|
Fortuitous Bumble posted:I don't know how to tell exactly what it's doing on OS X. I am running a Windows VM with 3GB allocated but usually Activity Monitor and htop say OSX is using like 2-3GB (not counting the VM I guess), but I get random beachballs switching to programs I haven't used in a while so I kind of assumed that at some point the OS goes berserk trying to swap memory for whatever reason. Well Activity Monitor tells you exactly how much swapping has been going on so you don't really have to assume.
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:14 |
|
|
I use MenuMeters and it puts my RAM usage pie chart right in the menu bar for me. Click it and it'll give you details about how much swap, etc. If you want to monitor it without always tabbing to Activity Monitor, that is.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Fortuitous Bumble posted:I don't know how to tell exactly what it's doing on OS X. I am running a Windows VM with 3GB allocated but usually Activity Monitor and htop say OSX is using like 2-3GB (not counting the VM I guess), but I get random beachballs switching to programs I haven't used in a while so I kind of assumed that at some point the OS goes berserk trying to swap memory for whatever reason. With VMWare, and probably Parallels and VirtualBox too, all memory used by VMs is "wired". Wired memory cannot be swapped or demand paged by OS X. When you run a 3GB VM on an 8GB Mac, effectively you have a 3GB Windows machine and a 5GB Mac. This may be leading to more memory pressure and swapping on the Mac side of things than you'd otherwise expect. Even without VMs being involved, for both 10.8 and 10.9 4GB is the practical minimum for no-swap light use (browsing with a reasonable number of tabs, plus a few lightweight productivity apps). With what amounts to 5GB and (I presume) heavier use patterns, it's not unexpected for 10.8 to swap a bit. The good news is that 10.9 may help. Its memory compression feature noticeably reduced swapping on a 4GB Mac for me.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Anybody else having a horrific time with Quick Look with .CR2 files? I thought 10.9.2 would fix it. I don't understand why something like Quick Look would even change, when it worked so well in the previous four Finder releases.  OS regression is one my least favorite occurrences, and it always baffles me how and why it manifests itself. More info here if you don't know about it. Anybody not have the problem? Maybe a clean install without migrating anything...? I don't want to use another app - that's why QL is brilliant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
What's the best SNES emulator for Mac? I don't need anything too fancy.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 23:30
|
|
|
online posted:What's the best SNES emulator for Mac? I don't need anything too fancy. OpenEmu is one of the most polished emulator & front-end packages I've ever come across.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2014 23:47
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Well in this case, fancy is good. Fantastic and way better than what I was looking for. Thanks!!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 00:24
|
|
|
online posted:Fantastic and way better than what I was looking for. Thanks!! Just keep in mind OpenEmu is a front end. It isn't actually an emulator. The actual emulator you'll be using is SNES9x.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 00:26
|
|
|
Or Higan. It can use that too. Of course, it's not that much more accurate than using SNES9x, since clobber told me they bundle the performance profile, which is comparable to the latest SNES9x in performance, but a bit more accurate. So far as I know, it's also the only decent frontend for PPSSPP, except you have to acquire or build the experimental plugins to enable that, I think.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 02:44
|
|
|
Djimi posted:Anybody else having a horrific time with Quick Look with .CR2 files? I thought 10.9.2 would fix it. I don't understand why something like Quick Look would even change, when it worked so well in the previous four Finder releases. Quick look is messed up for everyone. A clean install won't fix it, I did one recently to fix unrelated problems and I still have it. It's really disappointing. I did research about a month or so ago, nobody to my knowledge has solved it yet.  If anyone has a good workaround, I'd love to hear it. I guess there's Adobe bridge but still...
