[headbirth]

Pismo Users, what OS X version are you using and find stable on your system?

[stevesnj]

Originally posted by headbirth:
Pismo Users, what OS X version are you using and find stable on your system?

I've been using OS x 10.2.6...find it very stable but in conjunction with the specs below has helped it run even better.

[Fyre4ce]

9.2 baby

[neutrino23]

I'm running a Pismo 500 with 256 MB memory and a 40GB Toshiba drive 4500RPM with OS X 10.2.6. It runs OK. It would be too slow for me as my primary work machine, but is adequate for travelling for a couple weeks at a time.

It is quite stable for me.

I'll sell this when the next 15" PB comes out and buy that. If I were to keep it I'd add more memory and the fastest HD I could find that had liquid bearings. I've gone through several hard drives in different laptops and have found that HDs with liquid bearings don't develop the annoying whine that other HDs do.

[ASIMO]

Originally posted by Fyre4ce:
9.2 baby

What the hell? 10.9.2? Sent back from the future?

Anyhow, 10.2.6 here on a 400Mhz and 320MB. Stable? For the most part. But I must say that I have had three kernel panics (not sure of the cause(s)) within the past two weeks; this, after having absolutely zero since 10.1.whatever. Other than the kernel panics, nothing else usual.

[bmhome1]

10.2.6 on 400 with 1GB RAM (highly recommended for OSX performance with Pismo).

Be aware there are problems with OSX versions after 10.2.3 with PC card insertions and expansion bay device insertions with PowerBooks. This OS will lock up (cursor movement only) for up to 5 full minutes until device mounts. Sometimes a forced (power button only option) shut down needed with fsck repairs in single user mode to clean up errors. Widely reported for many Powerbook users. I've stopped using PC card CF adaptors until next revision, its too much trouble.

[version]

Pismo 400 with 768 mb ram, and a 40gig HD. Running 10.2.6, and it's fast enough for me. I've tried Panther and it is much faster than Jag.

The extra ram and drive space really makes a difference.

[angelmb]

Mac OS 9.2.1 and Mac OS X 10.2.5, Pismo 500, 1 GB RAM, original 12 GB hard disk.

My capsure pc card does not work under Mac OS X.

[Lateralus]

Running 10.2.6 on this baby.

It's zippy enough for me. I also have the system running 10.3 on a seperate partitiion, and it is... noticeably faster.

[headbirth]

So 10.3 runs fast on a PISMO! That's great news.

Thanks for the input guys. I was having trouble with 10.2.4-.6 and decided to go back to 10.2.1. Shortly after that I discovered that my hard drive was on it's way out and replaced it. Now I'm wondering if my problems with the newer versions of X were drive related.

10.2.1 is stable for me but still has those bugs the newer versions have fixed.

I might just wait for 10.3 then.

[poocat]

another vote for 10.2.6.

but man, has my battery been messed lately... it's sitting at three percent... dunno why, but i don't like it... i've tried mad resets and everything... and this is a new (less than 1 year old) battery... not the original one. i wish i could figure that out. otherwise i love this baby.

pc.

[cdhostage]

NOTHING! Becuase it's at Powerlogix HAHAHAHAHAHA 900 megahertz G3 coming MY WAY.


...


10.2.6

[Timo]

500 Mhz Pismo running 10.2.6, nicely.

[bmhome1]

Check the open firmware reset tip discussion for reviving Powerbook batteries over at MacInTouch.com very recently.

[zos]

10.2.6 is my OS. I get a lot of spinning cursors, but otherwise it's fast enough and very stable. I'm really looking forward to Panther now...

[darkmatter]

10.2.6

Window Manager and many Open Source Applications with latest version of KDE. My Pismo has only 128 Mb RAM and old HD

Regards
Darkmatter

[fisherKing]

pismo 400 with 768ram, 20g 5400rpm hd...
and 10.2.6.

mostly i love it but it IS a bit sluggish.
sometimes i run it in thousands of colors, helps some apps.

stable as can be!

[mpbritt]

I'm running Mac OS X v.10.2.6 exlusively. I've found all versions of OS X since 10.1 to be rock solid stable, but YMMV.

