Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Seeds Two OS X Mavericks Preview 3 Bug Fixes
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
fatespawn
macrumors 6502
Ddyracer
macrumors 68000
It seems consistent for me. The first time I restarted after doing the restart update it took 35 secs. After that, (i did it 3 times maybe 4) it took 15 to 18 secs.
The first time i restarted i had resume checked and like 7 apps open but, I also shut downed once with the shutdown resume thing checked, and it was like under 20 secs this time i also had 7 apps open.
I also want to say i shut downed again and it was like 40 secs (i didn't time it this time) but spotlight was acting crazy and getting stuck on indexing. I'm going to keep testing.
I am running on a external drive, which is quite slow and gets only 40mbs read & write through usb 2.
After 10.7 and 10.8, it should be. My confidence in OS X engineering is slowly being restored since 10.6. Stability and memory management improvements, GUI unification (mostly by eliminating 'skeuomorphic" design), Open GL 4.0+ core support (finally), increased focus on "true" desktop systems and multiple displays, and less focus on social network integration have been a breath of fresh air. I'm looking forwarding to OS X "iBooks" and other features not yet released (iLife, iWork, Pro-Apps, etc).
Throwing this out there as it may help others, I performed a clean install; made a 10.9 USB install drive, rebooted, wiped my SSD boot, installed 10.9 then updates. I also fresh installed my app's instead of a full "Time Machine" restore (keep my OS X and other OS app's on a separate HDD), and simply dragged and dropped any files from my "Time Machine" backups folder. My 6-Core Mac Pro5,1 is running faster and smoother than 10.6 and 10.9 'installed" over 10.8.
Ha! Harsh, but somewhat true. I'm relieved the Mac Pro hasn't been dropped, but this "update" will require external chassises for my (4) internal SATA HDD's, internal LG Blu-Ray burner and main SSD boot. External Thunderbolt devices and chassises aren't cheap, coupled with possible price points on par with the current gen, it may be an expensive upgrade for a smaller form factor with less internal upgradability and no internal SATA III support. A gradual move towards full external drive dependency by incorporating some internal SATA III and full PCIe card slots would have been better. I fear hurt businesses and many professional may avoid upgrading due to initial costs.
Last edited:
Mavericks
Can anyone with retina MacBook Pro confirm that in Mavericks, Keynote doesn't require the discrete GPU? It's kind of strange that Keynote requires dGPU and due to this battery doesn't last long and my rMBP gets hot..
Can anyone with retina MacBook Pro confirm that in Mavericks, Keynote doesn't require the discrete GPU? It's kind of strange that Keynote requires dGPU and due to this battery doesn't last long and my rMBP gets hot..
tdtran1025
macrumors 6502
Mr. Retrofire
macrumors 603
You can use gfxCardStatus under Mountain Lion (And Mavericks?). Make sure you quit Keynote before you switch the GPU.
Thanks for the tip. I thought latest version of gfxCardStatus took away the freedom to force the graphics card option. But it did seem to work if I force the integrated graphics option before I start the Keynote! Anyway I don't know why Apple couldn't make it easier itself so that when applications do really need dGPU then it's turned on and not always..
KylePowers
macrumors 68000
I'd rather see it completely debugged, well as much as reasonable. In the past these major OS updates have often been just a bit buggy.
As for a new name I think that story has already been written.
sulpfiction
macrumors 68040
I did read what u wrote. But that still doesn't limit the problem to a certain machine. It's an old card. That's the problem. It's just slowing down and acting up. Just like any component of an older machine. I have 2 or 3 computers at work that were all bought about 5 years ago, and are all exactly the same. And while they all need to be replaced, 1 still runs perfectly fine, 1 is just a little slow and laggy, and 1 gets errors, locks up, has memory problems, etc.
All I'm saying is that your pointing the finger at the type of machine & compatibility being the problem. When it's most likely a result of an old card just acting old.
All I'm saying is that your pointing the finger at the type of machine & compatibility being the problem. When it's most likely a result of an old card just acting old.
jmgregory1
macrumors 68040
I have. 13" 2011 base unit with a quickly degrading battery, around 84% at 300 cycles, I went from about 4 hours max to close to 7 on Mavericks. Of course it borked my email, so I'm not using it as my main unit.
MrNomNoms
macrumors 65816
I never said that - so stop lying. I stated they had the same video card but I appear to be wrong given that the iMac I had used a "Radeon HD 2600 PRO" where as the Mac Pro in question has a "Radeon HD 2600 XT" - the fact that my old iMac has a less powerful GPU yet not exhibiting the same issues tells me there is something more to it besides so-called 'old hardware slowing down'.
squeeks
macrumors 68040
No, the fact is even if they were both Radeon 2600 XTs the on in the iMac is a special desktop version soldered to the main board where as the mac pro version is an actual expansion card running on a PCIE port, so to even assume that you would have the same issue on both machines just because they are both "2600 xt's" doesn't make any sense.
Graphics Fix update CoreGraphics Framework but that didn't fix reboot on startup (when windowserver kicks in) for me with MP2008 and 7950/EFI
I am waiting with bated breath for your explanation of how electronics slow down with age. Does the electron flow break off bits and pieces creating a sludge buildup inside which gums up the works? Is it from the magic smoke slowly leaking out?
KylePowers
macrumors 68000
I'm at 82% with 320 cycles, so that's fantastic news. I'll probably be upgrading to a 13in rMBP when Haswell lands, but I was thinking of giving my 2011 13in MBA to my girlfriend (or, maybe selling it)... so good battery life would definitely be a plus.
Do you recommend updating now or waiting for official release? I'm pretty eager to try it out, but from what I've read, it's definitely still beta status. Do you have you to reinstall with each new preview release, or can it just be updated?
Rocketman
macrumors 603
Old, but ubiquitous. That's the point. Support what is out there in reality, when you claim to support that era system. Simple.
I would like to see some of the relevant bug fixes added to the two prior OS releases as well. Some machines will be stuck on those OS's forever due to software compatibility issues.
Rocketman
jmgregory1
macrumors 68040
I'm so tempted to get a '13 13" mba, just for the battery life improvements. Not that 7 hours isn't great, after living with 4, but I love the iPad for the fact that I can work ALL day on the road without worrying about the battery and that isn't the case with the mba. I stopped bringing my air because I wasn't getting enough untethered to a wall outlet use out of it.
I would not recommend installing Mavericks, unless you're a developer and want to be a guinea pig. Functionally, it's been mostly fine, with the exception of Mail not working, making it unusable as a daily driver for me (which it isn't at this point).
it just has to be updated, but as seen, on the long term a clean install is better.
on the other hand, I have an old MPB (late 2009) with a battery with 807 cycles, and the battery time (kind of 2hours) has been doubled, at least. It works, besides of quite a lot of other welcomed improvements. So I also can say that am regaining faith into the updates for a better work after all that pseudo improvements which seemed to aim to turn my working machine into a social networking machine...
But jep, consider that as beta there a still a lot of stuff to be ironed out, like a quite unresponsive mail which has to be restarted very often, but nevertheless, that works more or less.