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 04:37
|
|
|
Say, I have a fairly old MacBook Pro 4,1 (Core 2 Duo 2.4Ghz, 4GB RAM) that's been sitting around on 10.6.8 and hasn't been formatted in forever. It's been growing increasingly slow during restarts (not that I ever restart outside of the odd software update) and updates, and in fact I thought it was done for when it seemingly hung for a few hours during the Snow Leopard update. I haven't had any issues outside of this. I'm considering doing a fresh format & install of Mavericks, which apparently will require me to first soft update to Mavericks, then use it to create a bootable USB install drive and then boot off that to format and install proper. Now before I do this, I just want to make sure that I won't end up with an OS that takes up too much resources for this poor old MacBook, resulting in a fresh install that's actually slower than Snow Leopard. Apple says this MacBook Pro should be supported, but I've been using computers long enough to know that "supported" does not mean "smooth". Is this going to work well?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 22:11
|
|
|
You might want more RAM. It'll work, but eh, having 8 gives me more headroom on Mavericks. With light usage and only 4gb you'll be swapping a lot, so I hope you have an SSD if you go that route. If you go to 8gb and get an SSD, that machine will work great.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 22:16
|
|
|
4GB 200-pin DDR2 chips are anything but cheap, and I'm not even sure it's supported. Although searching through forums seems to indicate that the actual maximum is 6GB, with a 4GB and 2GB slot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Oh I didn't know that, that seems queer. Well, give the OS a shot anyway, what do you have to lose? Mavericks is a lot more efficient in a lot of ways than previous versions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
Pivo posted:Oh I didn't know that, that seems queer. Well, give the OS a shot anyway, what do you have to lose? Mavericks is a lot more efficient in a lot of ways than previous versions. 
Djimi fucked around with this message at 02:31 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 23:15
|
|
|
I don't know, my machine is quicker on Mavericks than before and has greater battery life, and I have fewer problems with random beachballing esp. with loving Finder. Quick Look always works for me quite well. I guess it's different for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 23:17
|
|
|
Ok, here's my situation, I'm still googling for a straight answer, but I'm hoping I can get one here... My main 650 GB hard drive is 10.6.8, and due to Presonus not releasing Mavericks drivers for my Firestudio 2626 audio interface, I'm staying with that on that hard drive for all of my audio work. However, I just installed a 250gb HDD, and it's recognized and all that. Can I just download Mavericks and install it fresh onto the second HDD, and then choose which one to boot into whenever I start my mac? EDIT: Looks like I'll have to make a bootable USB Mavericks drive... true?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
One more: a good music player that also places .flac and is lightweight?
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 23:37
|
|
|
Rupert Buttermilk posted:EDIT: Looks like I'll have to make a bootable USB Mavericks drive... true? To do a clean install on a drive, yeah you'll need to make a bootable install drive. Then you should just be able to install it to whatever drive. Then hold Option at boot to select which to boot.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2014 23:58
|
|
|
Djimi posted:I actually would dissuade someone from going to Mavericks if they don't actually need to. I would max out RAM, and put in an SSD for sure and then install fresh 10.6.8 on that machine and migrate. Eh, as extra context, bear in mind that this MacBook pretty much is only used to IM or Google stuff while my main PC is busy so I don't have to alt-tab. Apart from that, sometimes I'll drag it along to watch Netflix in bed. That's about it. I really just feel like wiping this thing and getting a clean start.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 00:03
|
|
|
