I want a powerbook that can run osx and xp perfectly, would a G5 powerbook be able to

[DavidCL23]

I want a powerbook that can run osx and xp perfectly, would a G5 powerbook be able to? When I fork $3000 over for a laptop I expect it to last my 4 years at college, and I don't believe the current 667mhz g4 powerbook will.

[eyelikeart]

I don't think XP is available in a "Virtual PC" type of release....?

why do u want to have the ability to run XP on a PowerBook?

[DavidCL23]

I want one computer to use for every task, which includes XP. I have a 1.6ghz athlon XP at home, and it screems in XP while my labs dual 800mhz g4 is unbearably slow.

[IndyGopher]

Originally posted by eyelikeart
I don't think XP is available in a "Virtual PC" type of release....?

why do u want to have the ability to run XP on a PowerBook?

XP installs on Virtual PC 5 without much bother. It is, however, agonizingly slow... at least under Mac OS X. (Which is certainly not an XP-only problem) However, I don't believe Connectix has a OS Pack that includes Windows XP, so it's a manual install. If you are intent on doing this, though, I would strongly recommend getting Connectix' Windows 2000 pack and using an XP upgrade on it. This will put all the additions and tweaked drivers in there. (the wide screen mode for the G4 powerbooks and Cinema displays, though, don't seem to survive the upgrade. After the upgrade my PBG4 now thinks "full screen" is 1024x768. I haven't cared enough to see if I can fix that.) It's probably wiser to let Connectix do their own XP pack before making the jump. XP doesn't offer enough "new" stuff to make the switch from 2000 worth the manual hassle.

[mozez]

one, the g5 power book will not come out for a long time, talking maybe a year or more, second, yes, motorolla owns amd, which has put forth most of the architecture of the new g5, making it more windows compatible, same with ram and board, so the rumor is that if you have a 1 ghz g5, it should run xp in virtual pc, which they do have!! cause i have it, (it runs beyond slow ok, beyond, but recognizes my dvd player) at the same clock speed comparitively, like 1gz g5 = 1 ghz pIII cause virtual pc doesn't use the risk processing

[DavidCL23]

How long ago did motorolla buy AMD? Also how much did they pay?

[colocolo]

A couple of things here:

Motorola does NOT own AMD.

I still don't get why would you possibly want to run XP, unless its for a specific application. In fact, you may want your computer to run a specific program maybe, but in no case a specific OS. And in what sense is your Athlon so much faster than the dual 800 G4? In what specific task?

Let's try to bring this long argument about speed and put some numbers on it so that we may all discuss this with facts :)

[mac_airport]

perhaps mot bought amd after the close of regular trading today?...oh my, what will sanders do now?...i doubt his taste in clothes will go over well at mot...

on a serious note, mot just reported earnings today; here is a link to a reuters story:

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/nm/20020122/tc/tech_motorola_earns_dc_4.html

note the following from the story:

"...motorola...is in the process of slashing almost a third of its work force...":eek:

[j763]

XP emulation on a mac is S-L-O-W. That's fine if you're going to be running small apps on XP. If you want to run games or more resource-hungry programs -- forget about it. You have to think about what you want to do with your machine, instead of just saying "Oh, i want a laptop that runs xp and osx"...

[Choppaface]

VPC is great for like MP3 sharing or doing webpage tests...but don't expect to do regular 3DSMAX work in it :D

[mac15]

gee you are a newbie
xp won't run 3d apps, it barely runs solitare (in os x)
how did you get into college

[DavidCL23]

Well, I want to have xp on my system for divx files (over 1000 on my skewls network) and games.

[mozez]

