PDA

View Full Version : PowerPC owners feeling 'abandoned' ?




hungry ghost
Feb 10, 2011, 08:25 AM
Hi, just wondered what other PowerPC users feel about the fact that upgrades to the OS can't go higher than 10.5.

Have just been reading about OS Lion's upcoming release, and it frustrates me that sooner or later I will have perfectly functioning hardware forced into retirement due to the inevitable need to keep up with new versions of OS.

Just interested if others accept this as inevitable progress, or, like me, wonder whether Apple's decision to withdraw support for the PowerPC is more marketing based than technology driven.

Thanks!



Xenc
Feb 10, 2011, 08:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)

I think the marketing side of things is long gone by now. These decisions are made from a technical stand point. Floppy disks still work, but they are outdated technology. Phasing out the old pushes the whole industry forward, unfortunately.

sim667
Feb 10, 2011, 08:51 AM
I think they'll run ubuntu if its being left behind by the OS you're worried about.

MacHamster68
Feb 10, 2011, 09:29 AM
i dont feel abandoned , i still run Tiger on my PPC Mac's and OS9 !!!, and tiger runs and even OS9 still runs fantastic so i dont see a point in upgrading to leopard , all apps that did run 4 years ago under tiger still run as good as then and apps that did run under OS9 10 years ago still run , i have no need for bloated GUI's in apps , i need apps to just work, i dont care about looks in apps i dont need features i will never use , a reason why i still use a old mobile from the year 1997 as all i need it for are phone calls and maybe send a message , honestly i never even have used spotlight , i know where every file is exact because i did save it there , i disabled dashboard on all my Mac's as i dont use it so no need for it to hog ram ,
and even i have a intel iMac which runs snow leopard , but its on a separate partition as i still run Tiger 90%of times on it because of apple talk , a reason why i had choosen a early intel iMac and not a later one , i might even sell it once i fully upgraded my PowerMac G5 2.3 dual core (at the moment its taken apart to get anodized in snow white )and i will run tiger on it and classic , there are people out there who care more then that company which had the slogan "think different" like the bunch who created TenFourFox and i totally agree with the words on their website http://www.floodgap.com/software/tenfourfox/Apple's been giving us Power Mac users the proverbial middle digit since 2006. Remember: think different.

hungry ghost
Feb 10, 2011, 11:18 AM
@ MacHamster - I'm in a similar boat to you; still running Tiger on a Dual 1.8 G5 and very satisfied. I may upgrade to Leopard very soon, if for no other reason than it's there, and I can!

But, Apple is clearly a very different company now compared to when I first entered the mac world 11 years ago. (Of course, much has changed in the industry.) But yeh, I agree that it does sometimes feel like there is much less encouragement to upgrade and repair older models than perhaps could be the case. A couple of recent unsatisfactory incidents with Apple tech support regarding repairs are probably colouring my view on this topic.

I need to be running Adobe CS for work and I'll get by a while longer without needing CS5. Sooner or later it will be necessary though, which will require an Intel mac.

@ sim667 - Never thought of running Ubuntu; tbh, if the day ever comes when a hackintosh version of OS can be easily installed on PC architecture by your average joe (i.e. me), I would switch in a jiffy. I'm too fond of mac OS to switch, but I really don't care much what the box under my desk looks like.

@ Xenc - floppy discs are outdated technology? No one told me....... ;-)

Thanks for the replies.

sigamy
Feb 10, 2011, 11:43 AM
Panther and Tiger are great OSes. Things move on, that's progress. And especially with Apple. They've never wanted to be tied down with backward compatibility.

If you need to stay up-to-date, older machines are great for servers, backup machines, iTunes jukeboxes or to pass down to friends/family or to donate to non-profit org.

leekohler
Feb 10, 2011, 02:05 PM
Not really. I did at first when they announced Snow Leopard would be the last OS for PPC. But since they've slowed OS development, I don't feel cheated at all. Leopard will most likely still be supported when Lion comes out. I will have gotten about 6 years out of my dual core G5 by the time they drop support. I'm fine with that.

VanneDC
Feb 10, 2011, 03:28 PM
i still have and love my few (count 2) PowerMacs and G4 Imac. And even though i am waiting for a few parts to soop up the Imac, the Powermacs still do a lot of real work.

They are also great for when mates/friends stay over and i dont want to let them near my studio to "check thier email"

They are robust and extremely well built. and will run Leopard for years to come, so yeah i am not too fussed with snow leopard/lion... its all good.. use what you want, dont use what you dont want.

cheers and smile, be happy! :)

Lord Blackadder
Feb 10, 2011, 03:31 PM
The Intel switch made it inevitable that the PPC Macs would be made obsolete sooner than would have otherwise been the case. I don't think Apple's abandoned the PowerPC, but their future lies with other hardware, so consumers are forced to accept that the PowerPC architecture on the Mac is rapidly on it's way out.

JoeG4
Feb 10, 2011, 03:46 PM
Despite the majority of my machines being PPC based, I'm hoping to 'replace' them all with Intel Macs in a year or two anyway, so whatever. :)

skinniezinho
Feb 10, 2011, 06:18 PM
There is plenty of life in powerpcs.Panther is a good OS,although "for real" life I think is impraticable,tiger is ok,and leopard is more than enough.
I even did a F.A.Q for powerpc owners to help them making their powerpcs "less abandoned" :)
I am happy with mine (with tiger) although I might try some linux distros..

goMac
Feb 10, 2011, 06:48 PM
But, Apple is clearly a very different company now compared to when I first entered the mac world 11 years ago.

Really? Do you not remember the time Apple promised all PowerPC's would run OS X, and then changed it up to G3's and higher? :)

This is hardly the first time Apple has left behind hardware. Heck, they gave the G5 a better lifespan than they did stuff like the Power Mac 9600.

g4 powerbookboy
Feb 10, 2011, 07:31 PM
Ill still use and enjoy my ppc machines as long as they will boot up and work, i mostly use them for itunes, web surfing and word processing and don't really see the need for a major upgrade in hardware as long as they still work. i have a g3 imac 500/256, a 1st gen tibook 400/512 and a g4 ibook 1.2/512 so i am quite happy with them the imac and tibook run tiger just fine and my newest ibook g4 is running leopard just fine with 512 of ram but will probably up that to 1.25gb sooner than later just because i can. i have a 2010 mac mini available to use which i do at times but i really dont see much difference between snow leopard and leopard.

dmr727
Feb 10, 2011, 09:14 PM
You bunch of whiners! How do you think I felt when Apple abandoned my Quadra 700 by releasing OS 8.5? "RISC is the future! 68K and x86 is a dead end! Blah blah blah!"

What goes around, comes around, bitches!




:p:p:p

Dane D.
Feb 10, 2011, 09:43 PM
dmr727
You bunch of whiners! How do you think I felt when Apple abandoned my Quadra 700 by releasing OS 8.5? "RISC is the future! 68K and x86 is a dead end! Blah blah blah!"
What goes around, comes around, bitches!
I'm happy with my G3/1.1GHz, it does everything I want, if I need something more robust, I use my son's 13" MacBook Pro.

macgeek18
Feb 10, 2011, 10:51 PM
I'm typing this in my maxed out G4 tiBook runnning Leopard. I love my G4's and don't plan to replace them till their dead or I sell them eventually from lack of space. :P

venomz
Feb 11, 2011, 02:23 AM
There is plenty of life in powerpcs.Panther is a good OS,although "for real" life I think is impraticable,tiger is ok,and leopard is more than enough.
I even did a F.A.Q for powerpc owners to help them making their powerpcs "less abandoned" :)
I am happy with mine (with tiger) although I might try some linux distros..

I've got to disagree about Tiger being okay to run.

All PPC users should be on Leopard, it is a fundamentally bad idea to continue using an OS once security support has ended.

Almost all existing mac malware exploits security vulnerabilities in Java (universal, can run on any mac) and Tiger users are stuck using an old, extremely vulnerable version.

gameface
Feb 11, 2011, 02:31 AM
I'm more bothered about FCS3 not working on my Dual G5. It sucks when I have to have an assistant work on a project I was cutting on my MP and I have to export an XML for them to relink. Or the fact I can't have them work in a CS5 project on it as well. It is ******, but it's something we need to deal with and something I accept. It unfortunately hurts us little guys who can't afford 3 brand new stations as my 2 old G5s work just fine for assembly edits and light GFX work. :mad:

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 10:13 AM
the major disappointment with the switch to intel was not actually the use of intel processors , the major disappointment came a bit later
since the first OSX apple was working on getting OSX run on pc's
and OSX tiger does run on both PPC and intel without any problem , leopard as much as i hate it did the same it run on PPC and intel , only snow leopard was made only to run on intel and thats where i ask WHY ? it was basically a kick in the lower regions for people who had bought a POWERMAC G5 just prior the switch in 2006 , thats when my PowerMac g5 dual core 2.3 was shipped 8/2006 to its original owner (company)who did pay a lot of money for it and then they could upgrade from tiger to leopard and then just when apple care ended 8/2009
they got told sorry but snow leopard or any newer OS we will make will not run on that old thing ..that was the date when this PowerMac with 15 others was stored in the warehouse to gather dust ,as i traced the company who originally owned it which went bankrupt shortly after they had to buy new MacPros ,because the software they had been using and they did need to upgrade to the newest version was made for snow leopard only 14 brothers of my PowerMac got sold during the insolvency , but mine because he had some scratches was left behind , and the company who bought the warehouse had no use for it either (windows fans) left it where it was until i delivered a parcel there and saw that poor thing in the corner full of dust (actually more inside then outside )

so my PowerMac is really angry with apple , because he was working perfectly only had some scratches , but apple said he is to old to work and thats why he was dumped in a dusty cold warehouse :mad:

adreamer12
Feb 11, 2011, 10:36 AM
I've got to disagree about Tiger being okay to run.

All PPC users should be on Leopard, it is a fundamentally bad idea to continue using an OS once security support has ended.

Almost all existing mac malware exploits security vulnerabilities in Java (universal, can run on any mac) and Tiger users are stuck using an old, extremely vulnerable version.

Is there any place(other than ebay) from where I can buy Leopard now?

Batman Sucks
Feb 11, 2011, 11:05 AM
I don't feel abandoned in the least.

The transition to the Intel CPUs was made 5 years ago now, so about a billion years ago in TechYears. Anyone using a machine for serious work/production likely has an upgrade schedule that would have them getting a new machine within a 5 year span. 5 years should be enough time to set aside ~$1000 bucks for a laptop upgrade, especially when the prices of these machines have actually come down/stayed the same since the transition.

Not to mention, as someone who was anxiously waiting for the G5 PowerBook, (ha remember that one?) the intel CPUs have been a great move and absolutely a key in the success Apple has had in the recent years (along with the iPod/iPhone).

For me personally, I still have a 15inch PB that I loaned to a roommate. And even though my most current machine is the latest refresh of the MBP 15inch that I bought 6 months ago, I still pull out my 12inch PB to use on a weekly basis. Love that little guy.

If you have a need to run Snow Leopard or anything that runs only on the Intel architecture, then you have a need to upgrade, simply put. Otherwise, get the most usage you can from what you have until you need to upgrade.

Irishman
Feb 11, 2011, 11:05 AM
Hi, just wondered what other PowerPC users feel about the fact that upgrades to the OS can't go higher than 10.5.

Have just been reading about OS Lion's upcoming release, and it frustrates me that sooner or later I will have perfectly functioning hardware forced into retirement due to the inevitable need to keep up with new versions of OS.

Just interested if others accept this as inevitable progress, or, like me, wonder whether Apple's decision to withdraw support for the PowerPC is more marketing based than technology driven.

Thanks!

Where there's a will...

I say that because, when OS X came out, my Mac wasn't supported (PowerMac 8600 250MHz proc). However, an enterprising programmer came out with a utility that allowed me to install OSX on my Mac. I've been happily been living in 10.1.5 ever since.

Keep your eyes open for something similar now.

hungry ghost
Feb 11, 2011, 11:18 AM
Really? Do you not remember the time Apple promised all PowerPC's would run OS X, and then changed it up to G3's and higher? :)

This is hardly the first time Apple has left behind hardware. Heck, they gave the G5 a better lifespan than they did stuff like the Power Mac 9600.

I don't remember, but as mentioned I only entered the mac world in 2000.

All PPC users should be on Leopard, it is a fundamentally bad idea to continue using an OS once security support has ended.

