WWDC Keynote

[Rower_CPU]

Originally posted by jelloshotsrule
it's a reasonable request to want the current hardware line to have totally optimized performance for system software...

on the same note though, rower (and other ibook folks), keep in mind that apple "recommends" a g4 to run os x.

so maybe if you think about the graphics cards in that sense for quartz extreme... maybe you won't be as upset.

either way though, i hear where you're coming from. but i don't think it's totally unreasonable. just not ideal.

I'm afraid that I've been coming off a little too harshly this whole time. I'm really excited about the changes in 10.2. I'm really looking forward to how they'll improve performance on the recommended machines.

I just think Apple could have done a little more to appease users of older technology. And it's sad that "older" in this case applies to two week old PowerBooks and PCI PowerMacs...

 

[jelloshotsrule]

Originally posted by Rower_CPU
I just think Apple could have done a little more to appease users of older technology. And it's sad that "older" in this case applies to two week old PowerBooks and PCI PowerMacs...

i agree. but again, i don't think it necessarily means "old" as much as not optimal. i mean, the g3 has never been recommended for os x in general. just as the non-high end graphics cards won't be recommended. i'm sure there will be a good amount of performance increase with any decent card (whether 32 or not) and probably just in general they will have improved the speed somewhat.

guess we have to wait and see what it actually feels like in real life computing...

 

[nickgold]

So what IS the problem with OS X now, then?

Is, "Finder doesn't scroll my single-foldered CD-ROM with 4000 MP3s as nicely as I think it should" the problem with OS X? I am using 10.1.4 on a 450 Sawtooth that me papy bought me (bless his heart), and I have used different revs of OS X on all sorts of other machines, from dual-800s to ibook 500s (rev1 I believe). This is in a small hi-tech company environment. And I was never like, Hmmmm, OS X is seriously blowing on this thing. Okay, maybe a few times... But really, isn't it pretty darn kicka$$ as is? Obviously it can't be as 100% dedicated to single tasks as OS 9. That's the whole point. The fact is, it is now up to par. Continued graphics system optimization is only a plus, even if every last user can't take advtantage of it.

 

[irmongoose]

how can any of you NOT be excited abuot this whole thing? It's showing that OS X has come up to where OS 9 was, and all it needs is a little speed. And with Jaguar, they are finally taking us to the future. Meaning.. something we haven't seen before. WAKE UP! The ride is just about to start!

And oh, I just realized another thing. I don't think iChat is gonna have any other service available... only AIM. You know why? Because it was all part of the contract with AOL/Time back when Time had the whole iMac-on-the-front-cover thingy. Time did that, and Apple would integrate an AIM-running app in the next major release of OS X.

And those of you with the ibooks, don't worry, there's still 4 months for Apple to come up with some way to integrate the OpenGl thing into teh older machines. That's why they had a PREVIEW release, and that's also why they are not gonna release it for the next 4 months.


so hang on tight, Steve is gonna take us to the FUTURE!!!!!





irmongoose

 

[foniks2020]

Finder will be multi-threaded..

In the Etcetera section you'll see that: "Et Cetera
The Finder features spring-loaded folders to aid in navigation — and is multi-threaded for superior performance... "

Multi-threaded means much faster Finder. Regardless of how the rendering is accomplished many of the normal UI functions are going to be much improved in performance over 10.1

How much does it really take to render windows really? Seems like it's been getting done quite well for a while w/o Quartz Extreme.. I do think they should provide support for all graphics cards that support OpenGL routines though, not just 4xAGP.. if GL is supported why shouldn't it benefit the OS?

Also about speed, I heard a while back that Apple is including super optimized (assembler) math routines for the PPC with 10.2 which should also add to all Mac user's performance quite a bit. This was something that didn't make it over from OS 9.0 until now and will be a part of the Darwin kernel instead of something Apple only. Also makes sense when you think about the optimized Java VM for the rack mount servers, etc.