for colocolo
first, motorolla is a "parent company" to amd, amd is a subsiderary, i think i spelled that wrong, of motorolla, basically, motorolla is like a big investor, has say on the board and such, and amd also has a dual, so don't try and say athlon versus dual 800, no, dual athlon versus dual g4, and since i am comparing i will note what i use a computer for, dvd ripping, graphics, games, and 3d work (i'm a maya animator so yes i am sorta biased) now, for photoshop i use my powerbook, aftereffects, powerbook, fun, powerbook, but everything else, amd, there is no question, games, faster, 3d, no question, dvd rip, no contest even when you tell it to use altivec. but, my point is apple is smart, they see a good idea and want to make their computers better, as they should, they want to always look at pcs and laugh. i'm all for apple using good hardware ideas, it benifits you ya know. let me guess though, you just can't believe that a pc chip maker had an idea that apple didn't and that apple atually wants to use it. grow up. pc technology is alot better than you think, and if you question it, just know that apple is a pc, now more than ever, you wanna bash ms, fine, but don't bash the chip makers and hardware makers. cause apple uses the same ones you see in dell, ibm, hp and everyone else. in specific task, maya, frame rates aren't even close, it can't handle dual processor support on the mac, yet(i can't wait for it to be bteer don't get me wrong ok) it can't support the newest features so it's a version behind on the mac, it's also dreadfully slow compared to even older pcs in render times. that's me though, that's what i use my stuff for, maybe you don't even use maya and so it doesn't matter. so start the bashing, be kind

[Choppaface]

i got 3dsmax to run on win 2000 in VPC..and it was very...very slow
VPC4 BTW

Originally posted by DavidCL23
Well, I want to have xp on my system for divx files (over 1000 on my skewls network) and games.

for divx, there's a mac divx player at mac.divx.st if that helps

[colocolo]

mozez:

i think you are way off the line with your post.

If teh fact is that Motorola owns AMD as you claim, then ok, its my mistake and thanks for the correction. It comes as a surprise at me though, and i even checked the amd site for any clue of what you were saying before stating that they weren't related. Guess I didn't look so hard.

As for the rest of your post, come on man, try and relax a little! :)

I just asked for "numbers", as I see claims from many sides giving antagonizing information about which system is faster. I just thought it would be good to start posting facts so that we can see what does everyone mean when saying this is a lot faster than the other. Just to add credibility nd to help the common knowledge base, you know.

Try to cool up and don't read so much between lines please, ok? It's surprising all the stuff you have to say about a simple request to post numerical comparisons!! :D :D

So, i ask again, i hope you get the idea now, I'll try to be as nice as possible:

can you give us some kind of benchmark when stating your athlon system (single-dual-quad- whatever, I NEVER said anything about it not being capable of dual processors!) and the dual 800, both computers you say you use?

I just ask this to everyone who posts things like "this system is faster than this other one" so that we can try and get an idea of the real deal

[DavidCL23]

Thanks, that is what I was looking for, this divx player rocks!

[colocolo]

You can do a lot more things on the mac than people tend to believe, david!
that's why you should always look for the kind of stuff you want to do instead of just trying to run a specific OS, in the first place.
About the games, there are tons of cool games out there for the mac, most of the better ones aren't even the ones that get the bigger publicity from Apple.
But if you have a set of favorite games that do not exist for the Mac, then you will have no choice there, and no way of running them on Virtual PC. If you really "need" them, I guess the only solution would be to get a PC(I can't believe I'm saying this!:) ), or just change your gaming portfolio

[AlphaTech]

I am curious.. Has anyone done comparisons with VPC (either 4 of 5) with win2k, and either xp (for extra profit to m$), or w98??

For VERY simple tasks, and I am talking from very little experience/use, vpc4 with win98 was ok (at best) on a G3 powerbook (upgraded to 512MB of RAM). I have not yet used vpc5 at all, so I do not know how it compares. According to Connectix it is supposed to be faster, but we all know how software makers claims should be taken (with a bag of salt most of the time). I haven't heard from the person that the software was installed on, mainly because she is in CA most of the time, and I am in MA.

Once upon a time, I picked up the emulator called 'realpc' since I was told by the store that I bought it that it was faster then virtual pc (was on the same shelf and version 3 I believe). It was dog slow on just about anything, and had extreme problems with allowing me to go online from within the pc part. I upgraded the RAM, the processor, and put in a pair of Seagate Cheetah hard drives. Just about everything I could do to eek out a bit more performance from the computer. I couldn't notice any difference in speed even after all that (on realpc, I did notice improvements on the Mac side).

