OSX 10.2.4 massive slowdown over 10.2.3 and other major issues
Wonderkid
Warning: This is a very angrily written posting
Right, I have had enough of the hype over OSX, which has since it's
launch, managed to slow down the Macintoshes of myself, my friends and
family. However, at this point, I speak for myself. I own a fully
functional 500Mhz Titanium G4 Powerbook with 384Meg RAM and a 20Gig
hard drive, of which, I still have about 6gig remaining.
About a week ago, I upgraded to 10.2.4. While OSX has always been
sluggish in comparison to OS9, 10.2.4 is a disaster, and I am keen to
hear from others who have experienced some or all of the problems I
list below AND from those who know how to fix them. I am very happy
with my Powerbook and have NO intention of buying a new machine simply
because of flaws in an upgrade. I know from the amazing speed of most
of the 3D games I have on this machine that it is MORE than capable of
running my applications and OS without any trouble. Is it possible
Apple have knobbled OS 10.2.4 to force people to upgrade to faster
machines?
1) Everything is twice to three times as slow than in 10.2.3. It is as
if I am using a 200Mhz machine. This is no exaggeration by the way.
2) Even after connecting my external 20gig LaCie Firewire drive, there
is a delay of between 30 seconds to a minute before it appears on the
desktop. And then, copying files is much slower than before.
3) Within applications (in particular the appallingly designed and
written Dreamweaver), there are delays before icons and buttons
respond, such as the Connect button that links you to your server.
Window dragging is sluggish and sometimes, dragging a window has no
effect, or the window suddenly jumps across the screen - pretty common
with Real Player One.
4) Now for something different, but as serious. Before installing
10.2.3, I backedup my Powerbook hard drive and performed a clean
install of 10.2.3. I recovered my backup to the Powerbook and ran
iPhoto to view my 400 or so photos, including some of good friends. To
my horror, about 95% of the photos were missing. I scanned the hard
drive (Library folders included) and cannot find them - on the backup
or on the Powerbook drive. I phoned Apple who wanted me to pay £35 per
question, so I hung up. (Pathetic isn't it?) Any ideas?
SO
I do not want to hear back from people saying this is my configuration
or from those defending Apple. There is NO other company that gets to
much press from defenders of the crown, and such one sidedness does
the company no favors at all. I have no weird plugins or utilities and
have 12 years Mac experience. I have a product that I spent thousands
on, my software is paid for, and it should work properly. But it
doesn't. (My PowerBook has an all new logic board and display, and
from a hardware angle, is perfect and reliable. A major contrast to
the software.)
I want to hear from those who have the same problem and know how to
fix it, and if there is no way to fix it (without somehow going back
to 10.2.3), there needs to be a major letter writing campaign to
Apple. I am fedup of the hype. What a contrast to my Sony Clie PEG
S300 that even after many years, has never crashed, works flawlessly
and does it's job.
CONTACTING ME
a l e x @ o w o n d e r . c o m
(I will not read rude replies. Am only interested in hearing from
those sympathetic and able to help. And do NOT reply to this posting
online, I won't read it.)
Thanks!
Robert Wilson
beautifully, in fact I have tried out some of the latest models at John
Lewis and they don't seem to run any faster!
I upgraded to 10.2.4. and found that my external DSL modem no longer
worked. I had to change back to 10.2.3. - but within a few days the
modem manufactureres had written a new driver so I re-installed it and I
have no complaints at all.
I like OSX - it's such an improvement where stability is concerned, there
are no extension conflicts, no control panels, no setting memory
allocations. Whilst I agree it is still a work in progress I think it is
getting better and better.
Bob.
Bryan Oakley
> In article <bbec26f6.0302...@posting.google.com>,
> goo...@owonder.com (Wonderkid) wrote:
>
>
>>OSX 10.2.4 massive slowdown over 10.2.3 and other major issues
>
>
How do you know that? Have you actually used this person's machine?
In my experience, people rarely report serious problems with their
machines unless they are actually experiencing serious problems with
their machines. Yes, there are exceptions, but I'd wager this isn't one
of them.
>
>
>>Warning: This is a very angrily written posting
>
>
> And moronic to boot.
