Apple's Problem No. 1

[AlphaTech]

gopher, good post.

Most Mac users also know what to look for when they want to remove software. A lot of the applications can be removed by dumping the folder that contains it and the prefernce file with it's name on it. Sometimes there are extensions that also can be removed, but typically, they won't do harm (unless you are experiencing software conflicts). Those are also easy to remove. Some Mac software installers come with uninstall/remove features, but not all.

On windblows, if you remove just one of the files that the software installer placed on your system, and then try to remove it through the uninstall/remove feature, forgedaboutit. Windblows basically tells you to go f*ck yourself.

 

[SilvorX]

SilvorX, I thought that you were not going to post anymore

well i'm back from the dead lol
i just dont like getting flamed thats all lol
n i'm still planning on getting meself a mac this fall (hoping it will be after the release of jaguar) n talked to my dad bout it (since i'm gonna be working for him this summer) n he said if i dont have enough money, he'll chip in some $$$

n i totally agree with alpha's last post, i try to remove something off ekz-pee, i have a hard time after i uninstall that app, for instance, i'm having LOTTTTS of winbloze problems right now just cuz of some lame ass kernel32.dll errors are causing ie/outlook express/aol messenger to not work n tried removing n everything n no luck so far, cant wait to get my mac

 

[Rajj]

Future HuH???

Apple Number One problem is Motorola and there slow ass chips!!!!
Apple would increase there sales by a subtanual amount if they would switch to AMD's Hammer series!!! I thought Apple is supposed to be ahead of everybody??? Don't get me wrong, I love OS X, but I hate the internet on OS X, because it is Dog slow!! My AMD XP 1700 BLows it rocks off!!! Only one problem..... Windows XP!!! AAHHHHH!!

 

[Backtothemac]

Re: Future HuH???

Originally posted by xrhajj
Apple Number One problem is Motorola and there slow ass chips!!!!
Apple would increase there sales by a subtanual amount if they would switch to AMD's Hammer series!!! I thought Apple is supposed to be ahead of everybody??? Don't get me wrong, I love OS X, but I hate the internet on OS X, because it is Dog slow!! My AMD XP 1700 BLows it rocks off!!! Only one problem..... Windows XP!!! AAHHHHH!!

Couple of questions.

1) What kind of Mac do you have that is slow under X on the net.
2) Have you optimized your internet connection.
3) What type of connection do you have.

 

[AlphaTech]

Re: Re: Future HuH???

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Couple of questions.

1) What kind of Mac do you have that is slow under X on the net.
2) Have you optimized your internet connection.
3) What type of connection do you have.

Yeah... I have used dial-up on OS X before (those rare times when I need to get email on my home accounts while I am at work) and the slowdown is from the connection speed, NOT the computer.

Go high speed and then the speed blazes. Granted, if your high speed ISP is only giving you 650Kbps downloads (max) and you have a cable modem in a populated area your speed during peak times is going to suck. Ever since my DSL connection was fixed up, I have seen download speeds of at least 180KBps (yes, Bytes) with burst giving me almost 2MBps (high 1900's Kbps).

Don't blame the Mac because you have a crappy ISP with questionable Mac support, or low connection speeds.

 

[Rajj]

Re: Re: Re: Future HuH???

Originally posted by AlphaTech


Yeah... I have used dial-up on OS X before (those rare times when I need to get email on my home accounts while I am at work) and the slowdown is from the connection speed, NOT the computer.

Go high speed and then the speed blazes. Granted, if your high speed ISP is only giving you 650Kbps downloads (max) and you have a cable modem in a populated area your speed during peak times is going to suck. Ever since my DSL connection was fixed up, I have seen download speeds of at least 180KBps (yes, Bytes) with burst giving me almost 2MBps (high 1900's Kbps).

Don't blame the Mac because you have a crappy ISP with questionable Mac support, or low connection speeds.

1. I have a Tibook 400
2. Yes
3. Cable Modem


And I will blame OS X, becxause it has a fetch and retrieve problem!!!
And the reason why I know this because my Tibook Is slaughtered by my celeron 750 notebook via airport via ethernet, and not to mention my Athlon XP 1700!!!... that's whole new story!!!!

