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.
More Mac Mini Speed Bumps?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
chaos86 said:
Wrong, please stop spreading these nonsense.
All binaries from now are.. guess what? Compatible with Windows 95 even! Sure, some drivers might not work, but for the most part the same flaws in ActiveX, the stupid HTML renderers, etc, are all still there.
In fact, DUH, they probably came from there.
98 probably comes with its own bag of nonsense. Registry corrupt anyone?
Any user considering Windows would be much better off with not 98, not 95, not 2000, but XP. Since it is the only one that is still actively being updated and supported.
And for all its flaws, used correctly Windows is still superior to MacOS in many ways. LookupD freezes, I need to reboot to get my network back again! Look, that Windows XP machine has an uptime of a week!, Why is the screen on my new Powerbook flickering like nobody's business?, Hmm.. Wonder why my PowerMac 1.8 Kernel panic's (AKA: A cute looking BSOD) every now and then, Why was my free memory slowly vanishing?, Woah! 10.4.3 is FAST! Waitaminute, what was it doing last time?!.
I'll leave you to think about it. As it is no platform is conclusively superior to the competition in every way.
generik said:
1) It's not nonsense. Almost all of todays virii and spyware are designed to use with the latest windows OSs. A lot has been added or changed since 98, DLLs, the kernel, etc, that virus writers are now using or modifying to make their malware. If a rootkit designed for an XP install tries to modify a 98 kernel it won't know where the lines of code are that it needs to modify. If it modifies the file system to hide itself, 98 was fat16 or 32, XP is usually NTFS, so that wont work.
That's not to say that a virus from back then that is still circulating can't infect your system; that's likely possible; but to find one still circulating, years after it's being found and eradicated is pretty small, and even then your virus scanner will know about it.
2) Nonsense is a singular noun "...this nonsense."
chaos86 said:
As a computer security engineer, I have to agree that many of the current vulnerabilities that are being released and exploited target the current versions of Windows (XP, Windows 2000). Granted, there are some that affect all versions of Windows (shows you how old some of the base code of 2000/XP is when they are still using code as early as 1995). But, to say that Windows 98 secure is a total joke. Any decent script kiddie or hacker can get root access to a Win 98 system in a matter of minutes if it is connected to the Internet (even easier if they are sitting in front of it with a Linux boot disk).
generik said:
You are kidding right? I am sitting here typing this on my one week old Mac Mini with iTunes playing, four web pages open, a number of widgets running in the background, and am editing some pictures in iPhoto.. I still have 523MB free (I have 1GB).. Now, if I was doing the same thing in my $2500 Windows Laptop running XP Pro with a 1.67GHZ Pentium M processor and 1GB of RAM I would see nothing but hourglasses....
I just have to disagree with you. To say that Macs have zero issues would be a lie too, but the foundation of the operating system (Unix) and the methods which it allocates memory to applications is FAR superior to the current Windows operating system. The truth is the reason why Microsoft has significantly delayed Longhorn/Vista is because they had to start completely over again. The majority of the promised "new" featurs of Vista (better file structure, better allocation of memory, more security, better search tools, easier to use interface, etc) already exist in Tiger... Period... I am a recent switcher (one week now) and it is my opinion that Tiger is FAR superior to Windows XP. I still use Windows everyday, but I would kill to have a MAC in my office...
EDIT: And by the way many of the features promised in M$ Vista will not even be released right away.. By the time a decent working version of Vista is released, Apple will once again beat them to market with a newer version of their OS (Leopard I think?).. I did not even touch on security issues with Microsoft products vs. Apple.. Ever used to build a house made out of cards when you were younger? That is the current foundation of the MS Operating systems. The more apps and features you pile on it, the faster the whole thing crashes
ack_mac said:
Just got my PB today..
OS X is truly sweet
But yeap, I agree with you on this one.. in Windows 98, "Huh? What permissions?" You can essentially just press "Cancel" at the Windows log in prompt and still log in ANYWAY. That's truly one joke of a security measure!
md11 said:
i know several, and they dont have problems with bugs because who is going to make bugs for a OS that is rarely used, same as apple. why make bugs for 4% of the market when you can nuts up the other 96% a lot more quickly.
i had xp pro for less than a year and had more problems than a granny with chafing knickers (no offence given to the grannies with chafing knickers so please excuse me there). since i have had a mac i have found it is easy to use and i have no problems at all, apple are always finding new ways to upgrade the current OS ie 10.4.3, where as with microsoft you will recieve thousands of security updates, which dont tell you what they are securing, yes you have service packs with windows but i have found that they have caused more problems than they corrected.
md11 said:
My school was using Windows 98 on all our Windows-based machines until this year. They all have 633MHz AMD K6s with 128MB RAM.
This year for our new Novell network they were all updated to XP. So while there aren't any still using 98, they were until a this year at least.