Anyways, it looks like all the evidence points to significant performance boosts across the board w/ QE more like a 4G tech that will benefit 4G (or should that read G4) machines.

 

[eirik]

QE

I'm wondering if SJ did QE (Quartz Extreme) justice in his announcement. As mentioned before, some nVidia guru recently talked of the next wave in video cards, which BTW begins in August... hmmm.

From what my faulty memory can reassemble, he said something to the effect that video cards would start addressing anti-aliasing and other characteristics for higher quality visualization that haven't really been addressed by video cards as much as frames per second and number of this shape per second blah, blah.

So my friends, I believe QE is not just about speed; its also about improved quality!

On another issue, QE support on machines with less than recommended video cards. I earlier wrote a rambling post on this. I started out stating that anything that can handle OpenGL would make your QE experience better.

But this assumes that many hands makes light work. That is, if your less than stellar video card can only handle 30% of the QE load without latency and overload, then the other 70% of the QE load would be allocated to your CPU as it is now.

So, since the cards aren't helping now, we'd see an improvement right? Maybe not. What if QE's OpenGL's acceleration means 'all or nothing'? That is, if a video card can handle OpenGL then it has to handle all of QE's OpenGL, the CPU would not share the burden. This, if true, could be awful and would undoubtedly require some controls to ensure that underperforming video cards simply don't engage QE. Why? Simply because in the example in the paragraph above, the video card could only handle 30% of the QE load without becoming overwhelmed, as illustrated by the obvious latency. This example also suggests that your CPU would be capable of handling more load (most likely would be a G4, BTW). So, if a video card with a little thingy, should not enter QE, if this feared all or nothing scenario is true, the outcome would not be pleasing.

Hmmm! [scratches his whisker covered chin]

Eirik

 

[Backtothemac]

Re: So what IS the problem with OS X now, then?

Originally posted by nickgold
If you are a lame little kid who wants to whine about the fact that your completely disorganized CD of 4000 pirated MP3s doesn't scroll quite as beautifully as you would like in the finder -- get a life, or a girlfriend, or something. Friends? Some personal satisfaction in your life outside of the scroll speed of your computer's freaking windows? Geez Louise!


Is, "Finder doesn't scroll my single-foldered CD-ROM with 4000 MP3s as nicely as I think it should" the problem with OS X? I am using 10.1.4 on a 450 Sawtooth that me papy bought me (bless his heart), and I have used different revs of OS X on all sorts of other machines, from dual-800s to ibook 500s (rev1 I believe). This is in a small hi-tech company environment. And I was never like, Hmmmm, OS X is seriously blowing on this thing. Okay, maybe a few times... But really, isn't it pretty darn kicka$$ as is? Obviously it can't be as 100% dedicated to single tasks as OS 9. That's the whole point. The fact is, it is now up to par. Continued graphics system optimization is only a plus, even if every last user can't take advtantage of it.

Arn, sorry for this before I even start.
First lets get something straight toolboy. I have a wife, child and a wonderful job. I don't sit around and play with my G4 450 that me "pappy" bought me. I have, unlike you, worked for every friggin thing that I have ever gotten in life. You should try it sometime, it really is refreshing to actually support yourself.

Second
Don't run around spouting off at the mouth about "pirated" anything. You know nothing about me, or my moral character. I don't know how old you are, or where you are from, but you will find that there are things you just don't do in life, and you will learn that lesson one day. You see here in the South, in person, running your mouth like you have been, somebody would have already given you that lesson.

Third
I am not running around saying that I am going to a PC, or that Apple blows chunks, or that I hate the Macs in my family. I am very excited about Quartz Extreme and think that it is a MUST HAVE upgrade. I am also saying that the G3 users out there who have been told by Apple since jump that there computers would be FULLY supported, have been lied to.

Now let me say that slowly for your dense head. T-H-E-Y H-A-V-E B-E-E-N
L-I-E-D T-O. There did you get that? It really is not that difficult of a concept, and I bet that you would have a different opinion on this if you had just purchased a Ti book with YOUR OWN FRIGGIN MONEY just two weeks ago.

