I can't believe it. OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
people who brought us previous Mac OS's. I used OS7.something through
& OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
OS that fights me at every turn.

OSX is clunky. I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness. As long as OSX has
been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
frustrating experience using it.

JMHO, okay? But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

On 10/21/04 11:00 PM, in article 211020042100567957%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com,
"g5blues" <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

>
> I can't believe it. OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's. I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
>
> OSX is clunky. I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness. As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.
>
> JMHO, okay? But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!

Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
and even auto defrags files under 20MB!
--
Brian Ehni

Unraveling the Truth about Fahrenheit 9/11 & Michael Moore

http://www.fahrenhype911.com/

g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> I can't believe it. OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's. I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
>
> OSX is clunky. I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness. As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.
>
> JMHO, okay? But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

I had the same feeling when I first started using OSX.III.III but as
most people say, the stability of the OS is quite a benefit.

At first I felt all at sea because I had no idea in what to do to solve
problems in OSX. I knew what to do to solve most of the problems I came
across in Systems 6 - 9. However, a bit of searching Apple's support
forums, the web generally and asking questions on usenet have made me
feel much more comfortable.

You'll probably find that there are many neat tricks in OSX that you
wished you had before. It's a continuous learning curve, full of
surprises and discoveries.

Stick with it and I'm sure you'll agree in a couple of months that you'd
never go back to OS9

Peter

--
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA

In article <BD9DF06F.108F3%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
<behni@comcast.net> wrote:

> No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!
>
> Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
> and even auto defrags files under 20MB!

I have to keep going back to OS 8.6 and my Wall Street if I want to get
any work done. I don't know about OS 9, I don't use it. But I have
considered installing it on the G5 and regressing. I have planned all
along and still do to follow Apple into the future, that's why I bought
the new gear and have been trying so hard to make OSX work for me.

I'm not a power user, but I'm not a newbie, either. I have struggled
and prospered, mostly prospered, with the Mac and have never used a Pee
Cee. I'm going to figure out how to make OSX do what I need it to do,
but I have to say that it is a real pain in the interface department.

Yes, more stable. Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display). But it
doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
human from using it faster.

This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have). I
know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
Steve Jobs. I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.

I hope they do better and pretty soon because I have work to do.

In article <211020042148503079%g5blues@logihdkufgh.com>,
g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:

> In article <BD9DF06F.108F3%behni@comcast.net>, Brian Paul Ehni
> <behni@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > No opinion, just fact: you could not pay me to go back to OS 9!
> >
> > Vague allusions to clunkiness aside, OS X is much more stable, looks better,
> > and even auto defrags files under 20MB!
>
> I have to keep going back to OS 8.6 and my Wall Street if I want to get
> any work done. I don't know about OS 9, I don't use it. But I have
> considered installing it on the G5 and regressing. I have planned all
> along and still do to follow Apple into the future, that's why I bought
> the new gear and have been trying so hard to make OSX work for me.
>
> I'm not a power user, but I'm not a newbie, either. I have struggled
> and prospered, mostly prospered, with the Mac and have never used a Pee
> Cee. I'm going to figure out how to make OSX do what I need it to do,
> but I have to say that it is a real pain in the interface department.
>
> Yes, more stable. Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display). But it
> doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
> human from using it faster.
>
> This could not possibly be the product of the programmers who brought
> us the easy to use OS's like 7+ through 8.6 (the latest I have). I
> know from following the progress of OSX that it's the brainchild of
> Steve Jobs. I guess that there are some limits even to his genius.
>
> I hope they do better and pretty soon because I have work to do.

I went to OS X Panther when I bought my G4 iBook in March. I've been
sing that as my main machine ever since. I think it works great. I have
now installed Panther on my 350 iMac and on my Wallstreet. I have no
desire or need to go back to OS 9 or earlier. I still have a few apps
that I need to run in Classic, but other than that go straight OS X.

I guess I don't know why you consider it "clunky." I find that it just
runs and is easy to use.

OS X IS different from earlier versions of the Mac OS, no doubt about
it. It DOES take some getting used to. But once over that, I have found
it to be great.

Bill

--
To send e-mail, remove .invalid

g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> Yes, more stable. Yes looks better (on my 23" studio display). But it
> doesn't matter if the computer is faster if the interface keeps the
> human from using it faster.

What specific problems do you have with the interface?

--
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA

In article <1gm2aln.1jy73c51sk1xeN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS******.com. au>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS******.com.au> wrote:

> I had the same feeling when I first started using OSX.III.III but as
> most people say, the stability of the OS is quite a benefit.

My hope was that I'd get used to it. But nearly two months later I'm
still having difficulty. Yes, the stability is nice, but the
occasional restart in OS 8.6 is not as time consuming as all of the
extra keystrokes and head scratching i"m doing in OSX.

> At first I felt all at sea because I had no idea in what to do to solve
> problems in OSX. I knew what to do to solve most of the problems I came
> across in Systems 6 - 9. However, a bit of searching Apple's support
> forums, the web generally and asking questions on usenet have made me
> feel much more comfortable.

