Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Which version of OSX to use?  (Read 7603 times)

Description:

0 Members and 7 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline save2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: us
    • Show all replies
Re: Which version of OSX to use?
« on: April 15, 2009, 03:04:07 AM »
As spoken about in another thread recently, I was disappointed going from 10.4 to 10.5. I have a 2.1ghz G5 and noticed slowdown in everyday usage in 10.5's performance. There are a few major annoyances, such as how the Finder takes "forever" to load and it seems that the the OS loads and hogs more resources for stuff you normally wouldn't use anyway. I've also noticed delays in typing in Safari as well. 10.5 just seems sluggish compared to the 10.4.

Never used TimeMachine either, and that may be a good program and all, but there are other backup schemes out there. HD failures are not common on a Mac like they are on a PeeCee of course too, so not sure if a backup program that's built into the OS would be a "must have" for me. In fact, I have never had a HD crash on a Mac system... knock on plastic and aluminum! lol

I currently run 10.5, but would like to go back to 10.4 someday. Oh - and that huge month tag that distracts from viewing iPhoto's thumbnails is annoying. I wish you could turn that off. There was also a few features taken away for unknown reasons from the latest iMovie/iDVD too that was mentioned and sorely missed by the editors at MacWorld that I cannot remember. Don't use them too much. All I know is that the iLife suite took a hit too performance wise, but of course - there may be positive tradeoffs... just can't think of any right now. All aspects of the computer seem slower with 10.5 on my system and I did a clean install too!

Oh and ditching classic support was really idiotic. I really like the flexibility of running OS9 type stuff and had a few programs which still used it. My favourite version of Photoshop for instance. I've since replaced it with CS4, but what the heck - it's only money, right?  :lol:

IMO - If you normally prefer stability and responsiveness to gimmicky bloat, you will be sorely disappointed in 10.5.

BTW: Anyone have any use for a boxed copy of 10.2?
 

Offline save2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: us
    • Show all replies
Re: Which version of OSX to use?
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2009, 03:06:51 AM »
Time Machine is a HD backup utility as easy as pie to use and setup is all. Your HD has got to be in good shape for it to work. It doesn't perform any other miracle other than restoring your software to a known 100% functional HD.

Quote

Tenacious wrote:
I'm gathering that Time Machine is a slick recovery program for a dying HD?

So far, the iSoftware has been lost on me.
 

Offline save2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: us
    • Show all replies
Re: Which version of OSX to use?
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2009, 05:51:33 AM »
@lofstudio:

No, I've never even heard of that. Thanks, I'll check into it tomorrow. I gave it a quick look and under the requirements, it said you needed a PPC ROM image or something like that. Where to get one of those? I'm not  really aware of a Mac underground scene at all.
 

Offline save2600

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Jul 2006
  • Posts: 3261
  • Country: us
    • Show all replies
Re: Which version of OSX to use?
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2009, 04:02:04 PM »
Thanks da9000, lots of good info there.

About the ram thing though and my observations. I wouldn't dream of complaining going from one computer to the other with different OS's. My observations are based on the same configuration. Just going from 10.4 to 10.5. My 2.1ghz iMac has 2.5gb of ram, so ram should not be an issue. That's plenty for what I use my machine for. And I'm not "spotlighting" while working either. lol  Tinkertool and I are old friends to be sure. What a great program. I'll have to look at those other recommendations of yours soon though.

Oh, one last point. I make the comment that PeeCee HD's fail more often than one used in a Mac because that has been my experience over the course of 25+ years. Yes, they may share the same technology now, but when you consider how the Mac's file system is so much different than the typical PeeCee's file system, I feel that comment IS more than substantiated. One only has to look at ScanDisk & defragging to understand Winblows is throwing data illogically all over the platter. That's a lot more wear and tear going on the entire mech of the HD compared to how the Mac reads/writes. Less wear and tear = reliability and fewer HD related problems. Again, in my experience.