Fourth
No the iBook is no the top of the line Mac notebook, however, a lot of people have purchase the 'top of the line' iBook. The fact is that it is frustrating to know that your machine will never get faster at handling X. Now berfore you go all stupid on us, X to X.1 was sooooo much faster. Each X.1.X release has been a little faster. Thus, we (G3 owners) have long thought that 10.2 would be much faster with a non bloated code (thanks Rower ). Now for whatever reason your elevator doesn't go all the way to the top, and I know it is hard for you to pay attention with the drool running out of the corner of your mouth, but please for all of our sanity, would you just try?

Fifth
I am satisfied with the speed of X. In fact, I think it is "snappy" on my iBooks, however, I think it could be improved when going through folders with large amounts of files. Like the over 2,000 pictures of my family that I have on the machine. Oh, and one more thing toolboy. It is not the scroll speed, that is fine. It is the 10 minutes that the CD icon (not an actual CD dolt, who in the hell can fit 4,000 mp3's on a CD?) spins before you can scroll the folder that is the problem.

Now, I am done, you are a geek. Get a life and let people vent without having an inmature child provoke a flamewar.

Again, sorry Arn, but me and Rower both laid off, and this guy just kept coming. Looks like we have a new Cyrus in the hizouse!

 

[buffsldr]

C'mon, BacktotheMac.... Who said anything about your moral character? I think it is your morale that is low.

But anyway, the fact you have 4000 mp3s in one folder without subfolders does lend itself to the idea that you did not use itunes to import from cds. But even if you did, I dont judge you, bro.

 

[cryptochrome]

Originally posted by Rocketman

The inkwell will allow those many users already using tablets in lieu of other pointing devices as primary input to visit the keybpoard less often and those with special non-character applications (chinese) to actually use a mac. There are a few chinese and asians out there wanting to use Macs folks, like 3 times as many as in the US and no peecee adoption issues because a peecee CAN'T DO IT AT ALL.

Assuming, of course, that inkwell can recognize glyph-based (or even just non-roman) alphabets. Being able to reliably interpret a set of ~100 characters is one thing - recognizing thousands upon thousands of separate characters is another. I'm not saying it can't, but you shouldn't assume so.

 

[Backtothemac]

Originally posted by buffsldr
C'mon, BacktotheMac.... Who said anything about your moral character? I think it is your morale that is low.

But anyway, the fact you have 4000 mp3s in one folder without subfolders does lend itself to the idea that you did not use itunes to import from cds. But even if you did, I dont judge you, bro.

Hey, believe me my morale is fine, I just can't stand illogical people. Anyway. They came from my old Athlon system. Therefore to make things easier, I placed everything in one folder so that I did not miss, or forget anything on the Athlon before I sold it to become (lighting strikes and thunder)

..(in loud voice like God talking) BACKTOTHEMAC!

 

[gjohns01]

Re: Finder will be multi-threaded..

Originally posted by foniks2020
In the Etcetera section you'll see that: "Et Cetera
The Finder features spring-loaded folders to aid in navigation — and is multi-threaded for superior performance... "

Multi-threaded means much faster Finder. Regardless of how the rendering is accomplished many of the normal UI functions are going to be much improved in performance over 10.1

How much does it really take to render windows really? Seems like it's been getting done quite well for a while w/o Quartz Extreme.. I do think they should provide support for all graphics cards that support OpenGL routines though, not just 4xAGP.. if GL is supported why shouldn't it benefit the OS?

Also about speed, I heard a while back that Apple is including super optimized (assembler) math routines for the PPC with 10.2 which should also add to all Mac user's performance quite a bit. This was something that didn't make it over from OS 9.0 until now and will be a part of the Darwin kernel instead of something Apple only. Also makes sense when you think about the optimized Java VM for the rack mount servers, etc.

Anyways, it looks like all the evidence points to significant performance boosts across the board w/ QE more like a 4G tech that will benefit 4G (or should that read G4) machines.