I have two books, one a fairly simple introduction and the other a big
thick more tekkie sort of treatment. I find that I am trying to look
up something that isn't listed because it is called something else.
Rather disconcerting.

> You'll probably find that there are many neat tricks in OSX that you
> wished you had before. It's a continuous learning curve, full of
> surprises and discoveries.

It was nice to be able to plug in my digital camera and fairly
effortlessly upload my pics. But I found iPhoto not to my liking so I
do it in GraphicConverter. I've been using GraphicConverter for years
and I'm not entirely pleased with the way that OSX presents it to me.
As far as new tricks are concerned, I'm not a new trick sort of person.
I want to do specific things and forget whatever else the computer
does. If I need to do something new, it's because I have a need, not
because the computer entices me to do it.

> Stick with it and I'm sure you'll agree in a couple of months that you'd
> never go back to OS9

Yes, I understand that. It's been a couple of months now. Will it be
the next couple of months or the couple of months after that? When I
upgraded in the past I had no setbacks, just continued working as I had
before. But OSX is quite different and I'm not all that convinced that
people wanted or needed it that way.

I wonder if the philosophy was to take the power of the new chips and
unix and bend the user to some new paradigm? It would be better
instead to make it as simple and elegant as the earlier systems.

In article <bbcollins-FEB7AB.01405922102004@news1.east.earthlink.net>,
B Collins <bbcollins@earthlink.net.invlaid> wrote:

> I went to OS X Panther when I bought my G4 iBook in March. I've been
> sing that as my main machine ever since. I think it works great. I have
> now installed Panther on my 350 iMac and on my Wallstreet. I have no
> desire or need to go back to OS 9 or earlier. I still have a few apps
> that I need to run in Classic, but other than that go straight OS X.
>
> I guess I don't know why you consider it "clunky." I find that it just
> runs and is easy to use.
>
> OS X IS different from earlier versions of the Mac OS, no doubt about
> it. It DOES take some getting used to. But once over that, I have found
> it to be great.
>
> Bill

Clunky. Little lags and delays in doing routine things like filling
out forms, changing file names, opening files, and like that. If I
didn't have my wall street with 8.6 right next to the G5 with OSX, then
I probably wouldn't notice the difference. OSX feels cumbersome.

I just wonder if I'm the only one who isn't entirely happy with this
new OS? At some point I still intend to leave the classic environment
behind entirely. It's going to take a lot longer than I'd originally
thought.

g5blues wrote:
> I can't believe it. OSX couldn't have been developed by the same
> people who brought us previous Mac OS's. I used OS7.something through
> & OS8.6 on three different Macs (P-200, P-575, Wall Street) and each
> update was better than the one before it, but I just don't know what to
> make of OSX except that it makes me angry to have spent so much for an
> OS that fights me at every turn.
>
> OSX is clunky. I have a new Mac with lotsa RAM and an OS update
> recently, so there's just no excuse for clunkiness. As long as OSX has
> been out and updated it's a shame that it causes me to undergo such a
> frustrating experience using it.
>
> JMHO, okay? But I can't be the only one who's on a rocky road with OSX.

The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock
concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
I can now do it the old way.
Otherwise, I think it's super cool cuz now I can learn how to manipulate
and do things from underneath, i.e. in Unix, and not just in the GUI.
Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.

GW
333mhz G3, 512mb Ram, formerly with OS8.6

In article <1gm2evi.spwoadpwh0sgN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS******.com.a u>, Peter
McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS******.com.au> wrote:

> What specific problems do you have with the interface?

I'm trying to say that it's clunky, but maybe other descriptors would
be better. It's not as snappy as the earlier OS's. Geeze, at 2.5 Ghz
you'd think it would run circles around the 233 Mhz Wall street. Is it
all of the caching and logging that's slowing it down? Checking for
permissions? Looking to see if the browser is open so it can prompt me
for an update? Is it an over-bulky OS already in its first iteration?
What is causing the lack of snappiness that OS 8.6 has?

And it's just hard to figure out sometimes. I'm looking in HELP and
the topics and explanations don't seem to match my thought process.
And it is a Mac thought process because I've been Mac oriented since
1993. Why would Apple even try to undo what they've had me do for so
long? Is it because they fired the "ease of use" programmers and hired
instead a bunch of college kids or ex-MS programmers who either don't
give a hoot about ease of use or else are mostly concerned with getting
their bells and whistles into the OS and to heck with the user?

Someone said that this is the OS they'd want their mother to use.
There's no way I'd subject my mother to OSX First because I would have
trouble explaining it, and second because I don't want to answer the
obvious question she'd ask: "Where is that nice little black and white
computer that was so easy for me to use?"

I spent the afternoon with two FTP programs. By dinnertime I was still
struggling with them trying to figure out how to upload and download
and delete. Neither was drag and drop but required me to browse for
files. That's stooooopid. The FETCH program on my black and white
P-200 had a very nice drag and drop both up and down, allowed me to
rename files and move files from one directory to another, had a simple
list of favorites, and didn't take forever to open and close the
directory at the ISP. OSX being so internet oriented should have such
a simple FTP client available as part of Safari or as a stand-alone
app.

