I know there are a few Mac users here... Anyone running X? I just installed mine...mixed emotions. Graphics are very cool but almost impractical (good part is that u can tone it down to ur preference). It's a pain in the *** to have to run both 9.1 and X to use 3rd party software. I think I'm gonna throw it in the closet and wait till all the software is compatible. It's going to take a while to get used to this new format but I think It's all going to be worth it. I'm also a little disappointed with the loss of outlook. *Only a few glitches so far but that's expected(cut paste between aps, forms in explr)

All IMO

------------------
Matt
Black 2001
--Mods--(so far)
BedRug
Snug Lid
My Truck Pics: http://homepage.mac.com/lightningkid/PhotoAlbum.html


[This message has been edited by black2k1 (edited 04-10-2001).]

[This message has been edited by black2k1 (edited 04-10-2001).]

 

I plan on checking it out soon as I get enough RAM...the mach kernel is supposed to be a pretty nice UNIX.

Dan

 

I really like the way 9.1 is working for me. I can watch my DVDs, and I don't have to go out and buy a bunch of new apps. Maybe when it comes bundled on a G5.

------------------
I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy.

'84 Alan Record Carbonio, Aerospoke wheels, Campy brakes.

'00 SVT Lightning, silver, built 2/9/00, #133 of 4966, G-tech Pro, JBA headers, 4.10 gears, Swanson chip, Pro-M, NGK plugs, carbon drive shaft, Roadmaster suspension kit, TransGo shift kit,
13.39 @ 102.5

2001 Kevlacat 2400, twin 115 Evinrude FICHT, Raytheon VHF, radar, autopilot and GPS chartplotter/fishfinder.
http://www.zing.com/album/?id=429389...4647875&idx=15

gmvye@pacbell.net

 

MacOS X isn't ready for prime-time, but it is a *lot* more developed than the Public Beta was.

I first thought I would install X on my beige G3 333MHz minitower, but it doesn't support the Voodoo 5500 card (yeah, I know).

So then I installed it on my PowerBook G3 400MHz (Pismo), and by itself, X shows a lot of promise. Unfortunately, even after prebinding and optimizing MacOS X, it's slow compared to running native MacOS 9.1. Coupled with the slowdown is the fact that none of the apps that I use daily (especially MS PowerPoint 2001) are fully supported. Oh sure, the Classic environment works well enough, but the it doesn't provide the full functionality of the native MacOS 9.1 environment.

I still have it installed, it's great for show.

The good news, according to rumor & speculation, is that MacOS X 10.0.1 should be out soon to clean some things up. I am personally of the opinion that MacOS X isn't going to be all that great until closer to the end of the year when more of the mainstream apps get released for it. Ultimately, I'd like to wait for the PowerMac G5 with quad- quad-core 2GHz processors... *sigh*.

~rick

------------------
rcarino@mindspring.com
2000 SVT F-150 Lightning (hot red, of course)

 

What SpoonDog said.

 

Moving to General Discussion. Threads like this don't belong in the Lightning forum. The more off-topic messages that exist here, the more time it takes to search for relevant information.

Steve

 

I agree with your assesments. I will be waiting for the newer applications but it shows real promise. However I could not get my Kids DVD to play movies while it was on. I reverted back to 9.1 (which comes with it) and everything is smooth. But most of the upgrade features remained! Which was cool.

Everyone knows this is really a Linux OS under there don't they? It is real stable but so different that they couldn't intergrate it so you are left with running 9.1 as a "classic". And OS X if you want to. If you install OS X and don't like it just re-install 9.1 and it will return to 9.1. But with the some of the updated features of OS X. And yes, Linux and OS X is also a memory hog. But it will run fine with only half of the 128 megs it claims to be the minimum requirement.

 

Working on Mac computers as a graphic designer for over 5 years. I must tell people that Apple's attempt at beating Windows 2000 failed! MacOS 10 was a good idea but for some reason again, Apple decided to make the product more "markety" instead of the professional approach we are used to in MacOS versions prior to 9.1

It's supposed to have a Unix backbone, which in turn would make MacOS more reliable. After the release of the public beta, users have been let down to find out it isn’t as crash proof as it was expected to be! To make it worse MacOS 10 does not support multi processors to the full extent at this time. It is over a year late and still needs to be worked on!

As I said I worked on Macs as a graphic designer, which is mostly the use for over 80% of Power Macs sold! I never said however I liked working on the Apple brand of computers. I found it to be annoying when it would just freeze up on you during operations in PhotoShop or even in QuarkXPress! I also had the habit of running my Apple computers clean. Meaning no useless extensions such as speech, etc… I always gave the system chances.

All this changed with Windows 2000 Professional and the newer generation of Intel and AMD chips! Yes I switched to the bright side! I purchased all my professional software for the Windows platform and ever since I have no more headaches with crashes and lock ups! My computer has been running for almost 2 years now with Windows 2000 Pro and it crashed maybe 4 or 5 times since I installed it!

I say keep your money for some truck parts because OSX isn’t worth it! Maybe OSX Server if you’re into that but then again that’s another thing (I’d go with Cobalt hehe). And for my Windows users if you use your computer for work and no games then win 2k is the bomb! I have Windows XP beta to try out so keep an eye open for that sucker!

Take care

 

eph1fifity- Well put. But sorry to see you go to the dark side!
A also use my Macs for graphic design and publishing but I have not had many problems with 9.1. Even when I'm running Photoshop, Quark, and illustrator,(all the major memory hogs) I rarely have any problems.

I have only put X on my iMac, and its getting taken off today. I guess for someone who keeps there puter completely "stock" (no 3rd party apps), OS X is perfect. As eph1fifity said, Macs are mostly used by pros, not people who get their rocks off with all these new "cool" graphics. I want performance over looks and I'm sure most Mac users would agree. So after using X for few days now, it gets a D- (at best) from me. I have never owned a PC but I have used Windows on my old mac (((((years ago,what was the name of that??? All I remember was that it was ******ing expensive and I used it once)))))... I just don't like the feel of Windows.. and X feels like Windows, so its back to 9.1 for me!
Later.........

------------------
Matt
Black 2001
--Mods--(so far)
BedRug
Snug Lid
My Truck Pics: http://homepage.mac.com/lightningkid/PhotoAlbum.html

 

Eph.......you've hit it right on the head. As a hardcore PC freak, there is nothing more stable than Windows2K for reliability and performance. Surprisingly, it outperfroms Win98SE in gaming now that it has been updated with SP1 and Direct X 8a.

I played with a G4, OS 9.1 and OSX as part of a cross platform validation study I was doing with my job. Sorry.....but Macs are now the b!tches of the computing industry. There is literally nothing that a Mac can do that a Thunderbird or P4 can't outperform heavily in the Win2K or Whistler environments.

~Leans back and grins~

Ahhhhhh......it's good to be the King.