Valve Warns of Gaming Performance Issues With NVIDIA Graphics Cards on Mac OS X 10.6.4

[fmaxwell]

I'd love to get into a quality discussion with you about all this, as it does seem that you are one of the few who do have a inkling as to what they are talking about.

Thank you.

Unfortunately your method of debate seems to consist of sarcasm, bold words and a condescending dismissal of anyone who does not share your viewpoint.

I am fine with people not sharing my viewpoint -- or even my values. But I tire of the asinine games played by trolls in these discussions. Yes, I've had problems with Windows and I've done fresh installs on several occasions. The trolls pretending that such problems are some kind of sign of incompetence on my part irks me. So does the pretending that this video problem is some kind of devastatingly horrific issue when it has been reported by only a small number of customers who use Valve games.

And let's stop pretending that everything is happy in Windows land. Every person who has used Windows for any significant period of time knows damn well that it's subject to registry bloat, that the security policy is arcane and difficult to administer effectively, that fragmentation of the registry, swap file, and applications remains a problem. They know that app uninstalls often leave incredible amounts of crap in directories, system directories, and in the registry, often with no means of identifying 'who' put it there.

If someone wants to discuss things in a rational manner and compare the pros and cons of Windows and OS X, I'm in. But if they are just here to score points, then I'm not treating them with respect.

Grow up, stop treating people like idiots and we can have an adult debate.

Perhaps you need to reread what you wrote, that I responded to. You made an insulting remark based on an assumption that the sole backup I had was online in my Mac Pro. Basically, treating me as an idiot.

I am happy to engage in an intelligent debate, but how about extending an olive branch rather than a sharp stick?

 

[layte]

I don't believe that is a good application of your valuable time.

I wonder if Aiden misspoke by using Time Machine instead of Time Capsule.

I'm still asked be certain peers why Apple doesn't have a version of Volume Shadow Copy.

Block change tracking becomes an order of magnitude harder when your target is a separate drive. It can be done, but the complexity and CPU requirements required push it beyond the consumer space. So not a terribly good technology for what Time Machine does.

 

[Eidorian]

Block change tracking becomes an order of magnitude harder when your target is a separate drive. It can be done, but the complexity and CPU requirements required push it beyond the consumer space. So not a terribly good technology for what Time Machine does.

The interest appears to be on a local drive with Time Machine or other network backup solutions taking care of the other grunt work. (That's still a work in progress on my part until I get some more calls from my clients.)

I'm also apparently one of the few people that remembers the name Volume Shadow Copy around here when I get phone calls.

 

[layte]

Thank you.



I am fine with people not sharing my viewpoint -- or even my values. But I tire of the asinine games played by trolls in these discussions. Yes, I've had problems with Windows and I've done fresh installs on several occasions. The trolls pretending that such problems are some kind of sign of incompetence on my part irks me. So does the pretending that this video problem is some kind of devastatingly horrific issue when it has been reported by only a small number of customers who use Valve games.

And let's stop pretending that everything is happy in Windows land. Every person who has used Windows for any significant period of time knows damn well that it's subject to registry bloat, that the security policy is arcane and difficult to administer effectively, that fragmentation of the registry, swap file, and applications remains a problem. They know that app uninstalls often leave incredible amounts of crap in directories, system directories, and in the registry, often with no means of identifying 'who' put it there.

If someone wants to discuss things in a rational manner and compare the pros and cons of Windows and OS X, I'm in. But if they are just here to score points, then I'm not treating them with respect.



Perhaps you need to reread what you wrote, that I responded to. You made an insulting remark based on an assumption that the sole backup I had was online in my Mac Pro. Basically, treating me as an idiot.

I am happy to engage in an intelligent debate, but how about extending an olive branch rather than a sharp stick?

Fair enough, please accept my apologies. But please understand that your abrasive posting manner could (and probably does) rub people the wrong way.