[mozez]

colocolo, see, you missed my point, for each application and what people use their computers for, numbers will go back and forth, this is better than this, but, what is fair? what would you conisder a "fair" fight, you go to some pc website and they put dual 2.2ghz xeons with 2 mb backside caches and 15,00 rpm scsi drives and 2 gigs of ram against a 733 and say look we are faster, and then apple on their own site put a dual 800 with scsi drives, and maxed on ram against a lower class, single pentium 4 with standard ram. now, i have to set this up so agree on it first, it's gonna take my boss's approval but that's fine, he's cool. want to do this by price or what. because if i put 3500 worth of equipment on one of our dual athlons, it's kinda unfair ya know, honostly, i mean we'd be talkin totally different hardware specs. if you want to go spec for spec i'd have to go lower in technology, so how can i do that? how does that prove anything. numbers don't work, they never will. if you want i just flat out list the stats of the systems and give you frame rates and scene files, is that ok? like 4 viewport fps, rendering fps, shaded and textured view fps, that i can do tomorrow if you want, but it's still not really fair. you're talking a maya that has for years been optimized on a pc and a new unoptimized older version of maya on a mac, if that's what you want don't be pissed when you see the results. it's comparing two things that can't be compared, the results in numbers won't prove anything, but if you want em, fine.

[Onyxx]

running xp on your mac to play divx mpeg 4 movies because you don't feel like actually looking around ( um like dude, try like google and stuff, huuuuuh [may i add that the first response on the google search engine under "mac divx" is a link to that divx player which has been around for a pretty long time]) and doing the minimal amount of research required to gleen an answer to your own question. two words. PeeCee User.

Whoo that was a mouth full.

[xelterran]

lets face it, when g5's come out at around 1.4ghz - 2ghz duel or more processors they are going to wipe the floor with p4's xeon's and amd's.

[tadpole]

hey guys, i hate to tell you all, but the Moz man is valid. there is a lot of Mac "jingoism" going on here. If you want hard raw data, just check out the latest SpecInt numbers. as for me, I've been a lifelong PC man with a healthy respect for Unix boxes, I'm a biochem major, so we need fast brawny brutual machines to model proteins, i run linux, solaris, irix and xp. i was for the longest time hoping like the rest of you all for a nice cheap 64bit unix box from Apple (G5 with OSX sans the crappy UI) but alas, this may not be, and Sun is selling a 64bit box for $795 academic price with an UltraSparc processor. you know what my schtick with OS10 is? Its not a standard unix, I've been getting a lot of data from the boys down in the university networking/tech dept. and the concensus is, she's not entirely posix compatible. i would like to see a full on Unix OS from Apple, perhaps a pro version of OS10 without glitz of the wholly inefficient yet eye candy UI and a lot of the raw power that I can get from a tricked up version of Linux or standard Solaris (btw Solaris 9 is coming out, and she's a beautiful beast!). So lay off of Mozez, he's in his right to cut down on the uneducated consumers out there. Suck it up yo!

[ftaok]

Moz may be right about the tech specs, but he's way off base about the Motorola stuff.

First of all, it's spelled "Motorola" not "motorolla". But that's just ticky-tacky stuff.

AMD is not owned in whole or in part by Motorola. About the only things connecting the two companies are HyperTransport, the semi-conductor biz, and Hector Ruiz.

Your arguments would be much more convincing if not for the obvious errors of such simple facts.

[TEG]

I run a PBG4 500, and have no problems running Divx encoded files, in .avi, .mpg, .asf, or .mov. Using the latest DIVX drivers for Quicktime, and AVI to MOV certainly helps. And on my schools, dorm network, 90% of the PCs have NIMDA, so who wants a PC, even for games, I've had no problem, aside from having to boot into OS 9 for multiplayer games. (www.divx.com has the latest mac plugins)

OSX....
OSX is great, aside from no support for IPX, its excellent. Any one saying otherwise is off of his/her rocker.

VPC
My Mac runs Win 98SE in Virtual PC 4, and a friend of mine has VPC 5. We ran them side by side and his kicked mine's butt. We both were running idntical systems so I'd say VPC 5 is OK. And VPC 4, runs Win98SE faster than my home PC, K6-2/550, 512MB Ram, 14GB HD (BTW I'm at school now, so no pc for me :D )


Thank God for Steve and Steve


PowerBook G4 500Mhz, 20Gb HD, DVD, 256MB Ram, OSX 10.1.2, OS 9.2.2, Win 98SE (Via Virtual PC 4...soon to be 5)

[chicagdan]

Could we please restore some sanity to this board ... AMD is not a subsidiary of Motorola, it is a PUBLICLY TRADED CORPORATION. If it were a wholy-owned subsidiary, you wouldn't be able to buy stock in it.