Almost all existing mac malware exploits security vulnerabilities in Java (universal, can run on any mac) and Tiger users are stuck using an old, extremely vulnerable version.

Interesting. I've put off moving to Leopard because everything runs fine on Tiger and has done for years. Also, when Leopard first was released I heard some initial reports that it was running slower on PPCs, since it was optimized for Intel. That put me off too, but I don't know if those reports were well founded or not.......?

max••
Feb 11, 2011, 11:20 AM
@ Xenc - floppy discs are outdated technology? No one told me....... ;-)

Thanks for the replies.
I second That :-)

What bugs me is when stuff that could run on ppc macs (normally running tiger) is coded as x86 only, i know my new eyetv could run on my macmini g4 (because i have done it before) but i need a slightly newer version of the software to make it work, i have no intel macs and my ppc mechiens work just fine for what i use them for heck my server is a 400mhz g4 sawtooth and apart from some usb troubles causing kp's it runs 24/7 fine and i know my dp 2.5Ghz g5 will be good for years to come, i refuse to accept ppc is dead because it just isn't im happy to live with tiger and leopard forever :-)

stev3n
Feb 11, 2011, 11:23 AM
I've always wanted to run Linux on my mac. Has anyone used Yellow Dog Linux (http://www.yellowdoglinux.com/) ?

macgeek18
Feb 11, 2011, 11:33 AM
I don't feel abandoned in the least.

The transition to the Intel CPUs was made 5 years ago now, so about a billion years ago in TechYears. Anyone using a machine for serious work/production likely has an upgrade schedule that would have them getting a new machine within a 5 year span. 5 years should be enough time to set aside ~$1000 bucks for a laptop upgrade, especially when the prices of these machines have actually come down/stayed the same since the transition.

Not to mention, as someone who was anxiously waiting for the G5 PowerBook, (ha remember that one?) the intel CPUs have been a great move and absolutely a key in the success Apple has had in the recent years (along with the iPod/iPhone).

For me personally, I still have a 15inch PB that I loaned to a roommate. And even though my most current machine is the latest refresh of the MBP 15inch that I bought 6 months ago, I still pull out my 12inch PB to use on a weekly basis. Love that little guy.

If you have a need to run Snow Leopard or anything that runs only on the Intel architecture, then you have a need to upgrade, simply put. Otherwise, get the most usage you can from what you have until you need to upgrade.

Well, what about us users that can only afford G4's for the last 2 years? I wanted to switch to Mac after using an Intel iMac for work. But some of us can't afford a new Mac Mini or intel mac in general and got stuck with G4's because they are cheap. Then Apple abandoned us.

gameface
Feb 11, 2011, 11:42 AM
Well, what about us users that can only afford G4's for the last 2 years? I wanted to switch to Mac after using an Intel iMac for work. But some of us can't afford a new Mac Mini or intel mac in general and got stuck with G4's because they are cheap. Then Apple abandoned us.

If you can't afford $500 for a computer (used mini or macbook) I don't think you should be using macs. And yes, you can find intel macs for that low and under that work way better than a G4 from what, 2004? Just saying.

eawmp1
Feb 11, 2011, 11:46 AM
Well, what about us users that can only afford G4's for the last 2 years? I wanted to switch to Mac after using an Intel iMac for work. But some of us can't afford a new Mac Mini or intel mac in general and got stuck with G4's because they are cheap. Then Apple abandoned us.

You switched platforms AFTER the Intel switch and are now complaining about it? You made a choice, but you have only yourself to blame.

This wasn't a processor upgrade, but a complete switch of processor architecture. The resources to code for both PPC and Intel processors could not continue to be used. I still have an iMac G4 and G5. The G4 runs Tiger fine, but with the increasing demands of video/Flash on the internet it gets bogged down. The G5 runs leopard just fine. I, however, don't expect Apple to continue to release new OS's that will run on my older machines.

venomz
Feb 11, 2011, 12:28 PM
Well, what about us users that can only afford G4's for the last 2 years? I wanted to switch to Mac after using an Intel iMac for work. But some of us can't afford a new Mac Mini or intel mac in general and got stuck with G4's because they are cheap. Then Apple abandoned us.

You bought into the platform after it had already depreciated and as such, you don't really have a leg to stand on when making such complaints.

Besides, like the other poster said, if you can't afford to save up for a couple of months and buy a mac mini and are borderline destitute, maybe you should focus on things other than buying computer hardware.

the major disappointment with the switch to intel was not actually the use of intel processors , the major disappointment came a bit later
since the first OSX apple was working on getting OSX run on pc's
and OSX tiger does run on both PPC and intel without any problem , leopard as much as i hate it did the same it run on PPC and intel , only snow leopard was made only to run on intel and thats where i ask WHY ? it was basically a kick in the lower regions for people who had bought a POWERMAC G5 just prior the switch in 2006 , thats when my PowerMac g5 dual core 2.3 was shipped 8/2006 to its original owner (company)who did pay a lot of money for it and then they could upgrade from tiger to leopard and then just when apple care ended 8/2009
they got told sorry but snow leopard or any newer OS we will make will not run on that old thing ..that was the date when this PowerMac with 15 others was stored in the warehouse to gather dust ,as i traced the company who originally owned it which went bankrupt shortly after they had to buy new MacPros ,because the software they had been using and they did need to upgrade to the newest version was made for snow leopard only 14 brothers of my PowerMac got sold during the insolvency , but mine because he had some scratches was left behind , and the company who bought the warehouse had no use for it either (windows fans) left it where it was until i delivered a parcel there and saw that poor thing in the corner full of dust (actually more inside then outside )

so my PowerMac is really angry with apple , because he was working perfectly only had some scratches , but apple said he is to old to work and thats why he was dumped in a dusty cold warehouse :mad:

Computers don't get angry, they just get old.

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 12:43 PM
i switched to Mac because of OSX and because of OS9 ,and because i did think different , i did not want a modern design on my desk ,the old design which was in my opinion far more beautiful then the new unibody design , my first Mac was a eMac 1.42 which has in my opinion a far better design then the unibodys with their boring grey slim shape ,before the eMac i had a brandnew dell which i run with linux , because since vista was introduced i did not touch windows any more ,
and i specifically did want OSX tiger as i find its the most advanced version of osx that still offers classic support and apple talk , which means back then apple did still care about their heritage and isn't overfilled with gadgets like leopard /snow leopard
i dont need a OS that looks like disney world at night , god i would not even mind a OS without GUI as long as it runs fast
ok i understand the majority of Mac users today dont even know that there is a terminal in the utility folder , and that something i am totally confused about how someone can buy a computer without even having basic knowledge
yes i know i am a grumpy old man who grew up with a commodore pet and a vc64 and sx 64 and sometimes i miss these old days, and then i unpack my sx 64 and play a bit asteroids

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 02:02 PM
Computers don't get angry, they just get old.

interesting comment ...if they get old , and some can even die , means they are living , and every living creature can get angry ;)

Irishman
Feb 11, 2011, 02:25 PM
Well, what about us users that can only afford G4's for the last 2 years? I wanted to switch to Mac after using an Intel iMac for work. But some of us can't afford a new Mac Mini or intel mac in general and got stuck with G4's because they are cheap. Then Apple abandoned us.

Mac Mini, my friend.

They're more capable than you might think.

Go to your Apple store and play with one. See for yourself.

And the price thing? Yes, as someone else said, Macs have always commanded a premium. This was true when you bought your first one. Unless you've always bought used, sub-$500 Macs. In which case, you shouldn't be complaining about not being able to run Apple's latest and greatest OS.

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 02:26 PM
If you can't afford $500 for a computer (used mini or macbook) I don't think you should be using macs. And yes, you can find intel macs for that low and under that work way better than a G4 from what, 2004? Just saying.

hmm interesting , that means you need to be privileged or fortunate enough to have a high income , we live in a world today where people are forced to work for a living , some have even to work hard to just make a basic living means to get food on the table , and if you cant afford to safe up for a intel Mac ,because the roof over your head , the transport that brings you to work and maybe feeding wife and kids are more important (for some these things come first despite they love Mac's ) then you do not deserve a Mac at all ?

gameface
Feb 11, 2011, 02:29 PM
hmm interesting , that means you need to be privileged or fortunate enough to have a high income , we live in a world today where people are forced to work for a living , some have even to work hard to just make a basic living , and if you cant afford to safe up for a intel Mac ,because the roof over your head , the transport that brings you to work and maybe feeding wife and kids are more important (for some these things come first despite they love Mac's ) then you do not deserve a Mac at all ?

Ugh, that is absolutely what I am saying. I can't afford a ****ing Porsche but do you see me crying about it? Maybe they should have thought about their priorities of having nice toys before they decided to bring children into this world that they obviously can't afford if $500 over the course of a year is unobtainable. I take it you're a socialist and want us to help them buy their shiny mac?

I had a Powerbook for 7 years. Why, because I couldn't afford to replace it. It wasn't until 2 years ago that I was stable enough to upgrade to Macbook Pro and a Mac Pro. Was I online whining that my G4 wasn't upgradable to SL? No I didn't. People need to harden the **** up and realize the world doesn't owe them ****.

tom vilsack
Feb 11, 2011, 03:25 PM
I think adobe just helped to slowly kill are ppc...no lastest version of flash...intel only :-(

looks like version 10,1,102,64 is the last for us...

as i use my mini mainly for web im sure it wont be long before a page says unable to load..please download lastest flash...errrrrrr

mabaker
Feb 11, 2011, 03:28 PM
I think adobe just helped to slowly kill are ppc...no lastest version of flash...intel only :-(

looks like version 10,1,102,64 is the last for us...

as i use my mini mainly for web im sure it wont be long before a page says unable to load..please download lastest flash...errrrrrr

YouTube still works perfectly with Flash 7 as far as I know.

skinniezinho
Feb 11, 2011, 03:35 PM
YouTube still works perfectly with Flash 7 as far as I know.

youtube is not the web..what I care less is about youtube..

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 03:57 PM
Ugh, that is absolutely what I am saying. I can't afford a ****ing Porsche but do you see me crying about it? Maybe they should have thought about their priorities of having nice toys before they decided to bring children into this world that they obviously can't afford if $500 over the course of a year is unobtainable. I take it you're a socialist and want us to help them buy their shiny mac?



didn't think so far but now as you said it .. why are you and the other wealthy not donating your intel iMac's and mini's when you buy a new one to the less fortunate in life , instead of selling it on ebay for the high resell value ;)

and if apple stops support completely ...
an there are other who do support us , morph os springs in mind it is made for G4 Mac's today
..Motto Think better think PPC ... and most bugs are sorted out since version 2.7 , after all its a OS still in constant development for PPC
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MorphOS


and its not much more expensive then a old leopard disc with scratches

chrismacguy
Feb 11, 2011, 04:55 PM
didn't think so far but now as you said it .. why are you and the other wealthy not donating your intel iMac's and mini's when you buy a new one to the less fortunate in life , instead of selling it on ebay for the high resell value ;)

They wont because once a jerk always a jerk. (I regularly refurbish G4s for Charity - although I do admit I am incredibly fortunate to have my Mac Pro and MacBook Air, both of which are necessary, but I couldve lived without if I absolutely had too).

VanneDC
Feb 11, 2011, 05:14 PM
The PPC is a great platform, always has been, and always will be in my eyes anyways.

I use my older macs for doing things my new macs cant, for example, playing PPC games... Wolfenstien and Quake and many, many other great PPC games spring to mind..

I also tend to use it for doing the the things it does great. For example, i use my PPC 1.5ghz mini as my home entertainment center hooked up to my plasma.. Works great for Divx and skype and any other crap ive thrown at it..

