Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

quagmire

macrumors 604
Apr 19, 2004
6,910
2,338
I too am a fan of Bertrand Serlet. I thought 10.6 was the amazing OS for the time of its release. I had a top of the MBP and added 8 GB (a lot for the time - I think we spent nearly a grand on the memory) and ran 10.6 doing some heavy development projects. 10.6 just screamed. It was just a well-tuned, solid, extremely efficient OS.

-P

Yeah we need another Snow Leopard like release. No new features, just a clean out the bloat and streamline everything. And if OS X continues to be free, don't think it will be an issue with users.
 

stefan200

macrumors newbie
Mar 28, 2014
2
0
weird thing with displays
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-03-28 at 21.22.52.png
    Screen Shot 2014-03-28 at 21.22.52.png
    620.8 KB · Views: 445

Pentad

macrumors 6502a
Nov 26, 2003
986
99
Indiana
Also, I don't see why people like to moan about how great 10.5 was... It made OSX considerably heavier to run (bye bye everything but the really last of the G4 machines and G5's) and had a ton of bugs. I personally like to call it Apple's Vista considering that disaster was pretty recent at the time. Sure, 10.6 fixed a lot of things, but I still consider it a massive service pack as reflected by the now much lower price.

I disagree. I felt 10.5 and especially 10.6 really completed the Intel transition and helped mature the OS on the new CPU platform. 10.6 was deemed an 'under the hood' release and boy was it.

10.6 brought so many core OS features Intel native that help to show how much more performance the Intel chips had when running native code.

-P
 

Kariya

macrumors 68000
Nov 3, 2010
1,820
10
It's been a bad sign, for me and many others. Before 10.7, OS X 10.X development varied between 1 ½ to 2 ½ years with biweekly or weekly releases that required downloading a .dmg from the developer site, burning the image to a DVD, wiping the system and installing a "clean" OS. This allowed for improved debugging by eliminating any possible third party app "contamination" (10.7+ releases have proved difficult to properly isolate any system matters), and allowed Apple more time to "get it right" before release. Of course not all 10.X first releases were stellar, but they were far better than the current annual release cycle to match iOS. There is no need to rush out annual OS overhauls, especially as we're just on 10.9.3 beta. By the time iOS is released it may be .5 or .6.

Personally, while Craig Federighi is an excellent engineer, nothing beats the work Bertrand Serlet did while SVP of OS X engineering. I still believe 10.5/6 are the best OS X releases to date (and before the "Serlet was involved with 10.7, he was not, he was already on his way out the door to Parallels 2009-2010, 10.7 was all Federighi).

Every OS X update since Snow Leopard its the same complaint from you. You sound like a broken record. Bertrand is gone. He's been gone for years now. And he's not coming back. Federighi worked under Bertrand too and i doubt he was twiddling his thumbs throughout that period.

People only tend to remember the good things of the past. Snow Leopard and even worse Leopard were far from perfect

Mavericks is a very solid OS...even more so since 10.9.2. And in my opinion, is superior to 10.5/10.6 overall.
 
Last edited:

iBug2

macrumors 601
Jun 12, 2005
4,531
851
It's been a bad sign, for me and many others. Before 10.7, OS X 10.X development varied between 1 ½ to 2 ½ years with biweekly or weekly releases that required downloading a .dmg from the developer site, burning the image to a DVD, wiping the system and installing a "clean" OS. This allowed for improved debugging by eliminating any possible third party app "contamination" (10.7+ releases have proved difficult to properly isolate any system matters), and allowed Apple more time to "get it right" before release.

If you are testing a beta, and want to have a clean OS at every release, just reinstall 10.9.0 and then update to the beta. This way you don't have to download an entire 5 GB DVD image every time. It's much better.

----------

I disagree. I felt 10.5 and especially 10.6 really completed the Intel transition and helped mature the OS on the new CPU platform. 10.6 was deemed an 'under the hood' release and boy was it.

