OS X Server Performance


Recommended Posts

I didn't want to use phpMyAdmin or any web manager because I don't have the MySQL port open to the outside world and I hated using the browser even more for this type of management.

You don't have to have the phpMyAdmin interface open to the outside world. You can fairly easily restrict traffic on that port to local-only using iptables, or you can just not forward it through your router to begin with. If you just don't like how it works, fair enough; everyone has different preferences.

Alright, how about using Ubuntu Server, without the GUI, and just reinstalling apache, php, and mysql to their newest stables?

If you choose to install the latest stable versions of your software from upstream, which I highly recommend against unless you absolutely need some specific features that only the latest version provides, at least build Debian packages from them (using dpkg-buildpackage or apt-build) so they can be properly tracked (and their dependencies resolved) from the package manager. However, keep in mind that you have to worry about keeping track of the latest versions and security advisories if you choose to install local versions. It is particularly critical that you keep on top of security updates with external-facing services, such as your web server. If you use the version from the repository, not only is the binary guaranteed to work on your system, but the package maintainer worries about security. I can tell you from experience that Debian package maintainers put a lot of effort into ensuring that their packages are secure and work smoothly with the rest of the operating system.

You don't have to have the phpMyAdmin interface open to the outside world. You can fairly easily restrict traffic on that port to local-only using iptables, or you can just not forward it through your router to begin with. If you just don't like how it works, fair enough; everyone has different preferences.

If you choose to install the latest stable versions of your software from upstream, which I highly recommend against unless you absolutely need some specific features that only the latest version provides, at least build Debian packages from them (using dpkg-buildpackage or apt-build) so they can be properly tracked (and their dependencies resolved) from the package manager. However, keep in mind that you have to worry about keeping track of the latest versions and security advisories if you choose to install local versions. It is particularly critical that you keep on top of security updates with external-facing services, such as your web server. If you use the version from the repository, not only is the binary guaranteed to work on your system, but the package maintainer worries about security. I can tell you from experience that Debian package maintainers put a lot of effort into ensuring that their packages are secure and work smoothly with the rest of the operating system.

Don't worry, I always trust the repositories. :) That was something I first learned about when I once had Media Temple & GoDaddy's VPS.

I'm currently installing Ubuntu Server on Virtual Box right now, but, what's a preferred amount of RAM and CPU core usage on this 4GB Mac Mini?

If you choose to install the latest stable versions of your software from upstream, which I highly recommend against unless you absolutely need some specific features that only the latest version provides

This times a bajillion, barring special circumstances. Bleeeding edge belongs on the desktop.. servers are all about keeping it stable, one of the big selling points of the stable branch or LTS release depending on which distro you picked. Newer isn't always better.

I'm currently installing Ubuntu Server on Virtual Box right now, but, what's a preferred amount of RAM and CPU core usage on this 4GB Mac Mini?

If it were Windows, I'd do 1GB, not that it'll get anywhere near that for real usage unless you're doing some heavy lifting on it.. but I'll defer to an OSX person.

  • Like 2

Clearly a website with little traffic would function well on a VM > Mac Mini > Home Network. This is far from ideal - the end result will be frustration as both your usage scenario and setup is going to become problematic pretty quickly.

What budget do you have?

To me it seems you would do a lot better using a virtualized environment - i.e, like blue hosts for example.

Side note,

Just remember while you host / build the websites, you are accountable - I.e. you may end up in court with 4-5 clients recovering their loses.

Clearly a website with little traffic would function well on a VM > Mac Mini > Home Network. This is far from ideal - the end result will be frustration as both your usage scenario and setup is going to become problematic pretty quickly.

What budget do you have?

To me it seems you would do a lot better using a virtualized environment - i.e, like blue hosts for example.

Side note,

Just remember while you host / build the websites, you are accountable - I.e. you may end up in court with 4-5 clients recovering their loses.

How much have you read in the comments above you?

I have 101Mbps internet with all ports open. I had the fastest server Host Gator could offer, and it's pretty obvious when I'm the only one in control.

I just want to point out IF the port 80 was blocked - You would not be able to view websites LOL

Source port VS target port, if port 80 was blocking on an ISP then any attempts to connect to your IP on port 80 would be silently discarded and never reach your computer whilst all attempts to access port 80 sites (which would be using ports > 4096 or > ~40,000) would all connect fine.