Just because it doesnt run Snowy, doesnt mean its useless...

i hope she has many, many years left in her... I also use my G5 PM for playing Homeworld 2... kicks the **** out of any intel lappy ive tried to play it on..

running the greatest and latest apps doesnt always mean increased productivity... I still regularly use older versions of Photoshop, cos i know how to do stuff in that, where-as i would be re-learing stuff for days on the latest version


Just remember, have fun it whatever your doing, if you find your not, try changing something :)

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 05:23 PM
by the way under morph os watching youtube videos in HD is possible without frame drops on a Mac MINI G4 and streamed not downloaded before playing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=54qYHeXhPvI

ok i wont give up on tiger because of classic , but i will certainly install Morph OS too instead of leopard as i dont want to slow down my G4 Mac's if there is a way of speeding them up and make them up to date, i mean still way cheaper then any intel Mac and leopard cost money too , and what is a better way of recycling and going green ..aluminium is not really environmentally friendly to produce so giving your G4 Mac mini or eMac maybe 5 -10 years longer live surely helps the environment

VanneDC
Feb 11, 2011, 06:02 PM
MacHammy,

mate, iam really interested to know how you find MorphOS as i looked at that a couple of years ago while still in early dev. Coming from the AmigaOS base i would expect good things from them. Also thier Gui looks clean and tidy.. (kinda reminds me of BeOS underneath the hood)

so plese let me know how you find Morp... Id be interested to find how it goes now :)

cheers

MacHamster68
Feb 11, 2011, 07:07 PM
MacHammy,

mate, iam really interested to know how you find MorphOS as i looked at that a couple of years ago while still in early dev. Coming from the AmigaOS base i would expect good things from them. Also thier Gui looks clean and tidy.. (kinda reminds me of BeOS underneath the hood)

so plese let me know how you find Morp... Id be interested to find how it goes now :)

cheers

i have so far tested only the demo and up to the point when it slows down dramatically after 30 minutes it runs fantastic and some of it reminds me of tiger , the simple feel , you know like if you go and buy a jacket and it just fits and feels like made especially for you , thats how i feel about tiger and morph os comes close to that feeling , while leopard does not feel like it was made for my PPC Mac's , sure it would run , but having tested morph os demo i have seen there is much more potential in these old Mac's as apple wants us to know about
here watch a another youtube about it dont forget to watch part 2 of it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TomrykR0AIc

especially the boot time is just amazing , its like morph OS had thrown out the HDD and replaced it with a ssd ( i tested it on one of my eMac 1.42's with 2gb ram but ati 9200 its a overclocked 1.25, did not notice it )

mabaker
Feb 11, 2011, 07:44 PM
i have so far tested only the demo and up to the point when it slows down dramatically after 30 minutes it runs fantastic and some of it reminds me of tiger , the simple feel , you know like if you go and buy a jacket and it just fits and feels like made especially for you , thats how i feel about tiger and morph os comes close to that feeling , while leopard does not feel like it was made for my PPC Mac's , sure it would run , but having tested morph os demo i have seen there is much more potential in these old Mac's as apple wants us to know about
here watch a another youtube about it dont forget to watch part 2 of it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TomrykR0AIc

especially the boot time is just amazing , its like morph OS had thrown out the HDD and replaced it with a ssd ( i tested it on one of my eMac 1.42's with 2gb ram and 64mb vram )

This is impressive.:eek:

macgeek18
Feb 11, 2011, 08:12 PM
If you can't afford $500 for a computer (used mini or macbook) I don't think you should be using macs. And yes, you can find intel macs for that low and under that work way better than a G4 from what, 2004? Just saying.

Wow.. You know I didn't even have a job till not even a year ago and when I switched to Mac Intel Mac's were still way more expensive than I could afford. So I bought a PM G4. For $100 that's not bad. Yeah and those who can't afford good mac's should still be aloud to have them. That is a very rich spoiled comment. Thanks from all of us not as fortunate as you...I still can only afford an 07 MBP. Some people have more priorities than computers.

You bought into the platform after it had already depreciated and as such, you don't really have a leg to stand on when making such complaints.

Besides, like the other poster said, if you can't afford to save up for a couple of months and buy a mac mini and are borderline destitute, maybe you should focus on things other than buying computer hardware.

You know, I do that's the reason I still use 10 year old computers!

MacHamster68
Feb 12, 2011, 07:35 AM
just another thing that was going through my mind ,
if apple did want to go intel fair enough its their right to decide what processors they want to use and if they want to use via processor in the future then so be it , but just creating a new OS and force people basically to upgrade to new hardware if they want this new OS is not really fair , as all the G3/G4/G5 Mac's still work some even more reliable then the intel Mac's , it would have been really easy for Apple to create maybe something like a snow leopard starter edition to run on PPC , windows does exact that with their win 7 starter edition for low end hardware in netbooks and nettops , ubuntu does it with the netbook edition
apple could have even kept the eMac or Mini G4 in production as a real entry model , in the eMac its proven it is stable to overclock to 1.8 ghz , or they could have fitted a freescale G4 inside and if they liked ,a simple lcd display for reduced powerconsumption in the eMac and used the iMac G5 case , the hardware had been there ready to be used
i mean its proven that the freescale G4 7448 despite being a single core can keep up with the core duos and the data sounds good too
The PowerPC 7448 "Apollo 8" is an evolution of the PowerPC 7447A announced at the first Freescale Technology Forum in June 2005. Improvements were higher clock rates (up to 2 GHz), a larger 1 MB L2 cache, a faster 200 MHz front side bus, and lower power consumption (18 W at 1.7 GHz)
if they would have done that, support for PPC would never have to stop
because if, then even the latest versions of any software would still run on these PowerMac's
as Morph OS proves if the OS is made especially for the hardware its running on then there is no need to upgrade the hardware and apple had the knowledge to and would not even needed more resources , they could it under tiger and could do it under leopard running on two different architectures
and it would have been a achievement to be proud of from apple if they could say our snow leopard still runs on 7 year old hardware and can easy keep up with atom based or amd neo based nettops and are not far of from the performance of dual cores
and it would not stop people who can afford to spend thousands on a computer to buy 27" i7 iMac's or a MacPro or intel mini if they want or need to if they need that bit more performance
and there had been people out there in 2005 too who did have to save up a year or 2 before they could buy a new eMac or a new mini , and these people had been really proud to own a Mac even if it was a low end one , and the peole who had to safe up a year every cent that was left over did not plan that they have ancient hardware in 3 years time that only gets half lackadaisical support with the constant thread of support stop

chrismacguy
Feb 12, 2011, 07:51 AM
it would have been really easy for Apple to create maybe something like a snow leopard starter edition to run on PPC , windows does exact that with their win 7 starter edition for low end hardware in netbooks and nettops

The fact you said that proves you dont have a solid understanding of computer science. Microsoft is able to create Windows 7 Starter edition, because all the netbook CPUs, and the latest i7s share a single instruction set (x86_64 these days, and x86 previously), so there is only 1 set of code to load the OS, build up the APIs etc. When Apple was maintaining both Intel and PowerPC builds, they were not only dealing with 2 wholly different instruction sets (some things Intel has cannot be done natively on PowerPC, and some things PowerPC has, such as AltiVec, cannot be done natively on Intel), but several ways of even talking to the hardware (Booting from Open Firmware is an absolute nightmare, as any PPC Linux developers know).

All Snow Leopard really did was remove all the PowerPC code, and add a lot of stuff that Intel CPUs can use, it would have no benefit for PowerPC anyway (and wouldnt run the latest software, as the latest software that requires 10.6 tends to be either work-round-able, or reliant on Intel CPU/Grand Central Dispatch/Something else under the hood Apple introduced for Intel CPUs).

While I love my PowerPC Macs, and intend on using PowerPC for a few more years yet, they had to be phased out from the current OS, as 10.6 wouldve slowed them down, and it wouldntve added much more than a few UI tweaks to 10.5 (I mean Apple has pushed everything that isnt Intel CPU enhanced to PowerPC, such as Safari 5, iTunes 10 etc).

skinniezinho
Feb 12, 2011, 07:58 AM
just another thing that was going through my mind ,
if apple did want to go intel fair enough its their right to decide what processors they want to use and if they want to use via processor in the future then so be it , but just creating a new OS and force people basically to upgrade to new hardware if they want this new OS is not really fair , as all the G3/G4/G5 Mac's still work some even more reliable then the intel Mac's , it would have been really easy for Apple to create maybe something like a snow leopard starter edition to run on PPC , windows does exact that with their win 7 starter edition for low end hardware in netbooks and nettops , ubuntu does it with the netbook edition
apple could have even kept the eMac or Mini G4 in production as a real entry model , in the eMac its proven it is stable to overclock to 1.8 ghz , or they could have fitted a freescale G4 inside and if they liked ,a simple lcd display for reduced powerconsumption in the eMac and used the iMac G5 case , the hardware had been there ready to be used
i mean its proven that the freescale G4 7448 despite being a single core can keep up with the core duos and the data sounds good too
The PowerPC 7448 "Apollo 8" is an evolution of the PowerPC 7447A announced at the first Freescale Technology Forum in June 2005. Improvements were higher clock rates (up to 2 GHz), a larger 1 MB L2 cache, a faster 200 MHz front side bus, and lower power consumption (18 W at 1.7 GHz)
if they would have done that, support for PPC would never have to stop
because if, then even the latest versions of any software would still run on these PowerMac's
as Morph OS proves if the OS is made especially for the hardware its running on then there is no need to upgrade the hardware and apple had the knowledge to and would not even needed more resources , they could it under tiger and could do it under leopard running on two different architectures
and it would have been a achievement to be proud of from apple if they could say our snow leopard still runs on 7 year old hardware and can easy keep up with atom based or amd neo based nettops and are not far of from the performance of dual cores
and it would not stop people who can afford to spend thousands on a computer to buy 27" i7 iMac's or a MacPro or intel mini if they want or need to if they need that bit more performance
and there had been people out there in 2005 too who did have to save up a year or 2 before they could buy a new eMac or a new mini , and these people had been really proud to own a Mac even if it was a low end one , and the peole who had to safe up a year every cent that was left over did not plan that they have ancient hardware in 3 years time that only gets half lackadaisical support with the constant thread of support stop


Although in the "consumer mind" that would be perfect,in terms of "industrial mind" that is unprofitable,so..it doesn't interest..
A powerpc machine in the mac line up would mean: more code do develop/test, a different production line,more people to give support,etc..
I think people need to know that brands can't support their machines forever...and the only machines that I think Apple was unfair with was the G5's,mainly the latest ones,because months later they launched intel machines wich dictated the end of powerpc innovation.
The only thing that makes my powermac angry with apple is the iPod,I simply can't get why do I have to have a machine that runs 10.5 to put music on my ultra lowend ipod shuffle 4G...
I know that my powermac can run it unofficially,but is slow as hell,and we are only talking about an itunes update for tiger...for a device that costs 49eur..

MacHamster68
Feb 12, 2011, 08:20 AM
i answer that with the words of a industrialist
A business that makes nothing but money is a poor kind of business.
(henry ford)
i mean if i would be ceo at apple even the poorest in africa could afford a basic new Mac and the richest in dubai too , the poor would get one from plastic the rich one made from gold , but the profit from the rich people would be used so the poor can afford one , but all would have the same operating system and great design is no question of money
ok sounds like it was said by Karl Marx , and yes in certain aspects i am a communist , but i dont want to make all equal in terms of income
but i want the same opportunities for everybody on earth and if everybody could afford a Mac and a internet connection that would be one step in this direction and it would educate billions instead of a couple millions , ok goverments on the earth would panic about that possibility , but i am great fan of wikileaks too , as i am for freedom of information for everybody who is looking for it
but i guess thats to political now for some so back to the topic
yes apple abandoned us PPC users , we are not worth to get full support for the entire life of our ppc Mac's, we did pay for tiger , some did pay for leopard , and i bet there would be plenty too who would pay for the upgrade to snow leopard or lion if they could install it on their PPC Mac..so apple would not lose profits

skinniezinho
Feb 12, 2011, 08:36 AM
i answer that with the words of a industrialist
A business that makes nothing but money is a poor kind of business.
(henry ford)
i mean if i would be ceo at apple even the poorest in africa could afford a basic new Mac and the richest in dubai too , the poor would get one from plastic the rich one made from gold , but the profit from the rich people would be used so the poor can afford one , but all would have the same operating system and great design is no question of money
ok sounds like it was said by Karl Marx , and yes in certain aspects i am a communist , but i dont want to make all equal in terms of income
but i want the same opportunities for everybody on earth

I understand you, and we would have a better world if everybody though that way,but simply it isn't like that in the apple world,and if it isn't we have 3 choices:
1)change for the PC world
2)use linux or other OS that better supports our machines
3)Upgrade the machines and hack the MacOS to run in our machines (in this case we are limited to leopard)

None of the 3 are good, but mailing apple saying "please bring powerpc back" or "please make lion run on powerpc macs" won't help either..
I think for the "common user" the best bet is number two..although for people who really need the machine to work,the best bet is buying a new mac...