As for our Macs, the majority are iMac DVs runing 9.1 and we have a few eMacs with 10.4.1. (There is a much larger percentage of PCs in the school than there are Macs)
chrismear said:
Chris -- granted you went for the 'combo' option so you can't confirm the dual-layer SuperDrive, but... can you confirm the 64meg gfx card?
And how long from point of ordering did it take to receive your mini?
Cheers fella.... cheesh, I'm sick of waiting for Apple to confirm the fact these puppies are now out and about, and goods to hear the UK are receiving them. Although I'm still somewhat weary to order one just in case I wind-up with the older 1.4 mni!?!!!
ack_mac said:
I often run no less than 200 tabs in Maxthon, while encoding video, using Bitlord, listening to music, and burning a disc in Nero all without seeing "nothing but hourglasses". I agree that memory management in OS X is better than XP but the scenario you described can be handled quite easily by XP Pro.
Longhorn was delayed because they kept adding features to it. Initially, Longhorn was supposed to be a Windows 98 type of release (small but solid update over 95) and all the good stuff was going to come in Blackcomb. As time went on they started bringing Blackcomb features into Longhorn and pushing the date further back. Currently Vista+WinFS (public beta at Vista's RTM) is pretty much all that was planned for Blackcomb. WinFS was removed from Vista proper because it took on a ton of extra features including a lot of server stuff. At PDC 2003, WinFS was client only. Apparently a lot of people were quite pissed that it wouldn't run on Windows Server 2003 and that it had no server features (Win2k3 will be the dominant Windows server OS until well into 2008-2009).
That is so vague that it's nearly impossible to be wrong. You really glossed over any particulars of those features and just used what may be the slightest of a resemblence to a feature in Tiger so that you could claim tiger already has those features. Here's an example:
The majority of the promised "new" features of the 2006 Ferrari 600 Imola(better handling, more ergonomic seats, more security, bigger engine, stronger chassis, etc) already exist in my Honda... Period...
Not to say that Tiger is a Honda but the references you made are way too vague. The file structure, memory management, security features, and search tools go well beyond those of Tiger... period. I can break them down if you like.
That's something that uninformed people could legitimately say back when WinFS was MIA, the sidebar disappeared, and MSH was supposedly gone. WinFS and MSH are available now and the sidebar is back. WinFS will be refreshed and released in public beta (the third public beta) when vista is RTM (before the holiday release). MSH is due to be final before Vista goes to RTM because it is the console for Exchange 12. I challenge you to actually back up that statement and tell which promised features won't be released right away.
Stay on target...
Ok guys, you've gotten way off topic here, if you wish to discuss things about a different topic please make a thread about it or chat in the MacRumors IRC.
Thank you
Ok guys, you've gotten way off topic here, if you wish to discuss things about a different topic please make a thread about it or chat in the MacRumors IRC.
Thank you
Hurry Up!
C'mon Apple, make the update official, so I can buy a mini to plug into my new telly! C'mon!
C'mon Apple, make the update official, so I can buy a mini to plug into my new telly! C'mon!
LimeiBook86 said:
May I take a moment to stand up and clap my hands in a furious motion out of sheer admiration that finally after [nearly] a full page of "Windows vs OS X" posts we have someone prepared to tell these posters to stay on-topic or move-on somewhere else...
Thank you.
BGil said:
You must be bloody joking.
I say again, you must be bloody joking.
I run a PC with specs easy twice yours, and with anything close to "200 tabs", burning CDs, and encoding video I can't help but wonder how anyone could put up with the sluggishness.
Having said that, let's be fair too, OS X is pretty memory hungry.
BGil said:
Security features, heh.
Alright then. Please tell me if I will be able to install applications in Vista, with my user account safely sandboxed in a limited user account, and have a SEAMLESS experience doing it.
Right now what I have experimented doing in XP:
1) Runas Administrator
Works.. except if the installer put entries into your current user registry key you are hoisted, because it would be under the admin's node instead of yours.
2) Just run it regardless!
Obviously doesn't work, thanks to this convoluted piece of **** called the Windows registry. Why? In their obsession to lock down everything to their own (and ONLY their own!) platform they can't even do better than simple text/xml files.
You might argue about how the registry will be better in Vista, essentially it is just a hack redirecting all unpriviledged writes to local machine node to the current user node. I am SO IMPRESSED. WOW.
Wake me up until you can specify a registry node, key, and define permissions for that. Pfft.
3) Convoluted solutions as always.
The *best* solution I've got it so have a special script that runs as administrator login, escalate my priviledges, immediately spawn a console window using my login (with the new escalated rights) from which I can install my application.
Twisted.
Contorted.
Complicated.
No way in hell any normal user will know it.
But hey, that's Windows for ya, normally they expect you to run in full admin and sit pretty.
ack_mac said:
Come on, that's exaggerating a bit now isn't it? If you can't keep 4 web pages open, run itunes and a few widgets, and edit some photos without "seeing nothing but hourglasses" on any machine with sufficient ram you've bought new any time in the last 4 years, you've got a hardware problem. Have you checked to see if your laptop has throttled back because of fan failure or a poor power saving setting choice?