How much have you read in the comments above you?

Honestly! I am cherry picking - I did not need to read much beyond your setup.

I have 101Mbps internet with all ports open.

I have 250 Mbps at home -- speed won't be an issue when you have very little activity.

I had the fastest server Host Gator could offer

What was the upload speed?

I have not used Host gator but I have used Soft layer who is same hardware and backbone. I have yet to find any home network solution with as little latency as the pipe they are using.

and it's pretty obvious when I'm the only one in control.

I am not 100% sure what you are referring to but IF you are judging terminal speeds I.e. local connectivity vs Texas, which is where a majority of Host Gator systems reside. You are correct it will be faster, however, your internet will top out being only 10 MB at some point.

P.s. Mr.XXIV in no way am I attempting to pick on you or judge you - I am looking to help you.

IF you are happy with the performance of your setup and it works - all the power to you. People have to live in the environment that is within their own means. My point is, for the same money as you have invested or with a little more investment, I am sure a better solution exists. IF you do not wish to change your solution that is great - I am glad it is complete.

In my opinion - the more simple the setup the more effective it will be for you in the long run.

I have been in your shoes before, When I created my first company it was ran off a Compaq 486 using Debian on a home ADSL line. At the time that was my means - the limitation was money - I knew I had a product but I needed to demo it live.

I am just saying - even with the equipment you have - the setup could be better.

Honestly! I am cherry picking - I did not need to read much beyond your setup.

I have 250 Mbps at home -- speed won't be an issue when you have very little activity.

What was the upload speed?

I have not used Host gator but I have used Soft layer who is same hardware and backbone. I have yet to find any home network solution with as little latency as the pipe they are using.

I am not 100% sure what you are referring to but IF you are judging terminal speeds I.e. local connectivity vs Texas, which is where a majority of Host Gator systems reside. You are correct it will be faster, however, your internet will top out being only 10 MB at some point.

Where are you located for such speeds in America?

I don't remember, I'm not the one who sends in the traffic. But my partner could prove he has enough to overload that server if he wanted to. I honestly wanted Media Temple more than Host Gator because of the latency.

I'm more in favor of ever hoping for Gigabit internet, 101 isn't enough for me.

I do not live in the US and it is a Fiber line.

Yea, I pretty much have one of the fastest in America. Sucks for US, right? LOL

The best we got now, is just the Google Fiber, and I'm anxious for it to be on this side.

Yea, I pretty much have one of the fastest in America. Sucks for US, right? LOL

The best we got now, is just the Google Fiber, and I'm anxious for it to be on this side.

Well you said 101 Mbps which is something like 11 MBs or so (Need a calculator) which is not bad even for delivering websites. It is about magnitude I.e. how many people are accessing content at the same time.

You mentioned that you maxed out a host gator package. The best hostgator package (which is pretty restrictive) is 100 mbps Uplink, so you have 1 megabit more but your I/O is probably reduced, your hardware is not designed specifically for this task and your setup has it more optimized for a desktop rather than a web server.

You will have other concerns,

Failure: For example the last Mac Book Pro I had - updated, and was stuck in a restart cycle repeatedly turning off - reaching the start-up screen and repeating. Are the users going to have to wait until you can afford a new machine? You are pushing it more than ever - it could happen at any time. In my instance I had to head home and get the disc that was supplied and start again but what if the hard drive goes?

DDos: What if you encounter this? - What preparations have you made to combat this effort?

Attack point: Now that your computer is public facing, what if the machine is compromised? Do you have the knowledge to resolve the issue?

Backups: What if your house catches on fire - no doubt your backups and machines are in the same location.

I could keep going, if the above is not relative to your situation - I will be able to find critical faults in the system.

Well you said 101 Mbps which is something like 11 MBs or so (Need a calculator) which is not bad even for delivering websites. It is about magnitude I.e. how many people are accessing content at the same time.

You mentioned that you maxed out a host gator package. The best hostgator package (which is pretty restrictive) is 100 mbps Uplink, so you have 1 megabit more but your I/O is probably reduced, your hardware is not designed specifically for this task and your setup has it more optimized for a desktop rather than a web server.