Pismo 400 Mhz, 512MB, 30 GB.
Michael

[BigMark]

G3 500MHz running 10.2.6

Never had a single crash/kernel panic, and all my PC cards work fine- never had a problem.

[DigitalEl]

I ran 10.2.6 on my 500 MHz Pismo and it was silkier than on my current 12" PowerBook, thanks to a full gig of RAM.

Edit: Wow. That post gave me my fifth star. Cool. I know. Nobody cares.

[jguidroz]

10.2.6

[PowerBookPismo]

Originally posted by ASIMO:
What the hell? 10.9.2? Sent back from the future?

No, he really means Mac OS 9.2.

[Moderator]

10.1.5 still...don't feel compelled to go to Jaguar at all (well maybe for Safari). I've used it on other machines and it just doesn't feel significantly different to me. Anyway I haven't crashed in months and months.

I remember the old <X days when I'd restart 4 or 5 times a day. Can't believe I stood for that sh*t.

Anyway I'll wait for Panther

On a Pismo 500 512MB

[[APi]TheMan]

Originally posted by cdhostage:
NOTHING! Becuase it's at Powerlogix HAHAHAHAHAHA 900 megahertz G3 coming MY WAY.

Oh damn you, cdhostage! I was scrolling down this thread hoping to be the only one preparing to post about my lovely 900 mhz Pismo and how it runs 10.2.6 so well... drats. At least I have mine already

I got my Powerlogix upgrade about 2 months ago and I love it. Very worth it, by the way.

My machine runs 10.2.6 and 10.3... but performance-wise I think 10.2.6 > 10.3 right now.

[poocat]

i seriously don't believe anyone's still on 10.1.
i mean, now i guess it's all the same, since 10.3 will be out soon enough...

but wow.

what a difference.

and i've tried the macintouch battery suggestions... any others would be welcome.

poocat.

[quietjim]

I've found 10.2.6 very stable. I have the usual problems with the Sony PCMIA card and inserting things in the expansion bay but I can live with that.

thinking about getting a 40G drive...how much difference would I feel between the 40G and 40GX?

[hsr]

10.2.6.

Bought it as a 400, put in a 500 mhz CPU recently, noticeably faster.

Spinning rainbow cursor --> MemoryStick! Watch, and you'll see the "inactive" memory slowly creep up. Watch "Top" and you'll notice that you're down to about 40 or 50 megs of free RAM when the spinning rainbow takes over. I've seen it down to 12.5 megs free.
and also ----> MacJanitor (but not Jaguar Cache Cleaner, for no reason I can imagine) **will, if you run the daily/weekly/monthly cleanup scripts, release the "inactive" memory.** I run the same scripts using JCC and MemoryStick and Top still shows a vast chunk as inactive, and whatever app developed the spinning rainbow is still stuck with it, won't disappear if force quit, and eventually the whole machine has to be power cycled and fscked.

This is with the swap files on either the boot drive, a different partition, or an external firewire drive, and 20 percent free on the internal (60-meg Toshiba) hard drive [8mg cache, fluid bearings, nice! but I want an 80-meg Hitachi now...].

Before I learned about MemoryStick, I'd get the spinning rainbow, sometimes it'd still be there hours later -- power cycle and immediately fsck to fix the orphaned temp fragments left behind or it gets worse and worse.

Jaguar Cache Cleaner does also help -- I have to run it whenever I start getting "Malloc" errors and unexpected quits, about once a week (or any day I use the machine more than a few hours at a time, whatever that may mean). Running every utility and deleting caches wholesale fixes the unexpected quits for a few days or a week, then they come back as a sudden flurry.

Temp stayedlow, never heard the fan with 400 mhz, a few times with the 500; but I've always controlled heat because the Pismo sits on a nice thick aluminum oven baking tray that conducts heat away. When it sat on a wood desk it'd make the wood very hot. Laptop? No way.

Never has been able to copy a music CD, from the internal or external CD-R to the hard drive, without adding pops and dropouts in the file, and I"ve tried everything. No help from AppleCare on that, it's had five trips in its first two years before I gave up hope. And writing to an external CD writer adds even more noise, at least one nasty glitch in any full length classical CD I try to back up. I'd had big hopes of backing up a large music collection. No joy.