PDA

View Full Version : The end of PPC




Wildy
May 25, 2013, 10:31 AM
So a little while ago I started a thread, and people chimed in with some good reasons / features these machines have which keep them relevant in this modern day and age. There will come a day though (for many people, this day has already come), when they are simply too old to be useful at all.

I have a desktop for all my heavy stuff (media, gaming etc.), but still use my 1.67 PB regularly for server management (SSH), audio production (Logic), casual gaming (Quake 3 etc.), minor photo editing (Aperture), development (Python), web surfing etc. etc.

For all of those tasks bar web surfing, it will never be obsolete. Pro audio is probably going to be using 24-bit 48kHz RAW for the foreseeable future - which the PB handles just fine. Every day there are bigger and better synthesizers etc., but the sheer number of producers still using G5s seems to suggest that it's perfectly feasible to make decent music with the tools we have already.

There are always going to be players for the old retro games (though I feel Quake 3 has been somewhat superseded by Quake Live) - thus, gaming will never make it obsolete.

It's debatable whether using a PPC for development work will be feasible in a few years' time; it really depends on what you are developing. Most of what I develop is either for embedded hardware targets, web applications, or command-line utilities. Regardless, the only intensive part of development is compilation, which can be done on a remote machine anyway.

While I don't do any editing, I use Aperture to manage my library and fix the colour levels on scanned negatives (I shoot a lot of film - such a hipster, I know). When working with images from my DSLR, my PB does struggle. I feel this is definitely an area where they really show their age due to the lack of RAM and CPU oomph when dealing with high-resolution RAW images.


So what does that leave? Well, web surfing, and the hardware itself. Thanks to the TFF and the like, we have a modern web browser which is able to handle HTML5. I'm no web designer, but I feel that many websites these days have a severe case of information overload. The other day my girlfriend was complaining that my PB was slow while browsing the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html) (avoid!). Given the design, it's not at all surprising. On further inspection, there are 4.4 MB of resources on the homepage alone (see this (http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/cVU18D/http://www.dailymail.co.uk) for the breakdown). That is absolutely ridiculous. The thing that really grinds my gears is when you go to read an article, the sidebar lists every single article - meaning the thing you're reading takes up maybe a screen height or two, and then there's a massive white gap all the way to the bottom, with reels upon reels of articles on the right that I would have noticed anyway while methodically going through everything on the front page. CSS3 is also another sticking point. It's now possible to achieve a lot of things with pure CSS that would have previously only been possible using sliced up images. The toll some of these functions take on the CPU is quite large in some cases.

So finally, we have hardware. Well, most of us at least one of: USB 2.0, Firewire 800, Gigabit ethernet, b/g wireless. Given I've worked on some, I know shamefully little about wireless technologies. There's some pretty interesting stuff brewing, what with mesh networks etc., but for the end user, I think it's all pretty transparent. The wifi in Coffee shops etc. will probably be b/g compatible for the next few years, but I can see the introduction of new standards being a major issue. While USB 2.0 opens up the possibility for using adapters, the chipset has to be supported in the OS, which a new one won't be. Which means people will either have to learn to use Linux, or hope someone ports the inevitable Linux kernel module for the new chipset(s).

If I need to move any large files around, I transfer it over the network. But there are always going to be USB 2.0 flashdrives and external hard drives, I don't think we'll see any change here.



So to conclude, for my personal usecase, there are really only two things which will mean the demise of my PowerBook:

Continuation in poorly designed, resource-heavy websites
Migration to newer, unsuppoted wireless standards


I look forward to hearing some other perspectives on this topic.

Cheers,
Mike



Lil Chillbil
May 25, 2013, 10:38 AM
My perspective has changed drastically on this topic, I can no longer really use powerpc as my "main" machine or even a 2nd machine more like a its there machine


as for everyone who is still using powerpc as their main machine...


http://t.qkme.me/3ov4p7.jpg

justperry
May 25, 2013, 10:40 AM
I use my PB 1.67 15" to control My 2012 Mac Mini with ARD, even browsing is (much) faster in ARD than using the browser on my PB.
So, it is still good for browsing this way.
The only thing I need to do though is to get a new fan on my PB, when it heats up while on a website in ARD from the Mini it heats up and the fan makes a terrible noise, for now I have a small fan next to it which helps a lot.

GermanyChris
May 25, 2013, 10:50 AM
My perspective has changed drastically on this topic, I can no longer really use powerpc as my "main" machine or even a 2nd machine more like a its there machine


as for everyone who is still using powerpc as their main machine...


Image (http://t.qkme.me/3ov4p7.jpg)

Just because you're a traitor doesn't mean everyone has to be ;)

rabidz7
May 25, 2013, 11:54 AM
Interesting that, if a 2005 QC PMG5 is useless, are all apple computers (besides mac pro and core iX iMacs) made in 2009 or before useless too?

Mactracker on my ePhone( what I call pre iPhone 5 iPhones) says that a QC PMG5 scores a 3284. A MBP 17" early 2009 scores 3078.

eyoungren
May 25, 2013, 12:04 PM
If anything, PowerPC is becoming stronger where I work. We recently had the G5 die (fried logicboard). I could have searched on eBay and found my boss a new logicboard, installed it and continued on, but we had it replaced with an Intel Mac.

It's taken me a week or so to integrate this Intel Mac, during which I was reminded that Apple killed Appletalk with Snow Leopard. We have two identical printers on our network, but one is older and only uses Appletalk while the other has IP printing and Appletalk. But the newer one has a faulty manual feed tray while the one on the Appletalk only printer works fine. Most of our printouts are ad proofs on letter so I need to use the Appletalk only printer the most. The problem for us too with IP printing is that it tends to sporadically produce lines or banding effects in our printouts. That'd be ok if we weren't a newspaper using those printouts to shoot film with. So…our venerable PowerMac G4/350 with 98mb of ram running 10.4.11 is now doing triple duty. It's an Applescript server, a font server and now a print server. It's the latter function that makes it possible for my ML Intel Mac to print.

We will be migrating soon to Intel Macs. Mine was the first. Next an Intel Mini server and then my coworker will get my Mac and I will get a newer more powerful one. Then the Editorial Assistant and possibly others at a later point.

But the two G4s that we have will continue to serve a purpose. I now have a G5 at home (my boss gave it to me) and I still take my PowerBooks to me to Starbucks and work. In fact, it was my 17" 1.67ghz DLSD that enabled me to still work for the two weeks that we had no Mac. The papers got out on time because Apple design made it easy to integrate my PowerBook in to the work network.

Lastly, I will say this. I've been using the new Intel Mac for about a week. It has 1GB less of ram than my G5, but it's doing the job very well. However, at least right now, I find it to be mechanical with no perceptible character. Even the start up chime sounds tinny. Using Mountain Lion for a few days or so has made me appreciate Leopard that much more on my PowerBooks.

GermanyChris
May 25, 2013, 12:08 PM
Interesting that, if a 2005 QC PMG5 is useless, are all apple computers (besides mac pro and core iX iMacs) made in 2009 or before useless too?

Mactracker on my ePhone( what I call pre iPhone 5 iPhones) says that a QC PMG5 scores a 3284. A MBP 17" early 2009 scores 3078.

They changed that much? My mid 09 scores 4200ish

666sheep
May 25, 2013, 12:18 PM
Interesting that, if a 2005 QC PMG5 is useless, are all apple computers (besides mac pro and core iX iMacs) made in 2009 or before useless too?


It's useless for everyone needing Intel only apps versions. For the rest it's very useable.

Mactracker on my ePhone( what I call pre iPhone 5 iPhones) says that a QC PMG5 scores a 3284. A MBP 17" early 2009 scores 3078.

Geekbench doesn't determine useability of computer, it only estimates CPU and memory performance. Only people I can imagine, who do Geekbench for a living are Primatelabs devs ;)

Aameiel
May 25, 2013, 12:19 PM
I been using my iMac G4 ( 1.25ghz 2 gigs of ram ) as a main machine for some time now. After some tweeking to the OS, it does all my everyday things with no problem. I watch youtube videos with no problems, surf the web, pay bills, buy/sell on ebay with no hick ups!! i have an i7 laptop for when i wanna game but for everything else i use this imac and love it !!! Just wanted to share that. :D

rabidz7
May 25, 2013, 12:22 PM
They changed that much? My mid 09 scores 4200ish

Early 09
413720

Mid 09
413721

bax2003
May 25, 2013, 12:48 PM
Not primary machine, but very capable, G5 Quad:

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6040/dockapps.png

http://img10.imageshack.us/img10/6040/dockapps.png

GermanyChris
May 25, 2013, 12:52 PM
Early 09
413720

Mid 09
413721

I wonder if the newer versions of geekbench are scoring higher

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1986293

rabidz7
May 25, 2013, 12:55 PM
I wonder if the newer versions of geekbench are scoring higher

http://browser.primatelabs.com/geekbench2/1986293

A mactracker score is the average score of all benchmarks ever submitted. Your mac is above average because you have 8GB of RAM.

GermanyChris
May 25, 2013, 01:07 PM
A mactracker score is the average score of all benchmarks ever submitted. Your mac is above average because you have 8GB of RAM.

Quantity generally doesn't make any difference, in mines it's not even matched.

http://browser.primatelabs.com/user/20986

If you look at my Mac Pro the jump from 32GB to 48GB only resulted in 300 points and that was moving to 3 DIMMs for triple channel. That's why I was wondering out loud if the bench was different in it's newer iterations.

archtopshop
May 25, 2013, 01:28 PM
If anything, PowerPC is becoming stronger where I work. We recently had the G5 die (fried logicboard). I could have searched on eBay and found my boss a new logicboard, installed it and continued on, but we had it replaced with an Intel Mac.

It's taken me a week or so to integrate this Intel Mac, during which I was reminded that Apple killed Appletalk with Snow Leopard. We have two identical printers on our network, but one is older and only uses Appletalk while the other has IP printing and Appletalk. But the newer one has a faulty manual feed tray while the one on the Appletalk only printer works fine. Most of our printouts are ad proofs on letter so I need to use the Appletalk only printer the most. The problem for us too with IP printing is that it tends to sporadically produce lines or banding effects in our printouts. That'd be ok if we weren't a newspaper using those printouts to shoot film with. So…our venerable PowerMac G4/350 with 98mb of ram running 10.4.11 is now doing triple duty. It's an Applescript server, a font server and now a print server. It's the latter function that makes it possible for my ML Intel Mac to print.

We will be migrating soon to Intel Macs. Mine was the first. Next an Intel Mini server and then my coworker will get my Mac and I will get a newer more powerful one. Then the Editorial Assistant and possibly others at a later point.

But the two G4s that we have will continue to serve a purpose. I now have a G5 at home (my boss gave it to me) and I still take my PowerBooks to me to Starbucks and work. In fact, it was my 17" 1.67ghz DLSD that enabled me to still work for the two weeks that we had no Mac. The papers got out on time because Apple design made it easy to integrate my PowerBook in to the work network.

Lastly, I will say this. I've been using the new Intel Mac for about a week. It has 1GB less of ram than my G5, but it's doing the job very well. However, at least right now, I find it to be mechanical with no perceptible character. Even the start up chime sounds tinny. Using Mountain Lion for a few days or so has made me appreciate Leopard that much more on my PowerBooks.

If I may ask a few questions; what software do you use on the Powermacs for producing your camera ready art? And, is switching to the Intel Macs going to require all new software?

benwiggy
May 25, 2013, 01:29 PM
So to conclude, for my personal usecase, there are really only two things which will mean the demise of my PowerBook:

Continuation in poorly designed, resource-heavy websites
Migration to newer, unsuppoted wireless standards

I look forward to hearing some other perspectives on this topic.

Of course any computer is capable of doing some form of useful work until the hardware gives up the ghost (and that's the usual demise).
However, new machines do offer increases in productivity, and sometimes that is the pragmatic death knell for older hardware. I could be using Photoshop 2.5 and Finale 3.7 on my Mac IIsi: but CS6 and Finale 2012 on a new Mini is a whole different ballgame. I can't even consider going back to my 2006 Intel iMac now. I am getting more work done, faster.

I've migrated from Mac 68000 to PPC; from OS 9 to OS X; from PPC to Intel: I've seen 5.25 floppies, 3.5" floppies, SyQuest cartridges, zip disks, SCSI, ADB ports, RS-232, NuBus, and countless more technologies come and go.
All of which leads me to the following:

All hardware and software is TEMPORARY. Hardware dies. Standards become superseded and obsolete. Old parts become rare and difficult to purchase. New hardware, to replace it, requires a new OS, which runs new software.

Data, hopefully, is eternal, and can be migrated from machine to machine, from app to app.

There's nothing wrong with running ageing hardware: but you need to be prepared for the day when the logic board fries, or the PSU eats itself, or some other component fails and no replacement can be found.

I don't mean to put a downer on PPC ownership! :D

eyoungren
May 25, 2013, 01:39 PM
If I may ask a few questions; what software do you use on the Powermacs for producing your camera ready art? And, is switching to the Intel Macs going to require all new software?
We are using the Adobe Creative Suite 4. For in house ads we start with ID CS4. Up to 2010 we were using QuarkXPress 8.5, Photoshop CS4, and Illustrator CS4. Before 2008 when we upgraded to Leopard it was QuarkXPress 6.x, Photoshop 7, Acrobat 6 Pro and Illustrator 10. We generally handle any incoming CR ads (that are PDF) with Acrobat 9 Pro. With Acro 9 we also have Quite A Box of Tricks and Enfocus Pitstop Pro 7.5. For fonts we are using Suitcase Fusion 4. Suitcase Fusion 2 and 3 will also work on the Intel.

I will be installing QuarkXPress 9.x soon however (that's just for compatibility reasons) and Adobe CS6.

I had to reinstall CS4 because I had used XSlimmer on the apps so they only had PowerPC code. Also, I had to create a new account (I had migrated my old one from the G5) before the Mac would recognize that the Intel CS4 versions had been installed. None of the reinstalls touched any of my preferences.

So, no it did not require new software. CS4 is universal, so is XPress 8.x, Acrobat 9 Pro and Suitcase Fusion 2 and 3. Also, the plugins for Acrobat that I mentioned seem to be universal as well as they function on the new Intel Mac too.

EDIT: Oh, we also use Office 2011. But Office 2008 is Universal and was what we were using previously.

eyoungren
May 25, 2013, 02:00 PM
…All hardware and software is TEMPORARY. Hardware dies. Standards become superseded and obsolete. Old parts become rare and difficult to purchase. New hardware, to replace it, requires a new OS, which runs new software.

Data, hopefully, is eternal, and can be migrated from machine to machine, from app to app.

There's nothing wrong with running ageing hardware: but you need to be prepared for the day when the logic board fries, or the PSU eats itself, or some other component fails and no replacement can be found.…
This is something that my boss is finally starting to get. If I had not pushed at any time for the last nine years I would still be using Photoshop 6 Educational, Pagemaker 7.0 and Illustrator 6 on a Gateway PC with Windows 2000 SP1 and 256MB ram. For what we do it is entirely possible to continue in this way because we produce in house and a PDF is a PDF. With certain exceptions it doesn't matter what program produces it.

But the nature of my profession is change. Change drives everything and if you do not keep up you eventually lose out or you pay dearly to upgrade. We are a small community weekly with two newspapers and a few monthlys and a couple of quarterlys.

We are getting out of the printing business (we have our own press downstairs) because the boss's lost out. The cost to upgrade our press and install the equipment we need to be direct to plate is prohibitive and the return on the investment will still leave us at a loss. So, we have started sending our monthlys and quarterlys to a local printer (Valley Newspapers) that prints Barrons and the Wall Street Journal. We have a good price for this and the quality far exceeds anything our press could even dream of. In June we will begin sending our weekly papers to Valley. Last week was the last run for the school newspapers that send us their papers to print. They will be getting our pricing with Valley. The same goes for our commercial clients that use us. In short, because we never upgraded over time we are dumping all of our print customers and the press won't be used any more. This leaves our pressman who is in his mid 50s and has worked here since he was 18 in a quandry as there will be no work for him.

So, my point is that while upgrade may be painful in the immediate, it is MUCH MORE PAINFUL and has REAL consequences if delayed long-term.

If I had not pushed it would be extremely difficult to open, let alone work with half of the "camera ready" ads/files we get now.

Wildy
May 25, 2013, 03:41 PM
Of course any computer is capable of doing some form of useful work until the hardware gives up the ghost (and that's the usual demise).
However, new machines do offer increases in productivity, and sometimes that is the pragmatic death knell for older hardware. I could be using Photoshop 2.5 and Finale 3.7 on my Mac IIsi: but CS6 and Finale 2012 on a new Mini is a whole different ballgame. I can't even consider going back to my 2006 Intel iMac now. I am getting more work done, faster.

I've migrated from Mac 68000 to PPC; from OS 9 to OS X; from PPC to Intel: I've seen 5.25 floppies, 3.5" floppies, SyQuest cartridges, zip disks, SCSI, ADB ports, RS-232, NuBus, and countless more technologies come and go.
All of which leads me to the following:

All hardware and software is TEMPORARY. Hardware dies. Standards become superseded and obsolete. Old parts become rare and difficult to purchase. New hardware, to replace it, requires a new OS, which runs new software.

Data, hopefully, is eternal, and can be migrated from machine to machine, from app to app.

There's nothing wrong with running ageing hardware: but you need to be prepared for the day when the logic board fries, or the PSU eats itself, or some other component fails and no replacement can be found.

I don't mean to put a downer on PPC ownership! :D

I think hardware failure is a given. I imagine if anything significant fails, it'll be time to move on to an Intel.

bax2003
May 25, 2013, 03:53 PM
You move to Intel, ok, Mac Pro 2008 for example, and than its Logic Board dies ? What then ?

It is very simple, if software available for PPC does your job, you will keep it. Component dies, you replace it.
There is zillion places where you can find replacement parts for G5.

Hardware dies - fact. If software does your job - that is it.

Wildy
May 25, 2013, 04:24 PM
It depends which part fails. Don't forget that on top of the cost of parts, there's also the cost of time (whether it's your own, or someone else's).

The software we choose to use isn't a problem - it's the things that are beyond our control which are the problem. New hardware standards, the evolution of the web - these are the things which worry me.

rjcalifornia
May 26, 2013, 04:23 PM
So a little while ago I started a thread, and people chimed in with some good reasons / features these machines have which keep them relevant in this modern day and age. There will come a day though (for many people, this day has already come), when they are simply too old to be useful at all.

I have a desktop for all my heavy stuff (media, gaming etc.), but still use my 1.67 PB regularly for server management (SSH), audio production (Logic), casual gaming (Quake 3 etc.), minor photo editing (Aperture), development (Python), web surfing etc. etc.

For all of those tasks bar web surfing, it will never be obsolete. Pro audio is probably going to be using 24-bit 48kHz RAW for the foreseeable future - which the PB handles just fine. Every day there are bigger and better synthesizers etc., but the sheer number of producers still using G5s seems to suggest that it's perfectly feasible to make decent music with the tools we have already.

There are always going to be players for the old retro games (though I feel Quake 3 has been somewhat superseded by Quake Live) - thus, gaming will never make it obsolete.

It's debatable whether using a PPC for development work will be feasible in a few years' time; it really depends on what you are developing. Most of what I develop is either for embedded hardware targets, web applications, or command-line utilities. Regardless, the only intensive part of development is compilation, which can be done on a remote machine anyway.

While I don't do any editing, I use Aperture to manage my library and fix the colour levels on scanned negatives (I shoot a lot of film - such a hipster, I know). When working with images from my DSLR, my PB does struggle. I feel this is definitely an area where they really show their age due to the lack of RAM and CPU oomph when dealing with high-resolution RAW images.