You will have other concerns,

Failure: For example the last Mac Book Pro I had - updated, and was stuck in a restart cycle repeatedly turning off - reaching the start-up screen and repeating. Are the users going to have to wait until you can afford a new machine? You are pushing it more than ever - it could happen at any time. In my instance I had to head home and get the disc that was supplied and start again but what if the hard drive goes?

DDos: What if you encounter this? - What preparations have you made to combat this effort?

Attack point: Now that your computer is public facing, what if the machine is compromised? Do you have the knowledge to resolve the issue?

Backups: What if your house catches on fire - no doubt your backups and machines are in the same location.

I could keep going, if the above is not relative to your situation - I will be able to find critical faults in the system.

I'm aware of server risks, and failures. That's why I preferred running mine at home. I plan on getting the iMac at it's best, later this year around the same time I finance my car. I actually want to find something better than 101Mbps. Somewhere.

This might seem like an odd question but why would you not just separate the two?

You have so many resources including the GUI running on your desktop that is just reducing performance and increasing your replacement cycle. Again iMac's are not designed for this work - Apple does make servers as well, a low end of this range would be much more suited.

On a bigger note, why Apple at all? This is not something they excel at!

This is something I have been trying to explain to people on Neowin, stop trying to force a screw driver to act like a hammer, IF you need both - buy both. Stop complaining when the Screw driver used incorrectly causes injury - If you cannot afford both seek finances or don't be a builder - people won't appreciate the lack of serious attention you give their lively-hoods and in the end - you will be the only person to lose out.

This might seem like an odd question but why would you not just separate the two?

You have so many resources including the GUI running on your desktop that is just reducing performance and increasing your replacement cycle. Again iMac's are not designed for this work - Apple does make servers as well, a low end of this range would be much more suited.

On a bigger note, why Apple at all? This is not something they excel at!

This is something I have been trying to explain to people on Neowin, stop trying to force a screw driver to act like a hammer, IF you need both - buy both. Stop complaining when the Screw driver used incorrectly causes injury - If you cannot afford both seek finances or don't be a builder - people won't appreciate the lack of serious attention you give their lively-hoods and in the end - you will be the only person to lose out.

Because i love having enough space, but I will have 1 or 2 Mac Mini's coexisting with each other for several types of servers. And you forgot about Apple's 12 Core Server.

Because I prefer the utilities they & the community provides, there are many possibilities and I won't give up until there's a good solution under this OS, even if running Ubuntu Server under VirtualBox.

If I could later, I'd invest in the Nitro Server Media Temple has. But I prefer doing things on my own terms. Like it or not, not everyone will agree with the same things you do, some do it better than others, I'll make do with what's in front of me in the most necessary manner.

There you go Centos - comes with gnome - Can run everything natively on it pretty easily. (This is an easy / cheap option.) Build your own desktop - research the parts and you might get it cheaper than your "iMac"

Because i love having enough space, but I will have 1 or 2 Mac Mini's coexisting with each other for several types of servers. And you forgot about Apple's 12 Core Server.

Because I prefer the utilities they & the community provides, there are many possibilities and I won't give up until there's a good solution under this OS, even if running Ubuntu Server under VirtualBox.

If I could later, I'd invest in the Nitro Server Media Temple has. But I prefer doing things on my own terms. Like it or not, not everyone will agree with the same things you do, some do it better than others, I'll make do with what's in front of me in the most necessary manner.

Hey I am not judging nor am I a Windows / Linux rep. - I am donating my time to help you. I am just trying to tell you - you can get more bang for your buck, In the end - IF it works, I am happy for you.

There you go Centos - comes with gnome - Can run everything natively on it pretty easily. (This is an easy / cheap option.) Build your own desktop - research the parts and you might get it cheaper than your "iMac"

I'm a developer & designer, I have a Mac for a reason. The server Host Gator has can't even compete with the iMac with the chosen configuration in my head. I don't need Linux with a GUI. I can run a Debian or Ubuntu with just the Terminal.

I have a Mac for a reason. The server Host Gator has can't even compete with the iMac with the chosen configuration in my head.

I am sorry but you really are speaking total ********.

The reason ALL BAR ONE website providers use ANYTHING BUT MACS for hosting is because macs are NOT designed for hosting AT ALL, from what I remember, apple has a few apple servers dotted around for their frontmost facing websites and everything behind them is NOT mac.