I haven't gone through the Quartz docs all that much so I may be a little technically off base. I believe the reason AGP and 32MB are required is that the image you will be seeing is compositied offscreen (in all of it's 24bit color, drop shadows, transparancies, and everything else glory) and then pushed on screen. That composite image probably needs everybit of the AGP bandwidth and VRAM in the system. I could be wrong. Maybe there's someone reading these posts that can give a better explanation.

 

[eric_n_dfw]

Nitpicking

I know I'm nitpicking, but people keep saying the 32MB is a requirement. Will everyone please repeat after me, "32MB VRAM is NOT required. It is a recomendation."

Also, I didn't have time last night to try the disabling of double buffering that I mentioned yesterday. Maybe tonight.

 

[Grokgod]

straight to Backtothemac

Now that was quite an angry, name calling post.

My reply to that is this.

The G4 is recommended for OSX
Not the G3, not in the past, not now , not ever.
Anyone that bought a G3 and didnt realize this.
is not aware of what is or has been obvious to many people.

Therefore if the G3 has NEVER been recommended for OSX.
Its hardly a surprise that it isnt within the recent recommended video requirements!
It is a low end unit, despite the fact that it is a so called high end within the
confines of its own subgroup of low end G3's.

If someone didnt understand these painfully obvious facts.
Then the delusion or desire for a cheap mac has gotten in the way
of the obvious logic of the situation.
G3's are not meant to run OSX in a manner that is similar to higher end units.
I think that all your name calling is sad considering that you seem unware of what is blatant to perhaps the most mentally retarded.

I am not certain how they do things in the South, it seems they dont do them well enough because you bought the wrong laptop at the wrong time and are running the wrong os on it.

Where I come from we call that asinine. or pathetic.

The fact that you used your own money, begs the question, why didnt you respect it more and make a purchase that reflects a better understanding of the situation.

G3 units are old chips, very old, and are meant for people that cant afford or do not have the credit to buy a better unit .
I dont know how old you are but maybe you should get more money or better credit before you make decisions that will cause you to react this way.

Maybe its your station in life that is making you so angry and not the G3.

If you have in fact purchased so many things in the past then you understand that you get what you pay for. This is even more true in the Mac world where cheap hardware is at a premium of costs.!

I, personally didnt enjoy your rant, I found it sad.

If a person gets a computer from dad or mom or where ever.
Its of little consequence.
The fact that they made a good decision is what is important.
You have not, and are paying the price.
Welcome to the real world.
I would have thought that at your age this is a lesson that you would have already learned.

BUT, I do agree with you on the Ti books!
yet again, I think that you are failing to understand the situation.
32 megs is the RECOMMENDED for OPtimum performance.
Its the chipset functions and its AGP slot that are needed.
The new Ti books are not obsolete, at all.
They will work faster and better on the new Quartz.

 

[Backtothemac]

Re: straight to Backtothemac

Grok
Well lets see here, you know what your are right. I bought my iBooks two months ago, and OS X came out over a year ago, and Apple shipped my iBooks with OS X as the startup OS. Now I tell you what I will just switch back to 9. Yea, that will work, except that now 9 is dead, and no more development will occur. So that means I am stuck forever in the land of no progress. Wait, hark, what is that an update for the STANDARD OS that came on my machines! Oh, too bad, we cannot fully support your new computer.

To hell with money, credit, and whether anyone thinks the iBooks are a good purchase. They do what I need them to do. I just wish, like so many other people that X (ONLY X 9 FLY'S) would do it a little faster. With each update to X we G3 users have gained a better experience with the OS, and it appears that it will end with X.2. Now what Rower and I have been trying to explain to the young lad is that it is frustrating, not life threating, that X.2 will not fully support the millions of G3 systems that are out there. All we are trying to say is that this is not a smart move by Apple.

They should have found a way to help the OS for us. Let us turn off all of the cool Eyecandy. That would be a way to help us. Give us the ability to kill the dock if we choose. That would give us a stable OS that did not kill our little ancient G3's.