So what does that leave? Well, web surfing, and the hardware itself. Thanks to the TFF and the like, we have a modern web browser which is able to handle HTML5. I'm no web designer, but I feel that many websites these days have a severe case of information overload. The other day my girlfriend was complaining that my PB was slow while browsing the Daily Mail (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/index.html) (avoid!). Given the design, it's not at all surprising. On further inspection, there are 4.4 MB of resources on the homepage alone (see this (http://tools.pingdom.com/fpt/#!/cVU18D/http://www.dailymail.co.uk) for the breakdown). That is absolutely ridiculous. The thing that really grinds my gears is when you go to read an article, the sidebar lists every single article - meaning the thing you're reading takes up maybe a screen height or two, and then there's a massive white gap all the way to the bottom, with reels upon reels of articles on the right that I would have noticed anyway while methodically going through everything on the front page. CSS3 is also another sticking point. It's now possible to achieve a lot of things with pure CSS that would have previously only been possible using sliced up images. The toll some of these functions take on the CPU is quite large in some cases.

So finally, we have hardware. Well, most of us at least one of: USB 2.0, Firewire 800, Gigabit ethernet, b/g wireless. Given I've worked on some, I know shamefully little about wireless technologies. There's some pretty interesting stuff brewing, what with mesh networks etc., but for the end user, I think it's all pretty transparent. The wifi in Coffee shops etc. will probably be b/g compatible for the next few years, but I can see the introduction of new standards being a major issue. While USB 2.0 opens up the possibility for using adapters, the chipset has to be supported in the OS, which a new one won't be. Which means people will either have to learn to use Linux, or hope someone ports the inevitable Linux kernel module for the new chipset(s).

If I need to move any large files around, I transfer it over the network. But there are always going to be USB 2.0 flashdrives and external hard drives, I don't think we'll see any change here.



So to conclude, for my personal usecase, there are really only two things which will mean the demise of my PowerBook:

Continuation in poorly designed, resource-heavy websites
Migration to newer, unsuppoted wireless standards


I look forward to hearing some other perspectives on this topic.

Cheers,
Mike

About websites being heavy and stuff...

On my iBook G4 I've done projects, heavy projects that uses a lot of CSS3, HTML5, a lot of graphics, etc. So heavy that my ibook almost can handle it. It is kinda funny, I can design, write and create heavy web applications on my ibook, but cannot be run on it.

It depends of tastes, the Daily Mail loads fine with no issues on my iBook G4 1.2 Ghz

rjcalifornia
May 26, 2013, 04:37 PM
This is something that my boss is finally starting to get. If I had not pushed at any time for the last nine years I would still be using Photoshop 6 Educational, Pagemaker 7.0 and Illustrator 6 on a Gateway PC with Windows 2000 SP1 and 256MB ram. For what we do it is entirely possible to continue in this way because we produce in house and a PDF is a PDF. With certain exceptions it doesn't matter what program produces it.

But the nature of my profession is change. Change drives everything and if you do not keep up you eventually lose out or you pay dearly to upgrade. We are a small community weekly with two newspapers and a few monthlys and a couple of quarterlys.

We are getting out of the printing business (we have our own press downstairs) because the boss's lost out. The cost to upgrade our press and install the equipment we need to be direct to plate is prohibitive and the return on the investment will still leave us at a loss. So, we have started sending our monthlys and quarterlys to a local printer (Valley Newspapers) that prints Barrons and the Wall Street Journal. We have a good price for this and the quality far exceeds anything our press could even dream of. In June we will begin sending our weekly papers to Valley. Last week was the last run for the school newspapers that send us their papers to print. They will be getting our pricing with Valley. The same goes for our commercial clients that use us. In short, because we never upgraded over time we are dumping all of our print customers and the press won't be used any more. This leaves our pressman who is in his mid 50s and has worked here since he was 18 in a quandry as there will be no work for him.

So, my point is that while upgrade may be painful in the immediate, it is MUCH MORE PAINFUL and has REAL consequences if delayed long-term.

If I had not pushed it would be extremely difficult to open, let alone work with half of the "camera ready" ads/files we get now.

Same here. You gotta keep moving forward, and that's why I keep my Windows Machine up and running. I bought Windows 8, and I will install it only if I HAVE to.

We have to accept that Macs are way behind Microsoft and HP. I bought my HP computer in 2006, with Windows Vista Basic, and at the same time I had my iBook G3. Windows was for WORK, ibook was for fun. Till this day, my '06 HP runs Windows 7 Professional, 2 GB of RAM AMD 1.4GHz 64bit, I bought and installed Visual Studio 2012 and I plan to Upgrade to Visual Studio 2013. Yes, an 8 years old machine that already passed the Windows 8 requirements.

Back to the point, Mac is way behind as a software and hardware company.

bax2003
May 26, 2013, 06:36 PM
You do not need to move forward if softwre that you use does your job on hardware that you have.

Even 10.5.x is better OS than W7.

eyoungren
May 26, 2013, 07:07 PM
You do not need to move forward if softwre that you use does your job on hardware that you have.

Even 10.5.x is better OS than W7.
You do if you want to continue doing what I do (Graphic Design).

Many of our customers (including the Citys of Glendale and Peoria, Arizona) send ads and legal documents in .docx format. The City of Glendale's weekly cable guide comes in .xlsx format. Word 2000 and Excel 2000 on a PC will not open .docx or .xlsx. I cannot open late version .ai files with Illustrator 6. How do I open a late version ID file with Adobe Pagemaker 7? Acrobat 5 for camera ready PDFs with no Quite a Box of Tricks and PitStop Pro? Photoshop 6 Educational for modern PSDs? That's just the stuff coming in.

Going out? The printer want's PDF/X-4:2008 That's NOT even in cards for Pagemaker 7. Sure I can export a postscript file or a series of EPS files. But Acrobat Distiller 5 does NOT have the option to create that PDF format. We're screwed unless we update (which I have forced over time to what we have now).

Sure, you're right if your own isolated process is all you have to meet or what you do matters only to you. But sooner or later outside forces will force change on you and my industry does not exist in a vacuum. There's one print customer we have who is about to experience this as there will no longer be anyone available to shoot his pasteups to negative, burn plate and then mount the plates on a press. All the printers in metro Phoenix want PDFs. So, his choice is to buy a computer and the software to produce his paper electronically — or fold.

NOTE. I am NOT arguing against PowerPC. For my own personal purposes I prefer it and I have more than one PowerPC Mac in my home. But web browsing, light word processing and email, occasional design work is fine as it's not what I depend on for my income. But at work, it doesn't and hasn't since 2006 cut it anymore. I don't particularly like the newer Intel Macs too much, but I do need them to keep up so that I can do my job.

Lil Chillbil
May 26, 2013, 08:01 PM
You do if you want to continue doing what I do (Graphic Design).

Many of our customers (including the Citys of Glendale and Peoria, Arizona) send ads and legal documents in .docx format. The City of Glendale's weekly cable guide comes in .xlsx format. Word 2000 and Excel 2000 on a PC will not open .docx or .xlsx. I cannot open late version .ai files with Illustrator 6. How do I open a late version ID file with Adobe Pagemaker 7? Acrobat 5 for camera ready PDFs with no Quite a Box of Tricks and PitStop Pro? Photoshop 6 Educational for modern PSDs? That's just the stuff coming in.

Going out? The printer want's PDF/X-4:2008 That's NOT even in cards for Pagemaker 7. Sure I can export a postscript file or a series of EPS files. But Acrobat Distiller 5 does NOT have the option to create that PDF format. We're screwed unless we update (which I have forced over time to what we have now).

Sure, you're right if your own isolated process is all you have to meet or what you do matters only to you. But sooner or later outside forces will force change on you and my industry does not exist in a vacuum. There's one print customer we have who is about to experience this as there will no longer be anyone available to shoot his pasteups to negative, burn plate and then mount the plates on a press. All the printers in metro Phoenix want PDFs. So, his choice is to buy a computer and the software to produce his paper electronically — or fold.

NOTE. I am NOT arguing against PowerPC. For my own personal purposes I prefer it and I have more than one PowerPC Mac in my home. But web browsing, light word processing and email, occasional design work is fine as it's not what I depend on for my income. But at work, it doesn't and hasn't since 2006 cut it anymore. I don't particularly like the newer Intel Macs too much, but I do need them to keep up so that I can do my job.


Adding onto another field where powerpc is useless is gaming and video editing,


no game being made this year runs on powerpc period.

video rendering is very very slow even on powermac g5 quads. They all have a total of 10Ghz and can't be overclocked. my current workstation is more than 3 seconds faster per operation and is not even at its max clock.


now supporters would argue that 3 seconds is not a big deal, 3 seconds per second of 1080p footage rendered means that if you are rendering an hour of 1080p a g5 would Finnish half an hour behind my pc.


they are just not useful in the pro market either

rjcalifornia
May 26, 2013, 08:28 PM
Adding onto another field where powerpc is useless is gaming and video editing,


no game being made this year runs on powerpc period.

video rendering is very very slow even on powermac g5 quads. They all have a total of 10Ghz and can't be overclocked. my current workstation is more than 3 seconds faster per operation and is not even at its max clock.


now supporters would argue that 3 seconds is not a big deal, 3 seconds per second of 1080p footage rendered means that if you are rendering an hour of 1080p a g5 would Finnish half an hour behind my pc.


they are just not useful in the pro market either

Well, Wii U is the last one, and it is having the same problem we are having:

EA already pull the plug on PowerPC Wii U development. No more games will be developed from EA. You might say Microsoft made them take that decision, however it is more profitable to focus on one architecture.

PowerPC based Game Consoles was a bad choice. Look at the first Xbox 360, so many issues. The PS3 was a power hungry device. At the time, 2005, PowerPC was the "right" choice. Now, completely useless. AMD is an expert in reducing heat without sacrificing performance. I know, my desktop pc is a Cool-And-Quite AMD.


Mark the year, 2013 is the year PowerPC died. Power7, Power6 completely useless, cannot fit on a small console, and never will. You might say IBM business is corporation, but the day will come when AMD creates a Mainframe as powerful as any IBM, but with 50% less power.

TacticalDesire
May 26, 2013, 08:33 PM
You do not need to move forward if softwre that you use does your job on hardware that you have.

Even 10.5.x is better OS than W7.

Entirely subjective. It depends on what you do. As a network admin and technology adviser no way would I say Leopard is a better OS than Windows 7. Even vista. But that's because needs vary.

rabidz7
May 26, 2013, 08:51 PM
Well, Wii U is the last one, and it is having the same problem we are having:

EA already pull the plug on PowerPC Wii U development. No more games will be developed from EA. You might say Microsoft made them take that decision, however it is more profitable to focus on one architecture.

PowerPC based Game Consoles was a bad choice. Look at the first Xbox 360, so many issues. The PS3 was a power hungry device. At the time, 2005, PowerPC was the "right" choice. Now, completely useless. AMD is an expert in reducing heat without sacrificing performance. I know, my desktop pc is a Cool-And-Quite AMD.


Mark the year, 2013 is the year PowerPC died. Power7, Power6 completely useless, cannot fit on a small console, and never will. You might say IBM business is corporation, but the day will come when AMD creates a Mainframe as powerful as any IBM, but with 50% less power.

How about the Power8? I could see it possible for IBM to returning to the desktop PC market if they launched a desktop version. They will most likely not do it although I would love to see that. Like the PPC970 was compared to the Power chips of the time.

MisterKeeks
May 26, 2013, 09:01 PM
I could see it possible

I couldn't. There is no market for them.

rjcalifornia
May 26, 2013, 09:07 PM
I couldn't. There is no market for them.

Never will. PowerPC is dead.

MisterKeeks
May 26, 2013, 09:30 PM
Never will. PowerPC is dead.

Commercially, yes. Otherwise, no.

rjcalifornia
May 26, 2013, 09:35 PM
Commercially, yes. Otherwise, no.

Dead Commercially = No $$$ = Death

MisterKeeks
May 26, 2013, 10:58 PM
Dead Commercially = No $$$ = Death

No. Just because there aren't any in the market doesn't mean the ones that are around cease to be useful or relevant.

seveej
May 27, 2013, 12:50 AM
About websites being heavy and stuff...

On my iBook G4 I've done projects, heavy projects that uses a lot of CSS3, HTML5, a lot of graphics, etc. So heavy that my ibook almost can handle it. It is kinda funny, I can design, write and create heavy web applications on my ibook, but cannot be run on it.

Have to tell you this anecdote: I was (once upon a time) working with this small small multimedia design agency (age of macromedia director and cd-rom's) and was asking the boss-man, why his designers were using outdated hardware (I remember observing, that they were so slow to use, it was painful).

His answer was revealing: "well, if the programmers use a machine which equals half the hardware requirements, the resulting software is sure to work at minimum spec. Also it helps them focus on not adding stupid frills.". I guess his company respected it's users more than it's workforce. I could never have worked there - I'm too impatient.

RGDS,

jeffzoom91
May 27, 2013, 02:21 AM
I recently bought a 17'' PB 1.67 DLHR (I always loved the design and the display, it was a cool toy for under $100), and I've got to tell you, I want to love the thing.

I want to say that it's still useful. And I get around on it just fine when I'm using it. I know where it's going to fall down and it doesn't bother me so much. It has such a gorgeous display, great speakers, and a fantastic Wolfson DSP. The keyboard is great, and as old as it is it still feels like a quality product.

That said, most of the those feelings evaporate once I switch to an intel mac. The difference is staggering. Even with the ram maxed out the Powerbook can't seem to handle iTunes and Webkit even on a moderately simple page. Multitasking, at least the way I'm become accustomed to it, is nearly impossible. At that point, it becomes pretty much useless for any real work. It becomes a toy, but that's okay, that's what I bought it for.

Any video above 480P is impossible, even when played in Quicktime with the graphics card over clocked. No new software exists for it. It's like living in a 2005 time bubble. B that's how I want it to be. The view is pretty nice looking back for PPC. The state of Software can't move forward dragging these archaic PowerPC chips. It just can't.

Here in 2013 however, unless you have a G5 PowerMac, the PPC mac is completely useless for anything other than absolute niche uses. Even at that point using a G5 Tower is only as useful as the software you're using it for.

When you really think about it though, staying on these machines, and using them as your daily workhorse, is not a good thing. Sure it's fun to be nostalgic (I've bought three PPC macs for this purpose), but trying to use them in your day to day life is a willful ignorance. You're just staving off the inevitable. "My PPC Mac is still perfectly fine for me". No, it's not, you just want to believe that it is. Steve didn't decide to move to intel just to make everyone buy new macs. It's easy to see why he moved, the performance per watt increase, especially in "non-watercooled" form was so great, it made you wonder why they didn't switch sooner. Don't believe me? Go watch the Keynote when it was announced. They said they had been running OSX on Intel for years.

So like the Clydesdale, let PPC macs fade into recreation, where they will be appreciated for what they are, rather than hated for what they're not. Because what they're not, is fast :p

:apple:

du0wow
May 27, 2013, 06:14 AM
I have a desktop for all my heavy stuff (media, gaming etc.), but still use my 1.67 PB regularly for server management (SSH), audio production (Logic), casual gaming (Quake 3 etc.), minor photo editing (Aperture), development (Python), web surfing etc. etc.

Which version of Logic and what VSTs are you using? Even on my C2D MacBook, Live 8 and 9 seems to be crawling with very basic manipulation of audio tracks.

Wildy
May 27, 2013, 07:10 AM
I'm using Logic 8 with the default AUs. Most of my signal chain is run through outboard gear though - there's not that much done in software. That said, I've done a couple of all-software tracks before and it went ok - but the heaviest thing in the mix was space designer.

I had an Ableton Live demo, but also found it too slow to be usable.

GermanyChris
May 27, 2013, 11:18 AM
I think we're all taking ourselves a bit too seriously.

We've all been wrong in the past and we'll be wrong again in the future.

We're all learning here

rjcalifornia
May 27, 2013, 11:27 AM
I think we're all taking ourselves a bit too seriously.

We've all been wrong in the past and we'll be wrong again in the future.

We're all learning here

Tru dat

eyoungren
May 27, 2013, 11:50 AM
I recently bought a 17'' PB 1.67 DLHR (I always loved the design and the display, it was a cool toy for under $100), and I've got to tell you, I want to love the thing.

I want to say that it's still useful. And I get around on it just fine when I'm using it. I know where it's going to fall down and it doesn't bother me so much. It has such a gorgeous display, great speakers, and a fantastic Wolfson DSP. The keyboard is great, and as old as it is it still feels like a quality product.

That said, most of the those feelings evaporate once I switch to an intel mac. The difference is staggering. Even with the ram maxed out the Powerbook can't seem to handle iTunes and Webkit even on a moderately simple page. Multitasking, at least the way I'm become accustomed to it, is nearly impossible. At that point, it becomes pretty much useless for any real work. It becomes a toy, but that's okay, that's what I bought it for.

Any video above 480P is impossible, even when played in Quicktime with the graphics card over clocked. No new software exists for it. It's like living in a 2005 time bubble. B that's how I want it to be. The view is pretty nice looking back for PPC. The state of Software can't move forward dragging these archaic PowerPC chips. It just can't.

Here in 2013 however, unless you have a G5 PowerMac, the PPC mac is completely useless for anything other than absolute niche uses. Even at that point using a G5 Tower is only as useful as the software you're using it for.

When you really think about it though, staying on these machines, and using them as your daily workhorse, is not a good thing. Sure it's fun to be nostalgic (I've bought three PPC macs for this purpose), but trying to use them in your day to day life is a willful ignorance. You're just staving off the inevitable. "My PPC Mac is still perfectly fine for me". No, it's not, you just want to believe that it is. Steve didn't decide to move to intel just to make everyone buy new macs. It's easy to see why he moved, the performance per watt increase, especially in "non-watercooled" form was so great, it made you wonder why they didn't switch sooner. Don't believe me? Go watch the Keynote when it was announced. They said they had been running OSX on Intel for years.

So like the Clydesdale, let PPC macs fade into recreation, where they will be appreciated for what they are, rather than hated for what they're not. Because what they're not, is fast :p

:apple:
My PowerPC Macs work just fine on the internet. But, I'm not using Webkit (which I hate). Come on, there are other browser alternatives out there! TenFourFox and Aurorafox are modern browsers equivalent to Firefox 20 and 21! And I use them, and the internet works just great!

It's really starting to cheese me off that comments about PowerPC Macs and the internet get made based on outdated Safari and webkit. Safari is just junk in my opinion, especially the older versions and I only use it when I have to. Sure, comparing it side by side to the Safari on an Intel Mac is going to be night and day. But, look SAFARI IS NOT THE BE ALL END ALL OF INTERNET BROWSING ON Macs! And if you want to use Webkit, do yourself a favour and install the nightly PowerPC Webkit builds!

Come on! TenFourFox, AuroraFox, Camino and Sea Monkey are out there and the first two are HTML5! There's even a plethora of OTHER Webkit browsers that absolutely kill Safari. Sunrise, Stainless, Radon, Demeter. Don't base assumptions of PowerPC capability on the standard install Apple apps. You'll just get skewed results!

You're right, I'm not using these Macs to do design work. But for my everyday at home tasks they are just fine. And they are more than capable of filling in the gap when called on. I used my 17" DLSD for two weeks when our work G5 burned out and it handled the same load the G5 handled until we got the new Intel Mac. Yeah, it was a bit slower, but all of our work got out on time. If I'd not had it we would have been royally screwed the last two weeks.

skateny
May 27, 2013, 02:36 PM
You're right, I'm not using these Macs to do design work. But for my everyday at home tasks they are just fine. And they are more than capable of filling in the gap when called on. I used my 17" DLSD for two weeks when our work G5 burned out and it handled the same load the G5 handled until we got the new Intel Mac. Yeah, it was a bit slower, but all of our work got out on time. If I'd not had it we would have been royally screwed the last two weeks.

Hey there.

Always appreciate your input, and very much enjoy your accounts describing your everyday use of PowerPCs.

What I took away from Jeff's post was that, when compared to using Intel Macs, the PowerPC is slow. Well, I think I knew this already. And, yes (and as you've suggested elsewhere), some day they will no longer cut it, and we'll have to move one, no matter how much we like using our PowerPC Macs.