 

[DMann]

The interest appears to be on a local drive with Time Machine or other network backup solutions taking care of the other grunt work. (That's still a work in progress on my part until I get some more calls from my clients.)

I'm also apparently one of the few people that remembers the name Volume Shadow Copy around here when I get phone calls.

The main problem with Volume Shadow Copy (yes, I remember it) is the performance impact it makes while running in the background.

Time Machine is better in this regard, as well as having an excellent UI.

 

[Eidorian]

The main problem with Volume Shadow Copy (yes, I remember it) is the performance impact it makes while running in the background.

I'd have to dedicate my time to monitor it in order to notice it.

Time Machine is better in this regard, as well having an excellent UI.

I agree about the interface. It doesn't save a few of the people I know that need to rollback and have never made a Time Machine backup. System Restore, snapshot, or rollback get tossed at me before I have to remind my clients that they need to use Time Machine.

 

[fmaxwell]

I don't believe that is a good application of your valuable time.

If your primary workstation is showing signs of instability, a fresh OS install under Windows is often the most effective use of your time. If you do a fresh install and the problems clear up, then you know that you aren't chasing a problem related to power supply noise, failing caps, flaky RAM, or ther hardware issue.

I wonder if Aiden misspoke by using Time Machine instead of Time Capsule.

I do not know, but Time Capsule certainly has its appeal: It's attractive, quiet, small and includes a NAS along with a dual-band WiFi Router (802.11a/b/g/n on 2.4ghz and 5ghz), wired router (three ports) and a USB print server. To me, that's more appealing than an HP home server. On the other hand, the single drive in it is not a big draw.

I'm still asked be certain peers why Apple doesn't have a version of Volume Shadow Copy.

And I ask why Windows (not Server) doesn't natively support RAID mirroring. I would rather have the native RAID support plus Time Machine. Volume Shadow Copy seems like a lot of complexity and is prone to real problems if the disk write happens during a crash or if applications are actively writing files, which can be left in inconsistent states.

 

[Eidorian]

I do not know, but Time Capsule certainly has its appeal: It's attractive, quiet, small and includes a NAS along with a dual-band WiFi Router (802.11a/b/g/n on 2.4ghz and 5ghz), wired router (three ports) and a USB print server. To me, that's more appealing than an HP home server. On the other hand, the single drive in it is not a big draw.

WiFi routers are a dime a dozen and to get a single drive slapped into one with an Apple logo on it isn't all that appealing to me.

HP, among other Home Server vendors, now seem to fully support Time Machine backup over the network. Not to mention it can handle those Windows machines too. My interest lies mostly in file services and location shifting my media. V2 is going to offer a Silverlight web interface that interests me and TV tuner support is still rumored.

I'd like to have bandwidth aware streaming of my recorded Windows Media Center shows or just have the Home Server alone with its own tuner taking care of that. Low power DVR along with location shifting and file services is rather attractive.

 

[fmaxwell]

Fair enough, please accept my apologies. But please understand that your abrasive posting manner could (and probably does) rub people the wrong way.

Thanks -- apology accepted with appreciation. You're a good man. And there's no "probably" about it: My abrasive posting manner definitely annoys a lot of people. I tend to be like that online when my patience wears thin. In-person, I'm a fun guy to hang with, but I just don't have the bandwidth to try to make nice with a bunch of people who are just trying to score points in a forum -- honest debate be damned.

 

[fmaxwell]

Lest we drift off-topic, I am finding it interesting that so many people have already reported the video problem resolved with the NVIDIA updated driver. I am sure that some percentage will have other problems, but this is looking like a less and less significant problem as time passes.

WiFi routers are a dime a dozen

I just paid $150 for a Netgear Dual-Band WNDR3700, which is, hardware-wise, one of the better ones out there (though the firmware is less than stellar). I'd been using a WRT54G T-Mobile version (double the RAM and Flash) flashed with Tomato, but I needed 5ghz due to interference -- plus I wanted the higher speed and range for the 802.11n.

and to get a single drive slapped into one with an Apple logo on it isn't all that appealing to me.