MacHamster68
Feb 12, 2011, 09:44 AM
yes i know that , i live in reality , ....just wishful thinking in a ideal world no children would have to die from starvation , and we would have no poverty at all and no wars on this planet and still new PPC Mac's and money would be something we have to look for in museums :D

MacHamster68
Feb 13, 2011, 10:05 PM
ok. thinking now really of getting rid of the intel iMac again and getting a Mini G4 1.5 ghz instead, it just feels wrong to keep something that killed ppc Mac development , chrismacguy is right you cannot support both and look in the eyes of my powerpc mac's , i really feel like a trader

Nameci
Feb 13, 2011, 10:27 PM
+1 on that.... Apple tends to be more of consumer friendly nowadays... that is why of the consumer products...

venomz
Feb 15, 2011, 11:30 PM
ok. thinking now really of getting rid of the intel iMac again and getting a Mini G4 1.5 ghz instead, it just feels wrong to keep something that killed ppc Mac development , chrismacguy is right you cannot support both and look in the eyes of my powerpc mac's , i really feel like a trader

^This statement is almost over the top in its stupidity.

If you're going to willingly restrict yourself to old, slow hardware running what is rapidly becoming a dead platform, good luck to you, the rest of the world isn't quite that delusional.

PS. it's traitor, not trader.

Nameci
Feb 15, 2011, 11:53 PM
As far as I am concerned, Apple now uses Intel, for now. Who knows time will come they would go back to PPC. PPC ain't that dead.

Anything can change, the world is round and keeps on spinning. Technology will always be technology no matter how old it is.

Is there anybody here that knows the "real" score why Apple left PowerPC? As far as I know, IBM/Motorola could not deliver the volume and Intel is cheap, that is why of the switch.

venomz
Feb 16, 2011, 02:03 AM
As far as I am concerned, Apple now uses Intel, for now. Who knows time will come they would go back to PPC. PPC ain't that dead.

Anything can change, the world is round and keeps on spinning. Technology will always be technology no matter how old it is.

Is there anybody here that knows the "real" score why Apple left PowerPC? As far as I know, IBM/Motorola could not deliver the volume and Intel is cheap, that is why of the switch.

Motorola and IBM couldn't deliver a series of mobile G5 chips for laptops.

Frankly, the performance of the G4-based laptops compared to the Intel offerings at the time was absolutely embarrassing.

Everyone and their mother knows this.

And in order to get decent performance out of their G5 workstations, Apple eventually had to go to the extreme of devising a liquid cooling system.

Do you think any manufacturer wants to go through the added expense of designing and shipping a liquid cooling system, having to deal with additional support liabilities when competing chips get similar performance using a simple head spreader and fan? No.

MacHamster68
Feb 16, 2011, 03:20 AM
Motorola and IBM couldn't deliver a series of mobile G5 chips for laptops.

Frankly, the performance of the G4-based laptops compared to the Intel offerings at the time was absolutely embarrassing.

Everyone and their mother knows this.

And in order to get decent performance out of their G5 workstations, Apple eventually had to go to the extreme of devising a liquid cooling system.

Do you think any manufacturer wants to go through the added expense of designing and shipping a liquid cooling system, having to deal with additional support liabilities when competing chips get similar performance using a simple head spreader and fan? No.

that is only half true , as my 2.3 dual core G5 is still air cooled , and apple could have asked freescale as their G4 would have been as fast as the intel core duos , but apples main problem was they did not want to pay money for good processors , they did want to get cheap processors and in quantities neither motorola or ibm or freescale could have produced them for the price apple was willing to pay , and apple did want windows to run natively on their Mac's to get more consumers in the boat
and this 3ghz barrier thats always taken as a excuse means the i7 which has only 2.8ghz is worse then a pentium 4 with 3.6 ghz isn't it ...yes if you believe apples arguments from back then it really is as it has a lower clockspeed

and freescale had processors around ..their G4 ok they renamed it in e600 could have been a ideal laptop processor
or their dual core MPC864x would have been a fantastic processor
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PowerPC_e600 and its a fact that these "g4" can easy keep up with the older G5 and newer core duos and did not have to fear core 2 duo's
so dont believe everything apple says , apple will say everything as they want to make profit and do not really care about best quality, all they care is what does it cost us to build and can we still sell for the same price keeping our profit margin
and who would trust a company that not even a half year before the transition proved that their G5 processor Mac's can outperform intel's , only to change their mind telling the opposite a couple month later to sell intels inside

and morph os nearly exclusively made to run on G4 Mac's it proves you dont need to improve hardware , improving the OS is more important , sorry to bring it up again shows that it was not in apples interest to improve OSX for the PPC platform as already with panther they knew they will go intel soon , so making improvements to really gain speed on the PPC Mac's was not in apples interest
as they had like steve said worked on getting osx running on intel processors since the first OSX and that was in 2001 cheetah ? so why would a company try to get their OS running on hardware they never would intend to use , officially they denied it back then and worked behind closed doors for 5 years and then suddenly everything they had said in the past became untrue to convince people to buy intel based mac's
...i say it with the words of winston churchill "never trust a statistic you did not forge yourself "

so it would not surprise me that apple today is working on getting osx running on via processors or amd processors , whoever maybe is getting cheaper in the future ,only to announce that intel was just not good enough ....

Piplodocus
Feb 16, 2011, 05:18 AM
Won't leopard run on it? I'm sure I had a leopard security update in the last month or 2 (unless I imagined it)? So it hasn't really been abandoned.

All the software you bought still works?

The only way I see it is that over time security may become an issue. What about all the people who bought PCs with XP that won't run windows 7? You just have to limit where you go on the web and use a firewall. That's the fault of the hackers, spammers, and malicious people out there.

If CS5 doesn't run on it then that's the fault of Adobe. If you're wanting to run a new program that wan't designed for your hardware/software configuration then that upgrade means the whole system if that's important to you, and the cost of the upgrade includes the computer.

It's a sad fact, but millions of computers, phones, ipods, and other tech are scrapped every day that work perfectly fine. It's peoples desire for the latest and greatest that makes them worthless. There's no reason I couldn't still use Windows 3.1 on my old computer. Sure I'll get Lion, but I bought my MBP for SL, not Lion, so I wouldn't be any more jealous if I couldn't run lion than I would be of people who have shiny new hardware.

From the opposite perspective, many don't want their OS and apps full of legacy support and code.

Maybe this all seems easy for me to say as I have an i7 MBP, but if you knew the time it took me to save for this, and the frustration I had with my previous hackintosh and PC then it's not like it's easy to just buy one. I even looked at buying old PPC Apples off ebay while saving, and decided it wasn't worth it in the long run, and I'd be better off with a cheap PC and XP/Vista/Win7.

It's a sad world of technology. I can get really quite depressed when I see perfectly working computers that were once great going into skips and landfill. Equally, everyone wants the latest computer/laptop/iphone/car/etc, that they survived perfectly well without before. It's people's desire for new that drives this all. :(

As Bill Gates said, "640K ought to be enough for anybody".

Chuck Fadanoid
Feb 16, 2011, 06:14 AM
Given that I saw nothing in Leopard to tempt me to upgrade from Tiger, and even less in Snow Leopard, I don't feel left behind at all in terms of Mac OS. Seeing the attention Apple pays to iToys, the cynic in me says that Apple pays almost as much attention to Mac OS PPC as it does to Mac OS Intel these days - very little.

I am looking at eventually either switching to a Mac Pro (being a Power Mac user, I couldn't downgrade to a laptop, an all in one or a whatever the mini's supposed to be) or going over to the PC world. It would be a sad day to leave Apple behind, but it's not the same Apple as when I was an old school fanboy, and to be honest the iToy revolution seems to have brought with it a really clueless, nasty, belligerent, arrogant ******* type fanboy - makes me not want to be a part of the Apple community any more.

And to those who like to wear the exorbitant price of Apple machines as some kind of badge of honour that makes them superior to the plebs, how about a system where Macs are priced closer to what they're worth (ie, $1000 less for the Quad Core Mac Pro) but with an added snobbery option where you pay extra (double the price?) to have a "I'm considerably richer than yow*" engraving, so you still won't get associated with the great unwashed? Can't say fairer than that.

* = Harry Enfield (UK comedian) reference for all non-UK folk

MacHamster68
Feb 16, 2011, 06:32 AM
i agree to that apple has changed a lot over the years and not to the better , but to be a fairer to leopard and snow leopard , time machine is a great way to keep a backed up system , but there had been no reason that it could not have been made into tiger , the rest of leopard an snow leopard is just a more flashy GUI orientated towards windows users
and for me tiger is still the best OSX , and when i see what this LION looks i fear the worst for apples future , its going more and more direction windows and most people who switch to Mac today only switch because of the unibody design and never really use OSX instead they install windows anyway , so as its a majority of new users only using windows to play games how long will it make sense for apple to even continue to develop OSX..after all it could increase profits if they would ditch OSX for good and they would only lose a couple of old customers who bought a Mac to seriously use it for work and quiet a lot of those still use PowerMac's and PowerBook's
i mean take them as cars , you have two choices either get a volkswagen beetle (the original) it brings you to and from work in a discrete way or get a modern Porsche for the same trip to and from work if you need to show off
and faster does not automatically mean better and more comfy

skinniezinho
Feb 16, 2011, 06:46 AM
i agree to that apple has changed a lot over the years , but to be a fairer to leopard and snow leopard , time machine is a great way to keep a backed up system , but there had been no reason that it could not have been made into tiger , the rest of leopard an snow leopard is just a more flashy GUI
and for me tiger is still the best OSX , and when i see what this LION looks i fear the worst for apples future , its going more and more direction windows , just a matter of time before apple decides OSX needs a registry too

I guess you can use carbon copy clone (http://www.bombich.com/)r, superduper (http://www.bombich.com/) or even Tri-Backup (http://www.tri-edre.com/english/tribackup.html) (paid) to achieve similar results to the time machine..

MacHamster68
Feb 16, 2011, 07:29 AM
I guess you can use carbon copy clone (http://www.bombich.com/)r, superduper (http://www.bombich.com/) or even Tri-Backup (http://www.tri-edre.com/english/tribackup.html) (paid) to achieve similar results to the time machine..



yes i use super duper for that as all my Mac's run OSX tiger , i only meant that it was a good idea of apple to implement that feature of backing up the system into osx , but i could not understand why that was not possible in OSX before leopard ,i mean super duper works since jaguar on Mac's , so is nothing new

hungry ghost
Feb 16, 2011, 12:01 PM
If CS5 doesn't run on it then that's the fault of Adobe. If you're wanting to run a new program that wan't designed for your hardware/software configuration then that upgrade means the whole system if that's important to you, and the cost of the upgrade includes the computer.

Yup, that's one factor in my disappointment. I know Adobe and Apple have fallen out of love with each other, and so it's unfair to put all the blame onto Apple.

I can get really quite depressed when I see perfectly working computers that were once great going into skips and landfill. Equally, everyone wants the latest computer/laptop/iphone/car/etc, that they survived perfectly well without before. It's people's desire for new that drives this all. :(

Ah, me too. I actually have two old CRT monitors I need to take to the tip, and whenever I go I find myself thinking about all the stuff that could be repaired, if it wasn't vastly more cost effective nowadays to bin it and buy new stuff. (But, I don't quite buy the idea that we all innately 'want' this stuff; supply-led demand has become a force to be reckoned with in the last couple of hundred years.....)

It would be a sad day to leave Apple behind, but it's not the same Apple as when I was an old school fanboy, and to be honest the iToy revolution seems to have brought with it a really clueless, nasty, belligerent, arrogant ******* type fanboy - makes me not want to be a part of the Apple community any more.

I'm too much of a fan of mac OS to ever switch, but I have certainly suffered because of some of their crazy proprietary hardware policies. It makes me envious of PC owners who can just nip down to Maplins and spend a tenner on a new plug, rather than be faced with an exorbitant repair bill for something minor and straightforward.

And to those who like to wear the exorbitant price of Apple machines as some kind of badge of honour that makes them superior to the plebs, how about a system where Macs are priced closer to what they're worth (ie, $1000 less for the Quad Core Mac Pro) but with an added snobbery option where you pay extra (double the price?) to have a "I'm considerably richer than yow*" engraving, so you still won't get associated with the great unwashed? Can't say fairer than that.

Ha! Nice idea.

mabaker
Feb 16, 2011, 12:49 PM
Given that I saw nothing in Leopard to tempt me to upgrade from Tiger, and even less in Snow Leopard, I don't feel left behind at all in terms of Mac OS. Seeing the attention Apple pays to iToys, the cynic in me says that Apple pays almost as much attention to Mac OS PPC as it does to Mac OS Intel these days - very little.