Honestly do what you like, but please do NOT spread more misinformation. Macs, like windows clients, are built with options designed for a desktop use except the old OSX Server for XServes which they discontinued (Probably because no-one bought them either; overpriced and again very unoptimised for server use).

If you want to learn more about the differences between desktops and servers, get a linux distro installed and compile your own kernel, selecting all the options such as timer frequency, block schedulers, latency-aiming and whatnot and you'll soon realise very quickly why macs are NOT designed to be servers - they come with one kernel and one kernel only.

I am sorry but you really are speaking total ********.

The reason ALL BAR ONE website providers use ANYTHING BUT MACS for hosting is because macs are NOT designed for hosting AT ALL, from what I remember, apple has a few apple servers dotted around for their frontmost facing websites and everything behind them is NOT mac.

Honestly do what you like, but please do NOT spread more misinformation. Macs, like windows clients, are built with options designed for a desktop use except the old OSX Server for XServes which they discontinued (Probably because no-one bought them either; overpriced and again very unoptimised for server use).

If you want to learn more about the differences between desktops and servers, get a linux distro installed and compile your own kernel, selecting all the options such as timer frequency, block schedulers, latency-aiming and whatnot and you'll soon realise very quickly why macs are NOT designed to be servers - they come with one kernel and one kernel only.

Major ********, I'm pretty sure just like every other OS, OS X is definitely usable as a server.

OS X may be not designed for the server, but with the system itself I can do anything. I have a Mac because I also have to develop for the mobile.

Since when was OS X Server discontinued?

Major ********, I'm pretty sure just like every other OS, OS X is definitely usable as a server.

OS X may be not designed for the server, but with the system itself I can do anything. I have a Mac because I also have to develop for the mobile.

Since when was OS X Server discontinued?

Since the xserve got retired, they removed the seperate mac osx server and replaced it with some product for $15 or so in the app store, and if you read the comments on it on the app store you'll see many 1 starts and customers complaing its crap, unfinished and very buggy.

You have a mac because you have to develop for mobile? Seriously - you have a mac for whatever reason you want (I don't care) but so far just so you know - every reason you've came up with is complete and utter garbage.

In fact; https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/os-x-server/id537441259?mt=12

Read them yourself.

'I never had an issue with File Read/Write Permissions with File Sharing, but after using Server, I simply can't easily edit files created by another user in the same network or workgroup? We are spending a lot of time fixing permission issues'

'With the last version adding DNS/DHCP controls back, we're finally feeling like it's becoming a server again compared to the first releases.' LOL at it being without such a basic tool.

'First, for anyone or any organization hoping for an out of box solution, fahgetit! Even though it has the web server and wiki built in, in my opinion, neither of them can serve a useful purpose.'

You've said you've had one so far for:

-> Backend web development

-> MySQL server

-> Other server

-> Desktop

-> A full server for a site

-> Mobile use

Quite a few people have told you about why not to use a mac as a server, feel free to do it if you still want to and you'll learn the hard way. Desktop use is a preference, if you prefer mac feel free to use it.

But I'm telling you now, if you get co-location hosting or whatnot with an 'imac' or 'mac mini' and you waltz on through the door with it, they'll show you the exit right away and won't stop laughing.

You've said you've had one so far for:

-> Backend web development

-> MySQL server

-> Other server

-> Desktop

-> A full server for a site

-> Mobile use

Quite a few people have told you about why not to use a mac as a server, feel free to do it if you still want to and you'll learn the hard way. Desktop use is a preference, if you prefer mac feel free to use it.

But I'm telling you now, if you get co-location hosting or whatnot with an 'imac' or 'mac mini' and you waltz on through the door with it, they'll show you the exit right away and won't stop laughing.

