Submit Hint Search The Forums LinksStatsPollsHeadlinesRSS
14,000 hints and counting!

iAddressX, ASM, and large Address Book lists... Apps
I have 10.2.1 installed and was getting a never-ending spinning beach ball when I would go up to the right corner of the menu bar to use ASM (version 2.03). Even force quitting the Finder would not restore it. The problem was resolved when I removed iAddressX from my computer. I love the program, but my address book has over 1,000 entries for my business and I think that this locked up the menu bar when I would go to ASM.

[Editor's note: I don't have ASM installed and have a relatively small number of contacts in iAddressX. Anyone else have a large contact database who can comment on their experiences with iAddressX and ASM?]
  • Currently 0.00 / 5
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  (0 votes cast)

iAddressX, ASM, and large Address Book lists... | 7 comments | Create New Account
Click here to return to the 'iAddressX, ASM, and large Address Book lists...' hint
The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. This site is not responsible for what they say.
Why do people want their OS to be unstable?
Authored by: bryanzak on Oct 04, '02 12:11:47PM

Why do people voluntarily add things like crapxies and APE to their OS X system? It just brings back the bad old days of crappy extensions on OS 9 patching things until they break.

Is it so important to have some stupid FruitMenu or something? Are people really willing to trade stability for some behavior they can't live without?

I really don't understand this. It seems so obvious that APE and the crapxies are a Really Bad Thing, yet they are still very popular, why exactly is that?

[ Reply to This | # ]
APE is at the application-layer...
Authored by: robg on Oct 04, '02 02:30:36PM

Read the APE web page. It cannot cause system instability. Perhaps it may cause an application crash, but that's about it -- it functions at the application, not system, level.


[ Reply to This | # ]
Re: Why do people want their OS to be unstable?
Authored by: escowles on Oct 05, '02 05:59:28AM

Personally, I like to make every process as efficient as possible - keyboard shortcuts at all costs, single mouse clicks, and only if absolutely necessary anything more than that. So OSX bothers me because I can't switch from one window in one application to a specific window in another application, unless they both happen to be visible on screen. You have to switch to the other app, and then switch to the window. I switched over from Linux, so I've generally got 5 or 6 terminal windows open at any given time -- you just can't keep that many visible on the screen. Add a couple of browser windows, some PDFs or Word docs, and it quickly gets hard to manage screen real-estate and application/task switching.

It's this kind of frustration that makes people want to change the basic behavior of the OS/GUI. The only reason a lot of this stuff is unstable is that Apple won't make public APIs for this stuff in a misguided attempt to prevent people from customizing the GUI.

In the end, it comes down to how much effort you're willing to put into it. If you want to mod things, you have to put up with reinstalling your mods after most software updates, incompatibilities with some software, and sometimes extra instability. For me, it's not worth it. I got over not having the Apple Menu by putting my Applications folder in my Dock. It's not as good, but I can live with it. Maybe if I've got some spare time, I'll write a Dockling that will do it properly. MacOS has never had a decent taskbar (like Win9x, Gnome, KDE, etc.), but I'll live with juggling desktop real estate. But I think it's naive to say that there's no good reason for people to want to hack the OS, when Apple gives them no choice.


[ Reply to This | # ]

Authored by: Drogoul on Oct 04, '02 01:33:23PM

Let's stay in the topic. Two things :

1) ASM and iAddressX are Menu Extras (like the ones Apple provides) and not APE/haxies related softs. To the author of the previous post: please inform yourself before issuing anything in the comments. They do not hack anything, just add functionality to your menu bar. And, in my opinion, they both fill a gap in Apple's implementation of, namely, the Finder and AddressBook.

2) It's true that iAddressX is actually very slow in updating its submenus with the list of contacts whenever you change one in AddressBook, or change a pref in the prefPane. And Menu Extras seem to all reside within the same process (if I'm wrong, please correct me), which means that, whenever one is blocked, it blocks the other ones. I've suffered from the same symptoms, and have temporarily removed iAddressX (i've only 250 contacts, but that's enough for the lag to appear).

I really hope it's gonna be fixed soon.
The solutions would be, from Apple, to multi-thread the UIServer (no hope in the near future) or, from iAddressX, to improve its sorting/menu building algorithm (and I guess it is feasible -- had it been open-source, I would have already checked).


[ Reply to This | # ]
I used ASM & iAddressX together....
Authored by: alajuela on Oct 04, '02 02:44:12PM

with no problem. But if they do give you a problem, then by all means, try Quitling instead of ASM. I would not give up iAddressX. Too useful.

To the person who asked:

"Are people really willing to trade stability for some behavior they can't live without?"

Um, well, you've sort of answered the question, right? If the behavior is something that cannot be lived without, then you do not live without it. I for one find FruitMenu, iAddressX, Meteor, iChoose, etc., invaluable. They have not caused me any stability problems, and they allow me some choice that Apple's dictatorial menubar framework does not.

[ Reply to This | # ]
Authored by: Drogoul on Oct 04, '02 03:57:25PM

The problem is not related to ASM, in fact. It happens with every menu bar extras whenever you have iAddressX installed and a long list of contacts. And, of course, you do not have access to iAddressX as well when it is updating its menus.


[ Reply to This | # ]
Same problem here
Authored by: dsw65 on Oct 04, '02 07:06:26PM

Unfortunately, I've had the same problem. As much as I _LOVE_ the concept of iAddressX, I had to disable it because it would lockup my menubar seemingly forever. I've got a large address book of business contacts (well over 2000), and iAddress couldn't deal with it. Actually, it seems that even Apple's Address Book has trouble keeping up... everything runs slow and clumsy. Big drag, because I've been anxious to ditch Now Contact, but I've gotta say that NC handled my database very fast and clean.

Interesting to hear that folks are having problems with iAddressX speed with much smaller databases than mine.

I really hope that Apple will improve Address Book's database handling; otherwise, it's a bad choice for large databases. Bummer :(

[ Reply to This | # ]