I am looking at eventually either switching to a Mac Pro (being a Power Mac user, I couldn't downgrade to a laptop, an all in one or a whatever the mini's supposed to be) or going over to the PC world. It would be a sad day to leave Apple behind, but it's not the same Apple as when I was an old school fanboy, and to be honest the iToy revolution seems to have brought with it a really clueless, nasty, belligerent, arrogant ******* type fanboy - makes me not want to be a part of the Apple community any more.

And to those who like to wear the exorbitant price of Apple machines as some kind of badge of honour that makes them superior to the plebs, how about a system where Macs are priced closer to what they're worth (ie, $1000 less for the Quad Core Mac Pro) but with an added snobbery option where you pay extra (double the price?) to have a "I'm considerably richer than yow*" engraving, so you still won't get associated with the great unwashed? Can't say fairer than that.

* = Harry Enfield (UK comedian) reference for all non-UK folk

I do agree about the current state of fanboihood. Yet you must not forget that the PowerMAc you got there cost like 3000 dollars at the date of its release.

Besides I would never think of Mac Pro being overpriced THAT much. 300-400 dollars tops considering their classic widely copied built quality.

zen.state
Feb 16, 2011, 02:07 PM
Many different thoughts..

Any computer is what you make it.

10.5 is still equal to or better than any other OS by MS or anyone else so I am fine for a few years with it being my max OS. I even prefer 10.5 over 10.6. My girlfriends new MacBook Pro is my latest project to maintain as she always somehow tends to mess things up. After 14+ hours using 10.6 over 3 days or so I found myself missing 10.5. Can't explain it but I just prefer 10.5 and find 10.6 to be not that much faster at all. My good friend with an 8 core Mac Pro also prefers 10.5.

10.4 can get by for many more years with Safari 4 support of HTML5. It's still much better than any Mac OS before it and MUCH better than XP or Vista.

Ubuntu is still an option on PowerPC even though they dropped support. There are still a small group of PowerPC geeks out there porting the x86 to G3-G5 PowerPC releases. Just google "PowerPC Ubuntu".

The PowerPC market is certainly not dead. There is still a G4 upgrade market with G4 7447 and 7448 upgrades still made by NewerTech. Virtually every console on the market uses a PowerPC/RISC chip of some sort. The e600 CPU by Freescale (motorola) is still rapidly used for industrial computing type systems. The G4 7448 is virtually identical to the e600 and shares the same core.

I still truly feel that PowerPC/RISC is a superior architecture. In the 2002-2005 time span the PowerPC makers IBM (G5) and Freescale (G4) simply were not researching and investing enough money into the technology. Because of this the speed increases in new CPU's were paltry and mobile chip development in particular suffered. The quad G5 at it's release time was plenty powerful enough but Apple had the huge burden of only having a G4 7447a to put in the PowerBooks.

Shortly after Apple stopped using PowerPC CPU's in late 2005 IBM introduced the Power series chips and Freescale the G4 7448. I think the 7448 could have actually saved PowerPC at Apple if it came out sooner. A single 1.8GHz only consumes about 16 watts vs. about 38 watts on a 7447 at the same speed. The 7448 is also 30-45% faster, has double the cache and runs considerably cooler. It also has a reengineered altivec core. So you could have a dual 2GHz 7448 in a PowerBook and it not use any more power than a single 7447. It would also be approx. 2.5-3x faster than the PB G4 1.67GHz 7447 which was the fastest Apple PowerPC laptop ever made. The 7448 is also only 90nm vs the 130-200nm size of all G4's before it.

Please share thoughts on these thoughts..

mabaker
Feb 16, 2011, 02:27 PM
Shortly after Apple stopped using PowerPC CPU's in late 2005 IBM introduced the Power series chips and Freescale the G4 7448. I think the 7448 could have actually saved PowerPC at Apple if it came out sooner. A single 1.8GHz only consumes about 16 watts vs. about 38 watts on a 7447 at the same speed. The 7448 is also 30-45% faster, has double the cache and runs considerably cooler. It also has a reengineered altivec core. So you could have a dual 2GHz 7448 in a PowerBook and it not use any more power than a single 7447. It would also be approx. 2.5-3x faster than the PB G4 1.67GHz 7447 which was the fastest Apple PowerPC laptop ever made. The 7448 is also only 90nm vs the 130-200nm size of all G4's before it.


I think the lacking performance of the PPC processors was just a comfortable and well timed excuse. He has been planning to jump on the Intel train ever since he came back to Apple. Nothing would have changed his decision, especially considering the cost of the PowerBook G5 would in NO way be comparable to the current line of the MacBooks. Not to mention PPC would not fit into their scheme of upcoming iPhones; the PPC platform would have required MUCH MUCH MUCH more focus - a thing Apple does not have for their OS not to mention an additional line of niche processors. Intel is a safe bet commercially. Unfortunately. :(

Toronto Mike
Feb 16, 2011, 11:11 PM
I still get angry over this issue of Apple hanging old technology out to dry. It seems that until we as a species can find a different way, then we are doomed to choke on the garbage we create, and the resources we stupidly use up - in our quest for short term thinking and profits. Apple's idea, thinking how green they are, is such a sick joke on all of us that buy into this idea and acceptance of planned obsolescence.

I'll use my G5 until I can no longer use it to access the internet. When that time comes, I'll make sure that I purchase the most cost effect device just for that limited purpose since my G5's software would still be able to do everything else that I require. The saving grace in all this is the internet still has a vested interest in shilling to the lowest common denominator so they will want you to be hooked up no matter what - with whatever can still run to keep you buying stuff. So maybe this day might not come for a very long time yet and my G5 will last me another 10 years.

Mike

Chuck Fadanoid
Feb 18, 2011, 03:22 AM
Despite what I've said about Apple, I don't get angry with them for no longer supporting PPC - they've moved onto a different architecture, for better or worse, and supporting the old will be a lot of work for little return. That's fair enough.

Plus, I bought my G5 after the switch (just before the Mac Pro came along) in full knowledge of what was going to happen - I don't need the latest and greatest, as long as it's an upgrade on what I have. My G3 iMac was getting very sluggish (it never really liked OS X) and the G5 was a world of difference. Plus the G5 was discounted at 33% off, which priced it in the middle of the iMacs. Well, an Intel laptop on a stick or a PPC "proper" computer: my choice was easy.

And the G5, with what I run on it, is still easily fast enough for my needs and I run it constantly on "reduced", so at 2.0Ghz instead of 2.7Ghz. The only thing it can't do well is run 1080p WMV (MKVs, AVIs and whatnot are not too bad, Apple's 1080p Movie trailers are not so good but not as bad as WMV). I'll use it until it breaks, by which time Apple may have abandoned OS X as we know it, all locked down with App Store ***** and no more terminal, X windows and all the other stuff tinkerers like me like to play with.

mabaker
Feb 18, 2011, 04:39 AM
And the G5, with what I run on it, is still easily fast enough for my needs and I run it constantly on "reduced", so at 2.0Ghz instead of 2.7Ghz. The only thing it can't do well is run 1080p WMV (MKVs, AVIs and whatnot are not too bad, Apple's 1080p Movie trailers are not so good but not as bad as WMV). I'll use it until it breaks, by which time Apple may have abandoned OS X as we know it, all locked down with App Store ***** and no more terminal, X windows and all the other stuff tinkerers like me like to play with.

Remember, Tim Cook is now in charge and he will be the next official CEO of Apple most likely. So I doubt your predictions about the total lockdown of iOS/Mac OS X will hold any truth in future. :) Tim Cook may be a follower of Jobs but he ainít half as concerned with ease of use through locking things down.

venomz
Feb 18, 2011, 09:10 AM
Many different thoughts..

Any computer is what you make it.

10.5 is still equal to or better than any other OS by MS or anyone else so I am fine for a few years with it being my max OS. I even prefer 10.5 over 10.6. My girlfriends new MacBook Pro is my latest project to maintain as she always somehow tends to mess things up. After 14+ hours using 10.6 over 3 days or so I found myself missing 10.5. Can't explain it but I just prefer 10.5 and find 10.6 to be not that much faster at all. My good friend with an 8 core Mac Pro also prefers 10.5.

10.4 can get by for many more years with Safari 4 support of HTML5. It's still much better than any Mac OS before it and MUCH better than XP or Vista.

Ubuntu is still an option on PowerPC even though they dropped support. There are still a small group of PowerPC geeks out there porting the x86 to G3-G5 PowerPC releases. Just google "PowerPC Ubuntu".

The PowerPC market is certainly not dead. There is still a G4 upgrade market with G4 7447 and 7448 upgrades still made by NewerTech. Virtually every console on the market uses a PowerPC/RISC chip of some sort. The e600 CPU by Freescale (motorola) is still rapidly used for industrial computing type systems. The G4 7448 is virtually identical to the e600 and shares the same core.

I still truly feel that PowerPC/RISC is a superior architecture. In the 2002-2005 time span the PowerPC makers IBM (G5) and Freescale (G4) simply were not researching and investing enough money into the technology. Because of this the speed increases in new CPU's were paltry and mobile chip development in particular suffered. The quad G5 at it's release time was plenty powerful enough but Apple had the huge burden of only having a G4 7447a to put in the PowerBooks.

Shortly after Apple stopped using PowerPC CPU's in late 2005 IBM introduced the Power series chips and Freescale the G4 7448. I think the 7448 could have actually saved PowerPC at Apple if it came out sooner. A single 1.8GHz only consumes about 16 watts vs. about 38 watts on a 7447 at the same speed. The 7448 is also 30-45% faster, has double the cache and runs considerably cooler. It also has a reengineered altivec core. So you could have a dual 2GHz 7448 in a PowerBook and it not use any more power than a single 7447. It would also be approx. 2.5-3x faster than the PB G4 1.67GHz 7447 which was the fastest Apple PowerPC laptop ever made. The 7448 is also only 90nm vs the 130-200nm size of all G4's before it.

Please share thoughts on these thoughts..

1) NewerTech's own marketing material touts that their drop-in G4 replacements only brings the performance of those machines up to the level of a 2006 Intel iMac. They are touting the ability to make your eight or nine year old hardware to perform like five year old hardware. It also states that those processors are "sold out" and if you google around, those processors haven't been available through them for over two years.

At the end of the day, you have an aging machine that is still fine for basic tasks as long as it is capable of running, but it will increasingly struggle to handle modern web content and it is no longer worth investing substantial sums of money into.

2) In my opinion, using a Mac is all about the Mac experience and to me that means running Mac OS. Resorting to running a fringe platform like Morph OS unless you specifically want to play with an Amiga-like OS or resorting to buggy hacked together builds of Ubuntu on aging mac hardware seems like a pointless exercise. If you want to run Ubuntu, officially supported builds will run far better on dirt cheap, generic PC hardware and you will have a far wider selection of software packages to choose from.

3) Having the 'theoretically' better ISA is totally irrelevant, real world performance counts for everything. The X86 ISA has supplanted many, many, 'theoretically' superior architectures due to the enormity of the engineering resources behind it which have allowed it to continually improve and overcome its initial shortcomings. A large part of this is the aggressive way in which Intel and AMD have continually pushed the envelope in terms of fabrication technology, allowing their chips to jump a performance lifecycle or two head of the competition.

There was a rough performance parity between x86 chips and the late G4/early G5 offerings but IBM and Motorola soon faltered, IBM encountered manufacturing difficulties and Motorola refused to invest anything further into the platform because it wanted to leave the chip fabrication business entirely. For a period of around to 2-3 years, the offerings from both of these companies became stagnant and since the x86 manufacturers were in fierce competition with each other (intel vs AMD), x86 chips eventually leapfrogged Power PC in performance.

It was the tech industry equivalent of running a race, leading the pack for a while, only to stumble and by the time you recover, your opponent has already lapped you.

A bit more on IBM.

IBM was supposed to have 3ghz and notebook parts ready within the first year of the G5's launch.

IBM completely blew up Apple's product timeline and forced Apple to push multiprocessor configurations before the computer industry was really ready for it, frankly before complier technology was there to support it, and forced them to develop OEM liquid cooling systems. The bottom line is that when a business partner, in this case a hardware supplier fails you that badly, to the point that it forces you make design changes that compromise the reliability of your products and undermines the competitiveness of your entire product line, it is really difficult to blame Apple for ditching IBM.

