Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Best PPC Computer
- Thread starter SuperKerem
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Only thing about the G5s is that they have a lot more power than other PowerPC Macs. They can handle some more modern stuff as well. Of course, trying to listen to anything with audio is futile- the fans drown out everything else.
As for reliability, they stink. Early air cooled models weer bad, especially the first Dual 2.0. Liquid Cooled ones were pretty awful as well; fortunately the one that I am typing at has a pristine LCS.
Design has to be:
G4 Cube
iMac G4
Aluminum PowerBook G4 (all sizes)
Usability:
PowerMac G5
FW800 MDD G4
Late 2005 PowerBook G4 with high resolution screen
PowerMac 9600 & 8600
G4 Cube
iMac G4
Aluminum PowerBook G4 (all sizes)
Usability:
PowerMac G5
FW800 MDD G4
Late 2005 PowerBook G4 with high resolution screen
PowerMac 9600 & 8600
I haven't actually had the chance to extensively try out so many PPC macs in my time so far, I've used a Sawtooth, a Snow iMac G3, a PowerBook G4 and a Power Mac G5 (a dual processor version) and I absolutely got much more stuff done on the later models. If I had to go with just one of them I'd upgrade the GPU on the PMG5 and choose that.
I'd most likely buy and MDD because parts are dirt cheap. If I needed a portable I'd pick up a 17" G4
In my opinion, the best portable PPC is the 12' powerbook G4, considering both performance and design... I owned the original 867 MHz model (which died while being serviced), and did not rest until I recently got a 1.33 GHz model (unfortunately not the 1.5...)...
Regarding desktops, I will have to choose the Cube... it is simply the slickest, smartest, cleanest design ever for a personal computer! I agree that running stock it was underpowered, but owning a upgraded Cube running at 1.35 GHz, I have nothing to say about it but... Whow!!
Regarding desktops, I will have to choose the Cube... it is simply the slickest, smartest, cleanest design ever for a personal computer! I agree that running stock it was underpowered, but owning a upgraded Cube running at 1.35 GHz, I have nothing to say about it but... Whow!!
I personally love any G4 Quicksilver towers due their expandability options, and processor upgrades available. They aren't as loud as the later mirror drive door models, and (IMO) look better.
I have one that is outfitted with a dual 1.5 GHZ G4 processor, USB 2.0 card, SATA card, and a Bluetooth / Wifi card. It still does so much of my daily computing, leaving my mini to do more of my Final Cut / Lightroom work.
I have one that is outfitted with a dual 1.5 GHZ G4 processor, USB 2.0 card, SATA card, and a Bluetooth / Wifi card. It still does so much of my daily computing, leaving my mini to do more of my Final Cut / Lightroom work.
Obviously the most successful PowerPC systems are the current gaming consoles, Wii U (2012), PS3 (2006) and Xbox 360 (2005).
You can't really talk about the 'best' computer, although there are some Mac PPC models that I liked particularly, liked the beautiful iMac G4. In general however the Intel Macs are in every way better.
You can't really talk about the 'best' computer, although there are some Mac PPC models that I liked particularly, liked the beautiful iMac G4. In general however the Intel Macs are in every way better.
My vote for design has to go to the PowerMac G4 Cube & the 12" PowerBook G4 - the Cube's passive cooling system & the fact there are so many upgrades you can ram into the thing is just outstanding, and something the Mini has never even come close to doing. And the PowerBook - IMO the best form factor a laptop could possibly have.
As for usability & overall ease in modern day use it has to be the PowerMac G5. The MDD's are great but the IDE hard drive interface (of course, you can use SATA with a PCI card) & the 2gb RAM limitation makes the G5 a much easier Mac to use in 2013. 4, 8, or 16gb RAM, and PCI-E GPU's in later revisions make the G5 unbelievably good value for money - as long as you can live with Leopard, of course.