Djimi posted:I actually would dissuade someone from going to Mavericks if they don't actually need to. I would max out RAM, and put in an SSD for sure and then install fresh 10.6.8 on that machine and migrate. Besides power management and multiple display/spaces - I don't see anything overly compelling about Mavericks. If my MBP didn't need to have >=10.7 on it, I'd be running 10.6.8 right now. Quick Look for one thing would work. And the OS is more responsive, and it works with external NAS for Time Machine... it may be 'efficient' for power usage, but it's not efficient overall, in my personal experience. I just did a 10.6.8 to Mavericks install on a MBP 5,1 two days ago for a friend. She is a graphic designer, she was miserable until the RAM was maxed out, after 1 day of use - I rush ordered it for her. She's going to buy a Intel 530 SSD and probably will be happy after I put that in there for her. But Apple would like to upgrade - so you probably should I would just get Windows XP. I'm glad that newly bought Apple computers don't run operating systems from the Pleistocene, or we would have that Windows-type situation where the 80% of laggards and luddites run some kind of abomination that needs to be supported by all newly released software. That would give developers a disincentive to support the new features. I have really seen major benefits from the memory and power management, features like full screen, using several virtual screens and others. So my anecdote is different from yours. Maybe I could state this in a nicer way, but Apple's philosophy is not as much about bending over backwards to support obsolete or ancient hardware and software as Microsoft's is. Mr. Smile Face Hat fucked around with this message at 06:05 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 00:09
|
|
|
online posted:One more: a good music player that also places .flac and is lightweight? That depends on your definition of lightweight. My fork of Cog is the most recently updated version of that player, which you may find here, but it rolls in at a 13MB download and 32MB installed. It also supports a metric buttload more formats than just MP3 and FLAC.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 00:43
|
|
|
kode54 posted:That depends on your definition of lightweight. My fork of Cog is the most recently updated version of that player, which you may find here, but it rolls in at a 13MB download and 32MB installed. It also supports a metric buttload more formats than just MP3 and FLAC. Oh, that's nice, I wanted to recommend Cog except it had gone largely unmaintained... I'll be sure to grab it from your fork once I'm done reinstalling.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Pivo posted:I don't know, my machine is quicker on Mavericks than before and has greater battery life, and I have fewer problems with random beachballing esp. with loving Finder. Quick Look always works for me quite well. I guess it's different for everyone.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 02:47
|
|
|
I have a Nikon and yes NEF files work in Quick Look just fine. Once I open the first one and whatever library loads into memory, they load incredibly quickly afterwards. I realize "Safari is snappier" is a bit of a meme with iOS updates, but seriously Mavericks just seems quicker when doing basic tasks, but of course I haven't scientifically tested it. I have a late 2011 17" MBP so it's quite a beefy machine, I guess it would be pretty hard to notice speed differences to begin with. It DOES boot quicker, I can tell you that. Pivo fucked around with this message at 03:07 on Mar 17, 2014 |
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 03:04
|
|
|
kode54 posted:That depends on your definition of lightweight. My fork of Cog is the most recently updated version of that player, which you may find here, but it rolls in at a 13MB download and 32MB installed. It also supports a metric buttload more formats than just MP3 and FLAC. Well, just tried the compiled binary on that page and it says the application is damaged. As much as I'd like to reinstall XCode and compile from scratch, I'm feeling a bit too lazy for that tonight and thought I'd let you know. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 03:52
|
|
|
Jan posted:Well, just tried the compiled binary on that page and it says the application is damaged. As much as I'd like to reinstall XCode and compile from scratch, I'm feeling a bit too lazy for that tonight and thought I'd let you know. I guess that error message could be telling the truth this time for you, but I'm guessing it's a repeat of the non-MAS (non-sandboxed app?) alert that lies about what's wrong. Ctrl-click on it and select "Open", and/or go to your Security & Privacy pref pane's General tab and change the "Allow apps downloaded from:" setting to "Anywhere".
