|
Cool Mac Gear• iPod Video • iPod nano • iPod 1G-2G • iPod 3G • iPod 4G • iPod Mini • PowerBook-iBook • Garageband |
I keep my workhorse PowerBook and my backup computer, an old Umax S-900, networked with a crossover Ethernet cable. I use the S-900 hard drive for file backups, and I also use that machine for long overnight downloads. Accessing the S-900 hard drive from the PowerBook in OS X has been working fine for the past year. But I just turn on file sharing in OS 9 on the S-900, select “Connect to Server” in the OS X Go Menu, and I’m in -- at least I was until this week. 
On Wednesday, I wanted to transfer a piece of software I had download the night before to the Pismo. I selected “Connect to Server” as usual, but in the OS 9 File Sharing control panel. It seemed to take an extraordinarily long time for the S-900 to show up in the servers window, and when I hit the Connect” button, I got this error message. That had never happened before. 
I tried several times over, but had no luck. I began to wonder if the hardware connection might be disconnected, but it was OK. Frustrated, I booted into OS9.2.2, and selected AppleTalk in the Chooser. No problem. The S-900 showed up instantly, and connected as normal. Obviously, the Ethernet connection and the File Sharing configuration on the S-900 were working fine. This is, incidentally, a prima facie example of why I’m nowhere near ready to give up on a dual-booting. Been able to run OS 9 is a tremendous help for troubleshooting OS X glitches. In this instance, it has confirmed that the problem is software-based, but I am still baffled as to what the problem is. I hadn’t changed anything from the configuration that has worked reliably for nearly a year, and indeed there’s not a whole lot to change in terms of accessing files on other computers over a network. I’ve checked the settings on the S-900 several times, and yes, the “Enable file sharing clients to connect over TCP/IP” box is selected. I’ve also been through the File Sharing instructions in David Pogue’s Mac OS X: The Missing Manual - Second Edition several times. No clues. If anyone out there has any light to shed on this, I’d be interested in hearing their thoughts. Perhaps it’s just something simple that I missing. I’m not stuck; since File Sharing still works fine in OS 9, but it’s inconvenient to have to reboot when I want to connect to the other computer. Another annoying issue is that when booted from OS X in in sleep mode, the Pismo will wake up spontaneously about 50% of the time when the telephone rings, presumably detected by the modem. Why this doesn’t happen every time it is a conundrum, and it does not happen at all in OS 9. Any ideas about how to prevent it other than unplugging the modem when the PowerBook is asleep? Finally, after a couple of days working in OS X, things began to slow down again (see Odyssey 213) this morning, with a lot of hard drive laboring. The Info dialog was still showing 540 MB free on the partition, but that’s down from 960 when I checked last evening. The slowdown seemed to manifest when I started up ViaVoice this morning. Anyway, I’m back in OS 9 for now, and I expect OS X will be back to normal when I reboot it, but having to do this every couple of days kind of negates the stability advantage. I know -- I need a bigger OS X partition. OSX, still/again From: Chris Long My good man! The latest: I’m using OSX.2.1 full time at work now, nearly without exception. at home I switch back and forth between OSX.2.2 and OS9.2, lately pretty much sticking with 9.2 for speed reasons. I’ve now spent literally WEEKS actually USING OS X for real-world work. my assessment is that’s it’s usable -- it’s not horrible -- it actually has a few real advantages over OS9. however, I must confess that I still prefer most of the user interface found in 9.2 ... and: working with OS X and Quark XPress in ‘Classic’ mode is pure hell. it’s just absurd it’s so bad. Found the following at http://daringfireball.net/, which i believe (?) I linked to from one of YOUR recent columns:
This pretty much sums it up for me. MAN, I wish wish WISH Apple had left well enough alone and just given us a more stable OS without feeling the need to reinvent the wheel ... By the way: I notice a big difference in performance between work (dual G4 867MHz) and home (iBook 500MHz) when running OSX, so I’m guessing that a lot of YOUR beefs with OS X are directly related to the overall OOMPH of your modest computers. which is no excuse -- it seems rather absurd that you’d have to buy a near top-o-the-line Mac just to run OS X, but this IS my experience. I’m no techie, but it seems to me that Apple could put out an OS X ‘lite’ for those of us with more modest machines. heck, this iBook is only 1.5 years old -- I’m sure not replacing it NOW just to run OS X! Anyway, if/when you do upgrade to something with a fair amount of muscle/RAM/disk space, I think you’ll be more-or-less vaguely satisfied with OSX. how’s THAT for a resounding endorsement? sigh, Hi Chris; We’re pretty much on the same page. I’m using OS X more these days, but except for Chimera and the new OS X only features in Tex Edit Plus, I’m usually wishing I was back in OS 9. I agree that a faster Mac would likely make it more vaguely satisfying. Charles
The OS X Odyssey archives may be accessed here: Note: Letters to Moore's Mailbag may or may not be published at the editor's discretion. Correspondents' email addresses will NOT be published unless the correspondent specifically requests publication. Letters may be edited for length and/or context. Opinions expressed in postings to Moore's MailBag are those of the respective correspondents and not necessarily shared or endorsed by the Editor and/or Applelinks management. If you would prefer that your message not appear in Moore's Mailbag, we would still like to hear from you. Just clearly mark your message "NOT FOR PUBLICATION," and it will not be published. CM
Page: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 |
| ||||
|
| ||||||
