jaguar on old iMac?

[Laukev7]

quote: *is this correct, x11=quartz as gnome=aqua? or how does that workout

This is correct.

 

quote: you cannot run jaguar on anyting but ppc right now.

I know that. Marklar is only a rumour. But OS X is still a UN*X. Claiming that an OS owns another because of portability is ridiculous, because this is only one detail amongst many others.

Oh, and OSX RULES!!!

[xyle_one]

quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:


I know that. Marklar is only a rumour. But OS X is still a UN*X. Claiming that an OS owns another because of portability is ridiculous, because this is only one detail amongst many others.

Oh, and OSX RULES!!!

true. it is rediculous. i do not use linux because it runs on everything. i use it because of a handful of other reasons. same with jaguar. ease of use, speed, cleanliness, power, the look (yes, look is important to me), stability, downright badass'ness all-around.

[Laukev7]

Maybe that "multi-processor" excuse is a sign that he would dearly want OS X for PC, so that he can use it.      

I should know; I just love OS X, but still have a PC. But I know that it would be suicide to port Aqua.

[psyjax]

dude, having high system requirements is a must now adays. Lets face it, less your running from a commandline, or using a barebones OS (Gentoo, slack, etc.) you just shouldent be expecting high eyecandy modern performance.

I have been using alot of win98 and RedHat lately, and while I don't like windowz at all (save a few nifty fetures that I give M$ credit for) I can definetly say I love how snappy and responsive stuff is. And it's not that OSX isn't snappy, it's just that it has lots of eyecandy filler stuff going on with things growing, shrinking, becomeing transparent etc. in Win98, and indeed Mac OS 9 you double click on something and up it pops.

This has become my major comlaint with OSX, not being able to turn off the eyecandy. You can do it in RedHat and Windoze, but not OSX.

Redhat it'self if is a bloated resource hog, but I like it    best, most stable linux I have ever used. OSX is still my fav. OS of all time, so don't you folks get any ideas about Psyax, Im still a total MacHead.

Just needed to do some PC programming lately.

[Pissed_Macman]

quote:Originally posted by Refalm:


I agree. Mac users are bitching about Windows, that can't run on old machines, while Mac OS X requires at least a 400 MHz. At least Windows XP can run on a 200 MHz. It makes Windows better than Mac OS in a way...

Of course, Linux owns them both. It can run on more than just one processor-type.

GET DA HELL OUTTA THE MAC SECTION WE DON"T WANT YOU HERE!!!

[Laukev7]

Heed his advice, Refalm, before Macman and his clan chase you, throwing spears at you.

[xyle_one]

quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
Heed his advice, Refalm, before Macman and his clan chase you, throwing spears at you.

um, i believe we are the Mac Commandos, and not the clan thank you very much  :rolleyes:  [/elitist mac user]

[jasonlane]

Has anyone ever seen Xpee running on a 200Mhz? Infact seen it running on a 1300Mhz chip? On a 1300 you can only have one window open at a time and you'd better not move those windows around!

It's all about equivalency. OS X running on a 400 mhz chip is not the same as XP running on a 400 Mhz chip, the two experiances would be very, very different. OS X on a 400Mhz chip actually works, XPeee barely works on a 1300 Mhz chip (I have an XPee test machine with this setup). All the things that Apple got right years ago Microsoft are only just starting to think about now.

Isn't it funny years ago I remmember development studios would have "a" mackintosh to "test" on. now here in 2003 I have 5 mac's 3 Linux machines and 1 windoze XP machine, to "test" on,  

[Laukev7]

quote: Mac Commandos

I was referring to Macman's nickname.

[ June 19, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]

My turn to be elitist:

 

quote: mackintosh

I never knew you could test on a raincoat.

[ June 19, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]

[Fett101]

I run a small webserver off a 400mhz XP. It's not just the webserver, but also FTP, Kazaa Lite, Antivirus, Firewall, and sometimes Photoshop. And then my main Machine is a 900mhz, which often has Photoshop, SETI@Home, 1-4 Browsers, an HTML editor, and Winamp open at the same time.

Many times you XP experience depends upon you hardware setup. And RAM. Hoard the RAM.

[jasonlane]

quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:


I never knew you could test on a raincoat.

[ June 19, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]

Ohh yes it's a very rewarding experiance, splash tests, drizzle test (a favourite here in the UK) and my personal fav'  the Cloud burst test  

[Laukev7]

quote: Ohh yes it's a very rewarding experiance, splash tests, drizzle test (a favourite here in the UK) and my personal fav' the Cloud burst test  

UK? So, you must've had a lot of practice!  

[sway]

i've ran 10.1 on an old 333mhz imac with 288mb ram, it wasn't fast but it was usable. don't expact to turn it into an elite maya workstation, though