Chuck Fadanoid
Feb 18, 2011, 10:18 AM
IBM completely blew up Apple's product timeline and forced Apple to push multiprocessor configurations before the computer industry was really ready for it, frankly before complier technology was there to support it, and forced them to develop OEM liquid cooling systems. The bottom line is that when a business partner, in this case a hardware supplier fails you that badly, to the point that it forces you make design changes that compromise the reliability of your products and undermines the competitiveness of your entire product line, it is really difficult to blame Apple for ditching IBM.

I agree. And you must think that Apple would have let IBM know of their internal x86 OS X builds, that they had contingency plans.

I'm sure in their labs they have OS X builds running on Mac Pro rigs with AMD processors in them too.

Perhaps if they ever completely abandon the Mac for iToys they'll release OS X to the world and we'll be able to buy HP, Fujitsu, Dell OS X machines ...

zen.state
Feb 18, 2011, 10:31 AM
1) NewerTech's own marketing material touts that their drop-in G4 replacements only brings the performance of those machines up to the level of a 2006 Intel iMac. They are touting the ability to make your eight or nine year old hardware to perform like five year old hardware. It also states that those processors are "sold out" and if you google around, those processors haven't been available through them for over two years.

You need to look at the OWC site macsales.com so see the ones they have for sale. OWC owns NewerTech and does not update that specific site. I just bought a single 1.8GHz 7448 in late 2009. They have 3 options currently with single 1.6GHz 7447a, dual 1.6GHz 7447a and dual 1.8GHz 7448. Here is a direct URL: http://eshop.macsales.com/search/MaxPower+G4


At the end of the day, you have an aging machine that is still fine for basic tasks as long as it is capable of running, but it will increasingly struggle to handle modern web content and it is no longer worth investing substantial sums of money into.

I'm not a GHz chaser. I love this older PowerPC hardware because of both how well it operates and it's longevity. I use it for everything I do and never feel like I don't have enough power. Keep in mind that I have invested 1000+ into this tower along with buying 2 spare Sawtooth G4's to have spare parts in the future. I would much rather have spent that 1000+ on making my G4 last as far into the future as possible than some crappy generic hardware.


2) In my opinion, using a Mac is all about the Mac experience and to me that means running Mac OS. Resorting to running a fringe platform like Morph OS unless you specifically want to play with an Amiga-like OS or resorting to buggy hacked together builds of Ubuntu on aging mac hardware seems like a pointless exercise. If you want to run Ubuntu, officially supported builds will run far better on dirt cheap, generic PC hardware and you will have a far wider selection of software packages to choose from.

That is where we clearly disagree most. I don't want generic boxes with even more generic parts in them. Myself and a few other geeks out there appreciate how PowerPC hardware functions and was made. I like to feel I am running the hardware I feel is best rather than what I have to use by default because the industry tells me I have to. I will take RISC over CISC for as long as I possibly can.

Motorola/Freescale has certainly not lost interest in making PowerPC/RISC CPU's as they currently make at least 5-6 different chips for that architecture. These chips are used mostly for industrial use. The G4 7448 is still made and has other markets besides G4 upgrades. The e600 core it uses is quite advanced. Also, as I mentioned already the 7448 could have easily solved the PowerBook G4 performance woes.

IBM are a much better PowerPC maker now than ever. The 3 big game consoles (PS3, xbox, wii) all have IBM PowerPC chips.

The high end core and power chips they make for the research and super computing markets exceed the performance of anything intel makes. PowerPC/RISC is still the high end of the market like always pretty much. There was just a downslide in the tech in the early to mid 2000's that has now recovered and then some. The only trouble for me and other RISC fanatics like myself is that Apple abandoned the architecture while it was having that weak stint. I really wish they had of stuck with it.

All I can do now is amerce myself in PowerPC goodness till my stockpile of hardware is gone. Thanks to how well it's made and having all my spare hardware.. that will be decades.


IBM completely blew up Apple's product timeline and forced Apple to push multiprocessor configurations before the computer industry was really ready for it, frankly before complier technology was there to support it, and forced them to develop OEM liquid cooling systems. The bottom line is that when a business partner, in this case a hardware supplier fails you that badly, to the point that it forces you make design changes that compromise the reliability of your products and undermines the competitiveness of your entire product line, it is really difficult to blame Apple for ditching IBM.

I forgot to comment on this..

It was Motorola that brought multiprocessors to Apple first. Not IBM. The G4 chips were pretty much all Moto. just as the G5 was all IBM. After the G3 the 3 companies pretty much stopped developing chips together where as before that every single chip was worked on by all 3.

The dual 604e 8600/9600 in 1997 and then dual G4 450 and 500 in fall 2000 were officially Motorola chips. As already mentioned all G4 chips are Motorola/Freescale.

The first multiprocessor Mac with IBM CPU's was the G5 tower.

A short history on who made what since the 603 PowerPC:

603,603e,603ev - Mostly IBM

604,604e - Mostly Moto.

G3 - Both but predominantly IBM
(above 3 were all co-engineered by all 3 companies to some level)

G4 - Motorola/Freescale only

G5 - IBM only

skinniezinho
Feb 18, 2011, 11:16 AM
You need to look at the OWC site macsales.com so see the ones they have for sale. OWC owns NewerTech and does not update that specific site. I just bought a single 1.8GHz 7448 in late 2009. They have 3 options currently with single 1.6GHz 7447a, dual 1.6GHz 7447a and dual 1.8GHz 7448. Here is a direct URL: http://eshop.macsales.com/search/MaxPower+G4

I'm not a GHz chaser. I love this older PowerPC hardware because of both how well it operates and it's longevity. I use it for everything I do and never feel like I don't have enough power. Keep in mind that I have invested 1000+ into this tower along with buying 2 spare Sawtooth G4's to have spare parts in the future. I would much rather have spent that 1000+ on making my G4 last as far into the future as possible than some crappy generic hardware.


Just a little off-topic, with the money you invested in that G4, wouldn't be better to buy a G5 or a more modern G4?

zen.state
Feb 18, 2011, 11:42 AM
Just a little off-topic, with the money you invested in that G4, wouldn't be better to buy a G5 or a more modern G4?

I have owned and used every single G4 tower over a 10+ year gap and from that experience have chosen the Sawtooth as the best overall for a few reasons. This is not just personal experience. I also spent that 10+ years so far researching other peoples experience. So my experience comes from a wide range of data and info I have compiled over these years:

1. It has the most reliable and well made hardware off them all. The PSU's especially on the other models (Gigabit Ethernet and MDD in particular) tend to die a lot sooner. When PSU's die they often like to take logic boards and CPU's with them. I use the stable Sawtooth PSU connected to state of the art voltage stabilization/conditioning that I have in my UPS.

2. The Digital Audio and Quicksilver are pretty reliable but only allow 1.5GB RAM vs. 2GB in all the rest including the Sawtooth. When you're living in the 1.5-2GB range the extra 512MB helps a lot more than the faster bus or AGP on later models. 2GB is 33% more than 1.5GB. Physical RAM translates to real world performance more than faster bus or agp.

3. G5's are all starting to die left and right these days it seems so it's too big a risk for me.

4. The 100MHz bus is not near the burden I ever thought it would be because I have a 7448 in it with 1MB of on chip full speed L2. This Sawtooth I have with it's current config (in my sig.) is even faster than the dual 1.42 MDD I used to own. Even with the Sawtooth's AGP 2x vs 4x on later G4's and 8x on G5's my mac uses core image and almost all of the 256MB vram in my geforce 6200 to draw enough capability out of it to outperform many with 4x/8x AGP and a Radeon 9800. just compare my graphics tests to later G4's and even single G5's to see. The 7448 helps with the 2D graphics speed a lot also.

Here are 2 xbench results of my system which hold their own against any other G4 or G5. In some aspects the 7448 is actually faster than a G5.

Running 10.4.11: http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=442130

Running 10.5.8: http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=501544

skinniezinho
Feb 18, 2011, 11:44 AM
I have owned and used every single G4 tower over a 10+ year gap and from that experience have chosen the Sawtooth as the best overall for a few reasons:

1. It has the most reliable and well made hardware off them all. The PSU's especially on the other models (Gigabit Ethernet and MDD in particular) tend to die a lot sooner. When PSU's die they often like to take logic boards and CPU's with them. I use the stable Sawtooth PSU connected to state of the art voltage stabilization/conditioning that I have in my UPS.

2. The Digital Audio and Quicksilver are pretty reliable but only allow 1.5GB RAM vs. 2GB in all the rest including the Sawtooth. When you're living in the 1.5-2GB range the extra 512MB helps a lot more than the faster bus or AGP on later models. 2GB is 33% more than 1.5GB. Physical RAM translates to real world performance more than faster bus or agp.

3. G5's are all starting to die left and right these days it seems so it's too big a risk for me.

4. The 100MHz bus is not near the burden I ever thought it would be because I have a 7448 in it with 1MB of on chip full speed L2. This Sawtooth I have with it's current config (in my sig.) is even faster than the dual 1.42 MDD I used to own.

Here are 2 xbench results of my system which hold their own against any other G4 or G5. In some aspects the 7448 is actually faster than a G5.

Running 10.4.11: http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=442130

Running 10.5.8: http://db.xbench.com/merge.xhtml?doc1=501544

Thanks for the great answer :D
If only cpu upgrades were cheaper...

zen.state
Feb 18, 2011, 11:56 AM
Thanks for the great answer :D
If only cpu upgrades were cheaper...

True enough. It's simply such a small market that the prices have to be that high. Re-read my post as I added more good info.

Too bad they stopped making the single 7448 upgrades and just have the dual now. My single 1.8GHz was 375 in late 2009 and outperforms any dual G4 other than those with dual 7448 upgrades. Since it's only 90nm and runs so cool along with only using 16 watts it could have easily been used in the PB G4.

MacHamster68
Feb 19, 2011, 04:15 AM
it might be expensive , but it gives your PowerMac a new lease of life that you would not expect performance wise form a not upgraded PowerMac , the single 1.8 can even in certain apps outperform a core 2 duo , so its cheaper then a used core 2 duo 1.83 mini for example and comes close to its performance and because its a PowerMac easier to upgrade , and with PowerMac g4 selling really cheap now i seen quicksilver selling for less then £60 this upgrade is a cheap way to get a really fast PowerMac G4, even if it does sound expensive , but its a PowerMac g4 , i guess thats worth the money

zen.state
Feb 19, 2011, 04:08 PM
If you're going to willingly restrict yourself to old, slow hardware running what is rapidly becoming a dead platform, good luck to you, the rest of the world isn't quite that delusional.


Just because you don't understand or get how people can prefer PowerPC hardware doesn't make them delusional. You obviously don't get computers in the first place when you senselessly base everything on raw performance. People being pro PowerPC in the PowerPC forum.. imagine that huh?

Not everyone sees hardware as some generic thing thats just a slave to software. True geeks actually have hardware preferences that go far beyond simple minded things like performance.

The old I disagree with you so you're delusional attitude is very goon-like.

max••
Feb 19, 2011, 04:24 PM
i see a lot of people saying how unreliable G5's are, i simply don't agree i have a dp 2.5ghz as of yet the lcs hasn't leaked a drop, abd the psu hasn't exploded, i think these horror storys of these g5's come mainly from people buying ones that have been used pretty much constantley since they where brought and had not been properly maintained (e.g. have not ever had the dust cleaned out), now im not saying properly maintained, barley used G5's never brake, just my one (which has been barley used and cleaned out regularly) is working grate and is not showing any signs of stopping.

I agree with people who would rather spend £1000+ on a g4 than getting a £200-300 pc, the 10 year old mac is just better, for example my 500mhz ibook G3 with 384mb or ram obliterates 72 under 6 month old pc's with dual core 2.93Ghz intec cpu's and 4gb of ram we built at school (they are already starting to brake)

zen.state
Feb 19, 2011, 04:40 PM
Re: G5

This link holds a lot of great data on G5 towers and their reliability.
http://www.macintouch.com/reliability/pmg5.html

Easily the most troublesome Mac tower ever. The first dual 2.0GHz was repaired above 30%. Thats huge. Anything above 2-3% is considered pretty bad.

G5's range from 11-32% in system repairs. I will find another page I saw once for G4 towers failure rate. The highest one was the MDD but was only at 6%. The Sawtooth (my fav.) was under 2%.