I have nothing against Intel Macs. Like many here, I enjoy using my iBook, which is also fine for the work I'm doing -- SPSS, word processing, research, bibliograpy apps, and Blackboard for online teaching. That said, my days of purchasing "new" PowerPCs are over. When I allow myself to think about such things, I imagine I'll need/want to move to Intel in early 2014.

eyoungren
May 27, 2013, 02:51 PM
I have nothing against Intel Macs. Like many here, I enjoy using my iBook, which is also fine for the work I'm doing -- SPSS, word processing, research, bibliograpy apps, and Blackboard for online teaching. That said, my days of purchasing "new" PowerPCs are over. When I allow myself to think about such things, I imagine I'll need/want to move to Intel in early 2014.
I do [have something against Intel Macs]. That's my problem. It's irrational and not based on fact. I "know" the Intel Macs are faster and more powerful. I "know" they are more modern and capable.

But I also "know" that they lack character. That particular point may change for me as I get acquainted with the new MP Xeon at work but for right now I'm just not there yet.

That said, yes, the time for me is coming. I've been around Macs long enough now to see how the tech moves in price stages. The first round of early Intels are now entering the price range I can afford them at. And while both my PowerBooks are great machines I've been using them consistently for the last three and a half years. They are great and do all I want and I don't take back anything I've previously said. But, sadly, any new purchase I get now will be an Intel.

My boss doesn't know it, but I have an internal compulsion that I have to honor that forces me to meet my deadlines. To that end I often do what it takes and that always includes an emergency plan in case something at work breaks down. My PowerBooks have always been a part of that backup plan. Plug them in when there is an emergency and get the work out - on time. But, now with the new Intel Mac I am going to need a backup Mac that is equal to the task. That's another point my boss and I strive on at work is to keep the machines in Composing equal. Same OS, same apps, etc. Right now there is a disparity because my coworker is still on the old PowerMac G4. That will be rectified soon. But now, to meet my own self-imposed backup requirments I am going to have to find an Intel Mac laptop.

Change is a bummer (this is a family forum so I cannot use the word I want to use) some times, but I have to roll with it.

MrPilot
May 27, 2013, 07:23 PM
I recently bought a 17'' PB 1.67 DLHR (I always loved the design and the display, it was a cool toy for under $100), and I've got to tell you, I want to love the thing.

I want to say that it's still useful. And I get around on it just fine when I'm using it. I know where it's going to fall down and it doesn't bother me so much. It has such a gorgeous display, great speakers, and a fantastic Wolfson DSP. The keyboard is great, and as old as it is it still feels like a quality product.

That said, most of the those feelings evaporate once I switch to an intel mac. The difference is staggering. Even with the ram maxed out the Powerbook can't seem to handle iTunes and Webkit even on a moderately simple page. Multitasking, at least the way I'm become accustomed to it, is nearly impossible. At that point, it becomes pretty much useless for any real work. It becomes a toy, but that's okay, that's what I bought it for.


Any video above 480P is impossible, even when played in Quicktime with the graphics card over clocked. No new software exists for it. It's like living in a 2005 time bubble. B that's how I want it to be. The view is pretty nice looking back for PPC. The state of Software can't move forward dragging these archaic PowerPC chips. It just can't.

Here in 2013 however, unless you have a G5 PowerMac, the PPC mac is completely useless for anything other than absolute niche uses. Even at that point using a G5 Tower is only as useful as the software you're using it for.

When you really think about it though, staying on these machines, and using them as your daily workhorse, is not a good thing. Sure it's fun to be nostalgic (I've bought three PPC macs for this purpose), but trying to use them in your day to day life is a willful ignorance. You're just staving off the inevitable. "My PPC Mac is still perfectly fine for me". No, it's not, you just want to believe that it is. Steve didn't decide to move to intel just to make everyone buy new macs. It's easy to see why he moved, the performance per watt increase, especially in "non-watercooled" form was so great, it made you wonder why they didn't switch sooner. Don't believe me? Go watch the Keynote when it was announced. They said they had been running OSX on Intel for years.

So like the Clydesdale, let PPC macs fade into recreation, where they will be appreciated for what they are, rather than hated for what they're not. Because what they're not, is fast :p

:apple:

Strange, I have a 15" PBG4 DLHR and I go to the most advanced pages without issues. At this second I'm currently installing newest itunes on to win7 using VPC 7 while restoring my iphone in OSX. I will use the VPC for jailbreaking using the PB. Btw, while doing this I have OSX itunes playing music and 3 tabs open on OSX Webkit browser. That surely qualifies as multitasking, right? Btw, havent touched my intel 17" for 6 weeks now.
I can do 720p youtube within xbmc and project free tv plays great on xbmc.
I can play SOME movies in 1080p but at 14fps so not that fluid but watchable. 720p movies work fine. My flightsim setup works fine using x-plane 9 on this baby. (If I need x-plane 10, I got the 17" intel for that but havent needed it so far.

Btw, I recently sold my imac 27" 2011 i7 with the 6970M gfx card because my works keeps me too many days abroad. I didnt get back to PPC until last month... last time I used one was in early 2007.
The introduction of HTML 5 made all of the sudden these computers relevant again... at least for me :)

goMac
May 27, 2013, 08:08 PM
Strange, I have a 15" PBG4 DLHR and I go to the most advanced pages without issues. At this second I'm currently installing newest itunes on to win7 using VPC 7 while restoring my iphone in OSX. I will use the VPC for jailbreaking using the PB. Btw, while doing this I have OSX itunes playing music and 3 tabs open on OSX Webkit browser. That surely qualifies as multitasking, right? Btw, havent touched my intel 17" for 6 weeks now.
I can do 720p youtube within xbmc and project free tv plays great on xbmc.
I can play SOME movies in 1080p but at 14fps so not that fluid but watchable. 720p movies work fine. My flightsim setup works fine using x-plane 9 on this baby. (If I need x-plane 10, I got the 17" intel for that but havent needed it so far.

Running Windows through VPC to accomplish tasks is barely keeping it together.... Emulating an x86 to get things done isn't exactly proving the usefulness of a PowerPC Mac. :)

Imixmuan
May 27, 2013, 10:13 PM
...not only do not have character, they do not have a soul. Peroid. Steve was already in the process of dying when the switch happened, and the death of PowerPC was the death of the real Apple. Tim Cook's Apple is a pale iphone inspired ghost of the truly great company that one was. Before you call me a poser, I've been an Apple user since 82 and a Mac user since 87. I was there in the darkest days, evangelizing like a madman. I've used and sold more macs than I've had hot meals in the last twenty five years.

Just think of some of the macs made between 98 and 2006...

Wallstreets
Pismos
Titaniums
Bondi Blue and other G3 imacs
G4 imacs
Powermac G4's

Think of the OS'es

9 (yes, I like 9, still), Jaguar, Panther, Tiger. I am deliberately leaving out Cheetah and Puma which were beta releases.

Name anything post 2006 that is even in the same league design/function wise as the above. Don't say Macbook Air, cause those are unupgradable Chinese McGarbage. Those machines had...soul. Yes, I am deliberately leaving out the G5's, which pretty much sucked. Lion, Mountain Lion? Suck. Snow Leopard? Doesn't suck as much, mostly cause it still supports PowerPC apps through Rosetta, IMHO.

Truth is, I'd rather own a Dell or Lenovo than any new Intel Mac. I've only owned two Intel macs and they were both garbage. Just one former fanboys opinion.

eyoungren
May 27, 2013, 10:33 PM
Well, my conundrum is that I have worked very hard since 2004 to sell my boss on Mac. I may have gotten through finally. We need a new server and the cost I quoted him of a refurb 2011 Intel Mac Mini with OSX Server is 1/4 the cost that he's been quoted from the PC guy we call to take care of our current POS Dell Poweredge. Thats the difference between a credit card purchase and obtaining financing and it's made him very happy.

I'd like to be able to stay PowerPC, I really would. But we can't and as bad as Intel Macs might be I'd rather finally convince him to buy Apple then to surrender all my hard earned ground by going PC. Frankly my boss is completely clueless about character and soul so it's not going to matter so much to him. :)

Lastly, I'll just say that I love the fact that with System 7.5 on my Mac IIci I can apply Kaleidoscope and the Platinum theme and my IIci is "running" OS9. :D

Jethryn Freyman
May 27, 2013, 10:56 PM
It's the internet that's the issue. Unnecessarily heavy websites loaded with muck. And especially Flash, if you don't have it blocked, video that loads by default, those annoying slideshows of images and stuff like iCloud.com that forces fast G5s to a crawl just because they force you to endure their fancy animations [hell, it's not exactly butter smooth on my Core 2 Duo MBP.]

Then there's newer versions of software. Example, there's one called "Memory Clean" on the App Store, what it does is it simply removes "Inactive" memory from the RAM cache or whatever it's called. It requires Mountain Lion 10.8, a 64-bit CPU, too. WTF. As far as I can tell, all that app is a fancy GUI wrapper around a single-word command-line utility called "purge." [You open Terminal > type "purge" > hit return > inactive RAM is purged.]

Developer tools like whatever the current Xcode is, v4 I think, they just don't allow you to build for PPC any more.] And with code signing requirements and new APIs to make things easier for developers that were added in 10.7 Lion and later, even Snow Leopard is being left behind quite frequently in the App Store. I wrote up a couple of decent whines and rants on my blog here:

http://michaelanthonyralph.com/blog/2013/05/15/app-store-developers-please-stop-dumbing-things-down/

http://michaelanthonyralph.com/blog/2013/05/27/great-free-apps-app-store-rant/

Yes, I'm melodramatic and like to rant :)

eyoungren
May 27, 2013, 11:21 PM
As far as I can tell, all that app is a fancy GUI wrapper around a single-word command-line utility called "purge." [You open Terminal > type "purge" > hit return > inactive RAM is purged.]
LOL!!!

Maybe I can make some money here! I have that command wrapped up in an Applescript [do shell script "purge"] app which I then ran through Dock Dodger so that it doesn't show in the Dock or the app switcher and then assigned a key command to it using FastScripts.

Sheesh!!!!

SkyBell
May 28, 2013, 01:16 AM
I've always been a rabid PPC fan; there's something about these machines that the Intel Macs just cannot compare to, no matter how shiny or powerful. I still love all my PPC Macs, but even I must admit; their time as jack-of-all-trades machines is nearing the end. My eMac is still able to do pretty much everything I ask of it, but it's requiring more patience and workaround tactics seemingly week by week, multi-tasking in particular. Just last night, I was experiencing severe stuttering and jerkiness while scrolling on some sites in TenFourFox, and some serious slow-downs attempting to run TFF, Safari, iTunes and VLC at the same time. Ripping DVD's can now take up to over 36 hours depending on length. These issues have been around for a while, but they are now reaching the point as to which they are causing me frustration and are hampering my enjoyment of my Mac.

Add that to the fact that for quite a while now, I have to spend hours figuring out ways to get newer tech devices to work properly with my architecture and OS, often times ending up with no solution. Put it all together, and even my rock-hard resolve as a PPC user has been considerably weakened.

My eMac is still a wonderful machine; Halo is always a favorite to jump into and get lost in for hours, it's still more than competent at audio editing, and it has zero problems as a media machine for watching movies and TV episodes. For these and other similar reasons, it is by no means, "useless", and will continue to play a part in my computer usage for years to come.

However, I did finally make the painful jump last night, and purchased a black MacBook from eBay (another site which my eMac has a little trouble with) to kill two birds with one stone; replacing my netbook (because my SO has been stealing it from me more and more often lately, lacking her own computer. ;)) and my main Mac at the same time.

PPC is not what it used to be, and I doubt it shall ever be close to its glory days again. But even though I suppose by some accounts I have "officially" moved on, it makes my day to see others still chugging along on these wonderful Macs. I plan very much to still make use of my PPC machines.

The day is indeed coming when they will no longer be viable for primary computer duty. But as an era ends, a new one beings; they have become quite the handy and useful backup and secondary machines, and have years ahead of them in these functions. :)

wobegong
May 28, 2013, 02:47 AM
My hopes for a lengthened PPC lifespan rested with Linux but I don't think that will go anywhere fast, no decent graphics drivers and a few (for me) key apps like Skype being unavailable are still making this a non-option for me. Mines been relegated to an XBMC centre but it does this extremely well, even HD runs fine (far better than when I used it as a computer with VLC).

It's a bit sad to see such a once great machine doing such a mundane task but it does it flawlessly and means it's still of use.

MrPilot
May 28, 2013, 05:45 AM
Running Windows through VPC to accomplish tasks is barely keeping it together.... Emulating an x86 to get things done isn't exactly proving the usefulness of a PowerPC Mac. :)

Naw, It was only to run a jailbreak app. I do that stuff once a year.

----------

My hopes for a lengthened PPC lifespan rested with Linux but I don't think that will go anywhere fast, no decent graphics drivers and a few (for me) key apps like Skype being unavailable are still making this a non-option for me. Mines been relegated to an XBMC centre but it does this extremely well, even HD runs fine (far better than when I used it as a computer with VLC).

It's a bit sad to see such a once great machine doing such a mundane task but it does it flawlessly and means it's still of use.

Can't you surf the web with it? Or use docx with updated office 2008?
Collect all your pictures with iPhoto? Edit your holiday movies with imovie 6HD?
I have the latest iMovie (intel) but I prefer to edit with iMovie 6HD. That and owning all the slick plugins is far better choice.

----------

wobegong
May 28, 2013, 05:57 AM
Can't you surf the web with it? Or use docx with updated office 2008?
Collect all your pictures with iPhoto? Edit your holiday movies with imovie 6HD?
I have the latest iMovie (intel) but I prefer to edit with iMovie 6HD. That and owning all the slick plugins is far better choice.

----------

Surfing is hit and miss, either slow or sites not loading properly, it may only be a few but it's a hassle I just don't need - would swap between Webkit and TFF to solve but just got tiring.

Photo editing (RAW) in Aperture was a) slow and b) on an incompatible version of Aperture to that which I use on my Intel Mac, the slowness may not have been an issue but I was finding myself moving pics to my MBP as it was smoother and faster to edit there, so then asked myself "whats the point?"
As for movie editing that is super slow on the G5 (used a Elgato x.264 to speed that up for 264 codes), again most times I let it re-encode etc overnight as i was in no rush but sometimes I needed something doing that day and then it was again a question of firing up the laptop or sweating watching the progress bar labour its way to 100% over many.....many....hours..

Updates to some of my heavily used apps (Evernote, Skype, Dropbox etc) stopping etc etc. Finally work switched to Linux and gave me a desktop so I had a spare MBP i7 which now sits with the G5's ACD, keyboard and mouse (like a small desktop) at home so it was kinda silly to keep using the G5 as my home machine. Now I have Steam, the right version of Aperture, up to date apps etc. I loved the G5 and I'm happy its still doing something useful but the MBP is a SERIOUS order of magnitude faster (on CPU heavy tasks) and if my old MB is anything to go by (that was on 24/7 and had been for 2.5 years in a hot room) should be just as reliable (fingers crossed).

MrPilot
May 28, 2013, 06:12 AM
Surfing is hit and miss, either slow or sites not loading properly, it may only be a few but it's a hassle I just don't need - would swap between Webkit and TFF to solve but just got tiring.

Photo editing (RAW) in Aperture was a) slow and b) on an incompatible version of Aperture to that which I use on my Intel Mac, the slowness may not have been an issue but I was finding myself moving pics to my MBP as it was smoother and faster to edit there, so then asked myself "whats the point?"
As for movie editing that is super slow on the G5 (used a Elgato x.264 to speed that up for 264 codes), again most times I let it re-encode etc overnight as i was in no rush but sometimes I needed something doing that day and then it was again a question of firing up the laptop or sweating watching the progress bar labour its way to 100% over many.....many....hours..

Updates to some of my heavily used apps (Evernote, Skype, Dropbox etc) stopping etc etc. Finally work switched to Linux and gave me a desktop so I had a spare MBP i7 which now sits with the G5's ACD, keyboard and mouse (like a small desktop) at home so it was kinda silly to keep using the G5 as my home machine. Now I have Steam, the right version of Aperture, up to date apps etc. I loved the G5 and I'm happy its still doing something useful but the MBP is a SERIOUS order of magnitude faster (on CPU heavy tasks) and if my old MB is anything to go by (that was on 24/7 and had been for 2.5 years in a hot room) should be just as reliable (fingers crossed).

Trust me, I had until 2 months ago an iMac i7 Quad with the best gfx card they ever put on a mac.... so I know the speed trade off. Of course, you make valid points but it's quite apparent that we both use the computers very differently. I actually still have an intel 17" MBP but I dont use it anymore.
What started as a fun test to see If I could survive with PPC only turned out to become a lifestyle. And also, I have to say that I'm mostly surprised for the better when it comes to PPC usefulness in 2013.

I understand that the App store, steam and other sites providing software and games are out of the question, but apps like skype hasn't offered me anything new besides some cosmetic front-end gui changes. Webkit (nightly builds) have proven to cope with anything I've thrown at it. I haven't tested TFF since version 15 I think, and it was a resource hog :(

Jethryn Freyman
May 28, 2013, 06:28 AM
LOL!!!

Maybe I can make some money here! I have that command wrapped up in an Applescript [do shell script "purge"] app which I then ran through Dock Dodger so that it doesn't show in the Dock or the app switcher and then assigned a key command to it using FastScripts.

Sheesh!!!!
Mate, beat you to it :P

http://www.michaelanthonyralph.com/software/purge_memory.zip

rabidz7
May 28, 2013, 11:07 AM
When I have to switch to x86 it will be going to AMD. I will also be using linux. I do not want to use a mac that is just an overpriced PC. I loved macs when they were special, when they were different, when apple actually thought different. But now AAPL is more focused on iCrap (iPhone, iPad, iPod) than producing quality computers. Now AMD is the company to switch to after PowerPC macs become too slow for use. With AMD you get to be part of a new rebel CPU architecture. Even though AMD is just a small company, much smaller than intell or nVidia, they can still produce great quality products.
:apple:

goMac
May 28, 2013, 11:44 AM
Even though AMD is just a small company, much smaller than intell or nVidia, they can still produce great quality products.
:apple:

AMD is not at all a small company. They own ATI, and build a lot of ARM processors.

Their processors are also definitely not faster than Intel CPUs. It's not like it was 10 years ago, ARM is competing on price, not speed.

skateny
May 28, 2013, 12:01 PM
I've always been a rabid PPC fan; there's something about these machines that the Intel Macs just cannot compare to, no matter how shiny or powerful.

I've always enjoyed using Macs -- from the Motorola 6800 chip, to the G4 PowerPC. During all that time, I never even approached the same enthusiasm when using Windows. I was around when the "Mac vs. Windows" war erupted on the Internet and everywhere else. Windows was only an "option" for me when I needed to use it at work.

To me, there certainly is something compelling about those early Macs -- call it character, personality, style, usability, responsiveness or just plain fun. I could tinker with OS 9 to my heart's content and not worry about trashing the whole system. Because I made myself knowledgeable about both Windows and the Mac OS, I would frequently get calls from Windows users about one problem or another. And I spent a good amount of time teaching people who switched from Windows to use the Mac OS. It was great fun for me.

It was a special time. The Amiga (which I owned) was still relevant, and every new iteration of Apple's PowerBooks drew a great deal of attention. And then, of course, there was the original iMac. Each time I got a new rig from UPS or FedEx was a magical event. From the 520c, to the Kanga, to the Wall Street and the Pismo. Always great fun to crack open the box of a freshly minted Mac.

I've commented here before that I won't purchase another PowerPC, unless there is a compelling reason to do so. It's very late in the game for PowerPCs, and my tinkering days are generally behind me. A lot of the "newer" technology is of little or no use to me. But I'll hold on to my iBook forever. A reminder of Apple's better days.

eyoungren
May 28, 2013, 12:28 PM
Mate, beat you to it :P

http://www.michaelanthonyralph.com/software/purge_memory.zip
LOL. Maybe. I'll have to check the creation date, but I did this several months ago. Your's is an automator action though right?

