Well under rosetta on my Mac Pro I can load all my PPC applications except SoundTrack Pro 1 just fine (It broke with 10.6.4) They also work fine on my White macBook (2.1 C2D) - so maybe it just depends on the application.
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.
future limitations of PowerPC Macs?
- Thread starter Cox Orange
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Well under rosetta on my Mac Pro I can load all my PPC applications except SoundTrack Pro 1 just fine (It broke with 10.6.4) They also work fine on my White macBook (2.1 C2D) - so maybe it just depends on the application.
Windows XP is supported by software developers, not microsoft, really. The fact is, Vista was such a flop, software dev's continued to make software that ran on it, which is why even the latest games included DX9 support. BUT, if you wanted DX10 features, you'd need to go to Vista, Vista was so bad many would prefer to play the DX9 version.
A current software developer has every right and ability to produce PPC Apps that run on Mac System 7.5, or more practically, PPC Apps running on Leopard. They don't, but that's not because of Apple, the resources are still there for PPC.
Another factor into why Windows XP has a (VERY unusually long) lifespan, was IBM / Lenovo. They REFUSED to install Vista on their machines, they included XP Pro on all machines until Microsoft finally said you CAN'T sell a brand new machine running XP, their licensing REQUIRED Windows 7, but honestly, Windows 7 is a good OS, and an improvement over Windows XP. Vista was a flop.
I, too, would like to see long-lived support for PowerPC, but you can always find good uses. I have a 366MHz Pentium III Laptop that I use as a file server / FTP server, works great! Now, my 250MHz third-party mac stays in my closet, can't find a use for it. But man, Apple only allowed third parties to make Macs for a short time, I'm hanging on to it!
-John
A current software developer has every right and ability to produce PPC Apps that run on Mac System 7.5, or more practically, PPC Apps running on Leopard. They don't, but that's not because of Apple, the resources are still there for PPC.
Another factor into why Windows XP has a (VERY unusually long) lifespan, was IBM / Lenovo. They REFUSED to install Vista on their machines, they included XP Pro on all machines until Microsoft finally said you CAN'T sell a brand new machine running XP, their licensing REQUIRED Windows 7, but honestly, Windows 7 is a good OS, and an improvement over Windows XP. Vista was a flop.
I, too, would like to see long-lived support for PowerPC, but you can always find good uses. I have a 366MHz Pentium III Laptop that I use as a file server / FTP server, works great! Now, my 250MHz third-party mac stays in my closet, can't find a use for it. But man, Apple only allowed third parties to make Macs for a short time, I'm hanging on to it!
-John
So you're saying something completely contrary to anything that has ever been demonstrated, refusing to foot the bill on providing evidence to support the claim and doing it on the premise of that evidence not being valid because of operating system differences (what?!) Oh, and then capping it all off by resting on conjecture about what a highly clocked, single-core dev kit system would be were it a dual-core Pentium D... which it wasn't.
Sorry, but I'm not going to spend all day arguing with somebody who is almost certainly a teenager, or at least resorts to insults, flame baiting and poor grammar as if he were.
Cheers mate.
1) At least Im an adult. If anybodies a teenager its you.
2) My grammar is perfectly fine thankyou very much, I just dont waste it when im on my mobile.
3) OS Differences affect the "speed" of a machine in massive ways, to consider anything else is ludicrous. For instance, even "cross-platform" benchmarks dont report the same on a Mac under OS X as they do on the same Mac under Bootcamp. If someone had benchmarked a Hackintosh based on the pentium D then we could let Geekbench settle this, since the G5 will never run Windows natively (shame really as I did like the PPC version of NT - certainly better than VirtualPC 3).
4. That conjecture is based of solid geekbench scores between a 3.6Ghz Pentium 4 HT, and a machine that is as-close-as-possible (Same RAM, same graphics etc) just with a Pentium D inside, and a 2.0 Pentium D gets as close for multi-threaded apps (If we use linear interpolation it shows its actually more like a 2.04Ghz Pentium D, but since this is an untestable theory, I thought Id stick to nice big round numbers for simplicity).
5. The Dev Kit isnt highly clocked really. The Pentium 4 shipped at 3.6Ghz (And it was overclocked to a stable 4.25Ghz before everyone went to the Pentium D and eventually Core Duo architectures.) Im not saying PowerPC is bad, Im saying that the closest x86 processor to the G5 is the Pentium D (for reasons Ive outlined time and time again, but you keep ignoring as your so hung up on benchmarks, which is silly since they never tally directly to real world usage anyway). I had a Dual 2.0G5 as an editing machine for years, I would quite happilly have traded it for a Pentium D running OS X, shame Apple switched too late for that to happen.