Stats: NBA. com
Celeron 750 notebook < 1 sec
Tibook 400 7 sec
1700 XP <.20

You do the math!!!
I hope Jaguar takes care of this problem!! Cause I really Like OS X

 

[Rajj]

Re: Re: Future HuH???

Originally posted by Backtothemac


Couple of questions.

1) What kind of Mac do you have that is slow under X on the net.
2) Have you optimized your internet connection.
3) What type of connection do you have.

On my cable Modem I get 1.8 to 2.5 mps on my Athlon XP
On my Tibook 400 I only get 1 mps to 1.5 mps

 

[AlphaTech]

xrhajj, I don't know what you did to f*ck up your TiBook, but I NEVER had any kind of fetching issues with my TiBook. Maybe you should optimize your drive, and UPDATE to the latest versions of your software. If you have never run utilities (such as NUM) they YOU are the reason for the slowdown, NOT the computer...

 

[Rajj]

Originally posted by AlphaTech
xrhajj, I don't know what you did to f*ck up your TiBook, but I NEVER had any kind of fetching issues with my TiBook. Maybe you should optimize your drive, and UPDATE to the latest versions of your software. If you have never run utilities (such as NUM) they YOU are the reason for the slowdown, NOT the computer...

Umm Let's see.... I changed my hard drive to a 40 gig, I added 512mb of ram, and I always run utilites, and what do I get in return.... That spinning rainbow wheel when I luanch IE or Mozilla!!! And then 10 seconds later I'm on line, with a cable modem!! But with my XP 1700... it's click and a nanosecond later, I'm on line!!! You do the math!!! I really like OS X, but I get sick of waiting. I spent all this money to be in 3rd place!!!!

 

[Rajj]

Alpha Tech, go to CompUSA, engage IE on the TiBook, and start tapping your fingers, and then go to the toshiba S607 or one with a wireless card installed and compare the times.

 

[AlphaTech]

which utilities, how often, which drive did you install (brand, spindle speed...). Only 512MB???? What memory, brand, spec... Did you follow any ESD procedures when you installed the drive and such???

 

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by xrhajj
Alpha Tech, go to CompUSA, engage IE on the TiBook, and start tapping your fingers, and then go to the toshiba S607 or one with a wireless card installed and compare the times.

Hey Bubba.. I AM on a TiBook right this very second... so stop blowing smoke. Read my signature ya mook.

btw, I AM using Airport to go online ALL THE TIME!

 

[Rajj]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


Hey Bubba.. I AM on a TiBook right this very second... so stop blowing smoke. Read my signature ya mook.

Hey Tranquillo!!!
I use Disk Warrior every friday
Toshiba 5400 rpm
And I am on my Tibook as we speak also!! and it is still slow on the web!!

 

[Rajj]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


Hey Bubba.. I AM on a TiBook right this very second... so stop blowing smoke. Read my signature ya mook.

btw, I AM using Airport to go online ALL THE TIME!

I use airport all the time also!!! if you have a cable or DSL, go to Nba.com and see how long it takes!!

 

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by xrhajj


Hey Tranquillo!!!
I use Disk Warrior every friday
Toshiba 5400 rpm
And I am on my Tibook as we speak also!! and it is still slow on the web!!

go to speed411.com and run the test... Anyone that knows anything knows that IBM drives beat toshiba drives in their sleep.

Is that the only utility you have??? which version??? Get NUM (at the very least) and/or TechTool Pro 3.x.

 

[Rajj]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


go to speed411.com and run the test... Anyone that knows anything knows that IBM drives beat toshiba drives in their sleep.

Is that the only utility you have??? which version??? Get NUM (at the very least) and/or TechTool Pro 3.x.

did you go to nba.com? And I went to speed411.com, it said 1.8mps, but OSX and Motorola Has a fetch and retrieve problem, you are an apple tech right?


How long did it take to get to nba.com?

