Mac OS X 10.4.9 (8P2111) Seeded to Developers

[treblah]

So you would rather that Apple release a buggy OS that tech sites would rip apart, trash, and generally give bad reviews instead of waiting a few months and released a polished OS.

Very true.

Oh wait, nevermind.

Tiger is the best version of Mac OS X yet. It offers substantial improvements over Panther in all important areas. The performance improvements are immediately noticeable.

Apple Mac OS X 10.4 "Tiger" is the strongest OS X release yet and a worthy competitor to Windows XP.…That's fine, I guess: Tiger performs well, looks great, and offers many modern OS features.

Those were the first Google returns for Tiger reviews but that pretty much covers everyone from edge-case Mac users to Microsoft shills. Here's to hoping Leopard is twice as 'bad' as Tiger. BTW, did you run 10.4.0? I thought you just got your first Mac.

 

[madmax_2069]

Not in that way, but there have been some things like that:

• Mac OS 9.0.4 v2
• System 7.0.1P
• System 7.1.2P
• System 7.5.3 Revision 2
• System 7.5.3 Revision 2.1
• System 7.5.3 Revision 2.2

And there were a few others, but I can't remember. I want to say that I read something about a Mac OS X release with a v2 after it, but I can't remember which one.

in OS X they redid the 10.2.8 update. cant remember why but i know that was one version of OS X that was rereleased

This better fix the problem with Safari regarding flash and drop down menus.

For example, on BestBuy.com, when you try and select an item from a drop down menu (such as Software under Computers), the menu flickers or disappears.

...Drives me crazy.

i have the same problem here to bro, it to drives me nuts that flash dont and has never worked right on a mac at all that i have seen in any version of Mac OS/OS X.



its like the dropdown get hidden by the picture. it just dont happen on bestbuy.com either many other sites do this as well. best buy is a good example for what the other sites do also

But that's the thing I don't understand... I not only am using a G4, but a slower one with less memory (probably) than either of you.

Why is it that it doesn't tank my iBook?

safari dont take 100% of my cpu but it comes close (also im on a Beige G3 running at 466mhz. it does run/move ok but my compaq celoron 500mhz with 64mb ram with a 3dfx voodoo 3 2000 pci running windows xp pro sp 2 ran it 50% smoother and faster than what my Mac does



one problem i have noticed myself when i have iTunes 7.x running and surfing with safari when i try to move the window around the mouse cursor flickers back and forth to the hand and to the normal pointer in a fast pulsating speed. i have tryed diffrent way's but it only happens when safari and iTunes are running together.

also i can be surfing i go to a site and if i click on a link wile the site is still loading it acts like i am not connected to the internet i am on dialup but it also happened to me wile i was on DSL. when it happens its like i load safari with no internet connection and it display's a error

i hope these problem are fixed in the next tiger update cause it will make for a better OS X user experience not having these problems.

 

[miniConvert]

i have the same problem bro, it to drives me nuts that flash dont and has never worked right on a mac at all that i have seen in any version of Mac OS/OS X.

its like the dropdown get hidden by the picture

We had the same issue when designing our new site - it has flash directly underneath the dropdowns and the dropdowns get hidden behind the flash. The problem was easily fixed by properly setting up the tag in the page that controls the flash element so transparency worked. This had to be done using the HTML code exported from Flash, using the code Dreamweaver creates didn't work. Sounds like BestBuy just need to test their website a little better.

 

[madmax_2069]

We had the same issue when designing our new site - it has flash directly underneath the dropdowns and the dropdowns get hidden behind the flash. The problem was easily fixed by properly setting up the tag in the page that controls the flash element so transparency worked. This had to be done using the HTML code exported from Flash, using the code Dreamweaver creates didn't work. Sounds like BestBuy just need to test their website a little better.

yea i see this with allot of other sites and not just bestbuy.

but i wonder why it display's correctly on otherbrowsers but not safari cause it seems like its just a problem with safari i haven't seen in firefox yet to see if its also there

i think you got the unedited version of my post before i posted pic's and added reply's to other peoples and my point out of errors is safari/ or site

EDIT: well i just tested bestbuy.com with firefox in Mac OS X and the problem isnt there also tried a few others as well and the problem isnt there with them. i have seen that safari bogs down with some flash and java and others dont

 

[mkrishnan]

safari dont take 100% of my cpu but it comes close (also im on a Beige G3 running at 466mhz. it does run/move ok but my compaq celoron 500mhz with 64mb ram with a 3dfx voodoo 3 2000 pci running windows xp pro sp 2 ran it 50% smoother and faster than what my Mac does.