Whoever mentioned MacTubes thank you as you gave my g4's new life again. 
My PowerMac has a purpose again.
My PowerMac has a purpose again. Whoever mentioned MacTubes thank you as you gave my g4's new life again.
Thank goodness I have a Mac Pro... I tried Youtube on my Dual 867, and it wasnt a brilliant experience...
sure some PPC Mac apps had been developped to run on ppc Mac's
and Apple did give us rosetta which should translate the code so a intel based Mac can make sense out of it , but they said in the same sentence that even some ilife versions would not work , the problem doesnnt effect people who buy a brandnew Mac as ilife comes included in a set of disc's , but on the used market its still common to keep the disc's and only sell the system , and that leaves the new owner to buy brandnew ilife and install disc's just for example if he buys a used intel , and the new owner does need to buy a lot of apps brandnew like for example office because office 2004 which i for example have but does not run on intel , but why should i buy a office 2011 version , there is nothing wrong with office 2004 (for my needs anyway) , thats why for me the PPC Mac's have a bright future , as i refuse to pay the price for the newest office for example or final cut or similar , because i own older versions and they do the job perfectly , photoshop for example has not changed a lot really, ok the GUI has changed and is more flashy now then it was 5 years ago , but thats not a argument that will convince me to upgrade for several 100' pound and final cut is even more expensive ,
ok some might say now "stop crying, just go to the next torrent site and download what you want", but i have still the opinion that there are some developers who don't swim in money , who have spend countless hours to get a app working , and these guys deserve something for their work , i even donate when i find freeware that really works for me , so i own all the software on my now 15 Mac's and 14 of them are PPC based , i even have most software multiple times , means for each Mac i own the software that is running on it , near all my ppc Macs run Tiger and i have a tiger disc for each , only because of the above reason , if i eventually in the future want to downsize and sell one the new owner gets disc's for all the installed software
but i am different anyway as i class a Mac without install disc as faulty , and i am one who has the opinion a Mac should look futuristic and not be mistaken for TV , so i will continue to use PPC Mac's and for example there is still software out there that is still developed for PPC ,
PPC might be sleepy a bit , but is far from dead
and as you know i like to compare with cars , sure a Mini from 2011 has a higher performance then a Mini from 1970 , but the old one will still bring you from A to B , and with regular service will continue to do so for the next years to come , same for PPC Mac's, only if YOU expect the performance of a brandnew one then you might get disappointed
and Apple did give us rosetta which should translate the code so a intel based Mac can make sense out of it , but they said in the same sentence that even some ilife versions would not work , the problem doesnnt effect people who buy a brandnew Mac as ilife comes included in a set of disc's , but on the used market its still common to keep the disc's and only sell the system , and that leaves the new owner to buy brandnew ilife and install disc's just for example if he buys a used intel , and the new owner does need to buy a lot of apps brandnew like for example office because office 2004 which i for example have but does not run on intel , but why should i buy a office 2011 version , there is nothing wrong with office 2004 (for my needs anyway) , thats why for me the PPC Mac's have a bright future , as i refuse to pay the price for the newest office for example or final cut or similar , because i own older versions and they do the job perfectly , photoshop for example has not changed a lot really, ok the GUI has changed and is more flashy now then it was 5 years ago , but thats not a argument that will convince me to upgrade for several 100' pound and final cut is even more expensive ,
ok some might say now "stop crying, just go to the next torrent site and download what you want", but i have still the opinion that there are some developers who don't swim in money , who have spend countless hours to get a app working , and these guys deserve something for their work , i even donate when i find freeware that really works for me , so i own all the software on my now 15 Mac's and 14 of them are PPC based , i even have most software multiple times , means for each Mac i own the software that is running on it , near all my ppc Macs run Tiger and i have a tiger disc for each , only because of the above reason , if i eventually in the future want to downsize and sell one the new owner gets disc's for all the installed software
but i am different anyway as i class a Mac without install disc as faulty , and i am one who has the opinion a Mac should look futuristic and not be mistaken for TV , so i will continue to use PPC Mac's and for example there is still software out there that is still developed for PPC ,
PPC might be sleepy a bit , but is far from dead
and as you know i like to compare with cars , sure a Mini from 2011 has a higher performance then a Mini from 1970 , but the old one will still bring you from A to B , and with regular service will continue to do so for the next years to come , same for PPC Mac's, only if YOU expect the performance of a brandnew one then you might get disappointed
Last edited:
Office 2004 runs on my MacBook just fine, as it does on a relatives MacBook Pro. Out of the between 10 and 15 Macs I own, all but 3 are PPC, And since I collect them, I dont worry about selling them, each has the OS they originally shipped with installed, excluding my PB with 10.5, my MDD with 10.4 and my G4 AGP with 10.4. Software wise I keep to my Intel Macs for productive work, but I still have Final Cut Pro installed on my G4/450 for instance, so Im not advocating ditching them.
