Am I running a cripple G5 without Tiger

[Symtex]

I'm wondering how much cripple is my new G5 by only running with 32 bit application. I know that G5 are able to run 32 bit application natively but how much more efficency will my G5 run 64-bit application ?

I'm also guessing that application will need to be coded for 64 bit addressing. how do you think until the Mac community are being able to release application with 64-bit addressing scheme ?

 

[johnnyjibbs]

Expect the tech-bods to come in and start a full-blown debate of 32bit vs 64bit soon 😛

Personally, although I don't know much about it, I see it like this: if you believe Apple, then your Mac isn't crippled much, it's just not technically using itself at 100% capacity. But that's a good thing because when you eventually get Tiger, your Mac should be faster and better at only the cost of Tiger to you.

 

[rosalindavenue]

I'm wondering how much cripple is my new G5 by only running with 32 bit application. I know that G5 are able to run 32 bit application natively but how much more efficency will my G5 run 64-bit application ?

I'm also guessing that application will need to be coded for 64 bit addressing. how do you think until the Mac community are being able to release application with 64-bit addressing scheme ?

Your G5 is no more crippled than anyone else's, since Tiger has not been released yet. 😉

 

[Bear]

To answer your question of how crippled is your G5 without TIger, you have to take the following into account:

1. How much memory does your G5 have? 2GB or less - not at all. Under 4GB probably not much. Over 4GB - depends on what you are running.
2. Do you have any applications that would work better under Tiger? Especially for what you are using it for?
3. Are there any Tiger specific features that would help you?

Unless you are using an application that can suck up a lot of memory (and has been updated to handle the new memory allocation limits under Tiger) you probably won't notice from an application perspective unless that application is using some other Tiger specific feature.

Some aplications may come out with new versions to make use of Tiger specific features around when Tiger is released, others will come over the next several months (or more).

From my point of view, it's not just what Tiger can do for the G5, it's also the features that Tiger has added.

I will get the family pack when tiger comes out and load that on my "test" system. Once I'm sure everything is working (you never know what might break with an OS upgrade) and I have any application and device driver updates I need, I'll put Tiger on my everyday system.

 

[Punani]

But my time will run out on Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038!!!! What are you going to do about that???? 😛

 

[Bear]

But my time will run out on Tue Jan 19 03:14:07 2038!!!! What are you going to do about that???? 😛

That sounds like a personal problem. 😀

 

[MeanD3feat]

I may be way off here but after reading the post about how tiger will affect memory hungry applications and reading a review of the imac I've had an idea.
In a set of benchmarks run by a popular mac website (tests were run to check apple's claims of the g5 imac being something like 100% faster than the g4 with ut04) it was noted that the g5 performance with the hard disc was very restricted even performing worse than an emac in some cases (or on the same level) and a tech explained that this was because of the g5 architechture (not just the imac).
What was said was that the hard disc was starved of bandwidth to allow the g5 better access to system memory-so does this mean that tiger will address this issue and we will see a huge boost in performance where in certain configurations because of the g5 architechture, system memory will be more heavily relied on (because it is faster than a disc anyway) and this will explain apple's apparently bizzare decision concering bandwidth allocation?
I am not remotely qualified to do anything other than speculate....
but if a 64 bit os basically affects ram use and the g5 has more bandwidth for ram at the expense of Hard drive performance... well this is a rumors site 😉

Can anyone shed some light here? Am I barking up the wrong tree? Am I about to be taken to court by Apple? 😀
Just kidding but thats my train of thought on this issue.
I'm off now to find the article that put this idea in my head. 🙄