with a 'true' Radeon with the version in the Rev B being closely related to the Rage 128.

I guess we will know soon enough when someone with the developer CD in hand checks this out.</STRONG>

Who told you that? That's BS.

The RADEON in the Rev. Bs are Mobile versions of the RADEON that came out before the 7500/8500 series.

I mean, the desktop RADEON 32 MEG DDR ADC and desktop RADEON Retail 32meg DDR are support with the technology, why not the mobility. Apple said, ANY RADEON! 32MBs RECOMENDED! Not REQUIRED for Quartz Extreme. RADEON REQUIRED or GeForce2MX REQUIRED!

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: Norm1985 ]

[Eug]

Dammit! Why won't Quartz Extreme run on my Apple II+??? Is this the support they give us Apple users? Dammit they should be put out of business for their shady business practices.

This iBook 600 user says: "GIVE IT A REST!"

I'd be more concerned about what CPU is going to be in the new fall 2002 laptops. Quartz acceleration is fine, but if the CPU is still slow, that's more reason to complain.

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: Eug ]

[k2man]

Rumors are that the iBooks will only have 16 megs of VRAM (up from the current 8 megs). So don't hold your breath on any new models using Quartz Extreme.

And I personally don't have a problem with that. OS X is usable *now* in its 10.1 rendition. If you want to buy an iBook )which is essentially an entry-level machine), then it's fair that you won't benefit from every whiz-bang feature crammed into OS X.

[Norm1985]

Originally posted by k2man:
<STRONG>Rumors are that the iBooks will only have 16 megs of VRAM (up from the current 8 megs). So don't hold your breath on any new models using Quartz Extreme.

And I personally don't have a problem with that. OS X is usable *now* in its 10.1 rendition. If you want to buy an iBook )which is essentially an entry-level machine), then it's fair that you won't benefit from every whiz-bang feature crammed into OS X.</STRONG>

32MB RECOMENDED, not REQUIRED. RADEON REQUIRED OR GEFORCE2MX REQUIRED for Quartz Extreme.

Jaguar dramatically improves the performance of Mac OS X with Quartz Extreme. Jaguar lets Quartz offload compositing tasks to a supported* video card, using OpenGL to accelerate the drawing and compositing of graphics. As with the benefits 3D games get from a video co-processor, the main CPU chip(s) can then focus on application-specific needs.
That means your shadows will drop quickly, your genies will appear slicker and your transparencies will layer faster � and Mac OS X can do more processing in the background while you move the foreground.

*nVidia: GeForce2MX, GeForce3, GeForce4 Ti, GeForce4 or GeForce4MX. ATI: any AGP Radeon card. 32MB VRAM recommended for optimum performance.

[dividend]

I feel the pain too, my computer is less than 6 months old, and I thought that when I bought it, it would be a bit slow, but that updates would fix that. Hopefully there will be some kind of speed-update even for us poor loosers with Jaguar, but burnt cash is burnt cash. wonder if it is the same thing as with Finul Cut Pro 3, where real-time needs a 667 mhz processor because there is a file that blocks 550's from doing that...

anyway, i spent 2300 dollars on something that is never going to work as speedy as expected. Next time I buy hardware, should I take into account that if the system then is slow, then I should not expect any updates to make it better. It is ok to buy a car if there are expectations that it will be made faster, but ytou are not going to buy a car if you know that newer functions that should already be there are going to a) slow down your computer, and b) are not accessible to you anyway.

It is not that I don't want Apple to do this, and I am of course happy for Apple and all other Mac-users who may benefit from this. Just thought that Apple should have said that for this particular computer, Ti550, don't expect it to become any faster with the next major upgrade; expect it to be slower and not able to make use of next-version software's goodiess. Don't even expect it to perform very well with the current version... that would have been honest.

Next time I decide to burn 2300 dollars I will take a much more critical view on how it actually performs and not expect it to become better at all, if it is an Apple. It is, again, not the case that I expected that my computer would be somewhat top-of-the-line for ever; I know very well that computers become "old" after some time, and as for Apple Powerbooks usually within 6 months. That's fine - but I do expect that Apple deals with such performance issues that are evident and obvious for those that buy their current computers and not ONLY do it for future purchasers. As long as their is other performance-boosting stuff I guess I should be happy and say I got what I expected and thought reasonable; then high-level stuff such as this is "bad luck" or "bad timing" and my "fault". BUT, if there is none of performance-boosting stuff in the next version - then I really feel screwed, and besides - no person using a portable less powerfull than the current Ti-books have a good reason to buy the update, if it turns out, which is normal, that it will EVEN more slow down performance. I am using a 550 mhz supercomputer chip that behaves like a 500 mhz P2 with OS X. And then you hear that OS 9 is dead.