Nameci
Feb 19, 2011, 04:44 PM
PowerPC Macs, are longer lasting... all of the PC's that were bought a couple of years later than my PowerMac G3 were not working anymore and were trashed. PowerMac G3 still chugging along.

max••
Feb 19, 2011, 04:52 PM
Re: G5

This link holds a lot of great data on G5 towers and their reliability.
http://www.macintouch.com/reliability/pmg5.html

Easily the most troublesome Mac tower ever. The first dual 2.0GHz was repaired above 30%. Thats huge. Anything above 2-3% is considered pretty bad.

G5's range from 11-32% in system repairs. I will find another page I saw once for G4 towers failure rate. The highest one was the MDD but was only at 6%. The Sawtooth (my fav.) was under 2%.
Mabey i am just lucky, my g5 has spent most of it's life in storage at my dad's work (which i may be getting a g4 imac from soon :-)), anyway when it brakes (which i accept it probably will) im just gonna repair it, I do agree the g4's are rock solid, my server is a sawtooth (has been running 24/7 since november 10, only crashes where because of a bad usb2 card) and my media center is a g4 macmini

JoeG4
Feb 19, 2011, 05:02 PM
The funny thing about the G5s is they are at first glance built really well. There's not a single gummy capacitor (the kind that like to blow after a few years) to be found ANYWHERE. It seems that the majority of failures either come from the power supply, thermal sensors, or the memory controller failing.

I can't entirely figure out why either. Most of them have 600W ACBel power supplies - I had an AcBel in my Quicksilver G4 and that machine ran 24/7 for about 6 years (with a couple of 2 day breaks for maintenance). I had a Vaio with an AcBel power supply in it as well, and that machine still works (13-14 years later!) It never ran 24/7 but I really used it.

Maybe Apple's engineers made a bad choice when they decided to run the fans so slow in the machine.

I'm using a working G5 at the moment - a 2nd gen Dual 2GHz. I'm convinced one of the thermal sensors is going to fail someday, but it runs fine as it is. Truth is, I feel kinda sorry to part out and sell a machine like this. XD

Much against my better judgement, too >>

Meanwhile, I feel worse about my MDD G4 - I bought it NEW 2 years ago, and although the HD I have in it right now is a piece of junk it runs fine. Problem that loud shill WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHH noise it makes. A week of constant use and I want to go at it office space style.

So I'm not sure. Maybe I'll part the G5 out, sell the G4 for some cash, sell some other odds and ends and hopefully have enough to afford a Mac Mini? But then I'd have to sell my ADC monitors and get something that runs off it! Crap! :(

The power supplies nuking out is what gets me though. I've never heard of a G4 power supply failing but it seems as if the G5 power supply failure rate is as high as 50% after 5-7 years. Yikes!

That said, I'm going to say Apple should've considered that a usable lifetime for a tower like this is about 10-12 years. No joke. I still see a lot of PowerMac G4s in operation in places like my college! Come to think of it, they have 2 labs full of G5s that are still in use too. XD

zen.state
Feb 19, 2011, 05:06 PM
Even at 32% most don't die. It's not like every single one is a time bomb or anything. I would say any 2003-04 model that still runs is definitely a good one.

max••
Feb 19, 2011, 05:29 PM
Even at 32% most don't die. It's not like every single one is a time bomb or anything. I would say any 2003-04 model that still runs is definitely a good one.

like mine, from june 2004, my only complaint is that it sounds like a jet engine unlike my g4's which are near silent :-), it was kinda funny the outher day, i put a cd in my g5 and got this ka-thunk noise, seems the cd somehow slipped of the spindle, now it has a light-scribe dl burner in it :-)

JoeG4
Feb 19, 2011, 06:35 PM
lol a ka-thunk noise. I'm using my "new" G5 with a 40GB IBM hard drive that came with my G4 MDD. That means, that the optical drive is sitting on the floor next to the G5 and the 40GB drive is making a bit of a racket sitting upside down on the top shelf. XD

I've taken it apart 2 or 3 times checking on that whole fan/heatsink situation, on the plus side I can now pull it apart and put it back together about as fast as Forrest Gump rebuilds his gun. :D

My G5 is fairly quiet to the point you generally just hear the hard drive, but every 10 minutes or so the fans roar for a split second and go back to normal.

Oh yea, you know how the fans roar with the door off? If you put the processors in the wrong order they will roar even louder than that! Seriously though, I think this machine just needed love. When I bought it, the RAM was installed in the wrong order so only 1/3 of it was being detected and one of the fan modules was just sitting in the case unplugged (you know, the one that is a total pain in the ass to plug in!)

MacHamster68
Feb 20, 2011, 05:49 AM
the main problem is not really G5 related , today people accept failure rates of just below 20% in electronic equipment and consider that as reliable and above average
i mean my granny has a fridge build by bosch in the early 60's and is still working fine without a problem , it might use a bit more energy then a modern one , but how long are modern fridges lasting ..5 years if you are lucky
i had some fridges which did not even last 2 years , ok they are cheaper now then they had been when my granny bought hers ,but quality still has a price , but companies want to make as much profit as they can today , not only apple
abd the consumer still believes for $2000 you get high quality build computers
but they forget that these $2000 they payed in say 2002 for the PowerMac G4 are in todays money just half at most , its only because the wages did not rise in the same way as the inflation , so people still think that is expensive , and dont realize that only the profit margin did stay the same but the parts got really cheap now for the manufacturers as everything comes form asia now for a fraction of the cost in the past ,
so the manufacturers make despite the inflation more profits then ever , because the items they produce will not last long , and its not in the interest of apple or any other company if the product you buy will last 20 years and longer
and for apple who had realized that people hang on to their old G4 Mac's had been and are still usable, so apple did need to find a way to force people to buy new Mac's , on way was to switch to intel and that did not really help much , but the next idea snow leopard did really force a lot to upgrade , so people have no choice other then to buy new and the software industry helps with new programs needing more processing power then ever before so people have to upgrade more often , so a new iMac became a throw away item like a plastic bag and 2 years down the line becomes obsolete because one or the other program just needs more processing power in 2 years time, but not becaue the program can do more , no in most cases its just the GUI that needs more processing power today then the same program with a less flashy GUI did need altogether 5 years ago , and people just want click and go programs , they dont want to look for perferences any more or where to adjust settings , and a lot dont even know what a terminal is for at all , click and go is the way people learn today to work with the computer , and they know because they get told so by the industry the program they bought now will be not up to standard in a years time and the new version will need a higher spec computer then anyway to work efficient, and these things had been different while you could in 2002 use a program just with minimum requirements , but today the minimum requirements will just crawl along and render a program near unusable

so if you got a G4 today i would invest in a 4778 processor upgrade which sounds expensive , but i would have the reliability which later Mac's wont have , so buying a sawtooth today and upgrade for a couple hundred $ makes it faster and in economic points more sense if you can live with programs that are already older like office 2004 for Mac instead of needing 2011 ,then buying a new iMac to run office 2011 which might not even last a year before mayor parts need replacing , ok there is apple care that pay for that , but i dont know for me that does not make sense if i have to buy apple care because i know the Mac i just bought for $2000 which still is a lot of money ,will break down more likely then the sawtooth

Nameci
Feb 20, 2011, 10:12 AM
+1 more than agree. That is why up until I hold to on, and prefer old PPC Macs. Yes these things fail, but I know where to find the issue and fix them. With my PowerMac G4 I am only waiting for the HDD to fail and probably replace it with an SSD. Last week, the thing just freeze up. HDD was very noisy, kind of noise that the head is searching for something on the platter and could not find it. I have verified disk in disk utility and there was some error and first aid could not fix it. Erased HDD, pop in the install disk and restored from time machine backup. Now it is running great, this is posted using the said the PowerMac G4. If only apple could just "compile" Snow leopard" and all the developers could just compile their apps in PCC as well, this thing could last at least for the next 5 years or so.

We really don't need faster processor to accomplish a certain task, what we need are apps that are optimized, and who needs flashy GUI and eye candy anyway?

WGoins88
Feb 21, 2011, 06:35 AM
I love both of my G4s. They both do everything I need them to do. Internet (Forums, facebook, ebay, etc), Email, watching DVDs, Youtube, videos on CNN and other sites, a few games, burning the occasional CD or DVD, and that's about it.

I don't game, video/audio edit, photoshop, or anything like that, therefore my 1.0 Dual MDD and my 1.42 eMac work just fine for me. I MIGHT step up to a Intel Mini or tower (When they get somewhat cheaper) in about 2-3 years, but certainly not anytime soon unless I am forced to.

HOWEVER, coming from a PC standpoint (I used to use PCs AND Macs, my Dad has a Dell laptop, and sisters have a tower), I do agree that the PPC guys are being "pushed off the cliff". Most Windows programs and such that aren't graphics intensive can STILL run on a 800+ MHz P3 or higher with Windows 98 or 2000. On the other hand, almost any program that comes out for a Mac now requires an Intel processor with at least 10.6 installed, which does essentially "push away" the PPC owners.

I actually almost bought a 1.6 PCI G5 tower, thinking I was getting something better. Good thing I didn't... the Geekbench score was no better than the 1.0 Dual I am on now, and it's still "just" a old (As some call them) PPC that won't run many new programs.

But, like I said... my G4 works fine for daily use, and I'll use it until I can't use it anymore. It's not old if it still works fine!

chrismacguy
Feb 21, 2011, 06:43 AM
HOWEVER, coming from a PC standpoint (I used to use PCs AND Macs, my Dad has a Dell laptop, and sisters have a tower), I do agree that the PPC guys are being "pushed off the cliff". Most Windows programs and such that aren't graphics intensive can STILL run on a 800+ MHz P3 or higher with Windows 98 or 2000

err No they dont. Nearly all programs these days require Windows XP. I havent seen new software come out for years that supports Windows 98, as it is ridiculously old (Heck, its not even supported as a "Legacy" product). While a few things ask for 2000 SP4, a lot more want XP/XPSP2, however the CPU requirement is about right, although enough stuff asks for 2.0Ghz or higher even if it doesnt need it.

Toronto Mike
Feb 21, 2011, 07:21 AM
I'd like to ask a general question regarding the longevity of my G5 with the internet.

The trend nowadays seems to have companies wanting to push us to upgrade by changing the technical requirements for the hardware to run on. My G5 runs Tiger 10.4.11. Since many of my graphic/photography programs require that operating system, this is where the line in drawn for me.

I love my G5 and what my programs can do for me. My biggest concern is being able to interface with the internet in the future.

What can I expect in the future regarding my ability to use the internet with the G5? Apple's latest Safari release, Safari 5, has dropped support for the Tiger. What is likely to happen down the road for users such as us? They still want to sell us stuff on the internet. In 10 years, do you think it likely for my G5 to still use the internet?

Your thoughts would be most appreciated.

MIke

mabaker
Feb 21, 2011, 07:30 AM
I'd like to ask a general question regarding the longevity of my G5 with the internet.

The trend nowadays seems to have companies wanting to push us to upgrade by changing the technical requirements for the hardware to run on. My G5 runs Tiger 10.4.11. Since many of my graphic/photography programs require that operating system, this is where the line in drawn for me.

I love my G5 and what my programs can do for me. My biggest concern is being able to interface with the internet in the future.

What can I expect in the future regarding my ability to use the internet with the G5? Apple's latest Safari release, Safari 5, has dropped support for the Tiger. What is likely to happen down the road for users such as us? They still want to sell us stuff on the internet. In 10 years, do you think it likely for my G5 to still use the internet?

Your thoughts would be most appreciated.

MIke

Donít worry, Mike, as much as Apple tried to kill PPC as fast as possible you will still be able to browse the web in the next 3-5 years on your PPC machine.

Remember, even youtube now supports Flash Player 8 minimum. PPC folks got Flash Player 10.1 which is working decently on all the G5s so if Flash videos are your concern, fear no more! Of course considering Flash will still be well and alive in 3 years. ;)

Firefox 4 will be released for Leopard, as well, the beta is working on Tiger, too.

Opera will be discontinuing the support for PPC soon, too but being able to run Safari with extensions on Leopard you will be 100% future proof - AdBlock, ClickToFlash and HTML5 audio extensions will make your G5 feel like new.

Oh, and yes, do upgrade your G5 to Leopard - itís a new life breathed into the sleek machine, believe me. This month I upgraded my iMacG5 to Leo and itís flying.

Tailpike1153
Feb 21, 2011, 07:55 AM
Hi, just wondered what other PowerPC users feel about the fact that upgrades to the OS can't go higher than 10.5.

Have just been reading about OS Lion's upcoming release, and it frustrates me that sooner or later I will have perfectly functioning hardware forced into retirement due to the inevitable need to keep up with new versions of OS.