Okay, now pardoning the previous poster's saying he did not want to upgrade just to be able to see a flash embed, at this point, this is ridiculous. Does a Beige G3 even officially support Tiger? Doesn't XP require 128 MB of RAM?

I could complain that my stone tablet is also sluggish opening pages with lots of Flash... Not to mention how easily it scratches when I'm just using the stylus...erm...chisel.

 

[kcmac]

iTunes 7 isn't supported on anything below 500mhz.

 

[tuartboy]

Okay, now pardoning the previous poster's saying he did not want to upgrade just to be able to see a flash embed, at this point, this is ridiculous. Does a Beige G3 even officially support Tiger? Doesn't XP require 128 MB of RAM?

I could complain that my stone tablet is also sluggish opening pages with lots of Flash... Not to mention how easily it scratches when I'm just using the stylus...erm...chisel.

I see your point, but in my case, my system is only 1.5 years old and has 3x that clock speed and 1.25Gb of Ram. I still have this problem and it just screams unoptimized code.

 

[Sam0r]

I see your point, but in my case, my system is only 1.5 years old and has 3x that clock speed and 1.25Gb of Ram. I still have this problem and it just screams unoptimized code.

Yeah, as far as I am conserned, this is the BIGGEST flaw of OS X, and its not even Apple's fault.

Can't quicktime also render flash? That might be worth looking into if it can...

 

[mkrishnan]

I see your point, but in my case, my system is only 1.5 years old and has 3x that clock speed and 1.25Gb of Ram. I still have this problem and it just screams unoptimized code.

But that was my point with respect to your system. How come mine is half as fast, has half as much RAM, and seems to deal with that site better?

 

[Sam0r]

But that was my point with respect to your system. How come mine is half as fast, has half as much RAM, and seems to deal with that site better?

Display resoltution. This is my other beef with mac's, not that its even noticable with the newer intel machines, but the higher the resolution you're running at, the slower the WHOLE machine seems to be.

Neither Windows or Linux have this problem. Seeing as you were running on an iBook, the resolution would have been 1024x768, which is fairly low considering what I bet most of us are running here.

Try running a flash movie at 1280x1024 and you'll see. I tried it just on my PB, setting the resolution to 1024x768 allows flash movies to play MUCH better, but at the PB's native resolution, 1280x854 (or something..) its deadly slow.

Now, isn't tiger supposed to have Quartz 2D Extreme, or something of similar description. I believe this will GREATLY aid us in this resolution problem, if we could activate it.

I'll have a search.

 

[tuartboy]

Display resoltution.

My 12" PB has a native resolution of 1024x768 and all tests have been run at that resolution. I also hook it up to a Dell 2405 (24" @ 1920x1200) at my desk and I see no performance difference in 2D applications whatsoever. Heck, Age III evens runs well at 1920x1200 on this machine, but 2D flash craps out...

 

[Sam0r]

My 12" PB has a native resolution of 1024x768 and all tests have been run at that resolution. I also hook it up to a Dell 2405 (24" @ 1920x1200) at my desk and I see no performance difference in 2D applications whatsoever. Heck, Age III evens runs well at 1920x1200 on this machine, but 2D flash craps out...

Well, It cerintaly makes a difference on all the mac systems I've used.

 

[SiliconAddict]

Very true.

Oh wait, nevermind.





Those were the first Google returns for Tiger reviews but that pretty much covers everyone from edge-case Mac users to Microsoft shills. Here's to hoping Leopard is twice as 'bad' as Tiger. BTW, did you run 10.4.0? I thought you just got your first Mac.

I don't care about John's review. The simple fact of the matter is that Tiger was a buggy mess when it came out. Talk to anyone who first adopted it on launch. I know at last count 6 people that downgraded and then upgraded again around 10.4.5 Like it or not apple has a history of releasing buggy updates, be they full blow OS updates or patches.

 

[tuartboy]

Well, It cerintaly makes a difference on all the mac systems I've used.

For CPU-bound tasks (Flash has very limited support for GPU acceleration) resolution means practically nothing. 1920x1200 might fill up the memory buffers pretty full with data, but it's still 2.3Megapixels no matter what you are doing since it's only 2D. Video/audio encoding, RAW processing, etc... will see no difference in performance at any supported resolution. This is different from GPU-accellerated tasks such as games and Motion 2 and such. Those apps can be made to scale up to use as much power as available. That's what the Z-axis and associated algorithmic geometry and effects add...

Don't exactly quote me on this as it's been a while since I took a computer graphics class (and I slept through a lot of it then...).