But to many Apple users, the integration of all of the functions (NAS, broadband gigabit router, dual-band WiFi router, print server/external drive USB port) into a single, attractive box is very appealing. Not my thing as I have a whole room full of separates, RAIDs, etc. But I see the appeal. So do many others.

HP, among other Home Server vendors, now seem to fully support Time Machine backup over the network. Not to mention it can handle those Windows machines too. My interest lies mostly in file services and location shifting my media. V2 is going to offer a Silverlight web interface that interests me and TV tuner support is still rumored.

I'd like to have bandwidth aware streaming of my recorded Windows Media Center shows or just have the Home Server alone with its own tuner taking care of that. Low power DVR along with location shifting and file services is rather attractive.

I hope that it works out well for you. There's nothing wrong with the HP Home Servers, but neither are they really true competitors to Time Capsule. Different purposes and markets.

I have been seriously considering a DROBO hanging off of a Firewire 800 port. Fill it up with four 2TB drives and get 6TB of usable, RAIDED storage. I'd probably go for the WD Green series drives. The Samsungs I got seem fine but are a bit noisier.

Speaking of low-power, I built an Atom 330 server with dual 5400 RPM notebook drives (RAID mirrored). It runs 24/7 to serve my domain and some that I host for friends. I took out the optical drive bracket by drilling out the rivets. That made room for me to put large passive heatsinks on the CPU and motherboard chipset. I put a close-to-silent, low-speed fan at the back. It has been running continuously for months and sits right at 28 watts power consumption. I can barely hear it. That's one thing that Apple gets: the value of quiet. My 8 core Mac Pro is whisper-quiet. Same with my girlfriend's Mac Mini.

 

[DMann]

....I just don't have the bandwidth to try to make nice with a bunch of people who are just trying to score points in a forum -- honest debate be damned.

Scoring points would be putting it mildly - trolling, baiting, spreading misinformation, while plugging competitors products (with links), on an Apple oriented site, no less, seems to be the peculiar MO in question here.

Thank you, your perspective and insights are most appreciated.

 

[AidenShaw]

You are incorrect, but read on...
...
Based on does not mean that it had the same code base. Microsoft hired a DEC engineer (Dave Cutler), one of the chief architects of the VAX VMS operating system, to come up with a new version of Windows that, among other things, added a security policy while still allowing the same apps that ran on Windows 3.x to run on Windows NT 3.1.

I've worked on the same team as Cutler, so I'm aware of the connection (that was the "won't go there" comment).

That's why NT had two different APIs: Win16 and Win32. The NT Win32 API was then back-ported to Windows Chicago in the Windows 95 release. It supported Win16 apps through a mechanism called "thunking"

Actually, NT has (had) 4 or 5 personalities or environments - or APIs as you call them.

• "Native" NT (not documented) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_API)
• Win32 32-bit (AKA "Windows API")
• "Win16" which is really a child environment under Win32 which "thunks" Win16 calls to the equivalent Win32 call
• OS2
• POSIX

If you're going to say that someone is wrong, you shouldn't make errors in your claim.

What they should have done is start over and not tried to maintain compatability between the old 16 bit versions of Windows, which had no security, and the new Windows NT.

The market disagrees - compatibility is extremely important for market success.

This was their chance to come up with a comprehensive, clear security policy such as had been implemented in Unix years earlier.

Which is why UNIX has flexible user/group identies, ACLs on files and system objects, group and domain policies?

Oh wait, no it doesn't.

I paid $99.99 each and installed them in my Mac Pro. How much would it cost me to use them in a Windows Home Server to do my backup?

$99.99 for each drive. How much additional did you pay for your Mac Pro to get a system with space for 2 extra drives?

Note that Windows Home Server for backups is much closer to Time Capsule, not Time Machine on a system that you already have.