[Norm1985]

Originally posted by dividend:
<STRONG>I feel the pain too, my computer is less than 6 months old, and I thought that when I bought it, it would be a bit slow, but that updates would fix that. Hopefully there will be some kind of speed-update even for us poor loosers with Jaguar, but burnt cash is burnt cash. wonder if it is the same thing as with Finul Cut Pro 3, where real-time needs a 667 mhz processor because there is a file that blocks 550's from doing that...

anyway, i spent 2300 dollars on something that is never going to work as speedy as expected. Next time I buy hardware, should I take into account that if the system then is slow, then I should not expect any updates to make it better. It is ok to buy a car if there are expectations that it will be made faster, but ytou are not going to buy a car if you know that newer functions that should already be there are going to a) slow down your computer, and b) are not accessible to you anyway.

It is not that I don't want Apple to do this, and I am of course happy for Apple and all other Mac-users who may benefit from this. Just thought that Apple should have said that for this particular computer, Ti550, don't expect it to become any faster with the next major upgrade; expect it to be slower and not able to make use of next-version software's goodiess. Don't even expect it to perform very well with the current version... that would have been honest.

Next time I decide to burn 2300 dollars I will take a much more critical view on how it actually performs and not expect it to become better at all, if it is an Apple. It is, again, not the case that I expected that my computer would be somewhat top-of-the-line for ever; I know very well that computers become "old" after some time, and as for Apple Powerbooks usually within 6 months. That's fine - but I do expect that Apple deals with such performance issues that are evident and obvious for those that buy their current computers and not ONLY do it for future purchasers. As long as their is other performance-boosting stuff I guess I should be happy and say I got what I expected and thought reasonable; then high-level stuff such as this is "bad luck" or "bad timing" and my "fault". BUT, if there is none of performance-boosting stuff in the next version - then I really feel screwed, and besides - no person using a portable less powerfull than the current Ti-books have a good reason to buy the update, if it turns out, which is normal, that it will EVEN more slow down performance. I am using a 550 mhz supercomputer chip that behaves like a 500 mhz P2 with OS X. And then you hear that OS 9 is dead.</STRONG>

Your PowerBook should be supported, it saids RADEON needed for Quartz Extreme, 32MBs of RAM RECOMENDED.

[dividend]

I feel the pain too, my computer is less than 6 months old, and I thought that when I bought it, it would be a bit slow, but that updates would fix that. Hopefully there will be some kind of speed-update even for us poor loosers with Jaguar, but burnt cash is burnt cash. wonder if it is the same thing as with Finul Cut Pro 3, where real-time needs a 667 mhz processor because there is a file that blocks 550's from doing that...

anyway, i spent 2300 dollars on something that is never going to work as speedy as expected. Next time I buy hardware, should I take into account that if the system then is slow, then I should not expect any updates to make it better. It is ok to buy a car if there are expectations that it will be made faster, but ytou are not going to buy a car if you know that newer functions that should already be there are going to a) slow down your computer, and b) are not accessible to you anyway.

It is not that I don't want Apple to do this, and I am of course happy for Apple and all other Mac-users who may benefit from this. Just thought that Apple should have said that for this particular computer, Ti550, don't expect it to become any faster with the next major upgrade; expect it to be slower and not able to make use of next-version software's goodiess. Don't even expect it to perform very well with the current version... that would have been honest.

Next time I decide to burn 2300 dollars I will take a much more critical view on how it actually performs and not expect it to become better at all, if it is an Apple. It is, again, not the case that I expected that my computer would be somewhat top-of-the-line for ever; I know very well that computers become "old" after some time, and as for Apple Powerbooks usually within 6 months. That's fine - but I do expect that Apple deals with such performance issues that are evident and obvious for those that buy their current computers and not ONLY do it for future purchasers. As long as their is other performance-boosting stuff I guess I should be happy and say I got what I expected and thought reasonable; then high-level stuff such as this is "bad luck" or "bad timing" and my "fault". BUT, if there is none of performance-boosting stuff in the next version - then I really feel screwed, and besides - no person using a portable less powerfull than the current Ti-books have a good reason to buy the update, if it turns out, which is normal, that it will EVEN more slow down performance. I am using a 550 mhz supercomputer chip that behaves like a 500 mhz P2 with OS X. And then you hear that OS 9 is dead.