10.6 brought so many core OS features Intel native that help to show how much more performance the Intel chips had when running native code.

-P

Yet 10.6 was the first OS release where Finder started getting slower. They added tons of animations which weren't really needed so now we can actually see windows opening and closing, which eats away little by little from our time. Browsing windows with thousands of files in them got a lot slower as well. Before 10.6 I could open two windows side by side, browse items in each of them really fast and then drag and drop thousands from one to the other instantly. Now I have to wait for those operations. I understand that Finder does a lot more today than back then but still, things got slower instead of faster.
 

throttlemeister

macrumors 6502a
Mar 31, 2009
550
63
Netherlands
Installed for like 2 hours and filed the first bug report already. Mail screws up its signatures again. Previous version would leave the old signature in place when switching accounts, this time it forgets all signatures assigned to accounts whenever you reboot.
 

3282868

macrumors 603
Jan 8, 2009
5,281
0
You can go on about that like you usually do until the cows come home, but the reality is that you don't design things like Operating Systems in the fashion that you ship a version and then have a meeting where you decide on what you're going to work on in the next version.

Instead you have long range plans that go for years ahead. When one version ships, the feature set for the next one is pretty much locked at that point. If you worked on one version up until launch or close to it, you've generally been part of planning the one after that as well as whatever comes after that. Just go read up some Apple history and you'll see that that's the way they plan OS development.

Also, I don't see why people like to moan about how great 10.5 was... It made OSX considerably heavier to run (bye bye everything but the really last of the G4 machines and G5's) and had a ton of bugs. I personally like to call it Apple's Vista considering that disaster was pretty recent at the time. Sure, 10.6 fixed a lot of things, but I still consider it a massive service pack as reflected by the now much lower price.

Seems you're referencing statements I never made while assuming I have no knowledge of how in-house OS development is planned and executed. Still doesn't change the reality that Serlet did a much better job engineering OS X than current development, and I've been developing with OS X for well over a decade. You know what that say about assumptions ;).

As for 10.6, seems your "opinion" isn't as popular as you suggest. Try not to be so sarcastic, Joe. (see what I did there :) )

By the way, suggesting Apple lowered OS X pricing because it, in your opinion, was bloated and sluggish, makes very little sense. Following that logic, the free 10.9 Mavericks update must be pretty horrible.
----------

Every OS X update since Snow Leopard its the same complaint from you. You sound like a broken record. Bertrand is gone. He's been gone for years now. And he's not coming back. Federighi worked under Bertrand too and i doubt he was twiddling his thumbs throughout that period.

Don't like it, don't read it, and you're dead wrong on Federighi. Serlet had nothing to do with 10.7. Before you rudely address someone, educate yourself and try to be a bit more mature, it will open more doors for you. :)

----------

I too am a fan of Bertrand Serlet. I thought 10.6 was the amazing OS for the time of its release. I had a top of the MBP and added 8 GB (a lot for the time - I think we spent nearly a grand on the memory) and ran 10.6 doing some heavy development projects. 10.6 just screamed. It was just a well-tuned, solid, extremely efficient OS.

-P

Exactly!
 
Last edited:

Mac.User

macrumors 6502
Aug 25, 2013
348
6
Anyone else's 15in Retina now say the resolution is 3360x2100?
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2014-03-28 at 11.34.25 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2014-03-28 at 11.34.25 PM.png
    66 KB · Views: 92

Mac.User

macrumors 6502
Aug 25, 2013
348
6
It looks like they took out the amount of memory used by the GPU. And they left out an extra space as you can see:

The system report app still shows the amount of memory used though, and it takes up 1.5GB of system memory, like with the previous build.

Weird resolution.
 

spaz8

macrumors 6502
Mar 3, 2007
492
91
I hope 10.9.3 fixes:

Sleep/Wake up mode is still wonky in 10.9.2 and after the Firmware update to the nMP.. my MP 1,1 on 10.6.8 acts how I would expect. I have to have a convulsion with the mouse, or drag to a sleep corner to get the nMP to tell the monitors to power up.

