Jump to content

Why Do People Claim It Is Unstable?


victxmac
 Share

15 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

I downloaded a Patched 10.4.4 CD and Installed it. It allowed me to install the 10.4.6 patch during install...Afterwards I patched it to 10.4.7.

 

All of this was done on Intel Machines. The First was a Dell PowerEdge 400SC, that had an NVIDIA MX 440 Graphics card. It did not have QE or CI, and the sound did not work, not that I really tried to get it working. What I really wanted was a Compatible MAC system so I bought the following.

 

Intel Pentium D 920 $99.90 at Fry's Electronics

Intel D945GNTLR $119.00 at Fry's Electronics

1GB DDR 533Mhz RAM $89.99 at Best Buy

 

I already had a 200GB HDD, a Samsung DVD-R, and a case.

 

I built the PC, Installed OSX 10.4.4 Patched to 10.4.6 and then loaded 10.4.7 Update. I did the AppleHDA.kext replacement for SigmaTel 9223 Audio, and added the ID in the Info.plist for my NIC to get it working.

 

It has run 100% reliable. No Crashes. Full QE, CI Support. I have installed MAC Applications, I have XBenched it...Get a 124 By the Way. It fly's. Boots way faster than Windows on the same hardware. I have not found anything that does not work.

 

I keep reading articles about how unstable this is, and everything. I understand that the update to 10.4.8 will have to be patched before I can install it, but what is really keeping me from staying at 10.4.7? I guess some software might require higher later, but for now I could run all the apps out there and it would work. Or I assume so. Today I am buying ILife 06 and installing it. Hopefully it will run just fine. Maybe I will have problems. But so far I have seen nothing to suggest that I will....

 

I was just wondering what everyone thinks is so unstable about it.

 

VicTxMac

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine that the reason some are reporting instability problems is due to the sheer number of different configs of PC hardware there is out there and OSx86 is design for only a small portion of that. There have been numerous "tweaks" to the drivers to force some extra hardware to work, but that does not guarantee it will work properly. The most notable is the video. I agree that OSX is very stable and works very well, but that reamains true as long as you are running hardware that is supported. Bascially everything here comes under the pretense of "YMMV".

 

I'm just glad that my rig falls in to the catagory of mostly supported.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it usually stable. Sometimes when I'm working with apps that need big memory, it hangs. It does the swapping onto the disk and dies. Like something failed in the "memory management", don't know if you happened to run into something similar. Other than that its pretty usable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It should be noted that you bought hardware to suit the OS. Windows is more stable because you can buy just about any hardware and it will be supported. I bought my laptop because I liked the laptop, and not because I wanted to run OSX86. The fact that it runs stable is a plus, but I know that Windows will run stable on it.

 

If consumer X goes out and buys a laptop in his price range and tries to install OSX86 on it, chances are he is not going to consider it stable or useful due to the level of customization and hacking needed to make the OS stable enough to use daily. You also noted that you did the hacks for your hardware. Windows, out of the box, will support 75% of your hardware (give or take) and if it doesn't, it is easy to get working.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I imagine that the reason some are reporting instability problems is due to the sheer number of different configs of PC hardware there is out there and OSx86 is design for only a small portion of that.

 

 

I think you nailed it. I jumped into OSX86 in three steps. The first was running it in VMWare under XP on my AMD system. This was pretty slow, and with only 1/2 of 1 GB of RAM dedicated to it, it was less than optimal. Step two was installing it on a USB drive on the same AMD system. Hacks got most of the hardware working, but my Radeon 9200 had no QE and no CI. The system performed a lot faster, but I probably installed OS X 5 times on that USB drive, tweaking and adjusting, while I was waiting for step three to happen. Step three was an Intel D945Gtp motherboard, 3.0 GHz dual core Pentium D, and a gig of DDR2 memory. With all of that, OS X installed on a dedicated SATA drive, the experience is 100 percent better. LAN had to be tweaked to get it up, but everything on the mainboard works except audio in. XBench went from about 25 to over 100. Issues that I was having with iTunes, Pages, Applescript, DVD Player, etc. have completely vanished. I'm going to get a supported USB audio solution for this box, and call myself completely happy.

 

I think that the AMD 'solution' is pretty much the hack that causes the most grief for people. Putting the OS on an Intel system made all the difference in the world, and I'm only 350 bucks in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for all of the replies...I guess the AMD thing is probably the biggest issue with getting it to run...I do have one question now that I have been using it for a while...What could I do to get it to xbench higher? Currently I have an IDE HDD and an IDE SAMSUNG Burner on the same channel (HDD Master DVD-R Slave).

 

My XBench is about 120. I thought maybe the HDD was being slowed by the optical drive on the same channel, but that is not the case as the xbench remains the same. I used iMovie and iDVD and made a movie of a trip, and it burned and works without a problem...I just wondered if there was anything else I could do to speed it up based on the specs given in my first post.

 

Thanks for any information.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got a 75.61 on xbench, but I'm fairly confident it is because I'm using an ancient 12gb hdd for the OS.