the only thing i could get to work of office was word , powerpoint kept crashing or better did not even load was only bouncing for hours, and i know how to install apps on a Mac, but never mind there is neo office and it runs on both ppc and intel
hmm odd, I just checked, and PowerPoint 2004 seems to work fine for me under Rosetta - its perfectly possible that your install is just slightly different (different Office version, different configs - the weirdest things can make rosetta behave differently)
PowerPC Mac's are great. They were the best in there day. Intel Mac's are great. It just depends on what your using them for. I have learned that my G4 iMac still rocks the web and iTunes 8 is just fine for basic needs.
Still, my iMac G4 is probably the last PPC Mac I buy. Unless it's a PowerBook G4.
Still, my iMac G4 is probably the last PPC Mac I buy. Unless it's a PowerBook G4.
I still have a love affair with my PowerBook G4, still looking near new aside from the paint finish on the left palmrest. Obviously, for PPC native apps and games, my 1.5 Ghz G4 still runs like a champ and I've upgraded the HDD to a 320GB.
While I have the 15" model, it feels like the near perfect road warrior. I do have a new unibody MBP, but I just have that fear of getting a single ding or a scratch on it. Another love affair is the matte screen. Sure the black glass looks awesome on the new MBP, the much thinner screen bezel and matte screen on my older G4 still look great and with the dedicated ATi 9700 made for some great gaming on WoW and Halo.
Sadly, despite running leopard and having it's specs at it's peak, WoW left this machine struggling and is technically unsupported by Blizzard (I remember when my 12" iBook G4 1.33 ran the game beautifully)
Overall, despite it's age, I still love my old monster even if it's getting slower and slower compared to the much newer Intel based Macs.
While I have the 15" model, it feels like the near perfect road warrior. I do have a new unibody MBP, but I just have that fear of getting a single ding or a scratch on it. Another love affair is the matte screen. Sure the black glass looks awesome on the new MBP, the much thinner screen bezel and matte screen on my older G4 still look great and with the dedicated ATi 9700 made for some great gaming on WoW and Halo.
Sadly, despite running leopard and having it's specs at it's peak, WoW left this machine struggling and is technically unsupported by Blizzard (I remember when my 12" iBook G4 1.33 ran the game beautifully)
Overall, despite it's age, I still love my old monster even if it's getting slower and slower compared to the much newer Intel based Macs.
I honestly can see PPC dieing soon. Right now i'm using a 500Mhz G4 with 1.25gb Ram. And its fine. I've been using it for youtube,spotify, web browsing, and i also type'd half an essay in WriteRoom on it last night. Its just as quick as my windows pc for these tasks apart from youtube, but even that still runs alright! I have yet to try macTube's yet though. I also need to try edt photos from my Canon 1d mark1 DSLR-circa 2001
When this get's slow, i'll try pick up a beefy'er G4.
When Tiger gets outdated, i'll move to panther.
I don't need a High spec machine! Sure i'd like one, but this is fine!
Any Thoughts?
When this get's slow, i'll try pick up a beefy'er G4.
When Tiger gets outdated, i'll move to panther.
I don't need a High spec machine! Sure i'd like one, but this is fine!
Any Thoughts?
They don't get slow, newer ones are just getting faster. It is just the end user's appreciation of things.
Future limitations of PowerPC Macs? Software support. But we will still be good up until a couple of years.
Future limitations of PowerPC Macs? Software support. But we will still be good up until a couple of years.
This thread is supposed to be about the future of PPC Macs, not an ongoing argument about P4's and G5's.