What might be happening to some systems is that the graphics card does not have sufficient memory support a lot of UI activity at higher resolutions. I know that this isn't too much of a problem even for me and I run desktop manager with 4 desktops full of stuff at the same time. In other words, my system is tracking a lot of open windows at the same time and I still don't see a problem. But perhaps...

And while we're on the topic of crappy web tech: Safari's implementation of JS, while solid and compatible, is slow as crap.

 

[Sam0r]

For CPU-bound tasks (Flash has very limited support for GPU acceleration) resolution means practically nothing. 1920x1200 might fill up the memory buffers pretty full with data, but it's still 2.3Megapixels no matter what you are doing since it's only 2D. Video/audio encoding, RAW processing, etc... will see no difference in performance at any supported resolution. This is different from GPU-accellerated tasks such as games and Motion 2 and such. Those apps can be made to scale up to use as much power as available. That's what the Z-axis and associated algorithmic geometry and effects add...

Don't exactly quote me on this as it's been a while since I took a computer graphics class (and I slept through a lot of it then...).

What might be happening to some systems is that the graphics card does not have sufficient memory support a lot of UI activity at higher resolutions. I know that this isn't too much of a problem even for me and I run desktop manager with 4 desktops full of stuff at the same time. In other words, my system is tracking a lot of open windows at the same time and I still don't see a problem. But perhaps...

And while we're on the topic of crappy web tech: Safari's implementation of JS, while solid and compatible, is slow as crap.

Perhaps not for cpu-bound tasks, but I'm telling you from first hand experience, that higher resolutions on an older mac cause a massive slowdown, not just for flash, but for everything that gets displayed on the screen.

You could say the same for any operating system, and it is true, but it seems to be a hell of a lot more apparent on an os x based system.

 

[EricNau]

We had the same issue when designing our new site - it has flash directly underneath the dropdowns and the dropdowns get hidden behind the flash. The problem was easily fixed by properly setting up the tag in the page that controls the flash element so transparency worked. This had to be done using the HTML code exported from Flash, using the code Dreamweaver creates didn't work. Sounds like BestBuy just need to test their website a little better.

While BestBuy could probably do something to fix their site, they shouldn't have to. This is definitely a problem with Safari, not the website code.

Here are some other sites with similar behavior...
http://www.sonystyle.com
http://www.circuitcity.com/

 

[Sam0r]

While BestBuy could probably do something to fix their site, they shouldn't have to. This is definitely a problem with Safari, not the website code.

Here are some other sites with similar behavior...
http://www.sonystyle.com
http://www.circuitcity.com/

Add http://www.adobe.com to that list...

 

[Lynxpro]

so what group, exactly, DO you Gallifreyans get along with? Or tolerate? Must be lonely out there, compadre.

Gallifreyans? Pfff....those are the commoners. Some of us are full-on Time Lords, thank you very much. Respect.

 

[Lynxpro]

Then, someone got the bright idea to invite Daleks over for tea. They kept shouting "¡Usted será exterminado!" Oh well, now Gallifrey makes the Alderaan star system look like a picnic!

Don't forget Krypton in that analysis too.

Besides, all the important stuff was moved to New Gallifrey eons ago. Even the Commode of Rassilon is in the Hall of Antiquities there. Of course, the smallest item on display in the collection is Keanu Reeves's brain. Neo indeed!

 

[EricNau]

Add http://www.adobe.com to that list...

...and, I just discovered http://www.garmin.com as well.

 

[mkrishnan]

...and, I just discovered http://www.garmin.com as well.

That site's very fast on my iBook G4 / 800. In fact only a slight difference between my iBook and my iMac G5. Are you really having problems with it?

 

[treblah]

I don't care about John's review. The simple fact of the matter is that Tiger was a buggy mess when it came out. Talk to anyone who first adopted it on launch. I know at last count 6 people that downgraded and then upgraded again around 10.4.5 Like it or not apple has a history of releasing buggy updates, be they full blow OS updates or patches.

So Apple shouldn't have released Tiger until February '06?

Since you know all about Apple's buggy releases so well just wait 10 months after Leopard is released and then upgrade. You won't have to deal with the millions of bugs and it will save you a lot time and effort.

Yeah, Apple's testing system is flawed. I can't imagine more than like 20K developers testing Leopard, so of course there are going to be bugs Apple doesn't catch. But for your each of your six friends how many more tens of thousands were using Tiger without any problems?

As someone who has personally ran 10.1, 2, 3 and 4.0, the benefits of each were greater than the annoyances.

