As expected (apple computers/OS/software)

[Quattro Pete]

Originally Posted By: Subdued
hey guy you might want to check out Windows 7

+1

XP is now 13 years old. That's like judging Hyundai today based on cars they made in 2001.

 

[jrustles]

Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
Originally Posted By: jrustles
I have the pagefile on it's own dedicated partition FFS!


Having it on its own partition isn't going to help. Its own drive; and preferably on its own SATA channel would help if you really run into trouble; but having it on a partition where the HDD also houses the OS and/ or the user files is not lightening the load of the SATA channel at all. In fact, forcing the read/ write head to skip all over the place to a different partition to mess with the page file might even theoretically slow tihngs down a bit.

I haven't used XP in several years but when I did it was running a recording studio. I had massive HDD throughput requirements and needed a boatload of RAM. I had the OS on a smallish 5,400rpm SATA drive, the audio (upwards of 24 channels of 24 bit, 96KHz audio going in both directions) on another SATA drive (7200rpm: I was always amazed that it never faltered) and the swap was a 4GB SCSI drive (10,000rpm). I found that having all of that HDD activity on entirely separate subsystems was the least of all evils.


I agree with the last part, particularly if one can support that many drives. I have a laptop with only two drive bays, so I do what I can.

Right at this moment, PF is on a separate drive/channel-shared only with music. Solo channel/drive or solo partition all help greatly. The SATA channel bandwidth doesn't help much, it's the fragmentation and queueing

Having everything on one logical drive means that tagged queues are split evenly between virtual memory and system files. Using the following partition structure has really helped my windows:

Partition sizes starting from the fastest outer disc edge (first LBAs) to the slowest (last LBAs) using a 160 and 250GB drive

Drive 1 -160GB
P1 T: - TEMP 4.36GB - FAT32 (PF used to be on here, I think only a small secondary PF is on here now)
P2 C: - SYS - 10.7GB FAT32
P3 D: - Data - 133GB FAT32

Drive 2 -250GB
P1 X: - PAGE - 1.99B FAT(16) with massive 64K sectors
P2 E: - MUSIC - 233GB FAT32

So when the system wants to access the pagefile, the hard drive heads are physically limited to the fastest tracks on the drive, and since they're the longest tracks also, it further reduces head seek activity (but may increase rotational latency).

On the system drive, the TMP partition is first, for the same reason; all my environment variables are set for the T: drive, incl. browser caches, TEMP folder, Scratch disk, Application Settings/Local Settings etc. Therefore the system drive, C: sees the least amount of writing, and it's contents rarely change thus rarely fragment. Also malicious cache/viruses are limited to be written on this drive. The last DATA partition is lowest priority for seek speed and contains bulk data.

One thing XP is struggles with, is running for long periods of time (a month of more) with no reboot. It chokes and stumbles on itself, PF gets so large and fragmented, .logs get out of control- the previous partition structure helps IMMENSELY. The machine goes min. 2 weeks without a reboot (when it does not crash lol)

About the FAT32 I must say that I have never had a HD or FS failure since swearing off NTFS. Before? Happened all the time. FAT32 is bulletproof and not any slower (perhaps faster when dealing with large files).


Thanks for the DisablePagingExecutive suggestion, just checked, found it at 1. Must have been like that for a while. But hey, what kind audio editing did you do? What was your software suite?

 

[Mystic]

Originally Posted By: Hokiefyd
Originally Posted By: Mystic
As expected Apple is going to abandon its professional photo editing program Aperture and even abandon iPhoto. They will have a new program combining the two which will be called Photo or Photos. I think they are supposed to come out with this new program this fall.


Quite honestly, this is why I went back to a PC platform after trying a Mac for about a year and a half. That is, not professional photo-editing software in particular, but Apple's apparent lack of ability to focus on a certain endeavor and see it through. It seems like they'll try something for a while, only to give up on it later if they get bored with it or if it didn't go how they wanted it. This happened with their first cloud service, MobileMe or whatever it was called. They got rid of that and moved to iCloud. If you were a MobileMe user, you couldn't just keep using it. No, they turned it OFF, and you had to either migrate to iCloud or use something else. And iCloud isn't particularly good in my opinion, and I have no confidence that they'll continue to use that into the future.

I felt the same way about iWork. It largely replaced many of AppleWorks' functions, but simply discontinued some of them. The newer versions are criticized for dropping key features and the new version of iWork only runs on the very latest version of OS X, orphaning many users of Lion and Mountain Lion.

I certainly applaud Apple for continuing product innovation, but the rate at which they adopt new technology (and subsequently orphan users of the old) is concerning, and gives me little confidence that what I use today will be supported tomorrow.


This is a really good reply in this post. This is exactly how I feel. I have used Apple Computers since 1996 and at one time if a person wanted to work on photos you really needed to be using a Mac. I don't think that is true anymore.

Imagine if Microsoft decided one day to trash Microsoft Office and come out with some simple little program good enough for the low information computer users but not good enough for business users. It would be a disaster. 90% of everybody use Microsoft Office. It has become a necessity in the business world. Even Mac users were often using a version of Microsoft Office for the Mac.