Honestly Vista wasn't good in the beginning but after all of the updates and service packs came out it was just fine. For me at least it ran as fast as XP and looked 1,000x better. XP is really getting on my nerves now though. It looks old and is old at the programming level as well. Time for people to move on to Windows 7.
i dont see vista as a flop ,if it wouldn't be for vista i possibly would have never made the move to linux and in the end to OSX , so i see vista as a great operating system to get people to try alternative operating systems , but i am not so sure if that was the intention of microsoft when they developed vista
but what has that to do with the question of "has PPC a future"
answer : a lot , at least in my case , as i do not swim in money and would never ever buy a computer on a loan or credit card the only Mac's in reach had been PPC Mac's and still are for most switchers to Mac , as you might see on ebay at the moment the demand is much higher for ppc Mac's then before , because the PPC Macs are still perfectly usable , within their limitations (and for normal computer users these limitations are beyond their needs anyway ) and there is the design , iMac G3/ G4 , eMac's and PowerMac G4's design just bring a smile to your face when you got one on your desk and it never gets boring to look at
and to get rid of some limitations get tenfourfox it made it possible to watch absolute stutter free youtube on my iMac G3 700mhz , ok only at 240p but honestly who needs more for watching some funny or less funny things at youtube
it made one thing clear PPC still has a bright future if people like these who develop apps like that get a bit support
and it shows one thing ,it is not only adobe and their flashplayer's fault like apple wants you to believe , it is the fault of apples safari and other browsers made for OSX and other apps , not coded with PPC in mind to make people buy intel Mac's, as i had a hackbook msi wind with a single core atom @1.6ghz , it showed me in direct comaprison that there is not a huge speed difference to a eMac 1.42 for normal usage , and more and more people buy nettops with atom processors because they realised for browsing, office and watching a dvd (what most do on a computer) and even for home usage of photoshop or final cut you do not need a intel i3 /i5 /i7 powered desktop
and for gaming you still need a windows pc or games console anyway so the point of "you cannot play modern games on a PPC Mac" is no point as you need to install windows on your intel Mac which transforms it into a PC made by apple and even a i7 iMac has still limitations (graphics card) when it comes to gaming
but what has that to do with the question of "has PPC a future"
answer : a lot , at least in my case , as i do not swim in money and would never ever buy a computer on a loan or credit card the only Mac's in reach had been PPC Mac's and still are for most switchers to Mac , as you might see on ebay at the moment the demand is much higher for ppc Mac's then before , because the PPC Macs are still perfectly usable , within their limitations (and for normal computer users these limitations are beyond their needs anyway ) and there is the design , iMac G3/ G4 , eMac's and PowerMac G4's design just bring a smile to your face when you got one on your desk and it never gets boring to look at
and to get rid of some limitations get tenfourfox it made it possible to watch absolute stutter free youtube on my iMac G3 700mhz , ok only at 240p but honestly who needs more for watching some funny or less funny things at youtube
it made one thing clear PPC still has a bright future if people like these who develop apps like that get a bit support
and it shows one thing ,it is not only adobe and their flashplayer's fault like apple wants you to believe , it is the fault of apples safari and other browsers made for OSX and other apps , not coded with PPC in mind to make people buy intel Mac's, as i had a hackbook msi wind with a single core atom @1.6ghz , it showed me in direct comaprison that there is not a huge speed difference to a eMac 1.42 for normal usage , and more and more people buy nettops with atom processors because they realised for browsing, office and watching a dvd (what most do on a computer) and even for home usage of photoshop or final cut you do not need a intel i3 /i5 /i7 powered desktop
and for gaming you still need a windows pc or games console anyway so the point of "you cannot play modern games on a PPC Mac" is no point as you need to install windows on your intel Mac which transforms it into a PC made by apple and even a i7 iMac has still limitations (graphics card) when it comes to gaming
Last edited:
The intel macs do have a HUGE advantage, and their prices these days are relatively affordable, considering the PPC macs at one point cost up to 3x as much...
As far as gaming, although in the PPC and early intel era your statement holds true, that is no longer the case... I have played some games in OSX that I used to play on windows on my macbook pro... after they were -fully- ported, not emulated, and they ran much much smoother than the pc version... in fact there is no longer a need to run windows at all and I'm considering doing away with my windows partition since the I no longer have a need for it now that games run in OSX... microsoft is quickly loosing relevance, and with the flow of games into OSX, it'll only make windows less of a necessity
The graphics cards in the current intel iMacs are actually extremely capable... they run circles around my nVidia GeForce 8600 GT... and they leave my poor old first gen iMac core duo in the dust, lets not even get into how they completely trash my PPC macs...