[talisker]

Originally posted by Loco Bozo:
<STRONG>Translation: Whatever you do, do not buy an iBook until they are updated. </STRONG>

Nonsense. My March 2002 ibook runs 10.1 very well. I'm happy to say I'm not a 'power user', just someone who uses their machine maybe 1-2 hours a day and it's marvellous. I became deeply sad, reading these boards for days before I bought it, thinking '...maybe if I wait until after the next Expo, there might be a revised version that will allow me to minimise windows 0.002 seconds quicker...', '...maybe one day I might want to develop a feature length cartoon on my ibook to rival Shrek and it probably wont be quick enough...', and '...i wonder where all my friends have gone...'. Luckily I just went and bought one and havent ever had any concern about performance. (Apart from the 'beachball' in IE, but that's IE). So what if 10.2 will be best experienced on a fast G4 (doh!), 10.1 is great on the ibook and 10.2 will doubtless be better, so I'm happy. If you need an ibook now, buy it now. If you don't need it now, don't buy it now. Not difficult guys.

[bobloblaw]

Originally posted by iPond317:
<STRONG>I have just officially lost all faith in Apple. Oh well, I'll regain it tomorrow I'm sure... So are we going to see any speed improvements in 10.2?!?!?!?! I have a TiBook 400 with 512MB and OS X should be able to run faster than it currently does! Apple, WHY NVIDIA ONLY?! </STRONG>

Go look on apples website right now! It says about the quartz ext. issue that any 2x agp with 32Mb of vram will work!

Interestingly enough, it also says that this is needed for optimal performance. (maybe this means that not everything on the screen will be able to be drawn in the gpu, but some of it?)

[Norm1985]

Originally posted by bobloblaw:
<STRONG>

Go look on apples website right now! It says about the quartz ext. issue that any 2x agp with 32Mb of vram will work!

Interestingly enough, it also says that this is needed for optimal performance. (maybe this means that not everything on the screen will be able to be drawn in the gpu, but some of it?)</STRONG>

Actually, it said ANY RADEON Required for Quartz Extreme. 32MB RECOMENDED, how many times do I have to tell you guys?

[dividend]

ok, I didn't see that it said 32 mb RECOMMENDED, so I am still hoping, and besides, no idea to complain until it is released, of course. Things might change, to the better or the worse.

OS X 10.1 works fine on my supercomputer 550 mhz Ti-machine? When I minimise or open a window to/from the dock, it sometimes gets "stuck" in between for a few SECONDS . What do you think non-mac users say when they see a genie-effect paused in the middle. pretty? Scrolling a folder in column view with more than 10 folders/files makes the finder stop and think (?) for a some two seconds.

Changing programmes thru the dock can sometimes take 10 seconds.

iDisk is slow, we know that already

Surfing is considerably slower than with x86-machines

is this supercomputer performance?

I am still hoping for better performance.

[ 05-06-2002: Message edited by: dividend ]

[bobloblaw]

Originally posted by Norm1985:
<STRONG>

Actually, it said ANY RADEON Required for Quartz Extreme. 32MB RECOMENDED, how many times do I have to tell you guys?</STRONG>

actually look at the bottom of apple's jaguar page buddy:
*nVidia: GeForce2MX, GeForce3, GeForce4 Ti, GeForce4 or GeForce4MX. ATI: any AGP Radeon card. 32MB VRAM recommended for OPTIMUM performance.

see that word optimum, that is what I was referring to.

[Sophus]

Originally posted by pat++:
<STRONG>grrrrrrrr </STRONG>

My oh my!
I have never seen such frantic confusion on any board in my whole life!!

Rejoice those who have a supported graphics card (me too).
To those left out, I feel sorry for you. But, come on, cheer up, OSX 10.2 will surely be much much faster on your older hardware than 10.1 is today. The update will be very good for all of us.

Sophus