Lil Chillbil
May 28, 2013, 12:45 PM
When I have to switch to x86 it will be going to AMD. I will also be using linux. I do not want to use a mac that is just an overpriced PC. I loved macs when they were special, when they were different, when apple actually thought different. But now AAPL is more focused on iCrap (iPhone, iPad, iPod) than producing quality computers. Now AMD is the company to switch to after PowerPC macs become too slow for use. With AMD you get to be part of a new rebel CPU architecture. Even though AMD is just a small company, much smaller than intell or nVidia, they can still produce great quality products.
:apple:

I agree with you on amd being the new rebel processor arch. But I think that some of us like Gotfrey powerpcfan4ever and myself have grown tired of wondering if support was going to drop for our architechture or whether or not something would have drivers. So we went intell for the "main" machine which gives a person a good anchor to the supported world to dive into the world of powerpc to tinker with things

Goftrey
May 28, 2013, 12:53 PM
like Goftrey

Please stop referencing me in your posts. If I have something to say I'll say it myself - I don't need someone speaking on my behalf.

I didn't make the switch because I grew; tired of wondering if support was going to drop for my architechture or whether or not something would have driversI switched because the price margins between say a quad G5 & a 1,1 Mac Pro, or a 1.67GHz DL/HD PBG4 & a Core Duo MBP are very minimal now & in terms of both speed & support - it's a no brainer.

netpositive
May 28, 2013, 12:57 PM
PowerPc's time is here
But it is all for the best
developers arise

Jethryn Freyman
May 28, 2013, 03:48 PM
AMD is not at all a small company. They own ATI, and build a lot of ARM processors.

Their processors are also definitely not faster than Intel CPUs. It's not like it was 10 years ago, ARM is competing on price, not speed.

This.

AMDs processors suck. I speak from experience. I had one of theirs last year and it took four cores running at 3.1GHz each to compare to a dual core 13" Macbook. Since Intel went to Core, AMD gets demolished unless you're strapped for cash and are building something cheap. Plus, their GPUs are great, but that's *only* because they bought ATI, a company that already knew what they were doing in regards to GPUs, AMD itself doesn't interfere with whatever goes on as far as Radeon development.

DaKKs
May 28, 2013, 04:09 PM
This.

AMDs processors suck. I speak from experience. I had one of theirs last year and it took four cores running at 3.1GHz each to compare to a dual core 13" Macbook. Since Intel went to Core, AMD gets demolished unless you're strapped for cash and are building something cheap. Plus, their GPUs are great, but that's *only* because they bought ATI, a company that already knew what they were doing in regards to GPUs, AMD itself doesn't interfere with whatever goes on as far as Radeon development.

Honestly, I'm speechless. Do you actually believe all that, or do you just pass it on without your brain progressing it?

Lil Chillbil
May 28, 2013, 04:16 PM
This.

AMDs processors suck. I speak from experience. I had one of theirs last year and it took four cores running at 3.1GHz each to compare to a dual core 13" Macbook. Since Intel went to Core, AMD gets demolished unless you're strapped for cash and are building something cheap. Plus, their GPUs are great, but that's *only* because they bought ATI, a company that already knew what they were doing in regards to GPUs, AMD itself doesn't interfere with whatever goes on as far as Radeon development.

Amd is far more overclockable and will give you a better performance per dollar.


I still prefer intel because I can afford it but my previous statement stands

ihuman:D
May 28, 2013, 04:17 PM
Honestly, I'm speechless. Do you actually believe all that, or do you just pass it on without your brain progressing it?

Well, in general AMD CPUs aren't as fast as their Intel counter-parts.

However, they have better integrated GPUs, most can manage power better (But Haswell will be out soon, so we'll see), most have more cores and they are also cheaper too.

IMHO I prefer Intel for their better computing-power and Haswell will be bringing better integrated GPUs and less power-consumption which will bring Intel to a better footing against AMD in those areas.

philz4life
May 28, 2013, 04:23 PM
How about the Power8? I could see it possible for IBM to returning to the desktop PC market if they launched a desktop version. They will most likely not do it although I would love to see that. Like the PPC970 was compared to the Power chips of the time.

Wouldn't it be amazing if Power 8 chips were released and sold reasonably well? If they did, companies would start supporting PowerPC again, and possibly some of their software would work on G4s and G5s as well as modern ones. Highly unlikely, but it would be brilliant if support and software could return as a result of new age PPC processors.

goMac
May 28, 2013, 04:24 PM
Amd is far more overclockable and will give you a better performance per dollar.

Sure, but that maxes out at a certain point. The Pentium 4 gave better performance per dollar but still got steamrolled by the G5. If you could buy an AMD processor faster than an Intel for better bang per buck, that would be great, but you can't. They even have trouble keeping up with Intel's i3s on the low end.

AMD vs. Intel is a lot like x86 vs. PowerPC back in the day. AMD, like x86 ten years ago, is cheaper but slower processors, while Intel, like IBM/PowerPC ten years ago, is producing faster, more expensive (but more sophisticated processors.)

If you take a look at the technology in a current i7, it's actually really impressive compared to PowerPC. Current Intel chips gave up on the Pentium 4 path and look much more like PowerPCs now. SSE is Altivec. You have a bus much more like and better than the G5's (and I suppose AMD's) HyperTransport. Probably Apple's influence at work there.

rjcalifornia
May 28, 2013, 04:54 PM
This.

AMDs processors suck. I speak from experience. I had one of theirs last year and it took four cores running at 3.1GHz each to compare to a dual core 13" Macbook. Since Intel went to Core, AMD gets demolished unless you're strapped for cash and are building something cheap. Plus, their GPUs are great, but that's *only* because they bought ATI, a company that already knew what they were doing in regards to GPUs, AMD itself doesn't interfere with whatever goes on as far as Radeon development.

I prefer AMD because it's cheap. Not as fast as Intel but fast enough for my work and entertainment :)

philz4life
May 28, 2013, 06:15 PM
In late 2011, I bought an iBook G4. It was my first Mac, and it ran very smoothly and browsed the web with ease. However, it gradually slowed down and although I cleaned it up and reinstalled the OS, web browsing was becoming difficult for it. About a year after getting the iBook, I bought a Powermac G4 MDD dual 1.25ghz. (I also have a 2007 MacBook, which the Powermac easily keeps up with) I use it daily as my primary computer. It's much faster than the iBook, and still is able to browse the web very well with Webkit. For a 10 year old computer, the MDD has got to be the absolute fastest out there. Dual processor Powermac G4s, late G4 laptops, and iMac and Powermac G5s aren't dead yet.

philz4life
May 28, 2013, 06:57 PM
I've always been a rabid PPC fan; there's something about these machines that the Intel Macs just cannot compare to, no matter how shiny or powerful. I still love all my PPC Macs, but even I must admit; their time as jack-of-all-trades machines is nearing the end. My eMac is still able to do pretty much everything I ask of it, but it's requiring more patience and workaround tactics seemingly week by week, multi-tasking in particular. Just last night, I was experiencing severe stuttering and jerkiness while scrolling on some sites in TenFourFox, and some serious slow-downs attempting to run TFF, Safari, iTunes and VLC at the same time. Ripping DVD's can now take up to over 36 hours depending on length. These issues have been around for a while, but they are now reaching the point as to which they are causing me frustration and are hampering my enjoyment of my Mac.



My Powermac G4 started to stutter and be very choppy when scrolling on TenFourFox. Then I found out about WebKit, and I've used it as my main browser ever since. The scrolling is significantly smoother. Give it a try and see if it improves your eMac experiences.
Ps: I also have black MacBook, my only Intel Mac

Jethryn Freyman
May 29, 2013, 12:12 AM
I prefer AMD because it's cheap. Not as fast as Intel but fast enough for my work and entertainment :)
Same reason I went with AMD, Intel was just too expensive and through 4 high clocked cores at my stuff got the job done just fine.

SkyBell
May 29, 2013, 01:37 AM
My Powermac G4 started to stutter and be very choppy when scrolling on TenFourFox. Then I found out about WebKit, and I've used it as my main browser ever since. The scrolling is significantly smoother. Give it a try and see if it improves your eMac experiences.
Ps: I also have black MacBook, my only Intel Mac

I've tried everything I could ever scrounge up; all the big name browsers, the lesser known but still-with-a-fanbase browsers, and even those one or two-off browsers some beginner coder made as a test project. In the past, I've been able to find a browser that worked well for all my needs; as time has passed, I've had to migrate to other browsers that are smaller, with less features and less compatibility. I've honestly reached the point where no single browser can adequately meet my expectations. Sure, I could use two or more taking advantage of each iterations strengths, but that is the point in which it has become more hassle than it is worth to deal with.

I have come to accept that this particular facet of my eMac's life is now, for the most part, over with. A hard thing to swallow, at least for me. But I understand that us PPC users have been left behind in nearly every way, and things aren't going to get any better. To try and deny that, web experience at the least, isn't growing harder to cope with would be foolish. I very much appreciate these few developers efforts to keep PPC a viable internet machine, but try as they might, they've never truly achieved making the PPC internet experience better; only slowed its decline.

For some upper-end PowerMac/PowerBook G4's and I would assume most if not all the G5's, I'm willing to bet that they still have the power to maintain a very usable and pleasant experience, and may continue to do so for quite some time. But, their day will come sooner or later. It's best to enioy these magnificent machines while we still can, in whatever ways we can. :)

DaKKs
May 29, 2013, 06:44 AM
Well, in general AMD CPUs aren't as fast as their Intel counter-parts.

However, they have better integrated GPUs, most can manage power better (But Haswell will be out soon, so we'll see), most have more cores and they are also cheaper too.

IMHO I prefer Intel for their better computing-power and Haswell will be bringing better integrated GPUs and less power-consumption which will bring Intel to a better footing against AMD in those areas.

Agreed. I'm not saying otherwise. However he made it sound like he was comparing the K6 to a i7-3970X. If he had done a proper benchmark with CPUs that actually compete with each other, I wouldn't have said anything about his results because its true. AMD is slower than Intel, but not by that much.

I prefer AMD because it's cheap. Not as fast as Intel but fast enough for my work and entertainment :)

Indeed. AMD makes some of the best compact systems ever. Their APUs are prefect for HTPCs, compact office computers and the like. I've built over two dozen HTPCs with AMD chips, so far no customer had any complaints.

MisterKeeks
May 29, 2013, 06:15 PM
I've tried everything I could ever scrounge up; all the big name browsers, the lesser known but still-with-a-fanbase browsers, and even those one or two-off browsers some beginner coder made as a test project. In the past, I've been able to find a browser that worked well for all my needs; as time has passed, I've had to migrate to other browsers that are smaller, with less features and less compatibility. I've honestly reached the point where no single browser can adequately meet my expectations. Sure, I could use two or more taking advantage of each iterations strengths, but that is the point in which it has become more hassle than it is worth to deal with.

I have come to accept that this particular facet of my eMac's life is now, for the most part, over with. A hard thing to swallow, at least for me. But I understand that us PPC users have been left behind in nearly every way, and things aren't going to get any better. To try and deny that, web experience at the least, isn't growing harder to cope with would be foolish. I very much appreciate these few developers efforts to keep PPC a viable internet machine, but try as they might, they've never truly achieved making the PPC internet experience better; only slowed its decline.

For some upper-end PowerMac/PowerBook G4's and I would assume most if not all the G5's, I'm willing to bet that they still have the power to maintain a very usable and pleasant experience, and may continue to do so for quite some time. But, their day will come sooner or later. It's best to enioy these magnificent machines while we still can, in whatever ways we can. :)

Some of these browsers might have a develop menu when you can choose to open the page you are on in a different browser from a menu.

Lil Chillbil
May 29, 2013, 06:21 PM
I've tried everything I could ever scrounge up; all the big name browsers, the lesser known but still-with-a-fanbase browsers, and even those one or two-off browsers some beginner coder made as a test project. In the past, I've been able to find a browser that worked well for all my needs; as time has passed, I've had to migrate to other browsers that are smaller, with less features and less compatibility. I've honestly reached the point where no single browser can adequately meet my expectations. Sure, I could use two or more taking advantage of each iterations strengths, but that is the point in which it has become more hassle than it is worth to deal with.

I have come to accept that this particular facet of my eMac's life is now, for the most part, over with. A hard thing to swallow, at least for me. But I understand that us PPC users have been left behind in nearly every way, and things aren't going to get any better. To try and deny that, web experience at the least, isn't growing harder to cope with would be foolish. I very much appreciate these few developers efforts to keep PPC a viable internet machine, but try as they might, they've never truly achieved making the PPC internet experience better; only slowed its decline.

For some upper-end PowerMac/PowerBook G4's and I would assume most if not all the G5's, I'm willing to bet that they still have the power to maintain a very usable and pleasant experience, and may continue to do so for quite some time. But, their day will come sooner or later. It's best to enioy these magnificent machines while we still can, in whatever ways we can. :)

May I just ask Cassie, what computer will you be leaving your emac for. I understand how hard it must be for you to swallow that you may soon need to leave your emac as your main do it all machine.

simie
May 29, 2013, 06:33 PM
Powerpc- well can i only say that no matter what CPU is inside the box and no matter what speed that it runs at, if the machine does the job well that you originally purchased it for then why do you need to buy a new one.

Sometime we get obsessed with program updates and new versions that we do not really need as they have features that we never use or security fixes that we do need as the machine is an independent machine not connected to any network etc.

So if you purchased software for the computer that is still useful to you then use it, if not then give the machine another task that it can do.

eyoungren
May 29, 2013, 09:43 PM
Mate, beat you to it :P

http://www.michaelanthonyralph.com/software/purge_memory.zip

OK, checked the dates on my scripts.

June 6, 2012, modified August 24, 2012. :D

happyfrappy
May 29, 2013, 11:20 PM
My old iMac G3 is the only 90s relic remaining, not sure why I still keep it around... maybe it just makes a spiffy hiding spot for my cat to sit on or it reminds me of the wasted hours playing Nanosaur, SimEarth, SimCity 2000 & Spaceward Ho :rolleyes:

I'm only sticking with G4 based systems for a handful of non-Universal applications or rare need for Classic(OS9) support, late generation G5 Macs suffered lots of quality control issues from leaking liquid cooling(PMG5) to bad capacitors of the iMac G5. Most pre-liquid cooled G5s typically have worse specs in my experience, often I only seem to find AGP models with GeForce 5200 or Radeon X850 XT.
While pre-Lion Macs which support Rosetta can be useful vs wasting space for a G4, some applications can only handle Tiger(2007 and earlier Intel Macs) as certain changes in Leopard/Snow Leopard are somewhat problematic due to under-the-hood changes of OS X.

As for those wanting an underdog processor, try ARM based computing such as the RaspPi, Beagle Board and later this year Adapteva Parallella(1Ghz dual-core Zynq 7020 with 16/64-core Epiphany co-processor and 1GB of DDR3L RAM). Personally I backed Adapteva Kickstarter as the OpenCL support of the Epiphany will be useful for crunching tasks.

Well, in general AMD CPUs aren't as fast as their Intel counter-parts.

However, they have better integrated GPUs, most can manage power better (But Haswell will be out soon, so we'll see), most have more cores and they are also cheaper too.

IMHO I prefer Intel for their better computing-power and Haswell will be bringing better integrated GPUs and less power-consumption which will bring Intel to a better footing against AMD in those areas.

If you've suffered some of the IGP issues with Intel quickly EOL-ing driver support with many pre-existing resolution/graphical glitches unfixed, Haswell IGP may look great on paper but a GPU is only as good as the driver support. Ivy Bridge suffers some of the weird issues via HDMI with certain TVs/monitors like Sandy Bridge, bad enough it took Intel weeks to resolve the random static/snow issues which impacted the 2012 Mac mini. Also some KVMs don't play well with Intel IGP, if you reboot there is a risk of losing the previous resolution(impacts Win/OS X/Linux/BSD).

AMD on the other hand supports their IGPs on par with their dGPUs, heck nVidia still offers surprising driver performance tweaks to 8-series GPUs--an old Thinkpad T61(Quadro NVS 140M) has a native Win8 driver(performance driver & CAD optimized driver) so video acceleration is smooth as butter, can't say the same for those with Intel X3100 :eek: I have a T61 w/X3100 and Vista performance is better than Win7 due to Intel refusing to release updated drivers to run the IGP in "performance mode"(Win7 gets stuck in "balanced") and I heard Win8 is even worse :mad:

Intell
May 29, 2013, 11:23 PM
Most pre-liquid cooled G5s typically have worse specs in my experience, often I only seem to find AGP models with GeForce 5200 or Radeon X850 XT.

What's wrong with the X850? It's one of the most powerful AGP cards for a Mac and the most powerful for a ADC display.

Wildy
May 30, 2013, 03:21 AM
If you've suffered some of the IGP issues with Intel quickly EOL-ing driver support with many pre-existing resolution/graphical glitches unfixed, Haswell IGP may look great on paper but a GPU is only as good as the driver support. Ivy Bridge suffers some of the weird issues via HDMI with certain TVs/monitors like Sandy Bridge, bad enough it took Intel weeks to resolve the random static/snow issues which impacted the 2012 Mac mini. Also some KVMs don't play well with Intel IGP, if you reboot there is a risk of losing the previous resolution(impacts Win/OS X/Linux/BSD).

AMD on the other hand supports their IGPs on par with their dGPUs, heck nVidia still offers surprising driver performance tweaks to 8-series GPUs--an old Thinkpad T61(Quadro NVS 140M) has a native Win8 driver(performance driver & CAD optimized driver) so video acceleration is smooth as butter, can't say the same for those with Intel X3100 :eek: I have a T61 w/X3100 and Vista performance is better than Win7 due to Intel refusing to release updated drivers to run the IGP in "performance mode"(Win7 gets stuck in "balanced") and I heard Win8 is even worse :mad:

Intel's graphics drivers [for Linux] are open-sourced though. You can guarantee that the community will pick up the project as soon as Intel abandons it.

ihuman:D
May 30, 2013, 03:25 AM
Intel's graphics drivers [for Linux] are open-sourced though. You can guarantee that the community will pick up the project as soon as Intel abandons it.

Yes and Intel's GPUs are now integrated into most of their processor dies so they're more widespread now which can't be ignored support-wise since so many people are using them.

MrPilot
May 30, 2013, 06:14 AM
Powerpc- well can i only say that no matter what CPU is inside the box and no matter what speed that it runs at, if the machine does the job well that you originally purchased it for then why do you need to buy a new one.

Sometime we get obsessed with program updates and new versions that we do not really need as they have features that we never use or security fixes that we do need as the machine is an independent machine not connected to any network etc.

So if you purchased software for the computer that is still useful to you then use it, if not then give the machine another task that it can do.

Like running office 2008 with the latest updates works for me as well as 2011 on my intel mac.

Skype 2.8 PPC allows me to filetransfer, video,audio call telephones... lol no group video maybe, not sure. But still very little has progressed.... iphoto? what is the major difference? Oh iCloud? Use your iDevice to send pics to iCloud :)

Badagri
May 31, 2013, 10:55 AM
Never will. PowerPC is dead.

I am curious though, what am I seeing at Wimbledon all these years?

http://www.londonlovesbusiness.com/pictures/586x360fitpad[237]/6/0/2/602_4.jpg
http://files.coloribus.com/files/adsarchive/part_579/5792505/file/ibm-servers-and-software-live-from-wimbledon-small-83692.jpg

When I have to switch to x86 it will be going to AMD. I will also be using linux. I do not want to use a mac that is just an overpriced PC. I loved macs when they were special, when they were different, when apple actually thought different. But now AAPL is more focused on iCrap (iPhone, iPad, iPod) than producing quality computers. Now AMD is the company to switch to after PowerPC macs become too slow for use. With AMD you get to be part of a new rebel CPU architecture. Even though AMD is just a small company, much smaller than intell or nVidia, they can still produce great quality products.
:apple:

But AMD aren't as fast as Intel.

