just for ***** and giggles (and ceriousity) I was wondering how well would a BluRay drive work in a 1GHz eMac or PowerMac via SATA To IDE adapter (in the case of eMac) or a 1.5Gbps SATA card (in the case of the PowerMac)?
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.
BluRay Drive in a PPC?
- Thread starter MatthewLTL
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You might be able burn Blu-rays in a PPC if you use Toast. Version 10 was the last Universal version and Blu-ray burning came in with version 9. You would probably be better off with a G5 for that, though. Make sure that you don't update QT beyond 7.6.4 or you will have codec issues.
You can view some Blu-ray movies in VLC with a hack but whether the PPC versions will support/cope with that is another issue.
You can view some Blu-ray movies in VLC with a hack but whether the PPC versions will support/cope with that is another issue.
ill likely never do it. I have dedicated standard DVD players for movies. I was JW how well a BluRay would work on the IDE interface in general.
i was meaning IDE interface via SATA TO IDE adapter. I thought the G5s only had SATA HDDs. Isn't the ODD of G5s still PATA?
This is pure speculation, but in light of the high quality that BluRay movies are, wouldn't the ATA 100 bus used for the optical drive be overloaded?
This is anecdotal, but there are USB 2.0 Blueray drives that supposedly work fine for video playback. If that will work, an ATA100 bus should be fine.
(Is the G5 optical bus actually ATA100? I've never researched this, but I know that even the last G4s used ATA33 on the optical bus).
ATA would cope easily. 1x BR is about 5MB/sec or approximately the same as a 32x CD-ROM at full pelt.
Pretty much every computer that would have the computational power in either the CPU or GPU to decode a BR movie shipped with a SATA interface. SATA replaced ATA over 10 years ago.
Exercise some common sense.
Exercise some common sense.
Pretty much every computer that would have the computational power in either the CPU or GPU to decode a BR movie shipped with a SATA interface. SATA replaced ATA over 10 years ago.
Exercise some common sense.
10 years ago computers still used IDE HDDs and Optical Drives with SATA ports on the boards 10 years ago 40GB HDDs were standard for PCs
If they did they were legacy designs. I was covering an IT purchasing job role in 2005, buying PCs that came with SATA optical drives.
i wonder if the better question is if ATA is dead than why does the cost of brand new ATA Drives Surpass SATA by 75%?
For example a 250GB IDE HDD costs the same price range as a 1GB SATA Drive.
back in 2001 bought a Gateway computer with Windows ME, It had a 20GB IDE HDD and IDE CD-ROM Drive.
Back in 2005 bought a brand new Socket A Compaq Presario SR1303WM it had 2 SATA ports on the board but came with a IDE DVD Combo drive and 40GB 5400RPM Maxtor DiamondMax "Skinny" Drive. by 2006 computers had 60GB IDE HDDs Desktop computers (low end consumer ones) did not start shipping with SATA HDDs until late 2006 and did not start shipping with SATA optical drives until 2008). however the higher end comptuters of the same time did use SATA HDDs
My HP Pavilion A825n had a 200GB SATA HDD inside it but still IDE Optical Drives. My now dead PDSInc. Vector GZ (2006) had a 80GB SATA HDD in it but still a IDE DVD Drive.
PATA drives haven't been made for a few years. What's left that's new is being sold off as new old stock. Look at SCSI drives. They're even more expensive than PATA drives, because they haven't been made in about 15 years.
Yeah. We (work) found it was pretty much impossible to reliably source IDE drives from our suppliers from around 2009 onwards. We used to keep a stock of spare 80GB drives for out of warranty PCs. It became uneconomic so we started re-using old drives and took the reliability hit.
Last edited:
Because they haven't been made in years. Again, look at SCSI drives. They're even more obsolete, yet still cost much more than a PATA drive. Almost a $1 per megabyte in some cases.
They were likely running legacy chipsets, as is the way with low end consumer kit. I'm done arguing this.
Supply and Demand - it's basic economics.
20th Anniversary Macs should be worth $20 by your yardstick, but they're not due to scarcity of supply and the demand from Apple collectors.