Does Motorola have an investment (which would mean holding non-controlling shares) in AMD? Perhaps ... after all, Microsoft holds non-controlling shares of Apple. But such investments merely get you a seat on the board, they don't equal managing control of the company.

And I'm not even sure Motorola has invested in AMD. Whoever is spreading this god-awful, stupid information really should learn more and blather less.

[tadpole]

Okay dude, the fact that most people in your dorm have NIMDA says that 1.) Your university has a crappy firewall up. 2.) People are irresponsible about their machines, most viruscan suites with the most up to date dat files will catch Nimda. 3.) Personal firewalls are free.

Okay about your OSX worship, look, it claims to be UNIX, but it is not POSIX compliant. So for it to be more amendable for the porting of various Unix software, it must rachet its kernal up a notch. I believe that FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD were all based on SVR2 kernals, so was mach. They have since added modern modules with the latest builds, but it is still nonetheless behind the modern Unix's like Solaris which is post SVR5. Furthermore, when you attack a PC you must make a distinction between the hardware and the software. When I run my AMD with Mandrake, I have a machine that is mad fast, stable and looks darn nice with Gnome. If you think that Apple is the end all be all with hardware, then where is the DDR? and why do the graphics chipsets appear in the so called PC world first? Geforce/ATI all made their chipsets public on PC's first. Also, a Mac is a PC! Your frontside bus is already a generation behind in speed, so no matter how much you pump up the CPU, the bottle neck in the FSB is going to be there. Sure, you can say that the G5 is going to solve all of this, sure you can worship vaporware, but where does that get you?

Children like to harp about how nice their toys are, in the big world, kiddo, if we want Unix, not unix-like, we go with AIX, Solaris and IRIX, not OSX. Have you even compiled a kernel mod before? Do you even know how to mount journaling file systems? Do you even know the difference between a workstation class graphics chipset and your everyday video chipset? Kid, have you ever constructed your own Unix box? or Any box?

Thats right, kiddo, shut up.

[spikey]

I know microsoft did have a hell of alot of Apples shares.
But i dont think they have them any more, no?

just trying to confuse the boards even more than they are already.

[spikey]

Yeah you are right tadpole.
but people shouldnt bash OSX just because it doesnt do something it wasnt made to do.
You people (whoever you are) shouldnt be comparing OSX to solaris, 2 different things for different purposes really. OSX does what it was meant to do, and reasonably well, apart from quartz which is ok but not the best.

The G5 will bring a new era to apple computing, the G5 will bring with it DDR, which will inturn bring with it a faster FSB. It will leave the delayed Hammer series in the ****.
But as you say, for now its all vapourware.

[networkman]

the worship of os x is fine even though tadpole doesn't seem to think the hardware and software is "up to date"...the problem i have more than that is that os x takes a lot of ram and i can't use it on my old rev a ibook comfortably...i think that is more pertinent to many thousands of users than if a box has ddr ram

most consumers, the ones who have the spending power in high tech, don't even know that there are different types of ram

i always love to see the perspective of a "student" spouting off "hypothetical" facts as if they were important but wait until you become a techie in the real working world, tadpole, and see what facts are important

i see students say that because sgi boxes are better than windows boxes, they should be the one taking over...it's not about who is the best, this is business, not a hardware/software competition

if you are a computer science student, realize that you will have to unlearn most of what your professors told you unless they are in the field working right now and teaching on the side

i have a couple of college degrees and industry certifications and i teach also so i am certainly not down on education

and realize that unix may be cool in theory and in practice in your ivory tower cocoon (like beOS), but the real world runs windows with all its flaws and downsides and apple's os x is used more than all the other flavors of unix combined

my unix, linux, and beos friends are out of work in silicon valley because they refuse to go where the market is and would rather work at starbucks and be "those superior unix dudes" and knock windows and apple all day long (but there is something to be said for those true "believers" out of the mainstream, too, since woz was one)

but are you willing to be a starving innovator? (woz made out ok because he was lucky enough to know steve jobs)

this is not a criticism, but just put in a decade or two in the working world, see how it sucks, and you may get a better perspective before you attack TEG

but both of you have pertinent points and if others look carefully at your two posts, they are not necessarily in conflict against each other