Though, judged in a contest, I'm sure the original post would score a
distant second to yours.
I wish I had advice for the original poster, but I've not upgraded to
10.2.4 myself. I tend to wait for the dust to settle, and it does indeed
appear that this update has some issues (at least, according to some of
the anecdotal evidence on Macintouch and this newsgroup). This is the
first I've heard of a "massive slowdown", so I tend to think this is an
isolated incident.
Have you tried running the process viewer to see if there's a process
chewing up lots of CPU time, dragging the rest of the system to a crawl?
It appears that for "most" 10.2.4 upgrades there is no massive slowdown,
so undoubtedly it is something unique to your system. It could be a
coincidental hardware failure, a bad spot on the disk where the swap
file is, a serious disk fragmentation issue, or any number of other things.
Jerry Stratton
> machines?
No, they knobbled OS 10.2.4 to force people to buy 300 MHz beige G3s. I
know this for a fact because I've seen 300 MHz beige G3s run OS 10.2.4
just fine. This is in no way an exaggeration by the way.
> 1) Everything is twice to three times as slow than in 10.2.3. It is as
> if I am using a 200Mhz machine. This is no exaggeration by the way.
Of course it's an exaggeration. What the heck is "twice to three times
as slow"? Do you have a "slowness rating" for your computers? "Gee, my
Titanium was 3.5 Gomers slow, now that I've upgraded to 10.2.4 it's 9.3
Gomers. Hoody Hoo!"
Give some examples of things that take two to three times as long
(assuming that's what you meant) in 10.2.4 as opposed to 10.2.3. You
know, like "it takes 10 seconds to perform this excel calculation
(giving the calculation) in 10.2.3, and it takes 28 seconds in 10.2.4."
Jerry
Tony Lawrence
: I wish I had advice for the original poster, but I've not upgraded to
: 10.2.4 myself. I tend to wait for the dust to settle, and it does indeed
: appear that this update has some issues (at least, according to some of
: the anecdotal evidence on Macintouch and this newsgroup). This is the
: first I've heard of a "massive slowdown", so I tend to think this is an
: isolated incident.
Well, I have, and it seems no different to me. One thing I did notice is
that he has 384MB of memory - that's not much, and I wonder whether he is
slow because of excessive paging..
--
to...@aplawrence.com
Unix/Linux resources: http://aplawrence.com
Inexpensive phone/email support
Download Free Linux Skills Test: http://pcunix.com/skilltests.html
Ray Fischer
>Right, I have had enough of the hype over OSX, which has since it's
>launch, managed to slow down the Macintoshes of myself, my friends and
>family. However, at this point, I speak for myself. I own a fully
>functional 500Mhz Titanium G4 Powerbook with 384Meg RAM and a 20Gig
>hard drive, of which, I still have about 6gig remaining.
>
>About a week ago, I upgraded to 10.2.4. While OSX has always been
>sluggish in comparison to OS9, 10.2.4 is a disaster, and I am keen to
>hear from others who have experienced some or all of the problems I
>list below AND from those who know how to fix them.
I installed 10.2.4 and noticed no change in speed at all.
[...]
>1) Everything is twice to three times as slow than in 10.2.3. It is as
>if I am using a 200Mhz machine. This is no exaggeration by the way.
Then there is something wrong with _your_ Mac, and not with 10.2.4.
I suggest that you run Disk Utikity and have it fix permissions
under the First Aid tab.
>2) Even after connecting my external 20gig LaCie Firewire drive, there
>is a delay of between 30 seconds to a minute before it appears on the
>desktop. And then, copying files is much slower than before.
Many people make the mistake of simply unplugging a portable
firewire drive instead of first unmounting it. When that happens
Mac OS first has to check the disk and repair any problems. That
can take 30 seconds.
>3) Within applications (in particular the appallingly designed and
>written Dreamweaver), there are delays before icons and buttons
>respond, such as the Connect button that links you to your server.
"Appallingly designed" might be a clue.