 

Results 75.61

System Info

Xbench Version 1.3

System Version 10.4.7 (8J2135)

Physical RAM 2048 MB

Model ADP2,1

Drive Type Maxtor 91360U4

CPU Test 77.22

GCD Loop 129.04 6.80 Mops/sec

Floating Point Basic 92.95 2.21 Gflop/sec

vecLib FFT 46.43 1.53 Gflop/sec

Floating Point Library 85.11 14.82 Mops/sec

Thread Test 142.70

Computation 102.59 2.08 Mops/sec, 4 threads

Lock Contention 234.28 10.08 Mlocks/sec, 4 threads

Memory Test 113.58

System 107.50

Allocate 107.99 396.59 Kalloc/sec

Fill 115.72 5626.47 MB/sec

Copy 99.95 2064.47 MB/sec

Stream 120.39

Copy 114.47 2364.40 MB/sec

Scale 113.95 2354.16 MB/sec

Add 127.41 2714.17 MB/sec

Triad 127.13 2719.67 MB/sec

Quartz Graphics Test 129.20

Line 106.83 7.11 Klines/sec [50% alpha]

Rectangle 136.12 40.64 Krects/sec [50% alpha]

Circle 127.45 10.39 Kcircles/sec [50% alpha]

Bezier 119.56 3.02 Kbeziers/sec [50% alpha]

Text 172.93 10.82 Kchars/sec

OpenGL Graphics Test 131.85

Spinning Squares 131.85 167.26 frames/sec

User Interface Test 247.97

Elements 247.97 1.14 Krefresh/sec

Disk Test 22.49

Sequential 27.26

Uncached Write 21.20 13.02 MB/sec [4K blocks]

Uncached Write 22.54 12.75 MB/sec [256K blocks]

Uncached Read 53.25 15.58 MB/sec [4K blocks]

Uncached Read 27.47 13.81 MB/sec [256K blocks]

Random 19.14

Uncached Write 7.02 0.74 MB/sec [4K blocks]

Uncached Write 33.46 10.71 MB/sec [256K blocks]

Uncached Read 56.76 0.40 MB/sec [4K blocks]

Uncached Read 52.86 9.81 MB/sec [256K blocks]

 

Since those scores are abysmal, but the others are pretty good, I think

 

I should also note I had iTunes open and playing, firefox open and MT Newswatcher open and downloading.. probably had something to do with my score

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, Im running a PentiumD 805, and Asus 945G Board 1GB or DDR2 and 110GB SATA Drive and it is pretty stable, I Xbench average about 113 or so. Its crashed a few times but havent found anything that i couldnt really do yet, i wanna try Final Cut but i wanna get the Universal application

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

My system never crashes i got like 5 different OSX86 boxes all intel all made to suit, from the now old 915 to the 945 supporting core duo, i tink if you stay inside hardware compatibility OSX is 1000% more stable than windows. I really doesnt have now any crash in any of my machines..

 

And im not using Windows anymore.

 

Right now im running with Vitaly new kernel and its wonderfull my xbench is around 160 and only running at 2.6 ghz

 

Cheers

 

but the way i runn all the pro apps perfectly.

 

u should try codez for mac ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say that I have stability problems, but that not everything works for me. The system itself hasn't crashed. I just have some old hardware and can't get everything to work right (have an old video card, so all the resolutions that I can get in windows, i can't get in os x), can't watch dvds, safari still crashes, ever since the 10.4.8 update, double clicking doesn't work completely, etc. But I have a new mac pro on the way, so...

:glare:

 

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Currently I have an IDE HDD and an IDE SAMSUNG Burner on the same channel (HDD Master DVD-R Slave).

 

My XBench is about 120. I thought maybe the HDD was being slowed by the optical drive on the same channel, but that is not the case as the xbench remains the same.

 

I would definatly move the HD off the same IDE channel, it does improve performance I don't care what Xbench says. It's never a good idea to put a device that is many times slower on the same channel.

 

Unfortunatly I know the Intel D945GNTLR board only has one IDE channel(the one bad thing about it). You could get a cheap SATA drive for about $64-$110 depending on wheather you go with a 8MB or 16MB cache. I've got the same board and this drive works great for me:

http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/Se...595&CatId=0

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't say that I have stability problems, but that not everything works for me. The system itself hasn't crashed. I just have some old hardware and can't get everything to work right (have an old video card, so all the resolutions that I can get in windows, i can't get in os x), can't watch dvds, safari still crashes, ever since the 10.4.8 update, double clicking doesn't work completely, etc. But I have a new mac pro on the way, so...

:poster_oops:

 

Cheers.

 

if you wanted to fix that stuff I think it's a few frameworks from 10.4.7 or 10.4.6, replace them and you'd likely get a lot of stuff back to normal. IOKit.framework, and WebKit.framework (for safari crashes). If you're interested in fixing it, use pacifist and extract those frameworks and put them into /system/library/frameworks/ repair permissions and you should be good. after 10.4.8 I couldn't open a web page at all, until i replaced these.

 

if you search for 10.4.8 I think you'll get a thread or two just about the bugs, lots of discussion and solutions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...