AMD is not at all a small company. They own ATI, and build a lot of ARM processors.

Their processors are also definitely not faster than Intel CPUs. It's not like it was 10 years ago, ARM is competing on price, not speed.

AMD is still really struggling with single threaded applications.

This.

AMDs processors suck. I speak from experience. I had one of theirs last year and it took four cores running at 3.1GHz each to compare to a dual core 13" Macbook. Since Intel went to Core, AMD gets demolished unless you're strapped for cash and are building something cheap. Plus, their GPUs are great, but that's *only* because they bought ATI, a company that already knew what they were doing in regards to GPUs, AMD itself doesn't interfere with whatever goes on as far as Radeon development.

They don't suck. Piledriver is doing not bad against Ivy Bridge but it's still a long way to go. AMD is lacking big time raw speed in IPC for single thread performance.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/697?vs=551

Ariii
May 31, 2013, 12:31 PM
Even though it's impractical in a lot of cases, PowerPC machines work for the most part for what you probably would have used them when they were made.

I would expect my iBook Clamshell to be useful for plenty of things, even if they can be done by other computers, until it's pretty much dead.

YanniDepp
May 31, 2013, 03:34 PM
Camino has been discontinued. It was one of the last "modern" browsers available to PPC users and it's another nail in the coffin :-(

Intell
May 31, 2013, 03:54 PM
Camino has been discontinued. It was one of the last "modern" browsers available to PPC users and it's another nail in the coffin :-(

Camino wasn't very modern. TenFourFox is perhaps the most modern browser for PowerPC. It's getting support for new things like plugin free video chatting, other browsers aren't.

I am curious though, what am I seeing at Wimbledon all these years?

You're seeing IBM. One of two notable makers of PowerPC CPUs. Their profit from CPUs is very small and shrinking. They haven't been doing much R&D because of it as well.

wobegong
May 31, 2013, 06:30 PM
Camino has been discontinued. It was one of the last "modern" browsers available to PPC users and it's another nail in the coffin :-(

Roccat is pretty, no, very good and a quick info gathering exercise shows the developers are VERY communicative on forums and such.

SkyBell
Jun 1, 2013, 12:50 AM
Some of these browsers might have a develop menu when you can choose to open the page you are on in a different browser from a menu.
Does the page open within that same browser window, or completely open a new browser? If the latter, it's really no different then what I am already doing.
May I just ask Cassie, what computer will you be leaving your emac for. I understand how hard it must be for you to swallow that you may soon need to leave your emac as your main do it all machine.
I purchased a black MacBook from eBay a few days ago. Always wanted one, but my PPC Macs were always enough for my day to day usage, and I couldn't justify spending what they were going for at the times I looked at them.

I got a Black C2D, 2.2 GHz/2 GB RAM/160 GB HDD model for $360 shipped. Picking it up at the post office tomorrow morning. I know I won't feel the same way about it as my beloved eMac or other PPC machines, but I made sure that in transitioning to "the dark side", I got a machine I had at least a little love and longing for. ;) We'll see how things go in the morning.

kalel77
Jun 1, 2013, 02:22 AM
I have a Powerbook G4 1.67 ghz DLSD with leopard and guys, this machine worked always good, never had particular problems.
I use it mainly in the music production and music business, daily networking, a little bit of graphic editing and it still work just great even if it's connected to a huge amount of external studio device.
The only thing I miss right now are the speed on some web pages because flash and the Skype over imposing about the cut of video conference on version 2.8, because I can't migrate my Windows users to ichat.
Even if I worked with the latest machines in other environments, the powerpc machine in my opinion are still very good computers and should not been ignored from all the software & hardware brands.
Fortunately there are still exceptions, because we are still a big percentage of PPC users in the world.

Nameci
Jun 1, 2013, 08:33 AM
Does the page open within that same browser window, or completely open a new browser? If the latter, it's really no different then what I am already doing.

I purchased a black MacBook from eBay a few days ago. Always wanted one, but my PPC Macs were always enough for my day to day usage, and I couldn't justify spending what they were going for at the times I looked at them.

I got a Black C2D, 2.2 GHz/2 GB RAM/160 GB HDD model for $360 shipped. Picking it up at the post office tomorrow morning. I know I won't feel the same way about it as my beloved eMac or other PPC machines, but I made sure that in transitioning to "the dark side", I got a machine I had at least a little love and longing for. ;) We'll see how things go in the morning.

Congratulations on your purchase on that Black MB. I have one too, though it was beautiful and can run lion, it does not receive much love and use compared to my G5 quad.

Wildy
Jun 1, 2013, 09:34 AM
I have a Powerbook G4 1.67 ghz DLSD with leopard and guys, this machine worked always good, never had particular problems.
I use it mainly in the music production and music business, daily networking, a little bit of graphic editing and it still work just great even if it's connected to a huge amount of external studio device.
The only thing I miss right now are the speed on some web pages because flash and the Skype over imposing about the cut of video conference on version 2.8, because I can't migrate my Windows users to ichat.
Even if I worked with the latest machines in other environments, the powerpc machine in my opinion are still very good computers and should not been ignored from all the software & hardware brands.
Fortunately there are still exceptions, because we are still a big percentage of PPC users in the world.

Which DAW / plugins are you using?

MisterKeeks
Jun 1, 2013, 10:01 AM
Does the page open within that same browser window, or completely open a new browser? If the latter, it's really no different then what I am already doing.


It opens a new browser. However, it just automates the process. All you have to do is navigate to Develop > Open Page With > and choose the browser you want from a list that is automatically populated with all of the browsers on your computer. None of that gruesome copying and pasting URLs and none of the brutal exertion of searching for a certain browser.

kalel77
Jun 2, 2013, 04:30 AM
Which DAW / plugins are you using?

I mainly use the all Logic suite so Logic Pro 8, Mainstage, Waveburner, Soubdtrack Pro and than Sibelius First 6, Amazing Slow Downer, several Motu interface, the 4pre, the microlite, some other plugin as Ez Drummer, Lounge Lizzard Session, Ultra Analog Session, Reason Adapted plus some other stuff..

MysticCow
Jun 2, 2013, 10:10 AM
Camino has been discontinued. It was one of the last "modern" browsers available to PPC users and it's another nail in the coffin :-(

Camino was done a long time ago, and was easily displaced by TenFourFox and Aurora. Even OS 9 has a halfway modern browser in Classilla, although it has a long way to go.

MrPilot
Jun 2, 2013, 10:53 AM
Skype over imposing about the cut of video conference on version 2.8
When will they cut it?

kalel77
Jun 2, 2013, 10:58 AM
When will they cut it?

Is already begun, now you can't make any videocall to other skype users, just audio call...

MrPilot
Jun 2, 2013, 04:09 PM
Is already begun, now you can't make any videocall to other skype users, just audio call...

Strange, I've made video calls today. In fact one to a PC and another to an iPhone, no problems....

spunkgarLEWII
Jun 3, 2013, 10:23 AM
This is because the other end is using a version of Skype under 6.2 - I read on Skype's website that if one is using on a PC Skype 6.2 or higher, then video chat is cut off on the PowerPC end.. The same I think holds true for the Mac side.

Again, someone has to try it on the mac side to be sure.. but for the Windows side, if the version is 6.2 >, then expect no more video calls on PowerPC end.



Strange, I've made video calls today. In fact one to a PC and another to an iPhone, no problems....

eyoungren
Jun 3, 2013, 04:23 PM
This is because the other end is using a version of Skype under 6.2 - I read on Skype's website that if one is using on a PC Skype 6.2 or higher, then video chat is cut off on the PowerPC end.. The same I think holds true for the Mac side.

Again, someone has to try it on the mac side to be sure.. but for the Windows side, if the version is 6.2 >, then expect no more video calls on PowerPC end.
So, then the lock out of PowerPC is software based and dependent on the use of a version higher than 6.2.

That leads me to believe that cutting off PowerPC at the protocol level is either too difficult, time consuming or just not worth the time and effort. Considering that most of the people I converse with have PowerPC Macs and/or do not update much if at all, video calls with PowerPC is still doable with Skype.

MrPilot
Jun 3, 2013, 04:24 PM
This is because the other end is using a version of Skype under 6.2 - I read on Skype's website that if one is using on a PC Skype 6.2 or higher, then video chat is cut off on the PowerPC end.. The same I think holds true for the Mac side.

Again, someone has to try it on the mac side to be sure.. but for the Windows side, if the version is 6.2 >, then expect no more video calls on PowerPC end.

Ok! Thanks for the heads up :)

Now I need to try to find someone with a PC...

sikkinixx
Jun 3, 2013, 04:28 PM
As much as I love my G4 iMac... it's just too slow. Even opening Powerpoints or word docs to edit gets annoying sluggish compared to my speedy i7 Mac Mini.

It does, however, make a lovely digital picture frame. I have it wake up for a few hours a night to run the screensaver slideshow with a couple dozen GBs of photos. Snazzy.

Lil Chillbil
Jun 3, 2013, 04:33 PM
Ok! Thanks for the heads up :)

Now I need to try to find someone with a PC...

wayyyyyyyyyy ahead of you tested and confirmed that you can no longer skype video call or conference with anyone on a pc or mac using version 6.2 or greater




try explaining this to your boss that everyone at work has to downgrade to your level just to have the virtual meeting

Imixmuan
Jun 3, 2013, 04:38 PM
..Office 2004 with Microsoft's OpenXML converter, and word docs, Powerpoints, even .docx and .pptx files open fast and are easy to edit. If all it is a .doc or .ppt file, I'll use Office X, which is as one would expect, blazingly fast on an ibook G4 1.07 ghz. If you are using Office 2008 its known to be very slow on any mac that doesn't have multiple processors.

Obviously, no G4 will compare to a Core i7 mini. But, my ibook G4 cost me all of 80 George Washington Dollars two years ago. Your Core i7 mac mini cost a little more, I'd think.

ResPublica
Jun 3, 2013, 05:02 PM
Surfing the web is the biggest issue I have with PowerPC Macs; web sites have become a lot more complex than they used to be when I got my Mac mini G4. Even with great browsers like Tenfourfox, and with Flash uninstalled, performance remains an issue.
However for Word and applications like Dictionary, PowerPC Macs equal other Macs. Dropbox is a nice tool, too. Those machines are still great for work, but not really for fun stuff.

alexreich
Jun 3, 2013, 08:52 PM
My perspective has changed drastically on this topic, I can no longer really use powerpc as my "main" machine or even a 2nd machine more like a its there machine


as for everyone who is still using powerpc as their main machine...


Image (http://t.qkme.me/3ov4p7.jpg)

This is probably the funniest meme I've seen all day.

To the OP: I know that the PPC is dead. Anyone still riding that dead horse is crippling their computing experience for no (logical) reason.

I also believe that the Mac is on it's way out of the spotlight. Too overpriced, too overrated, and not innovative. Apple will quietly slip away with Steve gone.

eyoungren
Jun 3, 2013, 09:37 PM
…Anyone still riding that dead horse is crippling their computing experience for no (logical) reason.….
I can give you one logical reason. Price.
I can afford these Macs. Until the Intel Macs drop in to the $100 range they are out of my reach.

spunkgarLEWII
Jun 3, 2013, 11:27 PM
Yes, it is still doable, but one must have a version less than 6.3 on the PC and Mac end, otherwise the PowerPC end can't intitate video chat. I know, it sucks. right?

Strange, I've made video calls today. In fact one to a PC and another to an iPhone, no problems....

So, then the lock out of PowerPC is software based and dependent on the use of a version higher than 6.2.

That leads me to believe that cutting off PowerPC at the protocol level is either too difficult, time consuming or just not worth the time and effort. Considering that most of the people I converse with have PowerPC Macs and/or do not update much if at all, video calls with PowerPC is still doable with Skype.

----------

Those with Windows 8 are forced into the current version which is 6.3 and beta 6.4, so chatting by video with Win 8 folks is out.. But Windows 7 is a possiblilty, so long as those users don't upgrade to 6.3

Ok! Thanks for the heads up :)

Now I need to try to find someone with a PC...

Lil Chillbil
Jun 4, 2013, 12:52 AM
This is probably the funniest meme I've seen all day.

To the OP: I know that the PPC is dead. Anyone still riding that dead horse is crippling their computing experience for no (logical) reason.

I also believe that the Mac is on it's way out of the spotlight. Too overpriced, too overrated, and not innovative. Apple will quietly slip away with Steve gone.

Why the hating on ppc man, what did it ever do to you. It saved your precious mac platform from crumbling and microsoft from licensing os x to pcs.

What does it really matter to me or you that their workstation is based on a powerpc chip and not an intel one

we all love macs, some of us a little more than others :rolleyes:

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/ASCI-Apple-s-Winning-Streak-Is-Unstoppable-2.jpg

But when you get right down to it were all just rebels to the pc platform. sure I went the hackintosh route but I am still a mac user at heart.

So at the end of the day all I can really say is...



heres to the crazy ones...
http://www.happysimpleliving.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Toasting-the-new-year-at-Happy-Simple-Living-blog.jpg

stroked
Jun 4, 2013, 02:33 AM
I use Google Earth for my job, and with my 1.33 Ghz iBook, and maxed out ram, it got to the point where it was too slow to use. With my i7 MBP, it opens and zooms in instantly.

I'm a fanboy of OSX, not Macs, but I did enjoy this PPC forum, and learning all the tricks to make my Power PCs work better.

Now if all of the Power PCs that I have given away, would just die, I would be happy. I'm tired of all of the "how do I do this or that" calls.

rjcalifornia
Jun 4, 2013, 01:01 PM
This is probably the funniest meme I've seen all day.

To the OP: I know that the PPC is dead. Anyone still riding that dead horse is crippling their computing experience for no (logical) reason.

I also believe that the Mac is on it's way out of the spotlight. Too overpriced, too overrated, and not innovative. Apple will quietly slip away with Steve gone.

Price. My ibook is not fast, but it is fast enough for my tasks, for now of course.

Asuriyan
Jun 4, 2013, 01:34 PM
If anything, PowerPC is becoming stronger where I work. We recently had the G5 die (fried logicboard). I could have searched on eBay and found my boss a new logicboard, installed it and continued on, but we had it replaced with an Intel Mac.

It's taken me a week or so to integrate this Intel Mac, during which I was reminded that Apple killed Appletalk with Snow Leopard. We have two identical printers on our network, but one is older and only uses Appletalk while the other has IP printing and Appletalk. But the newer one has a faulty manual feed tray while the one on the Appletalk only printer works fine. Most of our printouts are ad proofs on letter so I need to use the Appletalk only printer the most. The problem for us too with IP printing is that it tends to sporadically produce lines or banding effects in our printouts. That'd be ok if we weren't a newspaper using those printouts to shoot film with. So…our venerable PowerMac G4/350 with 98mb of ram running 10.4.11 is now doing triple duty. It's an Applescript server, a font server and now a print server. It's the latter function that makes it possible for my ML Intel Mac to print.

We will be migrating soon to Intel Macs. Mine was the first. Next an Intel Mini server and then my coworker will get my Mac and I will get a newer more powerful one. Then the Editorial Assistant and possibly others at a later point.

But the two G4s that we have will continue to serve a purpose. I now have a G5 at home (my boss gave it to me) and I still take my PowerBooks to me to Starbucks and work. In fact, it was my 17" 1.67ghz DLSD that enabled me to still work for the two weeks that we had no Mac. The papers got out on time because Apple design made it easy to integrate my PowerBook in to the work network.

Lastly, I will say this. I've been using the new Intel Mac for about a week. It has 1GB less of ram than my G5, but it's doing the job very well. However, at least right now, I find it to be mechanical with no perceptible character. Even the start up chime sounds tinny. Using Mountain Lion for a few days or so has made me appreciate Leopard that much more on my PowerBooks.

You know, there is something to be said for refinement being the death of 'character'. My 2004 17" iMac and my 2006 15" MacBook Pro (my oldest current Macs- and yes, I realize that only one is PPC!) are 'clunkers' relative to my Retina MacBook Pro: the screens look grainy in comparison, they run hotter and noisier, but for all its refinement the Retina seems like a very sterile machine.

You don't normally want a machine to be 'temperamental' but with the newer MacBooks it's almost like I'm not even using a computer anymore. If that's what Jobs meant about the post-PC era, then maybe I finally see his point (as someone who just recently and only very reluctantly hopped on board with iPads).

That said, regardless of version OS X has always been full of the little touches that make me grow attached to the computer more than just as a piece of hardware. Mountain Lion is no exception. As much as I appreciate Jony Ive's influence, I feel that the skeuomorphism (who would have predicted that becoming such a buzzword in the tech world?) was one of those touches. How many other computer systems can you boot up and just marvel at the detail that goes into the user interface art?

I love this Retina MacBook as much as anything I've ever owned. The Apple ability to inspire loyalty in its products' owners is in no way diminished. But it's not a true replacement for my G5 iMac or my 12" PowerBook G4 (RIP DC jack! ...gonna have to fix that sucker someday soon...), or even my 2006 MBP, which I use quite frequently for Snow Leopard.

As long as they don't change the boot sound, I'm happy.

Goftrey
Jun 4, 2013, 04:11 PM
As long as they don't change the boot sound, I'm happy.

Even the startup chime isn't the same.

eyoungren
Jun 4, 2013, 08:26 PM
Even the startup chime isn't the same.
Nope, it's not. It's tinny sounding.

And it happens one or two seconds after you hit the power button. Like, as if the Intel Mac was having to boot something similar to BIOS on a PC. ;)

Asuriyan
Jun 4, 2013, 10:40 PM
Nope, it's not. It's tinny sounding.

And it happens one or two seconds after you hit the power button. Like, as if the Intel Mac was having to boot something similar to BIOS on a PC. ;)

I still think nothing beats the speakers in the white polycarbonate iMacs- G5 or Intel. They nailed it with that downward-firing design. Tiny though they are, the startup chime hits the resonant frequency of my table.

Imixmuan
Jun 4, 2013, 11:01 PM
I still find Google Earth to be plenty usable on a PowerPC mac, but then again I don't use it professionally. eMaps (version 2.5) is a very speedy rendition of Google maps for an old ibook G4.

My solution to things that require some semblance of speed is Linux Mint, on a Dell Laptop. 120 bucks off ebay and it gives me a CoreDuo processor, 4 GB of RAM. I can still do anything I need to with it, three years on. No hardware issues in that time, has cost a dime a day, hoping to get that down to a nickel a day. The day is coming, soon, when I will be all Linux, all the time. I just can't ever see shelling out more than 100 bucks or so for any computing device.

It all boils down to this: Not how much, but how little computer do you really need. If you need a Retina Macbook or Mac Pro, for work or for fun, get one. If you don't, don't. It's a free country, for the most part.

archtopshop
Jun 6, 2013, 06:35 PM
More and more, this is what's happening to our PowerPc's:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/19-LBS-Apple-Power-Mac-G4-G5-Green-Fiber-CPU-w-Motorola-Scrap-GOLD-RECOVERY-/121121700150?pt=CPUs&hash=item1c336a7936

eyoungren
Jun 6, 2013, 08:09 PM
More and more, this is what's happening to our PowerPc's:

http://www.ebay.com/itm/19-LBS-Apple-Power-Mac-G4-G5-Green-Fiber-CPU-w-Motorola-Scrap-GOLD-RECOVERY-/121121700150?pt=CPUs&hash=item1c336a7936
Not my G5. :D

I just swapped out a fried logicboard last night and it's alive!

spunkgarLEWII
Jun 6, 2013, 11:21 PM
Oh, no way in hell my G5 Quad is going to end up in the scrap heap. That person on ebay has absolutely no idea the power still within those old PowerPC chips. A Quad G5 is no slouch and neither is a G4 Dual 1.42 MDD.

I am sorry, but I don't agree what that seller is doing.

skateny
Jun 7, 2013, 12:01 AM
Oh, no way in hell my G5 Quad is going to end up in the scrap heap. That person on ebay has absolutely no idea the power still within those old PowerPC chips. A Quad G5 is no slouch and neither is a G4 Dual 1.42 MDD.