Well, Apple had reduced the capabilities of iWork and they are going to abandon their professional photo editing program. They left a lot of AppleWorks users in the lurch. But there is little commentary on any of this because Apple is a smaller part of the market, are not real big in the business world overall, and Apple has a mysterious elevated status where they can do no wrong. But thousands of people were affected. I know of people who had thousands of documents in AppleWorks. There were thousands of photographers who had been using Aperture and now must transfer their photos and learn different software.

I think Mac OS X is really a better O/S than Windows. But a person does not sit in front of a computer and admire the pretty O/S. They need applications to do various things. The business world needs quality office software. Photographers who want better quality photos than just iPhone photos need photo editing software.

So what it comes down to for me is when a company does not seem to care about my needs I don't care much for that company. And I can run Adobe Software on my iMac but I can also run those programs on my Windows computer. And the Windows computer is cheaper. And it is a custom built computer and I can upgrade it easily and cheaply. So the choice becomes very easy.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
I think Mac OS X is really a better O/S than Windows. But a person does not sit in front of a computer and admire the pretty O/S.


I sort of agree with the first sentence, and absolutely agree with the second one. I found OS X to be different from Windows for sure. We gave it a real honest test-drive...we had that computer for well over a year. Neither my wife nor I really warmed up to OS X. It was okay to use, but there seemed to be as many things that were more difficult to do in OS X as there were things easier to do. I like how you can take an immediate screen capture in Windows by pressing the Print Screen button. In OS X, it's something like Command-Shift plus a number, either 3 or 4. Maybe that's intuitive for an Apple user, I don't know. Print Screen is just as intuitive to me...and moreso. Our Apple still got junked up with files and got slow, just how Windows used to be. I reformatted the drive and reinstalled the OS fresh before I sold it, and was amazed at how fast the computer was after that. I thought to myself, "wait a minute; this is an Apple, this isn't supposed to do that!"

I've found this to be true of all operating systems. I've used OS X, I've used Windows since DOS 6/Windows 3.x, and I've played with a number of flavors of Linux/Ubuntu. All of them have their ups and downs, their easy-to-use and their not-so-easy-to-use, and their gotta-Google-it quirks that you just can't figure out. Most claims I've read about one being no-kidding better than another are usually very one-sided...discussing only the positive points of the "better" operating system and only the negative points of the "worse" operating system. They all have something to offer to different users.

 

[Mystic]

You and I think alike in a lot of ways. I have tried various operating systems also. I gave SuSe a try a long time ago, and I still use various Linux operating systems for special purposes. I have used Macs for a very long time-probably longer than many of the younger posters here who proclaim Macs superior to Windows computers. I have used special software operating on a Unix server at work. I will not discuss that software. And we used Windows from Windows 3.1 at work. I have close to twenty years experience with various computer operating systems. So I think I know something.

I think you and I will agree that without good applications NO O/S is worth much! I don't think there are many people who just sit there and stare at the pretty O/S.

Certainly one bad thing about Windows computers is all of the malware. But the major problem there is the computer user and with good malware protection the problem is not so great. I personally would rather have that problem than the problem of not having good applications to run on a computer, or not being able to run necessary hardware on a computer.

To me it is all technology and not some sort of religious thing. I will use whatever technology works for me. For some of the old time Apple Computer users the strange cultists who came along worshiping Apple and Steve Jobs were as strange to those old time users as they were to Windows users. I know that I was using Apple Computers a long time ago because of what Apple Computers at that time allowed me to do. I was not a member of a cult.

There are a lot of low information users nowadays. They think texting is proof of their vast intellectual powers. I need more than just texting. I want to do more with a computer.

 

[uc50ic4more]

Originally Posted By: jrustles
Thanks for the DisablePagingExecutive suggestion, just checked, found it at 1. Must have been like that for a while. But hey, what kind audio editing did you do? What was your software suite?

I made a modest living for several years recording: First, my specialty was recording in the field; but eventually every venue in the area was able to afford cheap recording devices they could hook up to their sound systems. After I moved into a more permanent studio I tried my darndest to concentrate on acoustic and folk music but like many people trying to make a living, found myself recording a lot of rappers and metal bands. It always beat the heck out of a day job and paid much better, too.

I used Nuendo during my PC years. It was no more capable than its close cousin Cubase in terms of music production but I needed it for some more advanced sync-to-video features it had. After I switched to Mac in 2006 I used Logic for audio and Final Cut for video. I prefer Cubase/ Nuendo but I am willing to accept that that is just because I was more familiar with the workflow and interface; not because of any superiority in the application(s). Another application I loved dearly was Sony's Vegas on the PC. If it had more robust time code lock and some MIDI stuff for music I could see it replacing all of the above.

Alas, these days I am a full-time dad and my recording equipment (most of which is 40 or 50+ years old) remains under blankets in a climate-controlled area of the house. The odd time I am still called upon to record I use Ardour for audio and Openshot for video; both on a Debian GNU/ Linux workstation, which also features Darktable for photo processing, Inkscape for SVG and vector graphics manipulation and GIMP, as it is, as a, uh, Photoshop replacement (it is far from it, sadly). It is enough, though, to satisfy my more pedestrian needs nowadays.