As far as the young lad, well he has brought it on himself, and I cannot wait to see his response. Oh, and one other thing. I had no delusions about a cheap Mac. I purchase two laptops that were 1500 dollars each. That isn't cheap. 999 for a Dell, that's cheap. Just because I did not spend 2499 on a TiBook doesn't mean that I should not have an optimized system. Wait, I am sorry. I would have had to wait for the new TiBooks. I agree with Rower in that I think the OS is getting even more bloated. I would love to have a preview version of X.2 so I could either say, yep I am right, or Man was I wrong. The fact is we will just have to wait and see.

Now your logic is flawed though when you say that you are in agreement with me about the Rev A,B, and C Ti's, but not the iBooks just because they have a G3. The G3 is not the issue. In fact, in 90% of real world apps, my little iBook will run with a Ti 500 or 550. It is the graphics subsystem that is the issue. It is the lack of hardware support in the OS for the hardware that the company sells that is the issue.

I'm not leaving Apple, I don't hate Apple. I am frustrated though, and for a just reason. That is all.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: straight to Backtothemac

Originally posted by Grokgod
...If a person gets a computer from dad or mom or where ever.
Its of little consequence.
The fact that they made a good decision is what is important.
You have not, and are paying the price.
Welcome to the real world.
I would have thought that at your age this is a lesson that you would have already learned...

It makes a WORLD of difference between being given a computer and having to buy it yourself. If you're not sweating the budget, then you have NO perspective on what it means to purchase a new machine or upgrade an old one (if possible).

They didn't have ANY part in the decision making process, so praising them for a good decision is faulty logic.

It seems we have a lot of "holier than thou" types around here with AGP PowerMacs and last weeks TiBooks who are thumbing their noses at the rest of the Mac using population...get a clue and take a look at what this move by Apple is really all about: $

 

[Grokgod]

About the Ti's

Well, I added to my post a bit late.

Let me add this here.
My logic is not flawed.
Ti books will run the new Quartz Extreme.
Extreme will look for certain chipset functions and a AGP port.
So any of the mobile radeon ati's will run extreme despite the ram.
32 megs is recommended! for optimum.

We all know that optimum is an ever changing event.
Therefore this variable is merely a signpost for the a debate or dialogue.

G3's do not run with the G4, there is Altivec also.
And system bus speed, etc
Yes the Os is the issue and the OS has requirement that are not in the iBook.

Despite that fact that OSx came loaded on your computer.
That is not supposed to defy the reality that a G4 is recommended by apple.
This was obvious when you bought the iBook.
The ibook was NEVER FULLY supported.
Why you are amazed that it isnt fully supported on a update is something I am afraid I dont understand.

The iBook have always been in this land you call "No Progress"

If the iBooks do what you need them to do but not fast enough as you say.
Then speed is something that you want them to do and they cannot DO.
You call that a good purchase, not in my eyes. Or yours.

As you said OSX is there to give you an experience.
It will not end with 10.2, but your perception of the experience will change.
Knowing that there are others getting a better or speedier experince.
Wasnt this always the case, relating the G3 to any G4?
I am certain that it was, but now you are more aware of it and the approaching divide tween the two experiences.

This is actually a smart move on Apples part.
Because it is the only move.
Surely you understand the pitfalls of lesser technology and that higher end tech is needed to improve speed and useability.
iBook specs are pathetic compared to real world computer technical specs or what is potentially possible. Apple is merely being upfront with the needed requirements, and repeating the obvious that iBooks are lowend and cannot support the new os in a manner that is comparable to what will hopefully soon arrive in newer technology.
This the the par for the course in the computer world.
Buy low stay low, longer.

1500 dollars is cheap, sorry.
Very cheap, you have to compare relative prices to the high end units.
3199 vs 1500. that is less than half, which equals cheap.
A 1500 mac is a cheap mac compared to what can be spent on a Mac.
To think otherwise is Delusion. The numers do not lie. This is not merely opinion.