Time Capsule costs $300 for a 1 TB system. It has no RAID-like redundancy, and the only option is to spend $499 for a 2 TB system eek: $200 for a TB ???) RAID is not an option.

The HP EX490 WHS system is $550 for 1 TB. It has 3 hot swap dive bays available. File shares can be mirrored if you have more than 1 drive - so it protects from a failed drive (something that Time Capsule cannot).

WHS is a home file server that provides RAID-like redundant storage of shared files, as well as a central backup store. The backups use SIS (Single Instance Store) so that only one copy of any file is stored - operating system, application and other files that are identical on multiple systems (or even on multiple partitions or directories on one system) are not duplicated.

Files open during backups? No problem, VSS (Volume Shadow Services) will help ensure that the backup is consistent at the moment that the backup is run.

Accidentally delete or mess up a file? Open the WHS GUI and look at the backups for the system/drive in question. Click one and say "view", and in a few minutes File Explorer will open with a view (as a network share) of that disk at that point in time. Drag the good version of the file to where you want. (A "few minutes" because the virtual share is created on demand.)

Laptop hard drive crash, destroying everything? Install the replacement drive, and let WHS do a "bare metal restore" of the system from the latest backup.

 

[Eidorian]

I just paid $150 for a Netgear Dual-Band WNDR3700, which is, hardware-wise, one of the better ones out there (though the firmware is less than stellar). I'd been using a WRT54G T-Mobile version (double the RAM and Flash) flashed with Tomato, but I needed 5ghz due to interference -- plus I wanted the higher speed and range for the 802.11n.

I just replaced my aging Belkin with a $29 ASUS N12 running dd-wrt until 802.11n final gets sorted out on the hardware vendor side in say 2011.

But to many Apple users, the integration of all of the functions (NAS, broadband gigabit router, dual-band WiFi router, print server/external drive USB port) into a single, attractive box is very appealing. Not my thing as I have a whole room full of separates, RAIDs, etc. But I see the appeal. So do many others.

It's too much to fail in one box with no redundancy on the backup. The Time Capsule isn't known for its reliability.

I hope that it works out well for you. There's nothing wrong with the HP Home Servers, but neither are they really true competitors to Time Capsule. Different purposes and markets.

I have been seriously considering a DROBO hanging off of a Firewire 800 port. Fill it up with four 2TB drives and get 6TB of usable, RAIDED storage. I'd probably go for the WD Green series drives. The Samsungs I got seem fine but are a bit noisier.

The Home Server hangs off of your network like an appliance. The dedicated hardware leaves you free to use whatever router you'd like and back up not only your Windows machines over the network but also your Macs via Time Machine. There's also a level of redundancy and expansion beyond a single drive. It's tempting at $199 for the bottom of the barrel Atom based model at 500 GB.

That's one thing that Apple gets: the value of quiet. My 8 core Mac Pro is whisper-quiet. Same with my girlfriend's Mac Mini.

Dead silent at 600 RPM in my P180 mini with a Core i5 750. I'd have to use SSDs to get any quieter. My Macbook wasn't silent until the replaced the logic board with a newer one.

 

[AidenShaw]

I wonder if Aiden misspoke by using Time Machine instead of Time Capsule.

In some ways I did misspeak - I get confused by Apple's cute product names. ("Retina Display" - do I wear that instead of contact lenses?)

I'm still asked by certain peers why Apple doesn't have a version of Volume Shadow Copy.

It is surprising, since without Volume Shadow Services (or equivalent functionality) it's impossible to ensure a consistent backup snapshot of a volume that's in active use.

But, maybe a backup where "most of my files are OK" is good enough.

Volume shadow copies are a required feature for high end server storage environments. ...and also standard in Windows client systems.

And, I have no idea what the idea of "VSS running in the background" means, nor how that relates to Time Machine - without VSS (or an equivalent) it's not possible for Time Machine to get a consistent backup of a volume that's in use.