Internet/Wifi is flaky, range is good (better), but speed and disconnecting is not, maybe just a nMP issue.

Better Graphics drivers, again my D700 runs 80%? faster under windows, please close that gap considerably.

Performance using a TB to FW800 cable to bring over data from an old drive, FW800 seems much faster on the MP 1,1 in 10.6.8, maybe just a nMP issue.
 

maflynn

macrumors Haswell
May 3, 2009
73,478
43,405
[MOD NOTE]
Please stay on topic, this thread is not about the OSX branding, or about Snow Leopard or any prior version of OSX. Its about the new 10.9.3 build and as such please discuss that.
 

mfvisuals

macrumors regular
Sep 9, 2009
193
71
SacTown, CA
Still waiting for working GMail....

Be nice to check my iPhone's GMail account, and then when I go to my iMac have my mail actually be read there, too. You know, like IMAP should work? Used to work just fine in Mountain Lion, so not sure what Apple changed to have it not work in Mavericks, despite whatever non-standard IMAP implementation Google uses.

Please, Apple. Think of the children.

That isn't going to be fixed by an OS update.

I'm able to do the same thing successfully on my Mac running OS X 10.9.2, as are all of my peers.

I think you may need to do some troubleshooting there...
 

Irishman

macrumors 68040
Nov 2, 2006
3,392
843
Has the version number of OpenGL changed in recent builds of 10.9.3? Or is it still at 4.1?
 

WallToWallMacs

macrumors regular
Jan 26, 2014
166
0
Has the version number of OpenGL changed in recent builds of 10.9.3? Or is it still at 4.1?

I doubt we'll see anything more than maybe a few extra extensions. Hopefully OpenGL 4.4 will appear in the new release as it has harmonised OpenGL ES 3.0 and OpenGL 4.4 which should make targeting both platforms easier for games developers. I really do hope they focus on getting the SMB2 issues under control or just go back to AFP and provide an AFP server for Windows Server because right now after hearing all the horror stories I might as well stick to an external hard disk because of the issues I would face if I had an NAS.

Has anyone run benchmarks on the updated video card drivers?
 

WilliamG

macrumors G3
Mar 29, 2008
9,924
3,800
Seattle
That isn't going to be fixed by an OS update.

I'm able to do the same thing successfully on my Mac running OS X 10.9.2, as are all of my peers.

I think you may need to do some troubleshooting there...

My father has the same issue on his 2009 iMac, and one of my friends has the same issue on his 2011 MacBook Pro. Drives us all crazy.
 

zeiter

macrumors 6502
Jan 19, 2008
384
3
Canada
Could someone check if it fixes the problem with external monitors connected with minidisplayport to displayport where they are either recognized as televisions or the signal sent is not RGB? Especially Dell's.

Thank you very much.
 

chrfr

macrumors G5
Jul 11, 2009
13,520
7,043
Could someone check if it fixes the problem with external monitors connected with minidisplayport to displayport where they are either recognized as televisions or the signal sent is not RGB? Especially Dell's.

Thank you very much.

I use a Dell display connected from the Thunderbolt port to displayport and don't see this problem in 10.9.2, can you provide more detail as to your setup?
 

lemonade-maker

macrumors 6502
Jun 20, 2009
497
4
Could someone check if it fixes the problem with external monitors connected with minidisplayport to displayport where they are either recognized as televisions or the signal sent is not RGB? Especially Dell's.

Thank you very much.

It does not fix the problem. Also, a problem with dvi only 2560x1440 monitors using apple's dvi-d to MDP adapter not being recognized at all on a new Mac pro still persists. This problem has existed since early 10.9.2 betas and was confirmed by apple engineers when it was released. Wish they'd fix it. Bug reports and phone conversations has had no traction.
 

klogg

macrumors member
Oct 17, 2012
64
2
So what is the latency with logic 9 or X on core audio driver now? Is it still very high on late 2013 rmbp's?
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.