 

[AlphaTech]

Originally posted by xrhajj

did you go to nba.com? And I went to speed411.com, it said 1.8mps, but OSX and Motorola Has a fetch and retrieve problem, you are an apple tech right?


How long did it take to get to nba.com?

You ever stop to think it was m$ making you it's b*tch and NOT Apple???? Try going to the same site with the latest version of Netscape. I did... Netscape 6.2.3 loaded the page in about 1-1.5 seconds, where ie took a few longer. Considering how I have my disk cache set to 0, I don't retain pages. How is ie on your peecee set?? If you go there all the time, it will cache the information which will give the appearance of faster load time.

Test things a bit more before you blame the computer maker for your 'speed issues' which really don't exist.

This was the FIRST time I have EVER gone to the nba site, and most likely the LAST time. I have a hell of a lot better things to do with my time then track b-ball teams and such. Actually the sports that are televised are of almost 0 interest to me. It's hard to find the ones I really care about, so I don't bother to watch any of them. I EASILY live without such things.

 

[SilvorX]

Don't blame the Mac because you have a crappy ISP with questionable Mac support, or low connection speeds.

i doubt i'dd blame the mac, back when i was basically puter illiterate, i was blaming the slow speeds on the modem cuz i thought it could do better (but then found out that the fastest we can get is 28.8 even tho half an hr away theres dsl) n i'm pretty sure my isp has mac support since their software works both on winbloze (not xp tho ) n most macs (up to and including os9 since i doubt u would want to use netscape 4.05 on osx)

 

[Rajj]

Originally posted by AlphaTech


You ever stop to think it was m$ making you it's b*tch and NOT Apple???? Try going to the same site with the latest version of Netscape. I did... Netscape 6.2.3 loaded the page in about 1-1.5 seconds, where ie took a few longer. Considering how I have my disk cache set to 0, I don't retain pages. How is ie on your peecee set?? If you go there all the time, it will cache the information which will give the appearance of faster load time.

Test things a bit more before you blame the computer maker for your 'speed issues' which really don't exist.

This was the FIRST time I have EVER gone to the nba site, and most likely the LAST time. I have a hell of a lot better things to do with my time then track b-ball teams and such. Actually the sports that are televised are of almost 0 interest to me. It's hard to find the ones I really care about, so I don't bother to watch any of them. I EASILY live without such things.

Ok, get your panties out of your ass!!!! it's pretty conspicuous (get a dictionary) you can't read!!! I like Apple, I won't have bought one if I didn't!!! this is my first Apple Computer, and I was under the impresion that Apple's OSX was world class material, and I think it is, but Every ASC has told me that OS X has a problem with IE and any other Browser, and Jaguar was the solution to this problem!!! But My point still stands, I spent over $3600 for my Tibook and software to convert to Apple, and it is still not paying for itself!!!
And as far as Basketball, Your just mad Boston Blows!!!

 

[ftaok]

Re: Compatibility not an issue

Originally posted by gopher
Start writing your webmasters to use standards on their webpage that are server side. Server side standards yield nothing but HTML pages that any web browser can render. Unfortunately too many try to add things that are Microsoft Java based, or Microsoft Jscript or ActiveX based. Webmasters who do this should be told that Windows isn't the only world out there, and they are promoting the Microsoft monopoly by using so many client based standards. Meanwhile you can get Connectix VirtualPC for the Mac to support those PC only webpages.

This is exactly the point I was trying to make. On the Internet, the OS should be invisible. Everything should work regardless of platform. If Apple wants to get a larger market share (that was the point of this thread), they will have to convince people that Macs are compatible. And they are, for the most part.

And who's gonna take the time to write to webmasters? If Apple wanted to correct this, they should be encouraging them to use the standards, not the end user.

As far as Microsoft Java and Jscript, I don't know enough about it. ActiveX, on the other hand, does allow for some neat little applets. Maybe Apple should support ActiveX.

And while they're at it, they should release some plug-ins for QT so that I can play avi's without going through a whole rig-a-more-roll.

And don't give me the whole "buy VPC" argument. Why would I want to pay $200 to view webpages that I should be able to view on my Mac?