 

[AidenShaw]

On the other hand, the single drive in it is not a big draw.

On the other hand, for me, the fact that it has 3 empty hot swap dive bays available out-of-the-box is a big draw. (I have four 1.5 TB drives in my HP WHS - 6 TB of storage in a selectable mix of RAID-1 mirrored important stuff and non-mirrored backups and other stuff (like my TiVo captures).)

And I ask why Windows (not Server) doesn't natively support RAID mirroring.

Why would you ask that, since Windows does support RAID-1 mirroring in the client systems?

I would rather have the native RAID support plus Time Machine.

Volume Shadow Copy seems like a lot of complexity

Anyone who mentions Volume Shadowing and RAID in the same sentence seriously misunderstands one or the other. They are unrelated, and address unrelated problems.

RAID mirroring: Please duplicate every write across two physical drives, so that if a drive fails the other is a complete copy of all data.

Volume Shadowing: On this volume (which could be a RAID array of any config) - please notify all applications with open files on the volume that a shadow has started. This gives complex applications like Exchange and databases the opportunity to update all tables and indices to a crash-consistent state. After all applications have responded, perform the equivalent of an _fflushall on all open writeable files to update any write buffers on disk. Then, create a frozen snapshot of the volume, so that any writes from this point on are not visible to the snapshot - but are visible to the rest of the system. After the snapshot is closed, free any of the "copy on write" sectors that were changed during the snapshot.​

Without volume shadow services, your Time Capsule backup may be crap. (And note that it's essential to do it on a system-wide basis - file-based snapshots can be inconsistent.)

 

[parapup]

You are incorrect, but read on...

I never had trouble finding my apps (duh!). The problem is that those apps add countless numbers of registry entries and DLLs.

So? Is that a problem in your head or you are saying it causes some grief to you in 2010? If so what exactly?

Google Search for "Windows 7" "Slow boot" results in about 34,000 results

snow leopard memory hog - 134,000 results. Ironic. Again what was your point? At least I think you are not claiming this is a "technical" discussion as you used Google as a proof to claim something sucks. Instead I will give you the technical proof - My Leopard machine on old Core2 MBP is taking up 164Mb in wired memory, 688Mb in used after few hours of use. My Snow Leopard MBP with 4GB RAM takes 789Mb Wired on boot up - nothing running or installed. That is 600Mb of additional memory in use (not cached, not pageable but straight burnt.) Microsoft could not afford to do something so crappy.

Yeah, right. Every trojan horse and piece of malware is listed there, too, right? What you're not getting is that there are like a half dozen different means that an application can force itself to load at boot time and they are not all listed and controlled by MSConfig. Take a look at the old program Startup Cop that lists the many places that an app can start.

Sure if one is stupid enough to install Trojans and Malware on Windows - if there are enough trojans available for OSX he/she will succeed equally well there too. Solution - if not obvious - don't do stupid stuff and you won't get Trojans. Simple.

But you're still missing it: It's often nearly impossible to tell what's hogging resources during startup. It's not like you can bring up Task Manager before Window starts. And even if you do manage to discover what's taking so long, do you know that the "uninstall" will remove all registry entries, all files that it's added to the system directories, and all processes that it invokes upon startup? Do you know that it will return to stock all system settings that it modified? No.

So you are saying you can install any crap on the system and then complain that it sucks? And then complain that you can't find what crap you installed in first place because Windows doesn't let you see what is going on before it starts up? No offense but that's idiotic. Plus there is Safe Mode since I forget when. Then there is also System Restore. What else do you expect the OS should do if you are bent on installing crap? Then there is the issue of quality of Apps - Windows allows you to have a OSX style portable app that does no changes to registry and puts all its DLLs in isolated directory. If you use Apps that abuse the system it's hardly the system's fault.