A few other favourites of mine are the Titanium PowerBook G4 & the PowerMac G3 AIO. The TiBook really in my eyes led the way for laptop design for this decade just gone & the G3 AIO just has to be the best looking beige computer ever made
As for usability & overall ease in modern day use it has to be the PowerMac G5. The MDD's are great but the IDE hard drive interface (of course, you can use SATA with a PCI card) & the 2gb RAM limitation makes the G5 a much easier Mac to use in 2013. 4, 8, or 16gb RAM, and PCI-E GPU's in later revisions make the G5 unbelievably good value for money - as long as you can live with Leopard, of course.
A few other favourites of mine are the Titanium PowerBook G4 & the PowerMac G3 AIO. The TiBook really in my eyes led the way for laptop design for this decade just gone & the G3 AIO just has to be the best looking beige computer ever made
This is very untrue everybody on this forum can give you a reason why intel macs are not better in every way. Yes they may be newer and more effiecent in some ways but in no form does newer mean better in every way.
How to upload pic?
I have to agree, mine is similar to yours except its 17 inch DLSD DDR2 model.
I have to agree, mine is similar to yours except its 17 inch DLSD DDR2 model.
What with all of the paint-chip and hinge issues they have, I don't know that they had the best design.
For instance, in what way is a Mac mini G4 running Tiger or Leopard better than a Mac mini Intel running the same OS? There are a lot of similarities between the 2005 PPC and 2006 Intel models, but the latter are a lot faster and more flexible and compatible in every way.
I do admit, however, that Mac OS X has gone through a few negative evolutions since Lion. I really miss the scroll bar arrows, for starters... but on the hardware side, things have only improved.
I've been wanting a PowerMac G4. The main reason is this seemed to be the only one that really had all of Apple's envisioned way of connecting things.
ADC and Apple Pro Speaker minijack ran power through the media connector to eliminate wires. These are the only machines that I know of that came with both. I've been very tempted to buy one just to say that I've owned them but have never gotten around to it.
The iMac G4 is also pretty nice.
ADC and Apple Pro Speaker minijack ran power through the media connector to eliminate wires. These are the only machines that I know of that came with both. I've been very tempted to buy one just to say that I've owned them but have never gotten around to it.
The iMac G4 is also pretty nice.
because most ppc are faster than early intel macs, how are they flexable the only reason they are more compatible are for the windows idiots who want to run an inferior os on there mac. If they wanna run windows for a professional business world buy a pc. Yeah its a luxury to some but its really not necessary. On the other hand yes mountain lion has become a mess, i enjoyed lion a little but ml ruined that.
I love my TiBooks, and they really did set a new industry standard for laptop style and design. Heck, even the current lineup of MacBooks can trace their appearance back to the TiBook. I guess I skipped it because the AlBooks really took the design that much further and were MUCH sturdier and expanded into the different screen sizes. The TiBook is still high on the list though.
----------
No, they were not. With the exception of the PowerMac G5, the Intel Core Duo versions of every Mac introduced in 2006 were MUCH faster than their G4 counterparts. Every Mac from the G5 iMac to the PowerBook G4 was made MUCH faster when they switched to the Core Duo. Don't get me wrong, I love my PPC machines, but when I got my original MacBook Pro 1.86 in May 2006, I couldn't believe how fast that thing was. The dual core chip really changed the game.
At the time of the transition, they had fallen behind, but I think he means when they were first introduced. During the early years, the G4 blew away the Intel competition, but with only marginal improvements over four years and severe problems with ramping up the clock rate (this was when the GHz war was all the rage), x86 caught up and was able to exceed PPC.
Edit: I misread his post, you are right. @ppcfanforever1, by the time of the Intel switch, PPC was really behind the times. That transition and the early Core processors basically led to the paradigm shift away from GHz and toward "moar cores". Perhaps just as egregious, Macs suffered from badly outdated graphics, some using solutions 2+ years old, which was borderline insulting.