Womp.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • On the topic of being locked out of a service. Recently two different friends of mine got locked out of their Google accounts. Both were hack attempts and one of them is waiting 30 days before he can get back in. He had backup codes and MFA but not a passkey. It was a browser token hack. Anyhow he has to wait 30 days for the dispute or whatever to end. The other person only had a password and is screwed losing all of the email, docs and years of photos. Google won’t help her at all. Her fault because she had no backup/recovery setup. Enable passkeys if possible. Also do NOT use browser based password managers. If using a cloud service make sure it is one you can fully sync to one of your devices so you can back it up. Like a PC or Mac with some backup drive plugged into it. Google is the worst to use IMHO. You can’t sync your photos at all. You have to use the “Take Out” service which is manual and takes days. That service strips the meta data from your photos. Also Google Docs synced to a device are useless without a Google accounts. MS Office/Libre Office is not going to open a link to a Google doc to a dead account.
    • Why you need to take back control of your synced passwords and how to go about doing that by Paul Hill Credit: Pixabay Last month, when Google decided to introduce daily and weekly caps for Gemini, it reignited an anxiety of mine, that you can’t really depend on service providers to maintain features forever, and it got me looking into free software (as in freedom) in other areas too. One app I quickly came across was KeePassXC on desktop and KeePassDX on Android as an alternative to password manager lock-in within the Chrome or Firefox ecosystems. I personally like to switch around with browsers, and using either password manager is inconvenient, so something like KeePassXC was interesting to me. The main issue with it now is syncing; I was not sure how to do that. After a bit of research, I came across Syncthing, a tool I was vaguely familiar with but had never used because it seemed complicated. However, I was completely wrong, and honestly, I think everyone should use it if they use multiple devices. It essentially lets you share folders peer to peer across all of your devices, no cloud services that you don’t control necessary! And it was fairly simple to set up, if not a bit clunky. Since setting it up, I’ve also started using Syncthing to back up other apps too, so don’t think it’s limited to just saving password databases. You can use it for pretty much anything you use Dropbox or Google Drive for. Before continuing to talk about those apps a bit more, let’s walk back a bit and talk about browser sync. Ever since the late 2000s and early 2010s, really, since we have been using smartphones, browser sync has been a necessity of life. I don’t know about you, but I have hundreds of passwords saved. For the most part, they’re all unique, so I don’t remember them and rely on software to manage them for me. Until recently, I’ve relied on password managers in Chrome and Firefox, but what I always found annoying was that it can be hard to transfer them between browsers. Sure, on Windows it is simple enough, but on Linux, exporting bookmarks has been temperamental. It works OK nowadays, but not too long ago, Chrome required you to enable exporting passwords in chrome://flags. The situation is even worse on mobile; there is no exporting or importing of passwords of any kind. You literally have to do it on a desktop, which is incredibly annoying in our mobile-first world. Sync also lets us take out bookmarks, history, tabs, and autofill data easily. To enable sync, it’s just a matter of signing into the browser once, and it handles the rest. It’s nice and easy. Obviously, all this has some issues, including those I’ve outlined above about it being hard to transfer data between browsers, but also things such as account suspension, lost account passwords, and other lock-in mechanisms, such as passkeys, being tied to a specific browser. On a sidenote, I have just removed all of my passkeys because they can make it harder to move browsers. I think the biggest threat to your synced passwords, especially if doing this with Google, is having your account suspended. I don’t ever expect mine to be suspended, but you do hear horror stories on Reddit where people lose access to their Google accounts. Imagine if you have hundreds of passwords, then suddenly lose access to them because Google froze your account, what would you do? So yes, it can be nice to use these syncing services for their convenience, but they also have risks. You may have seen me going on about free software quite a bit in my editorials. It’s essentially a concept championed by the Free Software Foundation. It’s software under particular licenses that grant you four freedoms: run the program for any purpose (0), study and change the source code (1), redistribute copies to others (2), and the freedom to distribute modified copies to others (3). For example, if there is an app I use and one day it gets abandoned by the developer, I can keep running it or even clone the software and continue developing it. Look at the myriad of cool services Google has run over the years before killing them. You can’t take the source code for those because they are proprietary, for the most part. Both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so I get the freedoms listed above. In my use case where I’m syncing a database full of my passwords, I also get proper ownership over my data, there is no losing access to the database due to a frozen account, I can access the code of the tools I’m using, and I can get support from real people online if I run into issues, rather than having to