 

[AmbitiousLemon]

the whole "you cant do certain things on the mac you can do on the pc" is a comment that is so inherently flawed it always shocks me. but like the other misconceptions it continues to be things people like ftaok use to make their rather poor arguments. you seem to loose track of the things that you can do on a mac that you cant do on a pc, which far outnumber the things you can do on a pc you cant do on a mac.

activex? damn, who cares. ive been using mozilla on osx and ie on osx before it since dp3 and have never run into a website i couldnt view on the mac. im not saying they dont exist, im saying the are insignificant and obscure. so some weird webmaster in some podunk site uses some obsolete technology to code his site, id say this is his problem not apple's. you can never stop some weirdo from using some weird code, but the overwhelming majority of sites work perfectly well. if you want to find obscure sites the mac cant render we can match them with obscure sites peecees cant render. so get over it.

macs are far more compatible than peecees, so dont even go there, hell peecees have trouble talking to other peecees let alone another platform. im not even going to get into this more because i think we are all familiar with apple's dominance in this area.

and as far as QT. again get over it. i can play any media file on my mac that i can play on a peecee and its actually much easier on the mac. if you figured out how to play divx files on a pc then let me tell you it never gets even that complicated on the mac.

and as far as vpc. it is relevant. because its yet one more thing macs can do that pcs cant (or cant well). lets see you run osx on your wintel pos. so in those few instances you find you need a pc you can just run vpc instead, whereas on the pc if you run into one of the many limitations of windows there is no running a mac app short of buying a mac.

if you want to keep the blinders while covering your ears screaming i dont want to learn, then fine, but please dont come around here and tell people who have actually explored the possibility that you know better. its insulting to us, and it doesnt reflect well on you. if you have problems on your mac, ask questions dont just assume you cant do something or that there is a 'problem' with apple.

 

[gopher]

Re: Re: Compatibility not an issue

Apple won't support ActiveX because it opens you to a whole lot of possible viruses. Apple supports Java which is a much more open standard. Use VirtualPC if there is a webpage you can't browse otherwise.

Originally posted by ftaok
This is exactly the point I was trying to make. On the Internet, the OS should be invisible. Everything should work regardless of platform. If Apple wants to get a larger market share (that was the point of this thread), they will have to convince people that Macs are compatible. And they are, for the most part.

And who's gonna take the time to write to webmasters? If Apple wanted to correct this, they should be encouraging them to use the standards, not the end user.

As far as Microsoft Java and Jscript, I don't know enough about it. ActiveX, on the other hand, does allow for some neat little applets. Maybe Apple should support ActiveX.

And while they're at it, they should release some plug-ins for QT so that I can play avi's without going through a whole rig-a-more-roll.

And don't give me the whole "buy VPC" argument. Why would I want to pay $200 to view webpages that I should be able to view on my Mac?

 

[Backtothemac]

Rant, Rant, Rant, Blah, Blah, Blah. Look the reason that your TiBook is slower is simple, and it has nothing to do with X and Moto. Now, your Celeron, Athlon, whatever you have, has the page in cache. That is the reason that it is coming up so fast. Another thing that is the problem is IE. It really does suck. Get Mozilla and tell me that it is taking that long. If so, then my iBook 600 will blow the friggin doors off your Ti. Have you bothered to think that there may be something wrong with it. Is it jus the internet, or all apps. If it is all Apps, then it is probably a memory problem or a hard drive problem.

Look, PC's are good at some things *cough* like crashing, but there are things that Macs can do that PC's can't. So, choose a platform, and live with it. Bi@ching about it will not do anyone any good. Something you want to do with a PC, but you only have a Mac. Get VPC. It is a viable alternative. And don't say not to say get VPC. If you own a PC and want to do something Mac only, then you have to get a Mac. At least this is a viable use for Mac users.