[Pelorus]

Originally posted by tadpole
hey guys, i hate to tell you all, but the Moz man is valid. there is a lot of Mac "jingoism" going on here. If you want hard raw data, just check out the latest SpecInt numbers.
SpecInt doesn't tell me how hard and fast I can work. I can only tell that. And on an apprently slower machine (according to SpecInt), I can work faster. How is that?
All SpecInt tells you is how good that processor is at performing the SpecInt benchmark.
Jingoism? Pah.
as for me, I've been a lifelong PC man
I'd be curious why you're trolling around here?
with a healthy respect for Unix boxes, I'm a biochem major, so we need fast brawny brutual machines to model proteins, i run linux, solaris, irix and xp. i was for the longest time hoping like the rest of you all for a nice cheap 64bit unix box from Apple (G5 with OSX sans the crappy UI)
"sans the crappy UI" would mean Darwin and not OSX. Duh. I'm curious what part of protein modelling needs "brutual" (sic) machines. The guys in the local genetics lab get along fine with low end PPCs. The actual "modelling" needs a good graphics card it's true but didn't you see mathematica at MacWorld?
but alas, this may not be, and Sun is selling a 64bit box for $795 academic price with an UltraSparc processor.
Uh, then buy one. It's only an UltraII, that doesn't include a screen and at the end of the day you end up with...Solaris. Whoop de doo...

you know what my schtick with OS10 is? Its not a standard unix,
Oh this will be a good one.
I've been getting a lot of data from the boys down in the university networking/tech dept. and the concensus is, she's not entirely posix compatible.
POSIX !=UNIX. According to the Open Group who know a bit about UNIX, Mac OS X is a UNIX.
i would like to see a full on Unix OS from Apple, perhaps a pro version of OS10 without glitz of the wholly inefficient yet eye candy UI and a lot of the raw power that I can get from a tricked up version of Linux or standard Solaris (btw Solaris 9 is coming out, and she's a beautiful beast!). So lay off of Mozez, he's in his right to cut down on the uneducated consumers out there. Suck it up yo!
If you want Linux, then keep it. If you want Solaris then keep it. If you want a Mac, you know where to go.
And I've seen development Solaris 9. It's nice. If you liked Solaris 8, that is.

I prefer something that copes with portables well (No, sorry, I've seen Linux on a portable and "well" doesn't cover it) and looks good (Solaris? Bwahahhahhahha) and is a Mac (duh.)

Isn't it nice that you don't have to go with OSX now? You can stay with Linux and Solaris.

[DavidCL23]

what is NIMDA?

[evildead]

You will never geable to emulate an OS "perfectly". The nature of emulation just wont alow it. Its not like your emulating NES or something like that on a computer that is 10 years newer and 1000 times faster. I have XP on my Mac running in VPC 5.0 and it is slow!! I have 98 and 2000 running also and they run ok. Probably faster than my Win2000 Box at work (1Ghz PIII) but its still slower than OS X.

You will be able to use windows with alomost no problems on a new Mac (yes a new G5 when ever that happens) But it will not run "perfectly".

[Pelorus]

Originally posted by tadpole
it claims to be UNIX, but it is not POSIX compliant.
Hardly a requirement. Again, check with the Open Group. They know a bit more about UNIX than some weenies down in a university network department.
So for it to be more amendable for the porting of various Unix software, it must rachet its kernal up a notch.
Really. Howso? Something technical to share about Mach?
I believe that FreeBSD/OpenBSD/NetBSD were all based on SVR2 kernals, so was mach. They have since added modern modules with the latest builds, but it is still nonetheless behind the modern Unix's like Solaris which is post SVR5.
Mate, by exactly the same logic, Solaris was based on an SVR2 kernel. You think that the BSDs have stood still?

Besides - your comment about SVR2 kernels and Mach shows that you're out of your league. Mach, FWIW, doesn't come from the same lineage as any of the System V kernels.
Furthermore, when you attack a PC you must make a distinction between the hardware and the software. When I run my AMD with Mandrake, I have a machine that is mad fast, stable and looks darn nice with Gnome. If you think that Apple is the end all be all with hardware, then where is the DDR? and why do the graphics chipsets appear in the so called PC world first? Geforce/ATI all made their chipsets public on PC's first. Also, a Mac is a PC! Your frontside bus is already a generation behind in speed, so no matter how much you pump up the CPU, the bottle neck in the FSB is going to be there. Sure, you can say that the G5 is going to solve all of this, sure you can worship vaporware, but where does that get you?