>4) Now for something different, but as serious. Before installing
>10.2.3, I backedup my Powerbook hard drive and performed a clean
>install of 10.2.3. I recovered my backup to the Powerbook and ran
>iPhoto to view my 400 or so photos, including some of good friends. To
>my horror, about 95% of the photos were missing. I scanned the hard
>drive (Library folders included) and cannot find them - on the backup
>or on the Powerbook drive. I phoned Apple who wanted me to pay £35 per
>question, so I hung up. (Pathetic isn't it?) Any ideas?
Copy them from your backup? Did you also upgrade from iPhoto 1?
Did you login with the same user id? Find files will not look
in the folders of other users, and if you created them with one account
you won't find them with a different account. Try looking manually
in the Users:Pictures folders.
--
Ray Fischer
rfis...@sonic.net
Larry Fransson
> OSX 10.2.4 massive slowdown over 10.2.3 and other major issues
>
> Warning: This is a very angrily written posting
Advice: Chill out some before you write next time.
> Is it possible
> Apple have knobbled OS 10.2.4 to force people to upgrade to faster
> machines?
Anything is possible. Very little is likely. Conspiracy theories
generally don't add to a person's credibility.
> I do not want to hear back from people saying this is my configuration
> or from those defending Apple.
No, no. Anything but your point of view would be pointless, wouldn't it?
> I want to hear from those who have the same problem and know how to
> fix it....
I've found that any time there is a major slowdown, it's related to a
rogue process hogging a lot of processor time. Do you ever run any
applications in Classic? I've had Classic (the process name is
"TrueBlueEnvironment") take off and hog a whole lot of processor time a
couple of times when it should have been sitting relatively idle since I
didn't have any Classic applications running at the time. Stopping
Classic fixed the problem. I've generally had to force quit Classic in
those cases because Classic was too busy to be interrupted by a normal
shutdown.
Beyond that, 10.2.4 seems no slower than any previous version.
--
Larry Fransson
Seattle, WA
Bryan Oakley
> Bryan Oakley <br...@bitmover.com> wrote:
>
> : I wish I had advice for the original poster, but I've not upgraded to
> : 10.2.4 myself. I tend to wait for the dust to settle, and it does indeed
> : appear that this update has some issues (at least, according to some of
> : the anecdotal evidence on Macintouch and this newsgroup). This is the
> : first I've heard of a "massive slowdown", so I tend to think this is an
> : isolated incident.
>
> Well, I have, and it seems no different to me. One thing I did notice is
> that he has 384MB of memory - that's not much, and I wonder whether he is
> slow because of excessive paging..
That was my first thought, but I assumed that 10.2.4's paging scheme
hadn't changed. You'd think if it was strictly a paging issue it would
have shown up before the upgrade. Stranger things have happened with
upgrades though -- sometimes seemingly innocent changes can expose
unusual edge cases.
Bryan Oakley
> In article <2tN5a.2147$ha6.43...@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com>,
> Bryan Oakley <br...@bitmover.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Enough wrote:
>>
>>>In article <bbec26f6.0302...@posting.google.com>,
>>> goo...@owonder.com (Wonderkid) wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>OSX 10.2.4 massive slowdown over 10.2.3 and other major issues
>>>
>>>
>>>Bulshit.
>>
>>How do you know that? Have you actually used this person's machine?
>
>
> Therefore you have no horse in this race.
But the issue isn't my machine, it's the original poster. I make no
claims that 10.2.4 is slower or faster, merely that it's entirely
possible that the original poster's machine could in fact be slower
immediately after the upgrade. Upgrades have been known to do worse no
matter what the vendor.
>
> BTW, it is smells like a troll, it is,
It didn't smell like a troll to me. Smelled more like someone frustrated
with his computer. I'm sure you didn't truly believe it was a troll
either, because anyone with any amount of USENET experience at all knows
the best response to a troll is silence rather than insults, since
insults are what trolls are typically trolling for.
> moron.
>
That was pretty lame. If you're trying to show your superiority you need
to take a different tack. A well-done insult may occassionally stop a
discussion, and perhaps illustrate a particularly adroit command of the
language. Lame insults, however, are just... well... lame.
Mike Hutchison
> OSX 10.2.4 massive slowdown over 10.2.3 and other major issues
Then you must be one of a few band of people that have this problem.