Here's another one. I installed flipalbum 3 and the preferences won't
open. So I trashed it. I tried to install Fly II a flying-type game
and gives me a box that tells me it won't install. The game is not
supported anymore and apparently the gawds up at Apple decided to do
something to OSX that makes the program obsolete.

Garageband. I have read the help several times but I'll be darned if I
can make anything with it. Don't try to tell me, I just don't have
time to screw with it since I have so many other problems trying to
create a productive situation with the computer and OSX. I mean, I
have stuff to do and all of this reprogramming Apple planned to have me
do is driving me up a wall.

By the time I'm done messing around trying to get something done or
discovering why I can't do it I'm fatigued and just want to shut down
and walk away. I rarely had that problem before. The older OS's
seemed to encourage me to stay at the computer and do one more thing
beyond what I'd planned. OSX is a hindrance in that regard. I'm not
getting things done and you'd think that almost two month's working
with OSX would have me zipping through chores and working overtime.
Not so.

In article <V02ed.21099$Kl3.21047@twister.socal.rr.com>, Geoff Welsh
<geoffdubya@some.rr.com> wrote:

> The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock
> concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
> http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
> I can now do it the old way.

I'm not so sure I understand. But I'll keep my eye out for a
discussion.

Thanks.

> Otherwise, I think it's super cool cuz now I can learn how to manipulate
> and do things from underneath, i.e. in Unix, and not just in the GUI.
> Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.
>
> GW
> 333mhz G3, 512mb Ram, formerly with OS8.6

If I not working with the GUI, then I probably shouldn't try to
manipulate things with the more direct approach. I'm sure, though,
that the occasion will arise. Your mention of FTP makes peaks my
interest since I'm not going to get much work done or be able to retire
the Wall Street until I can transfer files.

g5blues wrote:

> Geoff Welsh wrote:
>>The only thing I didn't like about about OSX was the minimize-to-dock
>>concept.....but thanks to Windowshade,
>>http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/wsx
>>I can now do it the old way.
>
> I'm not so sure I understand. But I'll keep my eye out for a
> discussion.
>
> Thanks.
>
In the Classic OS, when you click the minimize button on a window, it
would display the title bar of that window. I liked that.
In OSX, when you click minimize, the whole pane disappears down to "the
dock". I don't like that. My friends' Microsnot Windows machines do
that. By installing the Windowshade program I mentioned, you can now
minimize in the old way....or a half dozen other customizable
ways...it's a very cool little tweaker.
GW

g5blues wrote:

> Geoff Welsh wrote:
>>Unix is quite useful for FTP and SCP/SSH stuff that I do.
>>
>>GW
>
> If I not working with the GUI, then I probably shouldn't try to
> manipulate things with the more direct approach. I'm sure, though,
> that the occasion will arise. Your mention of FTP makes peaks my
> interest since I'm not going to get much work done or be able to retire
> the Wall Street until I can transfer files.

I used Fetch in classic OS.
Now with OSX, I just, drag the files to the My Name (user) folder.
Then open the Terminal app (which essentially puts you "in Unix" in the
User directory)

Type "ftp whoever@whatever_you_typedinaGUIftp_app" <return>
Watch for the prompts if it asks for a password or something.
Type "put filename" <return>

That's it....the file goes.
GW

g5blues <g5blues@logihdkufgh.com> wrote:
> In article <1gm2evi.spwoadpwh0sgN%p5m8.REMOVETHIS******.com.a u>, Peter
> McCallum <p5m8.REMOVETHIS******.com.au> wrote:
>
> > What specific problems do you have with the interface?
>
> I'm trying to say that it's clunky, but maybe other descriptors would
> be better. It's not as snappy as the earlier OS's.

Snappy hey?

snappy (as in "snappish") adj. : tending to speak irritably; "a snappish
tone of voice"

snappy (as in "snappy") adj. : smart and fashionable; "snappy
conversation"; "some sharp and whipping lines"

snappy (as in "crisp") adj. : pleasantly cold and invigorating; "crisp
clear nights and frosty mornings"; "a nipping wind"; "a nippy fall day";
"snappy weather"; (`parky' is a British term)

snappy (as in "dapper") adj. : marked by smartness in dress and manners;
"a dapper young man"; "a jaunty red hat"

snappy (as in "brisk") adj. : quick and energetic; "a brisk walk in the
park"; "a lively gait"; "a merry chase"; "traveling at a rattling rate";
"a snappy pace"; "a spanking breeze"

Which one do you mean?

--
Peter McCallum
Mackay Qld AUSTRALIA

[Snipped in order to get to the point]

The only things I'd like back are System 6's simple UI (You don't need
throbbing buttons or sheets), System 7's application menu (The triangles
in the Dock are hard to see), and... uhm... I think that's it.

No - wait! I WANT MY EASTER EGGS BACK! Almost forgot that one!

Even though I complain about the excess of pinstripes and eye-candy, OS X
has never caused me CDEV/INIT conflicts, kernel panics never show up, the
fonts are rendered majestically, I have X11 running... In essence, there
are more ups than downs.