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 04:08
|
|
|
Abjad Soup posted:I guess that error message could be telling the truth this time for you, but I'm guessing it's a repeat of the non-MAS (non-sandboxed app?) alert that lies about what's wrong. Ctrl-click on it and select "Open", and/or go to your Security & Privacy pref pane's General tab and change the "Allow apps downloaded from:" setting to "Anywhere". Oh, that's weird. I did see the "(application) is not from a registered developer blah blah" message before and just allowed it by instance in the Security preferences pane, but thought it wasn't it when it didn't show up in this security tab. Didn't expect it would manifest as an ambiguous message like that. Thanks for the heads up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 04:14
|
|
|
stuart scott irl posted:I get that RGB color noise when I'm playing a game that crashes, especially Kerbal Space Program (which runs like garbage on Mavericks incidentally), except it takes up the entire screen and I'm forced to hard restart. It seems to cause no lasting harm, unless you count the fact that it happens at all in the first place. I have no idea why it happens so I'm not sure this is terribly helpful. That is the HDCP handshake failing. What usually worked for me in the past (I haven't seen it happen in ages) is simply to turn the monitor off then on again.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 05:15
|
|
|
Dammit, damaged? I really need to fix my signing process. I currently codesign the whole blob and all nested frameworks and bundles at once using the --deep option, but randomly, the whole process fails due to a single timestamp error which only appears when the file is downloaded and installed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 05:19
|
|
|
Djimi posted:I never have had a beach ball issue in 10.6.8 - but maybe I've just been lucky with it. I suppose I'm plugged in with my laptop more often than not. So the battery life issue isn't as important to me. I do think Apple is shoving out major OS revisions at a much too rapid pace. I had at least the same amount of beach balls in 10.6 or more than I have now. That's because they're often caused by the storage being slow and apps being busy loading something or paging in memory, and now I have nearly everything on SSDs on my Macs. How major these individual revisions are is very subjective. I guess MS is going at the "correct" pace? Djimi posted:I completely passed on Lion and Mountain Lion because of it. Developers didn't have their act together for Lion at all, and ML came after swiftly on its heels. Lastly, do you use Quick Look to display Canon RAW files and it works fine for you? Yeah, no software worked on the Lions at all. Also, let's hand-wave away all progress that has been made in the meantime and just latch on to one issue. You really sound like you're very frightened of new things and Windows would make you much happier. I don't mean this in a bad way. Pivo posted:I realize "Safari is snappier" is a bit of a meme with iOS updates, but seriously Mavericks just seems quicker when doing basic tasks, but of course I haven't scientifically tested it. I have a late 2011 17" MBP so it's quite a beefy machine, I guess it would be pretty hard to notice speed differences to begin with. The difference in Safari was particularly striking going from Mountain Lion to Mavericks. Boot time also may have gone down, but I didn't benchmark them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 05:41
|
|
|
Damage is fixed, thanks to a magic script I've added to my packaging process in place of using codesign directly. Seriously.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 05:59
|
|
|
flavor posted:Yeah, no software worked on the Lions at all. Also, let's hand-wave away all progress that has been made in the meantime and just latch on to one issue. It appears you think that 'new features' always = good/better. Sometimes they are, sometimes they are not. Sure Apple makes new software features in each new OS release, it doesn't mean that they're an inherently great, asked for or wanted. Are the latest release of Apple products sort of like Manifest Destiny to you? Have you ever been dissatisfied with something new that wasn't as good as what it replaced? What’s the deal with bringing up Windows and Microsoft anyway? Is that funny? I guess you know them well? OS 10.6.8 was released 2 years, 7 months ago. The machine in question to be upgraded was released 6 years, 1 month ago. Usually newer Mac OSes cripple in some way the hardware from more than 4-5 years before that release. Mavericks looks to be (maybe) a big exception (depending on your CPU/RAM) to that rule. So it's actually that Apple completely bends you (us) over backwards to absolutely not support 'ancient' hardware. If they could make you buy a laptop or workstation every two years to the day, I'm sure they would love to. I think that would be the incorrect pace. The rapid adoption that we should be getting new features in OSes all the time doesn't make sense in and of itself. Features for hardware is different. If a chip has instructions to be taken advantage of, by all means - do it. If a trackpad can support gestures, put energy in that development — that's real progress. I get that. I’m not a Luddite. I’m not afraid of any technology, son. It's marketing and oooh look how cool (gilded leather address book/contacts in Lion?? WTF was that?) = more sales, that is the mantra. Just give me tools that work. That don’t f@*k up. Some things in a new OS work better and some things don't. I don’t think anybody (especially a long-time user) would have a problem agreeing with that statement. I have used every Apple graphical OS since 6.8. I have used every Apple product since I was a kid. I have direct experience with what I'm talking about. I have supported hundreds of Macs in a VFX film and publishing studio environment in Fortune 100 companies over the last 14 years. I'm a Mac expert. I am a certified Apple Portable Technician. I'm what Apple likes to bandy about as a "Genius." Because I know all about their OSes and can repair their products. I even code occasionally for my IT Engineer position. Unfortunately I’m not coding for the Finder.  