I am sorry, but I don't agree what that seller is doing.

I agree. Never going to part with my iBook. And I didn't like seeing that PowerPC graveyard on eBay.

archtopshop
Jun 7, 2013, 08:57 AM
I agree. Never going to part with my iBook. And I didn't like seeing that PowerPC graveyard on eBay.

Neither did I. I only posted the url to make a point; these machines are being scrapped, or sent to China to be scrapped, by the thousands. Most of the G4's are no longer worth more than the cost of shipping them. Many of the low-end G5's are at, or near that level too.

I've seen this happen before with earlier Mac models--beige G3's, the beige Power Macintosh PPC models, Quadra's, etc. You get the point. They disappear quicker than one might think.

First, full machines start to get scarce. Then mostly only parts are available. Then parts begin to get scarce. Eventually, parts become expensive because very few are available.

It's a familiar cycle that happens with most things. Muscle cars come to mind.

In high school, I had a friend who bought a brand new '71 Cuda, 383 c.u. SlapStick shifter, and loaded for about $3500, if I recall correctly. Five years later, he could get less than $1000 for it. Five years after that, it was probably only worth a few hundred dollars because junk yards were full of them.

Yea, I know, fast forward 40 years and a '71 Cuda is now worth a small fortune. But I wouldn't count on the same thing happening to our G4 or G5's. :D

My point is, if we plan on using our PPC's very far into the future, we need to get some spare parts while we still can.

It's days are numbered.

11colmil
Jun 7, 2013, 10:52 AM
I still have a PowerMac G4 (500 MHz) that I refuse to let go. Ive had the machine probably almost 15 years now with no problems. For the past few years, I've had the machine set up with a hardware RAID 0 and I use it as an FTP server. No matter how old the Mac, there is always still a use for it.

MrPilot
Jun 7, 2013, 01:05 PM
Yes, it is still doable, but one must have a version less than 6.3 on the PC and Mac end, otherwise the PowerPC end can't intitate video chat. I know, it sucks. right?





----------

Those with Windows 8 are forced into the current version which is 6.3 and beta 6.4, so chatting by video with Win 8 folks is out.. But Windows 7 is a possiblilty, so long as those users don't upgrade to 6.3

Ahh ok, thanks. So maybe with a little bit of luck I'll be able to convince my parents, family and friends to stick to mac skype >6.3. Actually, I might use the iPhone for skype or my MBP if all else fails :)

----------

Surfing the web is the biggest issue I have with PowerPC Macs; web sites have become a lot more complex than they used to be when I got my Mac mini G4. Even with great browsers like Tenfourfox, and with Flash uninstalled, performance remains an issue.
However for Word and applications like Dictionary, PowerPC Macs equal other Macs. Dropbox is a nice tool, too. Those machines are still great for work, but not really for fun stuff.

I was thinking about getting a mini g4 but, if performance is such an issue then I suppose I'll stick to this powerbook DLHR.

Thanks for the update

GermanyChris
Jun 10, 2013, 12:38 AM
Theres no other client that can talk Skype?

spunkgarLEWII
Jun 10, 2013, 12:49 AM
Your only chance is to convince those u chat with everyday to downgrade from 6.2 to anything lower than that.. otherwise, you will never be able to video chat.

Theres no other client that can talk Skype?

GermanyChris
Jun 10, 2013, 01:21 AM
Your only chance is to convince those u chat with everyday to downgrade from 6.2 to anything lower than that.. otherwise, you will never be able to video chat.

So Skype is special, their own protocols and all that?

-----------------------------------------------

There was someone here who wanted to write stuff for PowerPC, this seems like a good place to start.

spunkgarLEWII
Jun 10, 2013, 01:50 AM
Apparently, yes. I don't know why Skype is being such an arse about all this, but I guess the percentage of PowerPC users is less than 5 percent, so by that rhetoric they believe cutting them off would save them time and money.

Sadly, this is causing anger within the PowerPC community and I fear it could get loud as time moves on.

So Skype is special, their own protocols and all that?

-----------------------------------------------

There was someone here who wanted to write stuff for PowerPC, this seems like a good place to start.

GermanyChris
Jun 10, 2013, 02:06 AM
Apparently, yes. I don't know why Skype is being such an arse about all this, but I guess the percentage of PowerPC users is less than 5 percent, so by that rhetoric they believe cutting them off would save them time and money.

Sadly, this is causing anger within the PowerPC community and I fear it could get loud as time moves on.

probably less than 1/2 a percent..

Nameci
Jun 10, 2013, 04:26 AM
Theres no other client that can talk Skype?

I am afraid there isn't.

GermanyChris
Jun 10, 2013, 04:33 AM
I am afraid there isn't.

Can you tell I don't use Skype :o

Frost7
Jun 17, 2013, 03:56 AM
My perspective has changed drastically on this topic, I can no longer really use powerpc as my "main" machine or even a 2nd machine more like a its there machine


as for everyone who is still using powerpc as their main machine...


Image (http://t.qkme.me/3ov4p7.jpg)
Guess you can count me as the resistance. The two Macs in the sig are my primary machines, and you'll note one is a Quad G5. :P

spunkgarLEWII
Jun 17, 2013, 11:58 AM
Preach on, PPC dude!!!

Guess you can count me as the resistance. The two Macs in the sig are my primary machines, and you'll note one is a Quad G5. :P

zephyrnoid
Jun 25, 2013, 10:38 AM
My perspective has changed drastically on this topic, I can no longer really use powerpc as my "main" machine or even a 2nd machine more like a its there machine


as for everyone who is still using powerpc as their main machine...


Image (http://t.qkme.me/3ov4p7.jpg)

As a MacUser since 128K I bring a fresh old perspective don't I?
I have several macs around and do NOT dispose of working machines as long as I can still squeeze productivity out of software/hardware combos. Several of my machines operate offline for security.

Every time I hear that...."Oh! You're using OS9 Classic on a PowerPc...can I TOUCH you to see if you turn to dust?"
I simply refer such naysayers to some of my Weekly Deliverables Here (http://www.gearstylequarterly.com)
1) Shot with a nikon point and shoot camera
3) stupid simple pocket flash and ambient light
4) processed in Photoshop6 ( not CS6... 'Just 6') and Macromedia freehand 10 on a G4 PowerPC Powerbook 17 with maxed out RAM an a 250GB drive.
It's not fast, it's not powerful but... It's been PAID FOR 10 years ago :D
Now. I have newer tools for video editing and I really ought to upgrade my still image software to run on an Intel Mac at least, esp as Adobe is pulling all that cloud bull on us.
Looks Like I can run Photoshop version CS5.1 on my Intel Macs Natively.
If you have a copy you want to sell me, please give me a holler
;)

eyoungren
Jun 25, 2013, 01:09 PM
4) processed in Photoshop6 ( not CS6... 'Just 6') and Macromedia freehand 10 on a G4 PowerPC Powerbook 17 with maxed out RAM an a 250GB drive.
Ahhhh, Photoshop 6 and Freehand!

First worked with 6 in 1999 when I was an Ad Compositor at the Desert Sun in Palm Springs, Ca. PowerMac G4 with that and Freehand 8. I have always been a Freehand fan over Illustrator. It had way more going for it than Illy, but alas Adobe buried it.

We we're also using QuarkXPress 4.11 and Acrobat 4.0 on OS9 then. I managed to snag the Graphic Designer's mac, so the designer was on OS8.something. :D

ATM Deluxe, Suitcase 6. Great time. I wasn't a Mac convert at that time, but it was a great machine with great apps to work on back then. Freehand 8 was my Swiss Army knife can opener because it would open ANY file that Photoshop or Illy choked on.

Nameci
Jun 25, 2013, 07:44 PM
My take on this is that, a tool is only as effective or as efficient as the skill of the worker. Or a brush is only as artistic as hands of the artist that holds it.

It all goes back to the capability of the person behind that computer. No matter how old or new the tool is, the artist is still the one that gives life to an artwork.

A computer is basically just a tool, our powerpc mac is a tool. Well, may not be an advanced tool with all the bling, but it is still a tool, and still a good tool.

phoenixsan
Jun 25, 2013, 11:52 PM
supporting legacy hardware as Firewire, ZIP drives and discs, SCSI equipment and the same, PowerPC never will die. Developing?....Depends in how fast you want to compile and the code/languaje you are using. Wireless standards must be backwards compatible until some point in the time. More important is the parts needed to mantain the PPC hardware running as RAM, HDDs and so on. Makers/manufacturers have little interest in the making of old techno. So, in some moment we will not have parts to mantain old hardware running and that will be the TRUE end of the PowerPC platform, IMHO.....:(:confused::eek:



:):apple:

honam1021
Jun 29, 2013, 04:02 AM
http://www.minecraftforum.net/topic/1597991-minecraft-will-be-dropping-support-for-java-5-and-powerpc/

I know minecraft run on G5s very well and Mojang is dropping PPC support, fortunately other flash games still work with the 11.5 spoof hack, but that's just the matter of time.

throAU
Jun 29, 2013, 04:07 AM
A modern mac mini will out perform a powerpc based mac in all respects.


in FAR less power consumption, space, noise, heat, etc.

GermanyChris
Jun 29, 2013, 04:27 AM
A modern mac mini will out perform a powerpc based mac in all respects.


in FAR less power consumption, space, noise, heat, etc.

But that really misses the point.

skinniezinho
Jun 30, 2013, 06:26 AM
A modern mac mini will out perform a powerpc based mac in all respects.


in FAR less power consumption, space, noise, heat, etc.

Except in Charisma :P

rabidz7
Jul 2, 2013, 04:09 PM
A modern mac mini will out perform a powerpc based mac in all respects.


in FAR less power consumption, space, noise, heat, etc.

My PowerMac is faster though. I have 4 cores. I have 2.5GHz. I have an HD 7970 that refuses to work!

MisterKeeks
Jul 2, 2013, 04:17 PM
My PowerMac is faster though. I have 4 cores. I have 2.5GHz. I have an HD 7970 that refuses to work!

The Mac mini is faster though. It has up to 4 cores. It has 2.6GHz. It has Thunderbolt. It has USB3. It has HDMI. It has a graphics card with a ROM that both exists and works!

In fact, every Mac mini made in 2010 on (with the exception of the absolute low end model) is faster than your G5.

They're also more expensive.

eyoungren
Jul 2, 2013, 04:35 PM
Uhm…with the exception of cost, if speed was the deciding factor for us concerning the Macs we use, this conversation would never have happened.

Of course most of the Intel Macs are faster than PowerPC Macs. But that isn't why we're here. The fact that the sky is blue and water is wet and Intel is faster is immaterial to the discussion.

Goftrey
Jul 2, 2013, 05:17 PM
Uhm…with the exception of cost, if speed was the deciding factor for us concerning the Macs we use, this conversation would never have happened.

Of course most of the Intel Macs are faster than PowerPC Macs. But that isn't why we're here. The fact that the sky is blue and water is wet and Intel is faster is immaterial to the discussion.

Amen!

rabidz7
Jul 2, 2013, 06:03 PM
The Mac mini is faster though. It has up to 4 cores. It has 2.6GHz. It has Thunderbolt. It has USB3. It has HDMI. It has a graphics card with a ROM that both exists and works!

In fact, every Mac mini made in 2010 on (with the exception of the absolute low end model) is faster than your G5.

They're also more expensive.

I can have up to 64GB of (non functioning) RAM, I have 3 firewire ports and 4 USB ports. I have 3 DVI ports (1 not working, 1 not functioning in OS X, linux untested) 2 mini display (not working in OS X, linux untested)
and HDMI (not working), I can easily upgrade my computer, I have a faster GPU (not functioning in OS X, linux untested).

wobegong
Jul 2, 2013, 06:21 PM
I can have up to 64GB of (non functioning) RAM, I have 3 firewire ports and 4 USB ports. I have 3 DVI ports (1 not working, 1 not functioning in OS X, linux untested) 2 mini display (not working in OS X, linux untested)
and HDMI (not working), I can easily upgrade my computer, I have a faster GPU (not functioning in OS X, linux untested).

Wow what a great argument - you really make us all look good, almost makes me want to sell my G5...

rjcalifornia
Jul 2, 2013, 06:47 PM
I can have up to 64GB of (non functioning) RAM, I have 3 firewire ports and 4 USB ports. I have 3 DVI ports (1 not working, 1 not functioning in OS X, linux untested) 2 mini display (not working in OS X, linux untested)
and HDMI (not working), I can easily upgrade my computer, I have a faster GPU (not functioning in OS X, linux untested).

So...?

Badagri
Jul 3, 2013, 10:05 AM
Uhm…with the exception of cost, if speed was the deciding factor for us concerning the Macs we use, this conversation would never have happened.

Of course most of the Intel Macs are faster than PowerPC Macs. But that isn't why we're here. The fact that the sky is blue and water is wet and Intel is faster is immaterial to the discussion.

Thats the problem though. PowerPC is so slow now. The software has now outrun the hardware and needs faster hardware to run it efficiently or it's silly slow hours or days to do things. Or you end up cave man like stuck in PPC land.

MisterKeeks
Jul 3, 2013, 10:13 AM
Thats the problem though. PowerPC is so slow now. The software has now outrun the hardware and needs faster hardware to run it efficiently or it's silly slow hours or days to do things. Or you end up cave man like stuck in PPC land.

Have you ever used a PowerPC Mac?

eyoungren
Jul 3, 2013, 10:22 AM
Thats the problem though. PowerPC is so slow now. The software has now outrun the hardware and needs faster hardware to run it efficiently or it's silly slow hours or days to do things. Or you end up cave man like stuck in PPC land.
Or you learn how to work the PowerPC Mac like a poweruser and optimize it. And then you develop workflows and workarounds to achieve what you need to achieve. Unless you want to stay like a regular Mac user who does not tend to know much about how their Mac works. Then you go with Intel.

Again, my coworker uses a PowerMac G4/450 AGP, 1GB ram with Leopard and the Adobe Creative Suite 4. It gets the job done for ads, pagination, legals and classifieds. Sure, an Intel Mac would be much faster at this and we do have that in the upgrade plans. But it gets the job done right now.

I had a G5 here with the same software load out. It also got the job done. It died, so it got replaced with an Intel Mac. Which I find laggy in some issues and frustrating in others because my old G5 just handled it.

I'm not trying to win a speed race and we do not edit video. We are a weekly newspaper and PowerPC works.

If it works and you meet your deadlines and you're happy with it why do you have to go to Intel? In my industry, with a few exceptions, a PDF is a PDF. It doesn't matter if Pagemaker 5, QuarkXPress 3 or ID 2.0 make it. It's a PDF! My point is, the job got done.

And by the way it never takes days. We put out two sections of a newspaper in one 8 hour shift with deadlines of 1pm and 4pm. ID CS4 handles that just fine on a G5 and a G4.

Badagri
Jul 3, 2013, 12:29 PM
Have you ever used a PowerPC Mac?

Yes, I used to have a Dual 2.7 before it had fluid all over the place. Even then my tasks were getting slower. 3D/rendering and video editing as well as raw photo editing. Being stuck on older software was not helping. With all the newer tools I was feeling gimped considering what I saw was available on Windows.

Nameci
Jul 3, 2013, 01:55 PM
Nobody stops you from moving to Intel if that suits you. Whatever rocks your boat. But saying our grandmas are not able to do things and just slow because of old age is an insult to 'em. I still find it enjoyable to do my "job" on a lowly powerbook. It is not the end yet for powerpc. Because my powerpc macs are not dead, yet. But grandmas gone.

macuser453787
Jul 3, 2013, 11:00 PM
...a PDF is a PDF. It doesn't matter if Pagemaker 5, QuarkXPress 3 or ID 2.0 make it. It's a PDF!

Unless it's created from Publisher. :)

eyoungren
Jul 3, 2013, 11:29 PM
Unless it's created from Publisher. :)
LOL! One of those few "exceptions!" ;)

Another being one made from OS X itself.

macuser453787
Jul 4, 2013, 12:01 AM
LOL! One of those few "exceptions!" ;)

Another being one made from OS X itself.

Indeed! :) Though I'd take one made from OSX any day over a Publisher PDF. Come to think of it, I think today I used a client-supplied, OSX-made PDF, or more accurately one generated from Apple's Pages program.

eyoungren
Jul 4, 2013, 12:10 AM
Indeed! :) Though I'd take one made from OSX any day over a Publisher PDF. Come to think of it, I think today I used a client-supplied, OSX-made PDF, or more accurately one generated from Apple's Pages program.
Well, at least with a Publisher PDF you still get embedded fonts. Easy enough to convert the colorspace with Pitstop or Quite A Box of Tricks. An OS X generated PDF on the other hand…just depends on what app you're using as to whether you get a solid image or embedded fonts..

Haven't had much luck with customer sent Pages PDFs. I've gotten exactly two and the customer seems not to know how to make the PDF. She uses Pages on her iPad to make an ad and then sends us the Pages file. One, we don't have the latest version so we can't even begin to open that. So, she makes a PDF. Which of course, flattens, is RGB and no embedded fonts. We usually end up rebuilding her ads! :(

macuser453787
Jul 4, 2013, 12:29 AM
Well, at least with a Publisher PDF you still get embedded fonts. Easy enough to convert the colorspace with Pitstop or Quite A Box of Tricks. An OS X generated PDF on the other hand…just depends on what app you're using as to whether you get a solid image or embedded fonts..

Haven't had much luck with customer sent Pages PDFs. I've gotten exactly two and the customer seems not to know how to make the PDF. She uses Pages on her iPad to make an ad and then sends us the Pages file. One, we don't have the latest version so we can't even begin to open that. So, she makes a PDF. Which of course, flattens, is RGB and no embedded fonts. We usually end up rebuilding her ads! :(

Wow that sounds like quite an ordeal! To be frank, I haven't to the best of my knowledge worked with very many OSX-generated PDFs, but I have worked with Publisher plenty over the years (ugh, I do not like that program). Didn't know that OSX-made PDFs could be troublesome like that. I guess I assumed that since Apple has had a long-standing relationship with Adobe that Adobe might have helped them with their program-writing where PDF options/controls are concerned.

So OSX PDFs do not give you control over font embedding, huh? I can easily see that being problematic. Though the Pages PDF being RGB is a surprise. Again, I'd have thought that Apple would have written it a little better than that! At least Publisher gives you the option of CMYK (though anymore I leave Publisher layouts as RGB, generate the PDF, place it in InDesign and let InDesign do the CMYK interpolation - looks WAY better than what Publisher would produce).

eyoungren
Jul 4, 2013, 12:45 AM
Wow that sounds like quite an ordeal! To be frank, I haven't to the best of my knowledge worked with very many OSX-generated PDFs, but I have worked with Publisher plenty over the years (ugh, I do not like that program). Didn't know that OSX-made PDFs could be troublesome like that. I guess I assumed that since Apple has had a long-standing relationship with Adobe that Adobe might have helped them with their program-writing where PDF options/controls are concerned.

So OSX PDFs do not give you control over font embedding, huh? I can easily see that being problematic. Though the Pages PDF being RGB is a surprise. Again, I'd have thought that Apple would have written it a little better than that! At least Publisher gives you the option of CMYK (though anymore I leave Publisher layouts as RGB, generate the PDF, place it in InDesign and let InDesign do the CMYK interpolation - looks WAY better than what Publisher would produce).
Well, it just depends.. The customer's ads tend to be simple so it's not much work. As to OS X generated PDFs, you'd be correct in regards to Adobe, but it just depends on the program. And frankly, anyone making a PDF using the OS X option probably does not know enough to get a proper PDF (which is why I have issues). Like out customer I mention. I get RGB PDFs from Pages because like most clueless customers she'll place RGB PDFs and then just save out a PDF. That of course makes it RGB. Or I assume it does. I don't know Pages that well, but I keep getting RGB PDFs from her so what can I say?

InDesign you can export. QuarkXPress you can export, or make a PS or EPS file and distill. Illy, save a PDF, Photoshop, save a PDF, etc. But those are all options the program gives you. It's not directly written by the OS.