 

[Hokiefyd]

Originally Posted By: Mystic
To me it is all technology and not some sort of religious thing. I will use whatever technology works for me.


Right. Computer software is simply a means to an end. It's not the end itself. The "end" is the user being able to get done what he or she needs or wants to get done. The "end" isn't that someone is using this software or that.

I've read a lot of comments (both on this forum and on others) that seem to hint that the goal for some is to advocate for one piece of software or one operating system over another. In my humble opinion, that itself should never be a goal. That doesn't make us look very good as "IT folks". If we come across as advocating one software or operating system over another, especially if we do it before fully vetting that person's situation and outlining a comprehensive list of pros AND cons to what we're recommending, we begin to look like nothing more than a bunch of "fanboys" for this or that.

What our first step should be, again, in my humble opinion only, is not going straight for the recommendation of this or that, but asking what the user needs to get done, what that person's level of expertise is, what that person's desire is for learning something new (if learning something new would be required), etc. Recommending to someone to switch operating systems is a BIG deal. Will it work with all of their hardware? Do they have personal files such as photographs and documents that need to be migrated over and that will need to be backed up in the future? Is software available for that operating system that meets all of their needs? Sometimes that person might be a good candidate for a change in operating system; sometimes not. Either way, that operating system is simply a means for them to get their work done and, again, each one of them (OS X, Windows, Linux, etc) has different things to offer to different people.

 

[Mystic]

Exactly and 100% accurate. You can tell the fan boys right away. If somebody is urging anybody and everybody to immediately switch to some Linux O/S for example, that is obviously a fan boy.

After I had used Windows and Macs for a while I seriously considered switching to Linux O/Ss. I tried SuSe on a CD and I visited several websites where people were discussing Linux. I came across a website where there was a list of hardware that had finally become compatible with Linux O/Ss. My hardware, photo printer and scanner, that were very important to me, NEVER were listed as being compatible even after I had repeatedly visited that website and checked out the list over a very long period of time. I tried various open source software such as GIMP (a waste of time), OpenOffice (used to be good and now another open source office program is being promoted instead), and various other open source software alternatives to paid for software. In the end I decided that paying $150.00 for Microsoft Office Home and Student (for my home computer) was not killing me and I was compatible with 90% of everybody. I also decided to keep using Adobe Photoshop although today I mostly use Lightroom.

When I dared to praise Microsoft and Windows in some ways here some people flat our attacked me. Even launching personal attacks against me. Saying anything nice about Microsoft, Bill Gates, and Windows seemed to be considered by some people here a personal insult to them. To me Microsoft is just a corporation and not perfect but there are some things I like a lot about Windows-such as the hardware and software compatibility.

I bought my own Windows computer in 1995. I bought my own Apple Computer in 1996. I did not buy my Apple Computer because I had some profound hatred for Microsoft. I bought my Apple Computer because of what it allowed me to do. Using Photoshop I worked on a lot of photos and printed a lot of photos and scanned a lot of film.

All of us old time Apple people used to go up to this Apple independent store and attend free lectures and check out the new equipment. I attended all kinds of lectures. I attended one on Apple professional quality video recording equipment although I don't use professional quality video recording equipment myself. I attended one by two guys who were experts in professional quality drum scanning (mostly of large format film). I attended a beginning Photoshop class and an advanced Photoshop class at that store, paying to attend those classes.

Later on when these strange cultist characters started to show up, who worshipped Apple and Steve Jobs, I considered those people to be as odd as I am sure a lot of Windows users did. The cultists were insane. They would have their mothers stand in line for days if necessary so that they could buy the latest Apple new 'thing.'

I like Mac OS X a lot and if Apple was more reliable with its software applications and put more effort into professional quality applications I would definitely stay with Apple. But when a company simply abandons its software after a while and shows no apparent interest in some professional quality software, I am ready to move on. I now have, for example, thousands of photos in Aperture I am going to have to transfer. I have some AppleWorks documents I now can't access very easily and I know of people who have thousands of stranded AppleWorks documents. It actually is worse than I say-apparently the changes made to photos in Aperture will no longer apply and I will have to work again on thousands of photos. I am VERY UNHAPPY about all of that!

Now Microsoft has done some goofy stuff also. Trying to force desktop users to use a touch screen O/S on desktop computers made so sense. But Start8 software solved that Microsoft caused issue and apparently Windows 9 will be more logical. Otherwise a person could just use Windows 7 which I am totally ready to use again if Microsoft is too goofy. At least Microsoft will, according to what I have heard, support Windows 7 until 2020.

So it looks like to me that I have a Windows future. But nobody here can say I was narrow minded and not willing to try other O/Ss.

 

[jrustles]

Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more

I tried my darndest to concentrate on acoustic and folk music but like many people trying to make a living, found myself recording a lot of rappers and metal bands. It always beat the heck out of a day job and paid much better, too.



From someone trying to stick the acoustic and folk, the rappers and death metal must have been a blast

I was about the classic Steinberg duo (Cubase/Wavelab) for a bit there- matter of fact they're still installed!