I can make these criticisms of Apple because when I started in my chosen line of work, I labored on them and tested software products at Apple HQ @ 1 Infinite Loop. I was Quality Assurance Lead for our Mac software. Every Mac back then came with software from our company and I signed off on it. I personally tested on each hardware iteration and configuration, from then obsolete to not-yet-released models. Overtime and in new positions, I evolved from an Apple-centric view of computing (starting from Apple the ][) to using Unix, DOS, OS/2, Amiga, Windows and then Linux. I’ve written chapters in Dummies Books. I was asked to write six chapters for Mac OS X 10 Bible (I passed to work for a VFX studio, because guess what OS X 10.0 wasn't even ready enough to be written about right up to its release). Have you ever heard the maxim that you learn a lot about your native tongue when you study a foreign language? It really holds true for OS GUIs as well. I think it's great that Apple stole app switching from Windows, you know because Windows stole everything good from OS 7-9 that they could get away with. I get that. I applaud it actually. And Mac OS is the prettiest *nix OS ever. The CLI is sweet. Wish Linux / Windoze could do what the terminal can do. I mostly a big fan, as you can see by reading my life story about Apple. However, I'm not meek enough to 'handwave' their occasional blunders and bad decisions. I don't see through rose-colored glasses. I'm pragmatic. I am all for 'progress' when it is real and tangible, not just a new feature for the sake of a new feature, to sell new computers, because oops you installed a barely workable FREE! and NEW! OS on a 3+ year old machine. A lot of people don’t know how to install or won’t pay $80 to double their RAM – and can't fathom opening up a laptop. Guess what that means? Bingo – new computer. Let’s hide where your files are and how big their sizes are by default. Filled up hard drive but where are my files?... new computer (for most people.) That's the commodifying and dumbing-down aspect of the computer revolution that's repulsive. Unfortunately from an empirical point of view, I haven't upgraded enough prior Mac models to OS 10.9 to say definitely whether there are or aren't issues in somewhat older models, or that it’s a good OS for everyone’s needs. I do know that 4GB doesn't cut it. 4GB works very well on the Pleistocene 10.6.8 of 2011. I do know that Lion and Mountain Lion was a drag and was slow and bloated for prior hardware models and that drivers were an issue from 3rd parties in the beginning. I didn’t say “no software” worked. That’s your hyperbole. Read what I actually wrote, “Developers didn’t have their act together.” How do you construe that statement to mean what you wrote? Also it’s not about one issue – it’s about the need for OS change for the sake of it. Or the sake of software developers and engineers to keep making changes without them having a need to, necessarily, except so that they can have jobs or something to do? And I’m not hand-waving progress, I’m deriding regression, and I’d like (honestly) to know where that comes from in software development. That was the point of my initial post. And to find out if I can somehow fix it. I tried qlmanage –r and qlmanage –r cache. It didn’t appear to do anything. Pivo posted:It DOES boot quicker, I can tell you that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 08:03
|
|
|
woah
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:28
|
|
|
What did I just read 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 09:51
|
|
|
kode54 posted:My fork of Cog Just wanted to say thanks for this, Cog is my go-to player when I'm playing stuff outside of my iTunes library  (Also your codesign script made me laugh)
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 14:05
|
|
|
kode54 posted:Damage is fixed, thanks to a magic script I've added to my packaging process in place of using codesign directly. Seriously. Haven't developed on OS X since 10.4, seems like a doozy now! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 15:28
|
|
|
Djimi posted:I'm a Mac expert...reading my life story about Apple.  enjoy 10.6.8!
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
I'll counter his point about being a Mac expert and say that I maintain the desktop SOE for our Macs at work and there have been a significant number of back-end changes since 10.6, almost all for the better. 10.8 and 10.9 are significantly easier to get working with modern applications and network environments than 10.6 and I absolutely hate trying to get our sole lab of 10.6 Macs (used by people who won't stop using PPC binary software) at feature parity with the rest of our computers. flavour may come across as argumentative sometimes but he's nearly always right.
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 22:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 23, 2024 10:14 |
|
|
Djimi posted:Blah blah blah…
|
|
#
?
Mar 17, 2014 23:15
|
|