Until Apple starts wider testing: treat 10.x.0 as a paid beta, run the new system on a different partition, file bug reports and enjoy living on the bleeding edge.

 

[madmax_2069]

Okay, now pardoning the previous poster's saying he did not want to upgrade just to be able to see a flash embed, at this point, this is ridiculous. Does a Beige G3 even officially support Tiger? Doesn't XP require 128 MB of RAM?

I could complain that my stone tablet is also sluggish opening pages with lots of Flash... Not to mention how easily it scratches when I'm just using the stylus...erm...chisel.

Is the Beige G3 supported in tiger no it isn't, But it will run it with xpostfacto and if done right like i have you will have no problems out of tiger running on it ( i have had the same tiger install on this system since 10.4.3 and safari has only crashed once and i have had only 1 KP and that is all the crashing problems that i have seen ). tiger performs better on my system then what the supported 10.2-10.2.8 does. just because apple made tiger not support the Beige G3 don't mean it cant or cant run great. even tho having a ATI Radeon 7000 PCI video card installed which makes tiger that much more better to use and allows me to enable PCI extreme when i want to.

As for Windows XP's 128mb ram requirement is just that a requirement only not what it has to have for it to run. i have seen people install and run XP on a real old system with only 16mb ram yea it took forever to boot and was hardly useable but it was still done.

i was just stating that my Compaq even tho it only has 64mb ram and a celoron 500mhz cpu with a unsupported 3dfx voodoo 3 2000 PCI it still does flash and java allot faster and smoother than what it does on this Mac with tiger. flash and java on this Mac should run about the same if not better that it does on the Compaq.

my Friend has a Digital audio G4 466 with the same amount of ram that i have i almost beat him on a startup test (like under a half a second slower than his). yea his GUI was smoother running than mine but flash and java still ran allot slower than what the Compaq does (safari on his system scrolls real smooth until it hits java and or flash then it slows down to a studder pace) . so unsupported or not flash and java is buggy and slow on a Mac in every OS apple has made that could have ran java and flash allot better than what it does now. safari just has its bugs that other browsers don't have and other browsers have there bugs that safari don't have. its just other browsers run java and flash better on them then it does in safari. and in windows every browser runs java and flash better than any browser in OS X.

don't get me wrong or think that im trolling cause im not i would just love for apple to try to get this stuff working way better than it is now so it makes for a better Mac/OS X user experience not to just me but for other people as well. the majority of people that own computers Mac/PC surf the web more than anything else that a computer is used for. i guess you can say its a trade off between having bug's or slow down's in safari due to java or flash in OS X or having a overfill of viruses on a windows pc

sorry for putting people asleep with my long winded post

 

[SpaceMagic]

I don't know why people really worry. Mac OS X has got better every new edition. As someone who has run Public Beta all the way to 10.4.8, and every little update on the way, I can say that Apple have endeavoured to include as many machines as possible to support OS X in the most user friendly way.

Leopard is going to come out and it'll officially support every machine Tiger does, no doubt. Those who are brave will run xpostfacto and may even get to run Leopard. The point is, stop worrying. If you've bought a mac in the last 5 years, it's likely your Mac will run Leopard. If you've bought a PC in the last 6 months, you'll be blummin' lucky if it'll run Vista!

 

[madmax_2069]

I don't know why people really worry. Mac OS X has got better every new edition. As someone who has run Public Beta all the way to 10.4.8, and every little update on the way, I can say that Apple have endeavoured to include as many machines as possible to support OS X in the most user friendly way.

Leopard is going to come out and it'll officially support every machine Tiger does, no doubt. Those who are brave will run xpostfacto and may even get to run Leopard. The point is, stop worrying. If you've bought a mac in the last 5 years, it's likely your Mac will run Leopard. If you've bought a PC in the last 6 months, you'll be blummin' lucky if it'll run Vista!

yea i can tell that from jaguar (which supports my Beige G3) that tiger (that don't support my system) runs way more better/faster than what jag does. tiger is also way less buggy compared to jag.apple has done a wonderful job with tiger. but tiger could be better in some respects. but all in all tiger is a wonderful OS and Leopard will be even better than tiger but like people said it to will have its fair share of bugs when first launched. the only thing that normal people can do is submit bug's to try and help apple make OS X better.

i have seen a old iMac G3 running one of the beta's of 10.5 so i know it is possible some time down the road to install 10.5 on the Beige G3. ryan of xpostfacto hasn't posted on the OWC tech forums for xpostfacto in over a year so i don't know if a version of xpost will ever make it out.

but any way keep up the good work apple on making every release of OS X better