New 27″ iMacs wake up on the wrong side of the CPU

by James in Apple News, Tech News

8 Comments on “New 27″ iMacs wake up on the wrong side of the CPU”

Joe Anonymous Says:

October 31st, 2009 at 7:00 am

I wish people who don’t know anything about Macs would stop writing articles about them.

The 105% (or even higher) figure is perfectly reasonable. The CPU usage figure is based on a single core, so 105% means that both cores are being used a little over half.

Most of the reported problems are due to Flash. Flash is problematic on ALL platforms and I’d be happy if web designers stopped using it and switched to pure html which will do just about all the same things. When users of every platform are complaining about Flash, THAT is where the complaints should be addressed.

As to why the problem appears to be more common on the 27″ iMac? Presumably a video driver issue which will undoubtedly be worked out. But you can bet that Flash will continue to give problems.

Bennett Stowers Says:

October 31st, 2009 at 8:53 am

Hmm,
Return a iMac to Apple for a known problem with someone else’s buggy software. Interesting idea. Adobe makes some great software packages but Flash isn’t one of them. This is a common problem with Flash on all computers not just the 27″ iMac. Why not tell people to take their Dell or Gateway back for the same problem with Flash being a memory and CPU hog?

Joe Anonymous Says:

October 31st, 2009 at 9:21 am

Correction – I said 105% is reasonable. That’s not quite right. I should have said ‘valid’.

105% is a valid number – the percent CPU usage can be anywhere between 0 and 200% on a 2 core system.

It is NOT a reasonable number for a simple plugin. Flash obviously stinks and should never require a full 2+ GHz core simply to run a plugin.

Louis Wheeler Says:

October 31st, 2009 at 10:31 am

What still needs to be established is who is at fault. When Snow Leopard 10.6 was released on August twenty-eighth, it had a faulty Flash plugin which operated just exactly as you described.

Was this Apple’s fault, then? No, Adobe creates its own plugins, so it must take all responsibility. Adobe also delivered an updated version too late for the Grand Master DVD. Of course, it was rather simple to get on the Web and download a corrected copy. I understand that the first Snow Leopard update has the corrected version in it.

It is unclear what is going on now. None of the reports blame the plugin, when that is most likely culprit. None of the writers explain that Apple had this identical problem back in August and how easy it was to correct it.

Every report that I’ve seen concludes that this is Apple’s fault. Perhaps, it is. But none of the writers have done the ground work necessary to prove it.

Nor do the writers explain that it is risky to buy .0 version hardware and software. There are almost always bugs in equipment’s beginner stages, so it is troublesome to be an early adopter.

Adults know these problems and deal with them. Why are the Mac pundits acting like spoiled brats?

Mr. Apple Macsuks Says:

November 4th, 2009 at 1:30 am

Its apples and oranges folks. Apples and lemons actually- or apples are lemons- you figure it out. As for blaming Adobe and Flash…do you even understand the complexity of the flash player plugin- or the enourmity of getting such a complex plugin to work multi browser and cross platform? Adobe have done very well leading on from Macromedia. Most people only use apple macs to be ‘different’anyway- if mac users want to be different they should be using some weird and wonderful linux distro on an old amiga or commodore 64 system- only problem with that is they would have to know how to use a computer and have a basic understanding of the principles on which said computer operate- which leaves every mac user there ever was out of the picture…But seriously if your expensive mac is playing up I feel sorry for you, not because its playing up but because you own a mac in the first place. Just my 02c- now let the flaming commence shall we….

Eric O. Says:

November 4th, 2009 at 1:18 pm

I don’t know a whole lot about Macs, but showing 200% for a fully-utilized dual-core CPU seems a little odd. On other systems I’ve used, they still only go up to 100%, no matter how many cores you have, and for a dual-core CPU, if only one core is being used, it would show 50% usage; if one core of a quad-core CPU is being used, it would show 25%.

Joe Anonymous Says:

November 4th, 2009 at 2:24 pm

Why is that method any better? In many ways, it’s worse. Let’s say that you’re running the same application on a Core 2 Duo and a Core 2 Quad and the application uses 100% of a single core, but none of the other cores. The way Apple does it, the rating is 100% regardless of whether it’s a duo or a quad. Your way, the rating changes, depending on which system it is on.

Regardless, whether it’s right or wrong, that’s the way Apple is doing is, so people whining about how 105% isn’t possible are clearly clueless.

viddy Says:

November 6th, 2009 at 7:44 pm

I’ve had bigger problems than flash, I’m already on IMAC 27″ number 3. The first was returned because of a dead pixel, the so called Mac Genius at the Apple store tried to migrate my info from one system to another, and corrupted the hard drive….1 week old. Computer #2 starts up like the optical drive is about to blow up……going back to get #3 next week. Called Apple Head office to complain, they’re sending me a 1TB time capsule for free next week…….I have a feeling Mac #4 isn’t too far away.

Not impressed.

Post a Comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Notify me of followup comments via e-mail