consult a vague help page from an opaque company. With the KeePassXC password manager, you create a .kdbx file, which is what will be synced between devices. KeePassXC has cross-platform apps and also has browser extensions so that the browser can fetch passwords from the database once it is unlocked. Meanwhile, Syncthing is a peer-to-peer file sync tool where you can select folders to sync between your devices. Just pop files in the folders you choose, and then they will be available across your other devices whenever they come online. Syncthing is resilient as it works over both LAN and the internet and only ever sends content between your devices, never to a third-party server somewhere else. By combining these two pieces of software, you can essentially replicate the browser sync functionality. I have had a weird, conflicting issue where a new file is appearing, but it doesn’t seem to be impacting my main password database, which is updating between devices just fine. If you want to get a setup similar to what I have, you will need to go here to download KeePassXC for your computer. Once you have that, you will need to download your passwords from your web browser to a CSV file. In Chrome, you can type chrome://password-manager/settings into the URL bar, and you should see an option to download your passwords under Export Passwords. This will give you the CSV file you need for importing into KeePassXC. If you use a different browser, just use a search engine and type “browser-name export passwords” and muddle along. In KeePassXC, you’ll want to press Import File from the home screen, select the CSV file, and create a new database from it. On one of the screens of the wizard, there will be a Title field with a drop-down selected to none. Change this to Title and continue. You’ll select a name for the database, the encryption level (the defaults are fine), and then you will pick a password. I would choose four unrelated words that are easy for you to remember, as you’ll be typing them fairly often to access your passwords. When you have all your passwords in your new database, you will want to set up the browser extension so that your browser can fetch passwords from KeePassXC. Rather than explain how to do that here, refer to KeePassXC’s guide on how to set it up properly. Once you’ve got that set up, you want to install KeePassDX on Android. You can grab it on the F-Droid store and the Google Play Store. For iPhone users, there are other .kdbx-supporting apps, but I haven’t tried any of them, so have a look around and use what suits you. Once you have that done, you will want to install Syncthing on your computer and find a third-party app for your mobile device. On Android, I use an app called BasicSync; there are also options for iOS, but again, I’ve not tried these. Once you’ve got SyncThing, you’ll want to set it up and connect all of your devices together and share a folder between your gadgets. PCWorld has a good tutorial on setting up a synchronized file between your devices using SyncThing. Once you’ve set it up, congrats, you’ll never have to touch that stuff again except for adding or removing devices. I’ll be honest, I didn’t particularly like setting up Syncthing. It didn’t take me a massive amount of time, but I think I had to check online because I found it a bit confusing. That said, I’ve had it running for several weeks now and never need to touch the Syncthing settings, so that’s very nice. I also mentioned a conflicting file. I’m not sure why this is appearing, but the main .kdbx file seems to be updating and syncing just fine. What’s nice is that both KeePassXC and Syncthing are free software, so they won’t just vanish one day; you can take the code and fork the project or use a range of alternative implementations that others have made. It’s also nice that it works over LAN, so even if your ISP is having problems, your passwords will still sync. One area where you will want to be a bit more careful with this setup is if you only have one device. I am OK because I have a computer and two phones, all synced up. If you just have one device, you will probably want to store a backup of your .kdbx file somewhere else. Obviously, you’ll also want to remember your password really well, too. If you get locked out, it's game over. Overall, if you want to take back control of your computing from big tech, taking control of your passwords is an important part of this. You don’t need to immediately clear out your browser’s password manager; try running KeePassXC and the password manager concurrently for a while to see if you run into any problems. If you do try this out, let us know some other creative ways to use Syncthing. I haven’t really come up with a solution about what to do with my bookmarks, for example.
    • If the price was a dollar, someone would complain "Why isn't it free?" If it was free, someone would complain they weren't being paid to play it.
    • That lens of history will burn if you hold it at the right angle... Warn users too late: Shame, Microsoft! That extremely minor update to an obscure Control Panel widget required 2 years of warning. Warn users too early: Shame, Microsoft! We've got better things to do. Pipeline and process be damned, we'll just always be disappointed, eh?