 

[ftaok]

Originally posted by AmbitiousLemon
the whole "you cant do certain things on the mac you can do on the pc" is a comment that is so inherently flawed it always shocks me. but like the other misconceptions it continues to be things people like ftaok use to make their rather poor arguments. you seem to loose track of the things that you can do on a mac that you cant do on a pc, which far outnumber the things you can do on a pc you cant do on a mac.

activex? damn, who cares. ive been using mozilla on osx and ie on osx before it since dp3 and have never run into a website i couldnt view on the mac. im not saying they dont exist, im saying the are insignificant and obscure. so some weird webmaster in some podunk site uses some obsolete technology to code his site, id say this is his problem not apple's. you can never stop some weirdo from using some weird code, but the overwhelming majority of sites work perfectly well. if you want to find obscure sites the mac cant render we can match them with obscure sites peecees cant render. so get over it.

macs are far more compatible than peecees, so dont even go there, hell peecees have trouble talking to other peecees let alone another platform. im not even going to get into this more because i think we are all familiar with apple's dominance in this area.

and as far as QT. again get over it. i can play any media file on my mac that i can play on a peecee and its actually much easier on the mac. if you figured out how to play divx files on a pc then let me tell you it never gets even that complicated on the mac.

and as far as vpc. it is relevant. because its yet one more thing macs can do that pcs cant (or cant well). lets see you run osx on your wintel pos. so in those few instances you find you need a pc you can just run vpc instead, whereas on the pc if you run into one of the many limitations of windows there is no running a mac app short of buying a mac.

if you want to keep the blinders while covering your ears screaming i dont want to learn, then fine, but please dont come around here and tell people who have actually explored the possibility that you know better. its insulting to us, and it doesnt reflect well on you. if you have problems on your mac, ask questions dont just assume you cant do something or that there is a 'problem' with apple.

I know there are a lot of things that you can do with a Mac that you can't do with a PC. Hell, I use a Mac. The whole point of this thread is "What is Apple's biggest problem" in regards to market share. I stated that the "average joe" would respond that Macs aren't compatible. I know that they are compatible (for the most part), but the general perception out there is that they're not.

And to dismiss the non-use of ActiveX (and other web standards) as being the work of po-dunk webmasters is very short sighted. I doubt very much that you think that Microsoft is a po-dunk company.

And the QT thing. There are a lot of avi files that I got from the Internet (directly and indirectly) that I can't play on my Mac. These play fine on my PC, with no effort. To get them to work with my Mac, I'd need to convert them to a .mov file and then mess with the sound. Does that sound "easy" to you?

Look, I have no blinders on. I'm trying to keep with the topic at hand. You are the one that keeps taking the arguments off-topic. I know that Macs are superior to PCs (for my needs). The topic at hand is about getting the Mac market share up higher.

 

[jamesbhai]

as glad as i am to know that AlphaTech is uninterested in sports (not the eurosports, i'm guessing), i don't think flaming everything around accomplishes much. go to the site, run the test and report. geez, reading this is maddening.

my roommate has a tibook 400 and it is indeed slower surfing the web than it was under 9. so is my pismo 400. i just bought a new iBook and will be interested to see how that responds. some pages are snappy, but others are iffy that are not iffy under 9. one way to test is to try the same sites in classic and in X.

it doesn't matter if it's the browser, if it's the OS, if it's someone who doesn't run utilities weekly (you shouldn't HAVE to do that to get basic performance, tho it's nice for long-term maintenance), if the software that apple bundles with OS X for the internet is slower than a pc, it is a problem. sure, an experienced user can install other programs and run utilities and check apple support, but you can't expect that from most people, particularly if you are talking about convincincing PC users to try the mac. they shouldn't have to do that either. either apple could bundle netscape with X (tho i have speed issues with netscape as well as some pages not showing up properly) or hopefully jaguar will solve the problem.

it doesn't matter if it's apple, if it's IE, if it's support or whatever, what matters is the bottom line of speed. i am guessing that from what i have heard of jaguar, many of these 'known issues' will be resolved in 2 months.

so, just hang in there and see if jaguar fixes the problem. OS X is still a work in progress. i'm being patient and giving apple all the leeway it needs (read: jaguar) for the time being. if jaguar on the iBook is slow, THEN i'll be pissed.