44th week
howdy.
just thought i would add to the ordering mayhem: I also grew tired of the wait, relying on my g3 12" ibook. after reading the discussion here re. timing, serial numbers, etc., I took the plunge.
I ordered a CTO 1.42 mini (gig of ram) w/ superdrive on the 27th of October. the original ship date was by Nov. 1st. but a message came stating that might be delayed one week--till the 8th. yesterday--the 2nd--I received a notice that my mini had been shipped.
my serial number begins G544xxxx. therefore, I am confident that it will be the updated mini--post 35th week of the year. I will post another note once it has arrived to confirm that and to confirm that the superdrive is dl, etc. as some folk want to know.
Question: Could folks point me to toward other threads/reviews re. appropriate external hd's for the mini? The problem is that I think I have read most of them and I have yet to find anything that people don't have significant gripes about... I don't plan on using it as a boot drive although I will keep my iTunes music folder, movies, video editing, etc. on it. My highest priority is that it works. Second very highest, Quiet! I am a wank about fan an harddrive noise. In this sense, I am leaning toward the LeCie 250. OWC's miniMate (whatever the name is) seems great (hub) but noisy and unreliable.
But, _I don't need the same form factor as the mini if there is something better out there!_ Does anyone have any experience with OWC's Mercury Elite Aluminum series? Seem nice and _quiet._ I would likely have to go with the usb2/fw 400 since the 400/800 only has one 400 port--a drawback of many triple interface drives i have noticed, i.e. between the mini and the external hd, where would i plug in my sony video camera. (this drawing from what i have read that for reliably fast data transfer between mini and external hd, stick with firewire, not usb2)
these forums have been very helpful. thanks for all the thoughtful postings.
howdy.
just thought i would add to the ordering mayhem: I also grew tired of the wait, relying on my g3 12" ibook. after reading the discussion here re. timing, serial numbers, etc., I took the plunge.
I ordered a CTO 1.42 mini (gig of ram) w/ superdrive on the 27th of October. the original ship date was by Nov. 1st. but a message came stating that might be delayed one week--till the 8th. yesterday--the 2nd--I received a notice that my mini had been shipped.
my serial number begins G544xxxx. therefore, I am confident that it will be the updated mini--post 35th week of the year. I will post another note once it has arrived to confirm that and to confirm that the superdrive is dl, etc. as some folk want to know.
Question: Could folks point me to toward other threads/reviews re. appropriate external hd's for the mini? The problem is that I think I have read most of them and I have yet to find anything that people don't have significant gripes about... I don't plan on using it as a boot drive although I will keep my iTunes music folder, movies, video editing, etc. on it. My highest priority is that it works. Second very highest, Quiet! I am a wank about fan an harddrive noise. In this sense, I am leaning toward the LeCie 250. OWC's miniMate (whatever the name is) seems great (hub) but noisy and unreliable.
But, _I don't need the same form factor as the mini if there is something better out there!_ Does anyone have any experience with OWC's Mercury Elite Aluminum series? Seem nice and _quiet._ I would likely have to go with the usb2/fw 400 since the 400/800 only has one 400 port--a drawback of many triple interface drives i have noticed, i.e. between the mini and the external hd, where would i plug in my sony video camera. (this drawing from what i have read that for reliably fast data transfer between mini and external hd, stick with firewire, not usb2)
these forums have been very helpful. thanks for all the thoughtful postings.
Got my new Mac Mini
I ordered a 1.25 GHz Mac Mini with an 80 GB HD, Combo Drive, and 1 Gig of RAM on 10-22-05. I received it on 11-2-05. The serial number starts with G8543xxxxxx and it is indeed a 1.33 Ghz model with a Seagate Momentus 5400 rpm hard drive with an 8MB cache buffer. The video card still appears to be the 9200 with 32 MB ram. This is my first experience with a Mac Mini as I was using a G5 PowerMac 1.8 (first generation). I can tell a difference in speed but the Mac Mini does pretty well. The only thing that bothers me is the boot up time. When I see the first gray screen with the Apple and the circle timing whirligig(or whatever you call it)-it seems to stay on that screen for almost 2 minutes. I have not timed it but it is a LONG time. Is this normal?
I ordered a 1.25 GHz Mac Mini with an 80 GB HD, Combo Drive, and 1 Gig of RAM on 10-22-05. I received it on 11-2-05. The serial number starts with G8543xxxxxx and it is indeed a 1.33 Ghz model with a Seagate Momentus 5400 rpm hard drive with an 8MB cache buffer. The video card still appears to be the 9200 with 32 MB ram. This is my first experience with a Mac Mini as I was using a G5 PowerMac 1.8 (first generation). I can tell a difference in speed but the Mac Mini does pretty well. The only thing that bothers me is the boot up time. When I see the first gray screen with the Apple and the circle timing whirligig(or whatever you call it)-it seems to stay on that screen for almost 2 minutes. I have not timed it but it is a LONG time. Is this normal?