I'll bet I'm faster at working with my 400MHz Pismo than I am with your souped up Mandrake Machine. And that's what matters. You might find the reverse to be true and that's why we have choice.
By all means stick with your Mandrake. I've been there and decided that it rained too much. I went back to somewhere I could write books with real layout software, draw diagrams with real transparency, get email that looked beautiful and be able to do all of this on a laptop with decent power management.
Oh yeah, and Mac OS X has REAL transparent terminals and not what passes for transparency in the Gnome world.

Children like to harp about how nice their toys are, in the big world, kiddo, if we want Unix, not unix-like, we go with AIX, Solaris and IRIX, not OSX. Have you even compiled a kernel mod before? Do you even know how to mount journaling file systems? Do you even know the difference between a workstation class graphics chipset and your everyday video chipset? Kid, have you ever constructed your own Unix box? or Any box?
Thats right, kiddo, shut up.

If you want UNIX you'd never go near Linux. What's your point? UNIX and "unix-like" are just trademarking terms.
I've compiled a kernel - built it myself with the bits i needed. Done it on Linux and HP-UX. It was ...completely underwhelming.
On Mac OS X you would mount the journaling file system the same way as any other file system - that's why modern UNICES have a VFS.

Lastly. You don't expect that your preaching and telling someone to shut up will actually work? Oh. You do.

You're funny.

[SPG]

For the record. Microsoft no longer owns any Apple shares.
Repeat after me: Microsoft no longer owns any Apple shares.
Thank you.

[StealthRider]

Why do you even WANT to get a PowerBook w/ OS X, and, God Forbid, Microsloth Windoze XP? Just go to Dell and get a nice little $600 P4 workstation. THat runs XP, and is horrendously cheap.

[networkman]

...but if the dell is so cheap, then get it

it's really best if you get a mac and a dell or other pc and then you have the best of both worlds

but if i had to choose one, i would get the mac and have virtual pc even though some say it doesn't run fast enough but the computing world is still full of noticeable compromises

[chicagdan]

Or better yet buy a PS-2, Gamecube or XBox for the games and keep the Mac. I need a PC to play some sports sim games not available on consoles or the Mac, but an old, cheap PII is more than enough power for the games I play. For high-octane games, the new generation of consoles kills anything on Mac or PC.

[evildead]

If I absolutly had to get a WinBox...

I would get one for cheep (maybe a Dell if I could get over those Dam "Dude" commerchals) And run a dual boot with RedHat 7.2 and XP. I currently have a 200Mhz PI laptaop from NEC that I use when I need to run stuff that requires an x86. Coding in Assemboly for an x86 is a bit hard running VPC :) Its slow but it works most of the time. Im thinking of running a Linux server soon ..... hmmmm

[Onyxx]

First off I would like to say great post by Pelorus. People can run their suped up, screaming fast, minimaly supported, linux based machines, but where do they get software from? I am a Pismo user as well and people still wonder how i do all that i have with this 1 small machine. Sometimes it's not the speed, its how eficiantly it is used.

[evildead]

UNIX is very powerfull and stable but its not a desktop. Same thing with Linux. UNIX and linux may rule the server world but .... thats not what we are talking about. OS X is a desktop OS, true OS X server is out but I wonder how well it does ( i just really dont know). Currently Apple does not have the hardware to match UNIX systems... but Who cares! I love my mac and I love OS X. It does what it was desined to do and well. I think its great that its built on BSD UNIX but I am fully aware that it is not the same UNIX that I have running on my clustered enterprice level servers at work. I love going home to OS X after a long day at the terminal :)

[networkman]

it is smart that apple stayed in the home, education, and design desktop business

compaq got the bright idea of shifting some more of its vast resources for the "server world" and that move almost killed them, and still may end their run in the high tech business

[PyroTurtle]

The GeeForce 3 came out on Mac's first....
ATI was mac first for a long time....
all of these arguments are basicaly pointless anyway...
use whats comfortable, and that's all that matters....
whatever YOU think it was you need to prosper and work efficently, then use that....