Finally i would say that, Yes.
The fact that you bought an iBook which is not recommeded for OSX.
Means that you will never have an optimized system.
You never did.

Hell my new lcd iMac barely runs the damn thing.
And your complaining?

 

[agoldweber]

Apple is in a tough position--they produce hardware AND an OS. They are pushing their new OS while also trying to keep up with some hardware updates. It seems the line has to be drawn at some point where previously released hardware is left behind.

Where and when do you draw that line? Certainly we'd all agree that they don't need to support a 604/120... or do we all agree? That being said, the nature of technology is progress. A major part of progress is deciding how and when things in the past are left behind. It may be sucky for someone who has made a recent purchase, but everytime there is a major software update, some hardware owner is left behind.

What about the day when VHS tapes are no longer produced? What about the guy who bought a top-of-the-line VCR the day BEFORE the production stops? Does a company owe him something?

It seems we need to ask ourselves: why did we buy the box we bought? was it to always have the latest and greatest? or was it because it is what we could afford at the time and it suited our needs--games, web, work, etc.

It seems like folly to expect we'll always be up-to-date. It seems like a bigger folly to expect Apple to take care of us. We may be fans of their products and even their people, but let's face it: they're a multi-billion dollar business just like good ol Microsoft.

 

[eirik]

iBook

This thread is starting to wear on me!!!

Is the iBook video card soldered in place or sealed within a plastic casing? In otherwords, is the iBook owner FORBIDDEN from upgrading the video card?

Now, I suspect that the key driver for performance in the video card is video memory. That way it can store all of the frequently needed textures and things. That said, is there a Rage card with similar horsepower but more memory?

Given this development of QE and provided my assumption about the importance of RAM is correct, then I would not be surprised to see nVidia and ATI offer compatiable cards with more RAM for those textures and things.

I'm stretching things a bit here. But I'd much rather we discuss specific technical limitations, options, and possibilities for people to make the most of QE with what they've got plus an upgrade than what frankly has become banter about Apple and buyer responsibility.

So, there are a lot of questions in this post, explicit and implicit. Let's see if we can help our friends with Mac's that do not appear poised to enjoy all of the fruits of QE as those who buy the new cards from nVidia in August (maybe this will be a solution).

Eirik

 

[Backtothemac]

Grok....

Mac OS 9 Guide
Bring Your Mac Into the 21st Century
This handy guide for owners of Mac OS 9 and earlier systems will help you get up and running on Mac OS X. Learn useful shortcuts, system layout and, best of all, what you can forget.

System Requirements
To use Mac OS X, you will need an iMac, iBook, Power Mac G3, Power Mac G4, Power Mac G4 Cube, PowerBook G3, or PowerBook G4 computer with at least 128MB of physical RAM. Mac OS X does not support the original PowerBook G3 or processor upgrade cards. Check the supported products grid.

Where does it say that that a G4 is recommended? Where does Apple give this info?

 

[Backtothemac]

Re: iBook

Originally posted by eirik
This thread is starting to wear on me!!!

Is the iBook video card soldered in place or sealed within a plastic casing? In otherwords, is the iBook owner FORBIDDEN from upgrading the video card?

Now, I suspect that the key driver for performance in the video card is video memory. That way it can store all of the frequently needed textures and things. That said, is there a Rage card with similar horsepower but more memory?

Given this development of QE and provided my assumption about the importance of RAM is correct, then I would not be surprised to see nVidia and ATI offer compatiable cards with more RAM for those textures and things.

I'm stretching things a bit here. But I'd much rather we discuss specific technical limitations, options, and possibilities for people to make the most of QE with what they've got plus an upgrade than what frankly has become banter about Apple and buyer responsibility.

So, there are a lot of questions in this post, explicit and implicit. Let's see if we can help our friends with Mac's that do not appear poised to enjoy all of the fruits of QE as those who buy the new cards from nVidia in August (maybe this will be a solution).