    • Microsoft Paint used to be my favorite Windows app as a kid, and it's still pretty good by Usama Jawad I have been using Windows since the early 2000s, when I was around 10 years old or so. I vaguely remember playing around with Windows 98 and Windows 2000, but that may have been on school PCs which had old operating systems installed. My main OS on the home PC, and the one I recall spending most time with, was Windows XP. At that time, I used the home PC to create Word and PowerPoint documents for school, but a lot of the time, I simply used it to play games. My dad would bring game discs which we would try and install on the PC, sometimes unsuccessfully, and sometimes, we would rely on flash games in the browser, like Bubble Trouble on Miniclip. However, the problem with the latter approach was the internet speed. On a good day, our dial-up internet would offer us speeds of 56 kbps, but on most days, it was closer to 33 kbps. This did not facilitate online gaming as I would often have to wait minutes for a game to load or "draw" on the screen, and trying to download pirated games wasn't simple either. I remember getting tired of waiting for online games to load and just downloading simulator games from the Big Fish Games website instead, only to be disappointed after finding out that I was just being given access to trial versions of the title, and I needed to fork out money to pay for the full version. All of this is to say that it wasn't very easy to find entertainment options on the home PC when I was a kid, due to a number of reasons, mostly outside of my control. This situation pushed me towards a rather unconventional ally: Microsoft Paint. Whenever the internet wasn't working as good as I expected, I would simply spin up Paint and draw complete rubbish on the canvas. Of course, that wasn't always the intention, but it usually happened when I messed up drawing a straight line or something, and then I would give up on that particular piece and simply draw a random collection of objects. Microsoft Paint was extremely accessible and easy to use. Even if you weren't an artist, you could quickly understand the tools at your disposal and how to leverage them on a canvas. The absolute breadth on offer ensured that each painting was truly unique, as you could utilize various combinations of tools like the pencil, paint, spray paint, and more to truly personalize your creation. Since I wasn't particularly good at drawing both on digital screen or a physical screen, I remember that my main style of art would be to insert a bunch of randomly intersecting lines and then fill them with random colors through the paint can. I have trying to replicate that art style in the latest version of Paint below, and as you can see, it's truly Pablo Picasso-esque. The human imagination truly knows no bounds Microsoft Paint kept me occupied for hours and was my best friend when video games on the home PC were inaccessible for one reason or the other. There was no academic or professional reason for which I would need to use Paint, but I still loved using it in my personal time, even if what I created wasn't worth being shown to anyone. It was simply fun. Fast-forward to today, and the situation is mostly the same. Now that I am almost 29 years old, and I still have no reason to use Microsoft Paint in a professional capacity. In fact, I don't even use it in a personal capacity, except to dabble with it from time to time, just to see if core functionalities are still intact. And I'm happy to say that I think Microsoft Paint still offers the same accessibility and inviting experience that it did to me a couple of decades ago, even though its UX has been refreshed and it's been integrated with Copilot features. Interestingly, things could have been a lot different, had Microsoft had its way. Microsoft Paint was marked for deprecation with the Windows 10 Fall Creators Update in 2017, and even began displaying a product retirement alert, urging customers to shift to Paint 3D instead. Fortunately, after consumer backlash, Microsoft reversed course on this decision, and Paint continues to be a native app inside Windows installations that can also be updated quite frequently through the Microsoft Store. Instead, Paint 3D ended up on the chopping block, which is for the better, I think. I have intermittently played around with Microsoft's refreshed Paint experience in the past few years, and I do think it has received worthwhile upgrades. the UI and the UX has been modernized while retaining core functionality, and the app is still fairly easy to use. It doesn't meet any of my use-cases, but I've never really had any use-cases ever, as described previously. Of course, the elephant in the room is the Copilot integration. Personally, I believe that this is one place where Copilot does make sense, environmental concerns aside. I know that a lot of creatives use AI to generate images, and while some may be using professional alternatives, Paint still offers a decent casual experience, with the power of Copilot. Of course, you do need to have a valid Microsoft 365 Copilot license and available credits to use it, but even if you don't, you still get the big Copilot button in the toolbar, unfortunately. All in all, I am glad that Microsoft Paint continues to be a native feature in Windows 11, and a piece of software that has evolved to meet modern needs without cutting off its own roots. It's just an iconic piece of Windows history that was an essential part of my childhood, and while I don't use it anymore, I'm just glad it is still there.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Supreme Spray LV earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Month Later
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Genuinetonerink- Dubai earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • One Year In
      hhgygy earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      AMV earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      513
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      163
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      88
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      74
    5. 5
      Michael Scrip
      73
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!