Just interested if others accept this as inevitable progress, or, like me, wonder whether Apple's decision to withdraw support for the PowerPC is more marketing based than technology driven.

Thanks!

I don't feel abandoned. I've been around and used many iterations of Apple/Mac computers. You can still use you Mac well after the last official upgrade. I still have my G4 and Color classic. Thankfully the G4 can run CS3, when I need to down my iMac for upgrade or maintainance...I have a backup machine. It doesn't have all the bells and whistles but it still gets the job done.

zen.state
Feb 21, 2011, 08:18 AM
I'd like to ask a general question regarding the longevity of my G5 with the internet.

The trend nowadays seems to have companies wanting to push us to upgrade by changing the technical requirements for the hardware to run on. My G5 runs Tiger 10.4.11. Since many of my graphic/photography programs require that operating system, this is where the line in drawn for me.

I love my G5 and what my programs can do for me. My biggest concern is being able to interface with the internet in the future.

What can I expect in the future regarding my ability to use the internet with the G5? Apple's latest Safari release, Safari 5, has dropped support for the Tiger. What is likely to happen down the road for users such as us? They still want to sell us stuff on the internet. In 10 years, do you think it likely for my G5 to still use the internet?

Your thoughts would be most appreciated.

MIke

At first I actually thought your post was a joke. :)

Of course your G5 will be able to interface with the internet. Some people are still using System 6/7 in the Mac world for internet machines. Those OS's came out as long ago as 1988.

Your G5 will be able to access the net just fine for as long as it lives. Full HTML5 support is in Safari 4+ which runs on 10.4+

I also recommend that you upgrade to 10.5. On a G5 it will feel a bit faster than 10.4 and is also able to run current software. 10.5 also has advanced socket layer security which helps a lot with internet security. Even 10.4 is up to Vista or XP standards net/tech wise on the other side of the coin.

Toronto Mike
Feb 21, 2011, 01:19 PM
Thank you Mabaker and Zen.state for your timely response.

I'm afraid to move from Tiger to Leopard because I have a few plug-ins and programs written for Tiger. If its not broken....

Your thoughts about further years of use are reassuring. I want to stay with what I have for as long as possible. The only things that would force me off the G5 would be professional printers not being able to read my CS4 files, and access to the use of the internet. All the programs I have are superb and more than enough for what I use my computer for. I've stocked up on a spare power supply, and picked up a spare fully functioning identical used G5 (they go for very reasonable prices nowadays) so that in the event of my current machine frying out, bang, just boot from my cloned hard drive and I'm back in business.

The problem with getting a new computer, apart from the major expense, is that they have made it so you cannot load all your old software. I have spent far more on my software than that hardware. As someone with modest professional needs I cannot afford to be on the treadmill. Also, a not so minor point, is how much time do you need to learn all the nuances of a new program? It is quite considerable when programers have this obsessive need to keep changing where all the buttons are in the programs and the order at which the same tasks are executed.

Thanks once again for your insights. I just want to save money in the long run if I can still accomplish the same work with what I have. A computer, after all, is just a glorified tool. It's too bad you cannot keep them for as long as you would a hammer or fine screwdriver.

Mike

chrismacguy
Feb 21, 2011, 02:41 PM
I'm afraid to move from Tiger to Leopard because I have a few plug-ins and programs written for Tiger. If its not broken....

If necessary, you can always have them both installed, on different partitions. That way your Tiger programs will still work just fine under Tiger, you can then mess with 10.5, see if they work, if they do great, if not, you still have them under the Tiger install, and you can use Safari 5 under 10.5.8 for any websites that require it in the future.

mabaker
Feb 21, 2011, 03:04 PM
Thank you Mabaker and Zen.state for your timely response.

I'm afraid to move from Tiger to Leopard because I have a few plug-ins and programs written for Tiger. If its not broken....

Your thoughts about further years of use are reassuring. I want to stay with what I have for as long as possible. The only things that would force me off the G5 would be professional printers not being able to read my CS4 files, and access to the use of the internet. All the programs I have are superb and more than enough for what I use my computer for. I've stocked up on a spare power supply, and picked up a spare fully functioning identical used G5 (they go for very reasonable prices nowadays) so that in the event of my current machine frying out, bang, just boot from my cloned hard drive and I'm back in business.

The problem with getting a new computer, apart from the major expense, is that they have made it so you cannot load all your old software. I have spent far more on my software than that hardware. As someone with modest professional needs I cannot afford to be on the treadmill. Also, a not so minor point, is how much time do you need to learn all the nuances of a new program? It is quite considerable when programers have this obsessive need to keep changing where all the buttons are in the programs and the order at which the same tasks are executed.

Thanks once again for your insights. I just want to save money in the long run if I can still accomplish the same work with what I have. A computer, after all, is just a glorified tool. It's too bad you cannot keep them for as long as you would a hammer or fine screwdriver.

Mike

I think itís safe to say, Mike, that you can stay with Tiger for the immediate future. Printing and browser experience will remain unchanged for some time to come as you can see from some user experiences here. I wouldnít have any worries whatsoever if I were you especially considering that there are pros out there running CS1 and earlier even on MacOS9 to get their job done! :)

You put your money into that gorgeous Mac, get its worth by making it last long. Nothing wrong with that. It actually is rather refreshing attitude around here.

Toronto Mike
Feb 21, 2011, 09:19 PM
If necessary, you can always have them both installed, on different partitions. That way your Tiger programs will still work just fine under Tiger, you can then mess with 10.5, see if they work, if they do great, if not, you still have them under the Tiger install, and you can use Safari 5 under 10.5.8 for any websites that require it in the future.

That is a great idea to consider since I have a copy of Leopard fresh in the wrapped box. It would be an experiment to put on a partition in the second internal hard drive.

Thank you for the advice.

Mike

KŪtscheŮ«inqĶe
Feb 23, 2011, 09:08 AM
err No they dont. Nearly all programs these days require Windows XP. I havent seen new software come out for years that supports Windows 98, as it is ridiculously old (Heck, its not even supported as a "Legacy" product). While a few things ask for 2000 SP4, a lot more want XP/XPSP2, however the CPU requirement is about right, although enough stuff asks for 2.0Ghz or higher even if it doesnt need it.
a lot of current versions of win32 apps run on 9x.
opera and kmeleon run on win9x, though opera 9 was the last i personally ran on 350mhz k6-2 (cheesier than pII based celeron) win98se. opera 10 and 11 seem significantly more bloated. kmeleon might have been 1.5.3, little different from current kmeleon.
i don't use 9x anymore, but read about it (interest? amusement?)
check the unofficial 9x area of msfn. also "kernelex". Without kernelex, the biggest lack is av -- afaik, 9x will run only clamwin (optionally with sentinel).

2k
i think there are similar 'unofficial' support/patch people for win2k.

xp
just a hunch, but xp sp2 requirement might be for .net apps. (digression. ms updates require sp3 for x86 or sp2 for 64bit.)

as with other oses, win apps tend to need ram, rather than cpu *hz.
yt vids are small, so no trouble for old pcs.
avoid startup lag by avoiding startup scan option of retail security bloatware, or stay with original size hdd .

earlier p3 (pc100, like a g3 or early g4), xp, 512+mb: sketchup7, 2d cad, but true rendering (kerkythea) is hopeless :-/

Cox Orange
Feb 24, 2011, 09:20 AM
Even at 32% most don't die. It's not like every single one is a time bomb or anything. I would say any 2003-04 model that still runs is definitely a good one.

I do think that, too. It's like saying, if it did not fail until now, there is a fair chance that it will last even longer. So one is saver buying a used Mac maybe (that goes for Intel-Macs as well, I think. If an Intel-Mac survived his apple-care period without failure, it will most likely be ok).

There is a second thing that comes to mind, too. I think there are far more bad ones reported on the internet than good ones. Because someone who doesn't complain, would not go and tell "I just wanted to tell, my G4 is fine". So even at Mac-Intouch, they maybe got more feedback from owners of defective ones, than others. One would have to know how many Macs were sold and how many were reported to apple having failed.

...
i mean my granny has a fridge build by bosch in the early 60's and is still working fine without a problem , it might use a bit more energy then a modern one , but how long are modern fridges lasting ..5 years if you are lucky...

I am not a fan of conspiracy theories, but I heard something that I believe is true. In order to make more profit they build crappy ones, so that everyone has to buy something new more often. I heard this from a reliable source (if you like I will tell).
You can even prove it on the internet, there is a software on the internet that disables a ROM in Epson printers. The ROM tells the printer to stop working after a number of pages or hours on power. If you eliminate that special ROM, it works again like new.
There is also a light bulb in America, that is the oldest in the world and it still works (unfortunately they lost the information what material and process was used to make it that durable). The industries then told there technicians to built bulbs that meet a requirement. The requirement was, that it should not longer last than 1000h. On the other hand in east Germany under the socialist-government, they forced the industry to built bulbs that have to last 25 years, because they were low on raw material and wanted to make their "planned economy" be consistent in itself. When thy wanted to sell their products to the economically "free" west Germany they got told, that West G. will not import them because it interferes with the interests of the "free economy" :D

rebhaf
Jul 20, 2012, 05:59 AM
What a surprise to come home with my new iPhone 4s and discover that it won't work on my iBook G4 because my iTunes is too old (and that's because my OS is too old). How is it that Apple can make iTunes work on old versions of Windows XP but they can't make it work on OS X Tiger? Or is it just that they don't want to?

Well, the irony is, Apple has forced me to migrate fully to my Windows PC and now I have no more use for the Apple environment. My next laptop was going to be another Mac, but now it will be a Windows-based PC.

By the way, it's annoying to hear some of you calling this whining and drawing analogies to floppy disks. Pleeeeze... My iBook G4 is only a few years old. I bought it in Sept 2005, just a short time before Apple introduced Intel Macs. And guess what -- everything I use it for (movie editing, Web surfing, etc) works fine. I'm fully aware of planned obsolescence, but I don't accept that I have to buy a new computer every five years to avoid huge obsolescence issues.

skinniezinho
Jul 20, 2012, 06:12 AM
What a surprise to come home with my new iPhone 4s and discover that it won't work on my iBook G4 because my iTunes is too old (and that's because my OS is too old). How is it that Apple can make iTunes work on old versions of Windows XP but they can't make it work on OS X Tiger? Or is it just that they don't want to?

Well, the irony is, Apple has forced me to migrate fully to my Windows PC and now I have no more use for the Apple environment. My next laptop was going to be another Mac, but now it will be a Windows-based PC.

By the way, it's annoying to hear some of you calling this whining and drawing analogies to floppy disks. Pleeeeze... My iBook G4 is only a few years old. I bought it in Sept 2005, just a short time before Apple introduced Intel Macs. And guess what -- everything I use it for (movie editing, Web surfing, etc) works fine. I'm fully aware of planned obsolescence, but I don't accept that I have to buy a new computer every five years to avoid huge obsolescence issues.

If you have one of the last ibooks why not update it to 10.5.8 and have the newer itunes that support the latest iOs,or am I wrong?

Seth Mac Fan
Jul 20, 2012, 06:19 AM
I've always wanted to run Linux on my mac. Has anyone used Yellow Dog Linux (http://www.yellowdoglinux.com/) ?

Yes it is ok for what it is , but it is not being supported anymore . If you want a modern linux distro I would reccomend mint ppc (http://mintppc.org/) it is probably your best choice at this point . But my exspierence is linux does not work very good on power pc macs . So I would reccomend you dual boot Mac and linux .

estrides
Jul 20, 2012, 10:43 AM
I don't feel abandoned, Ive just come to terms that my horse and buggy are just getting old. It still pulls and moves the way it did the day I got it though...

PowerPCMacMan
Jul 20, 2012, 07:45 PM
Hi, I was at their website and there was nothing to download. Do I need to install Debian and then get MintPPC Linux? Sounds really interesting as I might look into installing this on my 2nd hard drive in my powerbook.


Yes it is ok for what it is , but it is not being supported anymore . If you want a modern linux distro I would reccomend mint ppc (http://mintppc.org/) it is probably your best choice at this point . But my exspierence is linux does not work very good on power pc macs . So I would reccomend you dual boot Mac and linux .

Ariii
Jul 20, 2012, 08:35 PM
Hi, I was at their website and there was nothing to download. Do I need to install Debian and then get MintPPC Linux? Sounds really interesting as I might look into installing this on my 2nd hard drive in my powerbook.

You don't need Debian to install it, and they have instructions on their website.