on 13/7/02 18:38, Nick Hingley at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > One thing I have experienced is that seemingly identical machines/set ups > can have totally different patterns of behaviour/misbehaviour. I have > encountered Macs that have been absolute dogs and despite clean reinstalls > et al will not behave and always need constant maintenance. Others will run > perfectly for months on end requiring no maintenance at all. Why this should > be I don't know but before I condemn the guy who is having all the problems > it is worth considering that perhaps he has got a hardware/software > combination with an inherant weakness. While his various rantings might seem > irrational to those who have no hassles with X, I can understand his > frustration and resulting prejudice; I have, based on my experience, > acquired plenty of my own.
I'm inclined to think that the bulk of these problems are actually the result of the user, and not the computer. The computer will operate only as cleanly as the user will allow it to. I tend to destroy my computers on a fairly regular basis, but that's because I often push them to the limits with what should be run, and I like to tinker more than most people. I've seen Macs that have run for years on end without a re-install (for example, a 610 that is still running the original System 7.1 from 1994 -- all it can do is M$ Word 5.0 (yes, 5, not 6), Excel 5.0, Telnet, and a few other things. It runs fine (doesn't get used much, if at all anymore (I might be the only one)). On the other hand, I know someone who is a little bit computer literate, but with that teeny bit of literacy is more dangerous than a complete novice -- her computers are a mess that regularly need cleaning. In my experience over the years, it seems that the two most dangerous things in computing stability are a *little* bit of knowledge applied all the time, or a *lot* of knowledge applied once in a while (I know how to fix most glitches, minor or major, but sometimes my fixes are duct tape (yes, Red Green is my hero)-style jobs that aren't viable in the long run without constant fiddling). If you don't allow your users to trouble-shoot their computers (i.e. all they are allowed to do is run apps, save and transfer files and turn the computer on & off) or install/remove apps computers tend to run without a hitch. As soon as you've got someone who *thinks* they know what they're doing but they don't really have the know-how to fix a problem you're going to be in deep (for supporting them, that is). > The big nightmare with any system upgrade has always been what won't work > now that worked fine with the old system. OS X adds a further dimension to > troubleshooting in this scenario which I find quite scary, and in my more > flippant moments I have said that if I must learn a different OS then > perhaps I should learn the one that 95% of the world is using. That's somewhat true. For the moment, you're probably better off with OS 9 if it works fairly seamlessly for you. From my limited experience (only 1 year OS X vs. 18 years on the previous OS series) I'd say OS X is *hands down* going to provide a simpler platform for troubleshooting and maintenance than System 0.97-7.5.5 & Mac OS 7.6-9.22 ever did. Because apps are run with their hands off the OS this keeps regular application-caused corruption at bay, and because the users can only access the OS with great effort (and a fair bit of knowledge) user screwups are kept to a minimum (and, I'd argue that's 95+% (or even higher) of the reason for regular crashes). The one place where I do see a bit of a troubleshooting problem is in that OS X is a much more complex beast that when you do get the 5% problem you're primary resort will be to back-up the User folder and re-install the OS. Thus, two major features are needed & should be Apple supplied: 1. a mechanism to *easily* back-up your Users folder and, 2. a mechanism to *easily* re-install the OS over a malfunctioning one. If you're gearing up to make the switch to OS X you probably should focus on learning how the Users folder works, and how to turn it to your advantage (I just wish they had a better way of dealing with the (now idiotic) Mac OS 9 Desktop Folder). It keeps you out of the application and OS space, and it also keeps your OS and applications out of your user space (as they should be). > What seems to have become lost over the years is the Mac's original and > unique selling points: Dead simple to set up, dead simple to use and > reliable. I am reminded of this whenever I go to the 1987 Mac II I still > have at home and use for my admin and figurework. Under OS 7.1.2 this > machine steadfastly does all that is asked of it and I haven't experienced a > random crash in years. (It CAN be made to crash but only by doing something > utterly stupid.) I have never rebuilt its desktop, zapped its PRAM or any of > the other tricks we all now know. In fact I had used Macs for 6 years before > I even discovered these operations (When I got my first Quadra). I never > looked under the bonnet/hood, I just drove. If OSX is meant to restore Mac > computing to those far off halcyon days then it will be a worthwhile project > but given the discussions I have witnessed on various lists I'm not sure it > is there yet. I'm not so sure about the crashiness of old Macs -- old Macs were pretty crash prone. My most stable of OS installs (considering the cornucopia of software I like to run) has to have been the OS 9 series. I experienced the fewest crash-and-restarts per hour of use in OS 9.0.4-9.2.2, than with any OS before (although, I did have a brief respite at OS 8.1). Of course, I'm repeating the same thing that I have for aeons now: OS X is by far the simplest OS to install and run of any of the Mac OSes (for me at least). I just *run* the computer. I don't have to delve into silly extensions and control panels turning them on or off to resolve conflicts, gain memory (in the olden days) and to ensure stability of the OS. I don't miss that one bit -- I can use my computer as if it were a black box without having to worry about fiddling to ensure a stable, crash-free ride. > In the meantime (especially given that some of my most used apps are not X > compliant) I think I will stick with the devil I know and when I do change I > know that there will be loads of knowledge on this and other lists to tap > into. ;-) Probably a good idea (for the moment) -- let others work out the bugs for you and let them front the lost productivity time ;) (but, you can't afford to wait too long or else you'll be left at a productivity disadvantage *and* having to learn a whole new OS *at the same time*). > Considerably more than my twopennyworth, thank you for your indulgance. Hope you enjoyed my threepennyworth :) Eric. -- G-List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- We have Apple Refurbished Monitors in stock! | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> G-List list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml> Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/g-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/> Using a Macintosh? Get free email and more at Applelinks! <http://www.applelinks.com>
