Intel Macs & Unoptimized Apps...

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by Lincoln 6 Echo, Dec 14, 2006.

  1. Lincoln 6 Echo macrumors member

    Nov 29, 2005

    ^ Says it all right there. I just have to vent, as I'm sure many have already. I just decided to tought it out the past few months and thought maybe the problems would go away, but they haven't and actually got worse...

    Apple's game is NOT tight. You'd think they could coordi-****ing-nate better with developers ESPECIALLY with developers who create flagship applications to get optimized version done on time. There's good chance it's just my MBP CD 2.16 GHz (w/2GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM), but I'm betting I'm not alone.

    When my performance and work rests upon the LACK of speed and performance of a computer touted and marketed and as being SOOO awesome, it's a big let down when you actually use the thing for serious work. I'm sure it's better for certain types of work than others, but HELL it's all those 'others' that Apple's success has stemmed from.

    Adobe Creative Suite is so $h!t. Photoshop CS2 and Illustrator CS2, are pathetic in my experience anyway. Photoshop CS and Illustrator CS on my old PowerBook G4 1.2 GHz performed way better and were much more stable. QuarkXpress is still a pathetic excuse for a sickly dog and was also better before Intel came along. My old G4 ate massive hi-res files for breakfast but my Intel Mac chugs and thinks about it at often and random times.

    When you need speed and stability expect lots of spinning beach balls and "<Application name> has expected quit" (gotta love that one) messages with these apps.

    Worst of all? We'll have to pay for upgrades and fixes to these applications almost always.

    But hey, maybe it's just me. ***** brutal :rolleyes:

    P.S. - Maybe I just need the new DiskWarrior to set my Intel Mac's a$$ straight. When's that due out?
  2. Silentwave macrumors 68000

    May 26, 2006
    Gainesville, FL
    It's not like they're falsely advertising it, buddy. they're honest about it.
    It's the DEVELOPERS who you should be angry at. Apple has nothing to do with it. The transition was announced and developing machines were available in June 2005. I don't doubt that several key developers knew well beforehand. The fact that they haven't gone universal is their choice in re: to their developing schedule

    You can always use the CS3 beta that should be out tomorrow.
  3. bousozoku Moderator emeritus

    Jun 25, 2002
    Gone but not forgotten.
    Apple can't force developers to do their bidding.

    Adobe has a lifetime of bad code to overcome and they're finally getting to Intel-native status with the public beta of Photoshop CS3.

    Apple have bent over backwards to get developers to convert and improve their applications. They've had multiple workshops and worked directly with some developers to get the applications working.

    I'm no Apple cheerleader but I don't see how Apple is responsible for Adobe dragging their feet. Adobe didn't even have nicely running Mac OS X applications on PowerPC because they didn't want to re-work their software.

    Spring will be a big deal and a lot of the waiting for Intel-native applications will be finished.
  4. Catfish_Man macrumors 68030


    Sep 13, 2001
    Portland, OR
    Actually, some of those Xcode updates (DWARF debug symbols, etc...) we've been seeing are likely responses to issues Adobe and other large app developers have seen when transitioning from Metrowerks. It's a bit hard to port an app when the debug binaries are too large to launch.
  5. radiantm3 macrumors 65816


    Oct 16, 2005
    San Jose, CA
    How much ram do you have? I use CS2 daily on my macbook pro and everything runs fine. It runs just as fast as my 1.67ghz Powerbook G4 and in some cases even faster. If you have 1gig or less ram, then you are going to see the beach ball a lot as you're probably running out of ram often.

Share This Page