Slowdowns in OS X is often related to a number of things:
1) Slow graphix card. Not in your case I think.
2) Hard disk corruption, run Disk First Aid from the System CD and fix all
errors it finds. Even run it again, to make sure all is OK. Or use a
commercial disk repair program, eg. Norton v6-7 (make sure it is up-to-date
with LiveUpdate), Diskwarrior, Drive10 or Techtool Pro.
3) Incompatible software. Make absolutely certain that all shareware and
commercial utilities and system enhancers are updated.
4) USB devices can reek havoc with OS 10.2x, so disconnect all devices before
updating or installing OS X.
If none of the above works or applies, then I suggest you go back to 10.2.3,
which means a reinstall. Sorry!
--
Regards,
Micheal Hutchison
Email: Mad...@graphixmad.plus.com
Mac-Troubleshooter+OE FAQ: www.graphixmad.plus.com
Tony Lawrence
Kernels do grow now and then. I really haven't noticed any difference, but
I do manage to get this poor maxed out Ibook paging heavily fairly often. It
doesn't take much: a few browsers open (I try to use Safari where
I can, but regularly seem to need IE still), 3 terminal windows (one local, one for my web site, another for news) and Mail.app seems to be able to eat up
the 640 MB pretty easily..
Jerry Stratton
Bryan Oakley <br...@bitmover.com> wrote:
> But the issue isn't my machine, it's the original poster. I make no
> claims that 10.2.4 is slower or faster, merely that it's entirely
> possible that the original poster's machine could in fact be slower
> immediately after the upgrade. Upgrades have been known to do worse no
> matter what the vendor.
Well, technically, the original poster's machine *can't* be as slow as
claimed. "Two to three times slower" would be going backwards at the
same speed or twice as fast as it was originally going. That'd be an
interesting trick. :*)
Unless there really is a "slowness rating" for computers that I haven't
seen yet.
Jerry
Jim Glidewell
> a l e x @ o w o n d e r . c o m
> (I will not read rude replies. Am only interested in hearing from
> those sympathetic and able to help. And do NOT reply to this posting
> online, I won't read it.)
Nevermind, then.
--
Jim Glidewell
My opinions only
Mike Rosenberg
> CONTACTING ME
> a l e x @ o w o n d e r . c o m
> (I will not read rude replies. Am only interested in hearing from
> those sympathetic and able to help. And do NOT reply to this posting
> online, I won't read it.)
1. How can you not read rude replies when you have to read the reply
first to determine if it's rude?
2. Do not reply online? You don't understand the concept of Usenet.
3. You really think someone should have to copy and paste your email
address and then edit out all the spaces?
Of course, you won't be seeing this response. Good thing, too, since
I'd say it qualifies as borderline rude.
--
Mike Rosenberg
Andreas Hollmann
> It's curious, I have a fairly old G4 tower 400mh and OSX runs
> beautifully, in fact I have tried out some of the latest models at John
> Lewis and they don't seem to run any faster!
I made the same experience. I have a Quicksilver G4/800 and when I
installed OSX on a Blue/White G3/400, I expected that this must be much
slower - but it wasn't.
A friend has a 2x1.25 GHz G4 and it makes no difference, too.
Andreas
--
funktionsorientierte webseiten und druckvorlagen
www.andreas-hollmann.de | in...@andreas-hollmann.de
---------------------------------------------------------------------
e-mail an mich? beachten sie: www.andreas-hollmann.de/netiquette.html
Karl von Laudermann
mi...@POSTTOGROUP.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:
> Wonderkid <goo...@owonder.com> wrote:
>
> > CONTACTING ME
> > a l e x @ o w o n d e r . c o m
> > (I will not read rude replies. Am only interested in hearing from
> > those sympathetic and able to help. And do NOT reply to this posting
> > online, I won't read it.)
>
> 2. Do not reply online? You don't understand the concept of Usenet.
Isn't email "online" as well? Maybe he wants a hand-written letter
snail-mailed to him. :-)
--
-- Karl J. von Laudermann -- karlvonl(at)rcn.com --
-- <http://www.geocities.com/~karlvonl/> --