Your lack of knowledge and comprehension is not my problem. Discussions of fragmentation of registry and swap files, registry bloat, and architectural flaws (e.g., apps writing to system directories) are technical. You, on the other hand, seem to want to argue that it's 'good enough' because it's popular.

Ha! Discussions about Global Warming, Alien Invasion, Hunger Free World et.al are also technical then? Or would we have to discuss the specifics for it to be technical? You say some often heard words and think that's a technical discussion and blame my skills for not "getting it" but you fail to explain / define the specifics and then go on to "prove" something based on Google search results. That's hard to take seriously. I don't want to drop to elementary level here - but when you say "Registry gets Fragmented" try first understanding what that means and then explain why that is so and how that affects you. For example you can say "Registry Search Algorithms have a quadratic behavior and so as I add things retrieving them becomes costlier resulting in slow downs". Then we can have a technical discussion.

And I am not arguing Windows is good enough *because* 90 some percent of people use it. I was trying to give you a clue, a starting point. NT is actually a very well designed system underneath. Sure Microsoft made its mistakes - if they even had the Firewall enabled by default prior to XP SP2 they wouldn't have gotten such a bad rap about security. The other part of the bad rap they get is due to Win 98/ME/SE - those are not NT based - I wouldn't even call them OSes. You say Windows lacks security but it's built right into it since beginning. Microsoft just made bad decision not to enforce it - that doesn't make Windows bad, not in 2010 when they fixed most of that.

 

[node808]

Oh my gad, i really thought osx could be good at gaming, but alas, this comes up. with a huge letdown and a big punch in the stomach for gaming on a mac.

I thought they would be good at gaming too. I realize this is a driver issue, but the integrated GPU's on all Macs and PC's arent really intended for gaming anyway. The hardware in the mid to low end Macs leaves a lot to be desired. OSX can only do so much, but it cant perform miracles.

 

[AidenShaw]

...but the integrated GPU's on all Macs and PC's arent really intended for gaming anyway.

Fortunately, many of those under $500 PC mini-towers with integrated graphics have PCIe x16 V2 slots, so that you can turn off the integrated graphics and use a more powerful discrete card.

Gives a good low price for the adverts, and let's one BTO (or DIY) a reasonable card.

(The $500 systems probably won't have a power supply adequate for the top card, but that's OK. If you're planning on spending over $500 on a 1.5GiB GTX 480 card, you probably won't expect to plug it into a system that costs less than the GPU.)

The hardware in the mid to low end Macs leaves a lot to be desired.

And the Apples have no user expansion options other than increasing the memory.

 

[Tex-Twil]

hi,
is there a way to revert 10.6.4 to 10.6.3 ?

 

[DMann]

hi,
is there a way to revert 10.6.4 to 10.6.3 ?

Yes, install the Mac OS X v10.6.3 Update (Combo)

This, however, will require a reinstall the original System Disks, and then you can update up to 10.6.3.

Hope this helps.

 

[Tex-Twil]

This, however, will require a reinstall the original System Disks, and then you can update up to 10.6.3.

what does that mean ?

 

[Erasmus]

what does that mean ?

It means you have to format your hard disk, install an earlier version of 10.6, and then update to 10.6.3.

Which means you will need to back up your data, as a full format is required.

 

[Tex-Twil]

It means you have to format your hard disk, install an earlier version of 10.6, and then update to 10.6.3.

Which means you will need to back up your data, as a full format is required.

ok so the answer to my question is no I can't revert to 10.6.3.

 

[Erasmus]

ok so the answer to my question is no I can't revert to 10.6.3.

Depends on your definition of "revert"?

 

[DMann]

ok so the answer to my question is no I can't revert to 10.6.3.

Depends on your definition of "revert"?

True, when you updated to 10.6.4, system files were changed, making it impossible to merely downshift back to 10.6.3

Reverting is possible by reinstalling 10.6, (System Disk) which will automatically reformat the drive, (although, a clean install is always recommended to avoid conflicts) and then updating to 10.6.3 using the Combo Update.