But say, you take a PS or EPS file that has embedded fonts. Open it in Preview and then save out a PDF…you'll get a RGB PDF that's been rasterized.

I hate Publisher! But only because people don't know how to use it. Most have no clue the difference between RGB and CMYK. As to your process, this is something I'd normally do, but we process our ads before they ever get into the newspaper document. So, I tend to just take care of it right there. Oh, I'll export an RGB PDF out of Publisher, but I convert it in Acrobat, then place it in ID.

No surprises on press day because I already know what it looks like. We're way behind the technology curve so we print seps which get pasted up then shot by camera, converted to film and then burned to plate. So, my seps have to be right from the get go. Fortunately, for us that period will be over in the next week as we are getting out of the printing business (but not the publishing business) and sending our papers to a printer from now on.

I'll be able to afford a little less anal retentiveness. :)

P.S. I've been in the newspaper business for 14 years, so I've gotten pretty good at ripping apart customer PDFs and repurposing the content. Pitstop, Acrobat, Illy, Photoshop and a few other tools really help. Ovis PDF-Recover is a great tool too as idiot customers sometimes like to pasword protect their PDFs. Ovis can crack them so I can work with them.

macuser453787
Jul 4, 2013, 01:16 AM
Well, it just depends.. The customer's ads tend to be simple so it's not much work. As to OS X generated PDFs, you'd be correct in regards to Adobe, but it just depends on the program. And frankly, anyone making a PDF using the OS X option probably does not know enough to get a proper PDF (which is why I have issues). Like out customer I mention. I get RGB PDFs from Pages because like most clueless customers she'll place RGB PDFs and then just save out a PDF. That of course makes it RGB. Or I assume it does. I don't know Pages that well, but I keep getting RGB PDFs from her so what can I say?

InDesign you can export. QuarkXPress you can export, or make a PS or EPS file and distill. Illy, save a PDF, Photoshop, save a PDF, etc. But those are all options the program gives you. It's not directly written by the OS.

But say, you take a PS or EPS file that has embedded fonts. Open it in Preview and then save out a PDF…you'll get a RGB PDF that's been rasterized.

I hate Publisher! But only because people don't know how to use it. Most have no clue the difference between RGB and CMYK. As to your process, this is something I'd normally do, but we process our ads before they ever get into the newspaper document. So, I tend to just take care of it right there. Oh, I'll export an RGB PDF out of Publisher, but I convert it in Acrobat, then place it in ID.

No surprises on press day because I already know what it looks like. We're way behind the technology curve so we print seps which get pasted up then shot by camera, converted to film and then burned to plate. So, my seps have to be right from the get go. Fortunately, for us that period will be over in the next week as we are getting out of the printing business (but not the publishing business) and sending our papers to a printer from now on.

I'll be able to afford a little less anal retentiveness. :)

P.S. I've been in the newspaper business for 14 years, so I've gotten pretty good at ripping apart customer PDFs and repurposing the content. Pitstop, Acrobat, Illy, Photoshop and a few other tools really help. Ovis PDF-Recover is a great tool too as idiot customers sometimes like to pasword protect their PDFs. Ovis can crack them so I can work with them.

That's right, now I remember reading your post about outsourcing for printing. I guess that will simply things some, huh?

Great to know about Ovis. I see PW-protected PDFs every once in a while. I've been in printing/design in one capacity or another since 1991 myself. Officially (though management has made exceptions), we're not allowed by company policy to edit PDFs at the shop I work at - not even with Pit Stop or Acrobat's Preflight features - so I've had to find ways to work around that limitation, or else tell the customer to fix it or be okay with it as is. It's because of this policy that I rely on InDesign for CMYK interpolation of RGB PDFs.

Wow, I didn't know that about Preview, but then I've always either exported from ID, saved as from IL, or printed to .ps (or .prn out of Publisher) and distilled, as the case may be.

What do you print your seps on that's clean enough to shoot film from? Just curious. Last time I had any exposure to film (pun not originally intended, then thought about, then intended :) ) was maybe 8 years ago or so.

eyoungren
Jul 4, 2013, 01:39 AM
That's right, now I remember reading your post about outsourcing for printing. I guess that will simply things some, huh?

Great to know about Ovis. I see PW-protected PDFs every once in a while. I've been in printing/design in one capacity or another since 1991 myself. Officially (though management has made exceptions), we're not allowed by company policy to edit PDFs at the shop I work at - not even with Pit Stop or Acrobat's Preflight features - so I've had to find ways to work around that limitation, or else tell the customer to fix it or be okay with it as is. It's because of this policy that I rely on InDesign for CMYK interpolation of RGB PDFs.

Wow, I didn't know that about Preview, but then I've always either exported from ID, saved as from IL, or printed to .ps (or .prn out of Publisher) and distilled, as the case may be.

What do you print your seps on that's clean enough to shoot film from? Just curious. Last time I had any exposure to film (pun not originally intended, then thought about, then intended :) ) was maybe 8 years ago or so.
Yeah, things will be much simpler! Just a matter of making a PDF when done with a page and sending the PDF over. We have a 75 line screen (150dpi) and our press struggles. The printer we are sending to is the local printer for the Wall Street Journal and Barrons so we're in good hands.

I totally get your position. And truth to tell, I'd actually prefer being in that spot. We're a small community weekly and most of the junk we get is from local customers who can barely figure out how to turn their computers on, let alone understand what I'm trying to tell them. They have no design departments and are usually passing along a PDF made by some other paper or outfit. It's usually the wrong size for us and has other problems.

I can't kick it back because there's no one to kick it back to. The newspaper business is also a little odd in the sense that when you buy an ad the design services are free. So, technically, I'm being paid to tear their PDF apart and put it together in the ad space they booked. Eventually, you just learn to deal because you're the only one that can fix it. That's where the apps come in.

Newspapers are also in a special position in that we have lattitude to font substitute. We aren't making coffee table books or print campaigns. Just printing ads. So if I don't have the customer's font because it's now an image or it bitmapped because they didn't embed it I can try and match it as best I can. So, we're less restricted in that respect. Also, we can't guarantee an exact color match because this is newsprint. Except if you're calling for spot color. There are no bluelines, press match proofs or anything like that (and several customers have been told that they CANNOT have proofs before the run because there's no paper to run at that point). The color is adjusted over the course of the run and that's it. :D

We have two Xante 3G Accel-a-Writers. They are tabloid (11x17) printers. Our format therefore is tabloid (10.33"x16" or 62p x 96p). Pages are printed one by one on 11x17. For color pages we print seps, one 11x17 page per color.

My coworker who's done the pasteup for years and actually started the company on color has gridsheets wide enough for two imposed pages. The press can handle 24 pages max per section so assuming that, one of these gridsheets would have page 1 and 24, then the next would have 2 and 23 and so on. The separations are pasted down on separate grid sheets and the black only pages are just pasted down by themselves.

All of that goes down to camera where the gridsheet is shot in the darkroom and the negative generated. Then we strip together the two negs so we have a full printer spread of four pages. THAT gets put into the plate burner and it spits out the plate which then goes on the press.

The press itself is a Goss Community 300. We've got four stations (3 color, 1 B/W). Once the plates are mounted they forklift a 3000lb paper roll on to the spool, feed it in and start the run.

We usually do two sections and since everyone's been doing this forever we roll out one paper on Tuesday and the next on Wednesday. Our papers are direct mail so they have to be at the post office by Thursday and Friday.

Going with the new printer will allows us to have color on any page (instead of back/front/center spread) and will give us an enormous jump in quality. Right now because of the press and all the generations of getting the output to plate you can see the dot on our photos with the naked eye and our registration is just crap. We've been sending our special sections to the printer as a test for about a month now and the quality is just light years from what we can do ourselves.

Unfortunately for my coworker, she's been stuck with informing our print customers that they have to find an alternative printer.

macuser453787
Jul 12, 2013, 05:36 PM
Yeah, things will be much simpler! Just a matter of making a PDF when done with a page and sending the PDF over. We have a 75 line screen (150dpi) and our press struggles. The printer we are sending to is the local printer for the Wall Street Journal and Barrons so we're in good hands.

Sweet!

I totally get your position. And truth to tell, I'd actually prefer being in that spot. We're a small community weekly and most of the junk we get is from local customers who can barely figure out how to turn their computers on, let alone understand what I'm trying to tell them. They have no design departments and are usually passing along a PDF made by some other paper or outfit. It's usually the wrong size for us and has other problems.

Yep been there for sure! Yeah there is a certain freedom in being able to say that we can't edit customer-supplied PDFs. :)

I can't kick it back because there's no one to kick it back to. The newspaper business is also a little odd in the sense that when you buy an ad the design services are free. So, technically, I'm being paid to tear their PDF apart and put it together in the ad space they booked. Eventually, you just learn to deal because you're the only one that can fix it. That's where the apps come in.

I know what you mean. Often the case has been that it's quicker for me to just go ahead and fix an issue (via workaround) than to spend time on the phone or exchanging emails, explaining what needs to be done and possibly having to put the job on hold while waiting for the customer to get in touch with their customer, etc. Why do that when it takes me an extra couple of minutes to fix the folding margins (for example) and move the job along to the proof stage? Doing it this way keeps the job moving and allows the company a lot more flexibility with the jobs that we gang together because there's a larger pool of approved jobs to pick and choose from, which in turn keeps Press and Bindery moving along and not waiting around for things to do.

Newspapers are also in a special position in that we have lattitude to font substitute. We aren't making coffee table books or print campaigns. Just printing ads. So if I don't have the customer's font because it's now an image or it bitmapped because they didn't embed it I can try and match it as best I can. So, we're less restricted in that respect. Also, we can't guarantee an exact color match because this is newsprint. Except if you're calling for spot color. There are no bluelines, press match proofs or anything like that (and several customers have been told that they CANNOT have proofs before the run because there's no paper to run at that point). The color is adjusted over the course of the run and that's it. :D

That's a good deal. Most of the time we don't run color proofs unless client specifically orders them - other than that our jobs get run to density and that's it.

We have two Xante 3G Accel-a-Writers. They are tabloid (11x17) printers. Our format therefore is tabloid (10.33"x16" or 62p x 96p). Pages are printed one by one on 11x17. For color pages we print seps, one 11x17 page per color.

My coworker who's done the pasteup for years and actually started the company on color has gridsheets wide enough for two imposed pages. The press can handle 24 pages max per section so assuming that, one of these gridsheets would have page 1 and 24, then the next would have 2 and 23 and so on. The separations are pasted down on separate grid sheets and the black only pages are just pasted down by themselves.

All of that goes down to camera where the gridsheet is shot in the darkroom and the negative generated. Then we strip together the two negs so we have a full printer spread of four pages. THAT gets put into the plate burner and it spits out the plate which then goes on the press.

Wow man, that's quite a process. CTP is awesome I have to say. The closest I ever got to stuff that manual was operating a stat camera back in the early 90s. Well, that and doing matchprints back in the mid-90s days of service bureaus.

Going with the new printer will allows us to have color on any page (instead of back/front/center spread) and will give us an enormous jump in quality. Right now because of the press and all the generations of getting the output to plate you can see the dot on our photos with the naked eye and our registration is just crap. We've been sending our special sections to the printer as a test for about a month now and the quality is just light years from what we can do ourselves.

That's great and better all around for you guys and for the advertisers/customers/readers. Quality is important.

Unfortunately for my coworker, she's been stuck with informing our print customers that they have to find an alternative printer.

Along those lines, how is the transition going? PM me if you'd like more info about our shop, in case any of your print customers are interested in being referred to a printer rather than having to search for one.

And apologies for the delayed reply! :)

eyoungren
Jul 12, 2013, 05:53 PM
No worries. I PMed you.

ibbz
Jul 23, 2013, 09:28 AM
I have been a Macintosh owner for many many years, and have been upgrading when required since my first Macintosh in 1995.

Intel Mac's aren't the same, they're Intel - and Intel used to be classed as Wintel - part of the enemy as it were, and now we're sleeping with him.
But needs must and I have my third Intel Macintosh - an iMac i5 with thunderbolt. (I still have my previous two Intel Macs ((white iMac 17" and Core 2 Duo Aluminium iMac)

My route back to PowerPC started with my Macintosh Classic II. I have been using my Classic II for Word/Excel and Chess and it along with the Extended Keyboard is a joy to use. But I have always lusted after a Macintosh SE30 and recently I bought a Mint reconditioned one. And I must say, what a gorgeous work of art - sorry Sir Jonny Ive, but Frog Designs Classic Macintosh's are in a different league entirely, my SE30 is timeless in its beauty and elegance and the Bondi Blue iMac looks crap in comparison, and my SE30 is more precious than any modern Macintosh.

I mant to use my SE30 for Office, along with Chess, and especially Infocom Text Adventures and other adventure games.

My problems arose when I acquired a USB Floppy drive to transfer software from macintoshgarden and other software downloaded onto my iMac onto my SE30. Networking was out of the question - as I installed System 7.1 for speed (it had 7.5.3 previously but that hogged too much space and speed).
I installed Sheepshaver with 7.5.3 onto the iMac but it's next to useless as I cannot mount Drives normally within it.

The biggest pain in the arse was not being able to write to Mac OS formatted Floppy Disks and transfer files from the iMac to the SE30.
I then had to look at getting myself another Mac to act as a go-between the iMac and SE30 - and the logical obvious choice was a Powerbook.

I managed to pick up a Powerbook G4 1.67 with 1 GB of RAM and OS X Tiger. And even though it has the u,o,i, key problems (need to apply pressure on the trackpad to activate the key presses) it's fine!

it solved my problem, I am able to file share between it and the iMac by logging onto my iMac - and I was amazed at the fact that I could web browse pretty normally using Safari. I have experienced no problems so far, ok, it's a tad slower than the iMac but still perfectly usable.

The only issue I have is with streaming video - for this I just use Mactubes, but I prefer playing using software designed for it, rather than modern stuff which is obviously going to be incompatible or geared towards more modern Macs.

The Powerbook is wonderful, looks cool, much cooler and nicer designed than my nephews i5 MBP - the keyboard is also nicer and the only way the MBP trumps is in the fact that it has a modern screen!

I have a question though - how does the Powerbook G4 compare in purely computing power to the ARM chip in an iPhone 4? The iPhone 4 manages to play video flawlessly and mirrors it on Apple TV - I have heard tell that it's not about the CPU/GPU being slow but rather software incompatibility ie. websites and video sites being made for modern machines and not being optimised in any way shape or form for PPC.

I think there is a 'homebrew' future for PPC machines, and long may they survive, and macintoshgarden is fantastic, I'm able to play games, use productivity software for my PBG4 along with my legacy SE30 which predates the PowerPC G4 by many years.
I've just completed Myth II Soulblighter on my G4!

By the way, someone mentioned the Wii U - EA abandoned the Wii U NOT because of the CPU but because of a ridiculous demand they made which Nintendo obviously turned down.
The CPU in the Wii U is very easy to develop for - hence it's choice. XB1 and PS4 have shifted to AMD as they make the GPU and cross developing between PC, XB1 and PS4 is easier - and as devs work with PC's and X86 primarily, shifting to X86 on home games consoles is an obvious choice.

Nameci
Jul 23, 2013, 10:05 AM
I have a PB G4 1.67 HiRes, and I can say it is better than an iPhone 4, since I accomplish my office work with it. No complaints.

Gtravis3
Jul 23, 2013, 10:05 AM
Howdy,
I still use my single processor 1.8 G5, (2003). I bought it the day Apple put them in the store. I bought my son and wife MacBook Pros lately, and I hate them, or perhaps I should say I hates the OS. I feel like I'm using a big iPhone. :confused: At least 10.5.8 still feels like a computer OS, but then again I hang in the terminal a lot, and was pretty happy when the Internet was all command line, UNIX shell kinda stuff. Ok, the web ain't bad either.
It's interesting to note that all the original stuff is still working, but a second HD that I added just crashed after only 3 years use. And alas I think that the super optical drive is suspect; having issues with burning DVDs.

Intell
Jul 23, 2013, 10:12 AM
I have a question though - how does the Powerbook G4 compare in purely computing power to the ARM chip in an iPhone 4? The iPhone 4 manages to play video flawlessly and mirrors it on Apple TV - I have heard tell that it's not about the CPU/GPU being slow but rather software incompatibility ie. websites and video sites being made for modern machines and not being optimised in any way shape or form for PPC.

All iOS devices have a hardware decoder and all iOS devices starting with the 3Gs have an hardware encoder. This allows it to play videos without using very much processing power and to send a video stream to the Apple TV. According to GeekBench, the iPad 4 has a benchmark score around that of a mid range dual processor G5. However, the mid range G5 still outperforms the iPad in some tasks and the iPad outperforms the G5 at others. Don't forget, GeekBench scores are an artificial means to determine a device's usability and real world speed.

Jessica Lares
Jul 23, 2013, 11:24 AM
Howdy,
I still use my single processor 1.8 G5, (2003). I bought it the day Apple put them in the store. I bought my son and wife MacBook Pros lately, and I hate them, or perhaps I should say I hates the OS. I feel like I'm using a big iPhone. :confused: At least 10.5.8 still feels like a computer OS, but then again I hang in the terminal a lot, and was pretty happy when the Internet was all command line, UNIX shell kinda stuff. Ok, the web ain't bad either.
It's interesting to note that all the original stuff is still working, but a second HD that I added just crashed after only 3 years use. And alas I think that the super optical drive is suspect; having issues with burning DVDs.

I have one too. You need to upgrade the SuperDrive firmware most likely. You can do that within Leopard.

Merv'sG5
Sep 3, 2013, 06:38 AM
Hello All,

For years I tried to keep the PPC Dream alive, I have Powermac G5 Quad Core machine! But I had no choice but to bite the bullet and bought myself second hand Mac Pro. But there is no new software that is being made for PPC's anymore! I am not an Intel person, but I need to run new apps! Now I don't know what to do with my old G5! Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks in advance,
Merv Stent

Colpeas
Sep 3, 2013, 06:59 AM
Hello All,

For years I tried to keep the PPC Dream alive, I have Powermac G5 Quad Core machine! But I had no choice but to bite the bullet and bought myself second hand Mac Pro. But there is no new software that is being made for PPC's anymore! I am not an Intel person, but I need to run new apps! Now I don't know what to do with my old G5! Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks in advance,
Merv Stent

Same thing here. I had to get an Intel machine for my office, so I bought the last gen. 17-inch MacBook Pro. However, I'm going to keep the Quad around, I love that machine so much! Would be better if I had something to use it for, though.

SkyBell
Sep 11, 2013, 01:46 PM
Hello All,

For years I tried to keep the PPC Dream alive, I have Powermac G5 Quad Core machine! But I had no choice but to bite the bullet and bought myself second hand Mac Pro. But there is no new software that is being made for PPC's anymore! I am not an Intel person, but I need to run new apps! Now I don't know what to do with my old G5! Anyone have any ideas?

Thanks in advance,
Merv Stent

Same thing here. I had to get an Intel machine for my office, so I bought the last gen. 17-inch MacBook Pro. However, I'm going to keep the Quad around, I love that machine so much! Would be better if I had something to use it for, though.
I'm in sort of the same boat here. I love my eMac to death, but it was just getting to the point of being incredibly frustrating to find work-arounds and coping with outdated software trying to keep up in today's world. I swallowed a bit of my pride back in April and purchased a MacBook. But that 'ol eMac isn't going anywhere, I still try to share the workload between the two machines. ;)

kaelwhale
Sep 15, 2013, 01:08 AM
I resurrected a friend's dual G5 a few weeks ago; I installed a terabyte hard drive and 4 GB of RAM (it would have been 8, but a few of the RAM slots are dead). It's snappy running 10.4, and it feels just like a new machine. :)

I use it when I'm at my desk and as a backup server for my other macs. It's sad that Apple discontinues support for computers so quickly; a dual or quad G5 with ample RAM is just as capable of running ML as any intel mac.