As far as gaming, although in the PPC and early intel era your statement holds true, that is no longer the case... I have played some games in OSX that I used to play on windows on my macbook pro... after they were -fully- ported, not emulated, and they ran much much smoother than the pc version... in fact there is no longer a need to run windows at all and I'm considering doing away with my windows partition since the I no longer have a need for it now that games run in OSX... microsoft is quickly loosing relevance, and with the flow of games into OSX, it'll only make windows less of a necessity
The graphics cards in the current intel iMacs are actually extremely capable... they run circles around my nVidia GeForce 8600 GT... and they leave my poor old first gen iMac core duo in the dust, lets not even get into how they completely trash my PPC macs...
You do make some great points here...
1. I remember paying over three times as much for my PowerBook G4 than I did buying the latest 13" MacBook Pro. Still, it runs very well despite it's age
2. On the gaming front, my PowerBook still performed better in some games especially when I saw the first consumer MacBook (core duo with the intel GMA 950 and even the later X3100 when the Santa Rosa platform released).
The MacBook Pro didn't fare much better early on as most Mac games were still native PPC. Better GPU and Processor aside, the PPC still had the lead in Mac gaming.
3. With OSX early on, many Mac games ran much faster when booting into Mac OS 9, one great example of this long ago was the Mac version of American McGee's Alice. This however, is no longer an issue as a Intel binary of the Alice .app is now out.
4. After buying my new 13" Pro, I'm rather impressed with the Nvidia 320m, for being a shared graphics solution, it is amazingly smooth with every game I've tried on it so far.
Also the fact that Bilzzard games are still alright with PPC anyway, the only games i really play, run on an 300mhz imac g3! Starcraft2 and Diablo 2 both run great on pretty much any PC or mac, in OS X. For me until i physically can't run my app's anymore i'll stick with what ever i can get for cheepest. As i said before, as soon as the G4 i have now is too slow, i'll get a faster one. As soon as thats to slow, I'll get a G5. And when that is to slow, then maybe i'll switch to Intel.
of course that depends on the games you play ,i still like to play asteroids on my commodore sx64 too or starcraft on my iMac G3 , i dont count framerates as a hobby
but i was actually refering to gamers ,and if you ask them about gaming they will tell you they want to be able to play games like crysis which is still a benchmark at highest possible settings for any setup , no matter if they want to really play crysis , but they want their setup to be able to play it and as i build gaming rigs for mates and close friends as a hobby ,but just got a mail from a mate which i converted to Mac, he bought a iMac i7 ,and a PowerMac G5 and on monday i received a email
with this from him with text like that "hello can you build me something like that again , i love my new iMac i7 and its lovely big screen ,but the fps are disappointing , i want a gaming rig again can you build me one where i can use 2 x27"apple cinema displays on "
some people are addicted to framerates and if they dont get over 200 of them they are starving to death
because of that i was refering to limitations of the i7 iMac for "gaming"
but if you are in a clear state of mind and still with both feet on the ground you can happily enjoy games even on a iMac G3 like i do
or starcraft on my iMac G3 , i dont count framerates as a hobby but i was actually refering to gamers ,and if you ask them about gaming they will tell you they want to be able to play games like crysis which is still a benchmark at highest possible settings for any setup , no matter if they want to really play crysis , but they want their setup to be able to play it and as i build gaming rigs for mates and close friends as a hobby ,but just got a mail from a mate which i converted to Mac, he bought a iMac i7 ,and a PowerMac G5 and on monday i received a email
with this from him with text like that "hello can you build me something like that again , i love my new iMac i7 and its lovely big screen ,but the fps are disappointing , i want a gaming rig again can you build me one where i can use 2 x27"apple cinema displays on "
some people are addicted to framerates and if they dont get over 200 of them they are starving to death
because of that i was refering to limitations of the i7 iMac for "gaming"
but if you are in a clear state of mind and still with both feet on the ground you can happily enjoy games even on a iMac G3 like i do
Last edited:
of course that depends on the games you play ,i still like to play asteroids on my commodore sx64 too
but i was actually refering to gamers ,and if you ask them about gaming they will tell you they want to be able to play games like crysis which is still a benchmark at highest possible settings for any setup , no matter if they want to really play crysis , but they want their setup to be able to play it and as i build gaming rigs for mates and close friends as a hobby ,but just got a mail from a mate which i converted to Mac, he bought a iMac i7 ,and a PowerMac G5 and on monday i received a email
with this from him with text like that "hello can you build me something like that again , i love my new iMac i7 and its lovely big screen ,but the fps are disappointing , i want a gaming rig again can you build me one where i can use 2 x27"apple cinema displays on "
some people are addicted to framerates and if they dont get over 200 of them they are starving to death
because of that i was refering to limitations of the i7 iMac for "gaming"
but if you are in a clear state of mind and still with both feet on the ground you can happily enjoy games even on a iMac G3 like i do
Under Windows in Bootcamp, there shouldn't be any problems with framerate? Anything over 60fps the human eye can't see anyway! I know there are some driver issues with bootcamp still but it really shouldn't effect the framerate in anyway, not that you would see anyway!