Eirik

Reality is that saddly that the chip is soldered into place. Also, it is not just memory, but the sets of instructions that the chip must perform. The Rage chipses will not work. Period. They never will. That is ok though. When I get an uber job, I will by the newest baddest Mac out there and be happy.

 

[Rower_CPU]

Re: About the Ti's

Originally posted by Grokgod
Well, I added to my post a bit late.

Let me add this here.
My logic is not flawed.
Ti books will run the new Quartz Extreme.
Extreme will look for certain chipset functions and a AGP port.
So any of the mobile radeon ati's will run extreme despite the ram.
32 megs is recommended! for optimum...Hell my new lcd iMac barely runs the damn thing.

Once again you're dancing around the issue.
ONLY the TiBooks released two weeks ago meet the recommended requirements.

The fact of the matter is that since we done have QE in our hands, we don't know what kind of performance to expect from systems that don't meet the recommended requirements.

And your LCD iMac DOES meet the recommended requirements, so it's no big surprise that you're not complaining.

 

[Grokgod]

Rower~

Sorry if it seems that I am dancing around the issue.
I understand that only the new Powerbooks have the MIN.
I dont think I am dancing when I say that graphics cards below the MIN
will still be able to use Extreme as lonog as it is a card that has the proper instruction code built into the graphics chipset.
An example would be Nvidia's famous lighting capabilities which were hardwired into the chipset.
Its that simple. Without the proper chipset there wll be NO speed up.
No matter how much Ram you have. I think that is very clear.

Expect slower performances and in some instances no support for extreme without the proper chipset.

Again~ Its recommended for OPTIMUM performance.

How many games have people played with below the min spec on their computers. It will run in accordance to the video chipset properties.

Of course my iMac has the MIN, I wouldnt have bought ANYTHING that has below 32 megs, its painfully obvious that this was the lowest acceptable level of ram and chipset properties. Why would I buy something that is bound to cause me to gripe. I perfer to be happy about my computer purchases.
Dont you?

I have to add here, that as in the game market.
The recommended is NOT what will make your game run snappy and fast.
32 megs on the right chipset will make it run.
I have NO illusions that this will be the best card for the OS. Its obvious that a 128 meg card is what is really needed and these cards are out on the market. As are 64 meg cards for laptops.

I am in the market for a new Ti, and have been for while.
I almost couldnt contain myself from buying the 667.
But it was obvious that it would have been a mistake!

Will I buy the 800?
Well, If I do, I will with the understanding that the video card and cpu speed will not be up to par in the near future. And since I cannot upgrade laptops that have video chips soldered onto the motherboard to cut costs and space.
I will be stuck with it.
But thats the nature of laptops. You have to buy at the crest of the wave.
Or get soaked!

People with agp g3 towers can upgrade and enjoy speed increases!

 

[Rower_CPU]

Grok-
Your points are good.

I'm going to try to settle down for awhile and take a wait and see approach. For all we know there may be performance increases across the board...but somehow I doubt it.

 

[buffsldr]

Straight to all people reading (or scanning) these threads:

Here is the readers digest version


Back: I feel cheated. I paid for a comp with a standard os and now I cant take full advantage of an update.
Grok: that is your own fault, you knew the g3 was not optimized for your comp.
Rower: You are young and stupid <insert more personal attacks here>

Its a cruel hard world, ain't it?

 

[Mr. Anderson]

When I upgraded to FCP3, certain transitions were made to be realtime, so that you didn't have to render them in order to preview them.

Apple wrote a script that basically assigned the number of realtime effects you could do on your machine by looking at the system profile. By editing this, you could disable the script and get all the scripts to run in realtime.

And what happened? It worked great, and if it was too much to handle, the playback would skip a frame or two to catch up. This was a great little hack and it also showed that even if my system didn't meet the minimum requirements for what I was trying to do it still ran well.

I would imagine that the same thing will happen for EQ. Now whether there is a script you can edit to increase your options, that remains to be seen. But I'm guessing that if you can install OSX on your machine, OSX.2 will work as well.