Nameci
Sep 15, 2013, 11:00 AM
I resurrected a friend's dual G5 a few weeks ago; I installed a terabyte hard drive and 4 GB of RAM (it would have been 8, but a few of the RAM slots are dead). It's snappy running 10.4, and it feels just like a new machine. :)

I use it when I'm at my desk and as a backup server for my other macs. It's sad that Apple discontinues support for computers so quickly; a dual or quad G5 with ample RAM is just as capable of running ML as any intel mac.

For sure it cannot run ML even if the hardware would suffice. Apple stripped PPC code since Snow Leopard.

Intell
Sep 15, 2013, 01:10 PM
It's sad that Apple discontinues support for computers so quickly; a dual or quad G5 with ample RAM is just as capable of running ML as any intel mac.

With Apple moving to 64-bit only with Lion, G5s would have taken a very big performance hit. G5s run 64-bit binaries much slower than 32-bit due to the large overhead and slower memory interface. This would have resulted in even a late-2006 Mac Mini with a 1.86Ghz Core2Duo surpassing a quad with ease when running 10.7 or any other 64-bit native binary. And with Apple's push to make Snow Leopard completely 64-bit, it was then that Apple chose to drop PowerPC support. In summation, a G5 is not as capable due to how it handles 64-bit binaries.

SkyBell
Sep 15, 2013, 08:06 PM
With Apple moving to 64-bit only with Lion, G5s would have taken a very big performance hit. G5s run 64-bit binaries much slower than 32-bit due to the large overhead and slower memory interface. This would have resulted in even a late-2006 Mac Mini with a 1.86Ghz Core2Duo surpassing a quad with ease when running 10.7 or any other 64-bit native binary. And with Apple's push to make Snow Leopard completely 64-bit, it was then that Apple chose to drop PowerPC support. In summation, a G5 is not as capable due to how it handles 64-bit binaries.
Finally, a tangible reason behind the relatively quick abandonment of PPC architecture; at least the first one I've ever heard.

Nameci
Sep 16, 2013, 02:01 AM
With Apple moving to 64-bit only with Lion, G5s would have taken a very big performance hit. G5s run 64-bit binaries much slower than 32-bit due to the large overhead and slower memory interface. This would have resulted in even a late-2006 Mac Mini with a 1.86Ghz Core2Duo surpassing a quad with ease when running 10.7 or any other 64-bit native binary. And with Apple's push to make Snow Leopard completely 64-bit, it was then that Apple chose to drop PowerPC support. In summation, a G5 is not as capable due to how it handles 64-bit binaries.

Makes sense, indeed.

kaelwhale
Sep 16, 2013, 04:06 PM
And with Apple's push to make Snow Leopard completely 64-bit, it was then that Apple chose to drop PowerPC support.
They could have compiled Snow Leopard in universal binary though, yes?

I'm not trying to argue that it was unreasonable of Apple to drop support for the PowerPC architecture, I just think that the G5 would have been easily capable of running Snow Leopard (and perhaps Lion, if it had been made 32-bit compatible). While it is true that almost all first-gen intel Macs are faster than PowerPC Macs, I think people underestimate the G5.

By the way - thank you for your explanation of Apple's decision to drop support for PowerPC, I had never heard that before!

ihuman:D
Sep 16, 2013, 04:10 PM
They could but support for Leopard ended in '11 when ML was released, I think the average lifespan of a computer is 5 years now so they still got support.

Intell
Sep 16, 2013, 04:27 PM
They could have compiled Snow Leopard in universal binary though, yes?

They could have, but I think it was a decision made by Apple to let the G5's ride out their life well. If they allowed the G5's to run 64-bit Snow Leopard, people would have complained at how slow it was compared to the lesser powered Core2Duo Minis. If Apple didn't compile it for 64-bit, but only 32-bit G5's, then people would have complained at why wasn't it 64-bit like the Intell version and why is it limited to only G5's and not the similarly powered G4's. Then there's the path Apple chose, drop PowerPC support completely. This is the best choice because it allowed Apple to slim down Snow Leopard and give it the speed over Leopard it's known for. People still complained about Apple dropping support for PowerPC, mostly without knowing why. But once they know why, they tend to agree with Apple's choices.

Mr. Retrofire
Sep 16, 2013, 04:36 PM
With Apple moving to 64-bit only with Lion, G5s would have taken a very big performance hit. G5s run 64-bit binaries much slower than 32-bit due to the large overhead and slower memory interface.
I'm sure you have a source for your claim. I doubt that, because the memory bus is already 128-bit on these machines. And btw, the instruction cache (64 KB per processor) accelerates the code execution.

Source:
https://developer.apple.com/legacy/library/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G5/PowerMacG5/PowerMacG5.pdf

kaelwhale
Sep 16, 2013, 04:39 PM
People still complained about Apple dropping support for PowerPC, mostly without knowing why. But once they know why, they tend to agree with Apple's choices.

I see, thank you for clarifying!

Intell
Sep 16, 2013, 04:44 PM
I'm sure you have a source for your claim. I doubt that, because the memory bus is already 128-bit on these machines. And btw, the instruction cache (64 KB per processor) accelerates the code execution.

It's all in this lovely article about Snow Leopard and 64-bit: http://appleinsider.com/articles/08/08/26/road_to_mac_os_x_10_6_snow_leopard_64_bits.html/page/1

And have you ever personally ran a 64-bit PowerPC binary? It's noticeably slower than the comparable 32-bit.

Mr. Retrofire
Sep 17, 2013, 01:08 AM
And have you ever personally ran a 64-bit PowerPC binary? It's noticeably slower than the comparable 32-bit.
This is probably a compiler related problem (i.e. the “newer” 64-Bit PowerPC compilers generated non-optimized code). I doubt that this is a hardware problem. AFAIK, the G5 processor was the first 64-Bit PowerPC processor in a Mac. Apple had probably no time to write optimized compilers for the 64-Bit PowerPC platform.

Wildy
Sep 17, 2013, 04:38 AM
Apple didn't write the compiler - their toolchain at the time used GCC (although with a lot of Apple contributions I'm sure).

Intell
Sep 17, 2013, 08:22 AM
This is probably a compiler related problem (i.e. the “newer” 64-Bit PowerPC compilers generated non-optimized code). I doubt that this is a hardware problem. AFAIK, the G5 processor was the first 64-Bit PowerPC processor in a Mac. Apple had probably no time to write optimized compilers for the 64-Bit PowerPC platform.

It isn't a compiler problem. Even 64-but Linux runs much slower than 32-bit Linux on a G5. It's just how the hardware was designed.

rabidz7
Sep 22, 2013, 01:30 PM
It isn't a compiler problem. Even 64-but Linux runs much slower than 32-bit Linux on a G5. It's just how the hardware was designed.

Does that mean I shouldn't upgrade my Debian to 64 bit?

UncleSchnitty
Sep 23, 2013, 01:54 PM
I love my G5 and its sad that it sits in another room now not doing anything. Every so often (now being one of them) I try to find something I can use it for. The machine works great the only issue is the inability to upgrade anything now. Now I have been running a Early 08 8-core Mac Pro and when a new os gets announced I immediately check the requirements. With mavericks coming the requirements are very close to excluding my computer. Why? Idk but I guess my point is its just sad when an entire system gets phased out. Apple used to be awesome with "backwards compatibility" but now it seems like Linux and Microsoft have become much better at that game. I just installed windows 8 on a laptop from 2004 and that thing runs impressively smooth.

I get it, it costs apple a lot of money to keep aging hardware alive. If they kept PPC going they would have developed 2 sets of the same operating system and software. -It would look like they have a slow version and a fast version of something. -Low end users would have no reason to upgrade. -Sales of new hardware would move slower.
But the other Os companies are keeping support so we will see. I guess my overall point is its still sad to see a perfectly good system just sit there because its not really supported anymore.

SkyBell
Sep 26, 2013, 01:11 PM
I love my G5 and its sad that it sits in another room now not doing anything. Every so often (now being one of them) I try to find something I can use it for. The machine works great the only issue is the inability to upgrade anything now. Now I have been running a Early 08 8-core Mac Pro and when a new os gets announced I immediately check the requirements. With mavericks coming the requirements are very close to excluding my computer. Why? Idk but I guess my point is its just sad when an entire system gets phased out. Apple used to be awesome with "backwards compatibility" but now it seems like Linux and Microsoft have become much better at that game. I just installed windows 8 on a laptop from 2004 and that thing runs impressively smooth.

I get it, it costs apple a lot of money to keep aging hardware alive. If they kept PPC going they would have developed 2 sets of the same operating system and software. -It would look like they have a slow version and a fast version of something. -Low end users would have no reason to upgrade. -Sales of new hardware would move slower.
But the other Os companies are keeping support so we will see. I guess my overall point is its still sad to see a perfectly good system just sit there because its not really supported anymore.
It is indeed a shame; I myself was always quite peeved that us PPC users couldn't at the very least have the huge improvement that is Snow Leopard; I run it on my MacBook, and it truly blows Leopard out of the water. I suppose perhaps at least some of that effect is due to the removal of PPC code, but still... :o

Just the other day though, I did a Tiger reinstall for the first time ever on my eMac; it had been running an installation that I had cloned from an old iBook G3's dying hard drive way back in 2007, and transferred between multiple Macs since, so you can probably imagine the awful shape that OS install was in after 8 years. :p I wiped and formatted the whole drive, started completely over fresh and anew with an install DVD I recently acquired.

And WOW! :eek: The difference in speed and smoothness throughout not just the OS, but the apps as well, is mind-blowing. I had forgotten this ol' tank could boot in less than two minutes. :o Well worth the time and effort, she feels like a brand new machine again! :)

m7891lla
Sep 29, 2013, 07:48 PM
...not only do not have character, they do not have a soul. Peroid. Steve was already in the process of dying when the switch happened, and the death of PowerPC was the death of the real Apple. Tim Cook's Apple is a pale iphone inspired ghost of the truly great company that one was. Before you call me a poser, I've been an Apple user since 82 and a Mac user since 87. I was there in the darkest days, evangelizing like a madman. I've used and sold more macs than I've had hot meals in the last twenty five years.

Just think of some of the macs made between 98 and 2006...

Wallstreets
Pismos
Titaniums
Bondi Blue and other G3 imacs
G4 imacs
Powermac G4's

Think of the OS'es

9 (yes, I like 9, still), Jaguar, Panther, Tiger. I am deliberately leaving out Cheetah and Puma which were beta releases.

Name anything post 2006 that is even in the same league design/function wise as the above. Don't say Macbook Air, cause those are unupgradable Chinese McGarbage. Those machines had...soul. Yes, I am deliberately leaving out the G5's, which pretty much sucked. Lion, Mountain Lion? Suck. Snow Leopard? Doesn't suck as much, mostly cause it still supports PowerPC apps through Rosetta, IMHO.

Truth is, I'd rather own a Dell or Lenovo than any new Intel Mac. I've only owned two Intel macs and they were both garbage. Just one former fanboys opinion.

When I have to switch to x86 it will be going to AMD. I will also be using linux. I do not want to use a mac that is just an overpriced PC. I loved macs when they were special, when they were different, when apple actually thought different. But now AAPL is more focused on iCrap (iPhone, iPad, iPod) than producing quality computers. Now AMD is the company to switch to after PowerPC macs become too slow for use. With AMD you get to be part of a new rebel CPU architecture. Even though AMD is just a small company, much smaller than intell or nVidia, they can still produce great quality products.
:apple:

My thoughts exactly, I just retired my 1st gen MacBook unibody for a Pismo. Apple has no soul or innovation anymore. There is no joy in using their products. I switched to a Macintosh SE around the Windows 95/98 era and never looked back. I would trash pick a machine or get one from a thrift store or school basement until I could afford a more modern unit. When the iMac came out, I was using a PowerBook 180c with a c-clamp on the display to put pressure on the screen to make the bottom third work.
From the 180c, I moved to a Centris 610 and then I eventually got a PowerBook G3 Wallstreet.
From there it was an even deeper love. I got an old Blue and White G3 and followed up with a Gigabit Ethernet G4. Eventually rebuilding a Pismo with eBay parts. I used that dear Pismo until it died in a Jeep accident where she came crashing down onto the floorboard and met her death.
I replaced my Pismo with a 12" PowerBook G4 which was somewhat fun to use. That machine had some issues so I eventually bit the bullet and purchased a unibody MacBook. From day one, I hated the keyboard and two-tone paint scheme. Sure the display was crystal clear and the multi-touch trackpad was cool but it wasnt a Mac. It had a wintel processor. Several months ago, the trackpad became erratic and for the past year the battery has been needing replaced. That is a relatively short life for a Macintosh considering my SE and Classic still run flawlessly floppy disk drives and all.
So what did I replace my MacBook with? A 400Mhz Pismo. I love it, I should have done it sooner. I love the keyboard, I love the sexy black curves and I love the upside-down illuminated Apple on the lid. I love the dual battery option but most of all, I love the not wintel processor. I embrace the Think Different mentality, I dont care about Windows compatibility issues, if I wanted compatibility, I would have been a PC user way back in the SE years.
I want a machine with soul, with character, with beauty. Apple left that behind years ago.
I have since upgraded to an Other World Computing 120GB SSD, have an 802.11n USB adapter on its way as well as a USB 2.0/Bluetooth PCMCIA card. I also plan to get some replacement parts for stock to keep her alive as the prices are rising and they are becoming more and more scarce.
She runs at 400Mhz with 512MB of RAM (I have a 500Mhz daughtercard on the way) and the original battery has at least a two hour life.

She boots in 41 seconds with OS X 10.4.11, yes, 41 seconds!

As for everyday use against the MacBook, I have not looked back.

I remember when using a Macintosh was not only thinking differently, it was also about standing up to Redmond and living differently.

Here's to the Crazy Ones!

The misfits.

The rebels.

The troublemakers.

The round pegs in the square holes.

The ones who see things differently.

They're not fond of rules.
And they have no respect for the status quo.

You can praise them, disagree with them, quote them,
disbelieve them, glorify or vilify them.
About the only thing you can't do is ignore them.

Because they change things.

They invent. They imagine. They heal.
They explore. They create. They inspire.
They push the human race forward.

Maybe they have to be crazy.

How else can you stare at an empty canvas & see a work of art?
Or, sit in silence & hear a song that's never been written?
Or, gaze at a red planet & see a laboratory on wheels?

We make tools for these kinds of people.

While some see them as the crazy ones, we see genius.

"Because the people who are crazy enough to think they
can change the world, are the ones who do."

:apple:

Andropov
Sep 30, 2013, 02:14 PM
My thoughts exactly, I just retired my 1st gen MacBook unibody for a Pismo. Apple has no soul or innovation anymore. There is no joy in using their products. I switched to a Macintosh SE around the Windows 95/98 era and never looked back. I would trash pick a machine or get one from a thrift store or school basement until I could afford a more modern unit. When the iMac came out, I was using a PowerBook 180c with a c-clamp on the display to put pressure on the screen to make the bottom third work.
From the 180c, I moved to a Centris 610 and then I eventually got a PowerBook G3 Wallstreet.
From there it was an even deeper love. I got an old Blue and White G3 and followed up with a Gigabit Ethernet G4. Eventually rebuilding a Pismo with eBay parts. I used that dear Pismo until it died in a Jeep accident where she came crashing down onto the floorboard and met her death.
I replaced my Pismo with a 12" PowerBook G4 which was somewhat fun to use. That machine had some issues so I eventually bit the bullet and purchased a unibody MacBook. From day one, I hated the keyboard and two-tone paint scheme. Sure the display was crystal clear and the multi-touch trackpad was cool but it wasnt a Mac. It had a wintel processor. Several months ago, the trackpad became erratic and for the past year the battery has been needing replaced. That is a relatively short life for a Macintosh considering my SE and Classic still run flawlessly floppy disk drives and all.
So what did I replace my MacBook with? A 400Mhz Pismo. I love it, I should have done it sooner. I love the keyboard, I love the sexy black curves and I love the upside-down illuminated Apple on the lid. I love the dual battery option but most of all, I love the not wintel processor. I embrace the Think Different mentality, I dont care about Windows compatibility issues, if I wanted compatibility, I would have been a PC user way back in the SE years.
I want a machine with soul, with character, with beauty. Apple left that behind years ago.
I have since upgraded to an Other World Computing 120GB SSD, have an 802.11n USB adapter on its way as well as a USB 2.0/Bluetooth PCMCIA card. I also plan to get some replacement parts for stock to keep her alive as the prices are rising and they are becoming more and more scarce.
She runs at 400Mhz with 512MB of RAM (I have a 500Mhz daughtercard on the way) and the original battery has at least a two hour life.

She boots in 41 seconds with OS X 10.4.11, yes, 41 seconds!

As for everyday use against the MacBook, I have not looked back.

I remember when using a Macintosh was not only thinking differently, it was also about standing up to Redmond and living differently.


In what twisted universe is a MacBook Pro worse than a 400Mhz Pismo from 1999? You can't seriously say that Apple computers have no soul anymore just because the "Wintel" processors. So what, the last PowerBook G4 was a wonderful computer but the first MacBook Pro, which looks identical (except for the iSight) is a lonely, soulless computer?

m7891lla
Sep 30, 2013, 10:21 PM
Not only the intel processors but the loss of class. I feel like ever since Apple has shifted from the underdog to the company known for flashy iPods and iPads and iWhatevers, their quality and soul has plummeted. Their products do not last near as long, and as other users on this thread have commented it is not the same company it used to be. Who remembers the flatscreen iMac or the eMac or the Mac Mini like the legendary all in one G3 or the Kanga or the SE and SE/30? What about the ads like the Orwellian 1984 run or the PowerBook G3 steamroller crushing PC laptops? The Pentium II riding on the back of the slug?
Ever since Apple hasn't needed to worry about keeping up and fighting the man, it is a different culture. Not one I want to be a part of.
Quality is down expandability is down, it is more of a make something smaller and ship it as soon as possible and hype it up as much as possible rather than making a bulletproof work of art.
Maybe I do live in a twisted world when I would rather use a Pismo than a stupid MacBook, but I dont think I am alone.
As for the PowerBook G4 models, I never really thought they were anything special either.

alexrmc92
Oct 2, 2013, 01:50 AM
Not only the intel processors but the loss of class. I feel like ever since Apple has shifted from the underdog to the company known for flashy iPods and iPads and iWhatevers, their quality and soul has plummeted. Their products do not last near as long, and as other users on this thread have commented it is not the same company it used to be. Who remembers the flatscreen iMac or the eMac or the Mac Mini like the legendary all in one G3 or the Kanga or the SE and SE/30? What about the ads like the Orwellian 1984 run or the PowerBook G3 steamroller crushing PC laptops? The Pentium II riding on the back of the slug?
Ever since Apple hasn't needed to worry about keeping up and fighting the man, it is a different culture. Not one I want to be a part of.
Quality is down expandability is down, it is more of a make something smaller and ship it as soon as possible and hype it up as much as possible rather than making a bulletproof work of art.
Maybe I do live in a twisted world when I would rather use a Pismo than a stupid MacBook, but I dont think I am alone.
As for the PowerBook G4 models, I never really thought they were anything special either.

This really doesn't have much to do with apple changing. When apple moved to Intel it was because IBM would not make a newer processor that supported apple's needs. IBM makes the most power hungry powerful chips they can make, which is why we never had a G5 laptop. Intel on the other hand was catching up and had low power chip designs ready to go. Intel catching up with IBM all had to do with chip design. Basically they started realizing late P3 / early P4 that RISC was the way to go and started making it's newer chips in a RISC fashion.

If you were to look at an intel chip today it's pretty much a RISC processor with a CISC compatibility layer built in. In the early days this is why SPARC and POWER were so much faster than intel chips, but now they are all pretty much equivalent in their own respects.

Intell
Oct 2, 2013, 10:42 AM
Don't forget that Apple wanted to go 64-bit. The G5, while a 64-bit design, didn't perform very well when it came to 64-bit tasks and was considerably slower than contemporary Intell and AMD designs.