gamers with humen eye's and sense for reality ? most of them would see 60fps as torture and file a case ,because they believe 60fps are against the geneva convention
but you are right for normal humans even 15 fps are playable ,
like you do not need office 2011 and a intel iMac 27" i7 to write a letter , clarisworks and a iMac G3 running OS9 are more then sufficient for that purpose
different people measure in different ways when it comes to computing
some want the overkill computer even if they only surf on websites and email things that can be perfectly displayed on a iMac g3 /ibook G3
without any noticeable speed difference , but they want the iMac i7 /or MacBook Pro even if its only for telling everybody "hey look what i can afford "
i accept the fact a professional film cutter , who does it for a living , needs a fast modern Mac (newest MacPro )and he needs the newest version final cut pro 7 , because for him every second is translated into cash
but human x who just cuts a holiday video once a year can happy live with a PPC mac and iMovie or with final cut pro 3 or 4
i for example sit in front of my iMac G3 now and do not care at all if Word 2004 needs to bounce 5 times before it's loaded now , but others think even 2 times bouncing is already to slow and therefor unusable , and i absolute do not sit here with a stopwatch to know exactly how much time is needed to move a document from one folder to the other , and i would never dump my sweet little iMac G3 only because OSX tiger needs some seconds longer to boot compared with my core duo iMac running OSX tiger too on my sharing partition because of apple talk
for me speed(how long to move documents or folders,boottime) is not really a meassure to declare a computer as usable and worth to have or declare it as ready for the dump
ok i use a intel iMac core duo , but only because i had a bad experience with a G5 iMac but i just liked the design and because it did cost less then usual and was internally new (thanks to the previous owner who did get everything renewed under apple care), ok yes i upgraded the harddrive with a 10000rpm velociraptor 600gb , but only because i got that drive for far less then the rrp
but you are right for normal humans even 15 fps are playable ,
like you do not need office 2011 and a intel iMac 27" i7 to write a letter , clarisworks and a iMac G3 running OS9 are more then sufficient for that purpose
different people measure in different ways when it comes to computing
some want the overkill computer even if they only surf on websites and email things that can be perfectly displayed on a iMac g3 /ibook G3
without any noticeable speed difference , but they want the iMac i7 /or MacBook Pro even if its only for telling everybody "hey look what i can afford "
i accept the fact a professional film cutter , who does it for a living , needs a fast modern Mac (newest MacPro )and he needs the newest version final cut pro 7 , because for him every second is translated into cash
but human x who just cuts a holiday video once a year can happy live with a PPC mac and iMovie or with final cut pro 3 or 4
i for example sit in front of my iMac G3 now and do not care at all if Word 2004 needs to bounce 5 times before it's loaded now , but others think even 2 times bouncing is already to slow and therefor unusable , and i absolute do not sit here with a stopwatch to know exactly how much time is needed to move a document from one folder to the other , and i would never dump my sweet little iMac G3 only because OSX tiger needs some seconds longer to boot compared with my core duo iMac running OSX tiger too on my sharing partition because of apple talk
for me speed(how long to move documents or folders,boottime) is not really a meassure to declare a computer as usable and worth to have or declare it as ready for the dump
ok i use a intel iMac core duo , but only because i had a bad experience with a G5 iMac but i just liked the design and because it did cost less then usual and was internally new (thanks to the previous owner who did get everything renewed under apple care), ok yes i upgraded the harddrive with a 10000rpm velociraptor 600gb , but only because i got that drive for far less then the rrp
Last edited: