How do I use the Web on a PPC Mac?

[repairedCheese]

@eyoungren to be fair, the OP wanted more speed in this case.

Cheers.

I like what Firefox brings to the table and i have a powerful enough Mac that if usually doesn't matter, but Leopard Webkit can run the web Discord client for me, and be fully functional. This is about speed, and unless you're willing to install Linux, Firefox isn't going to touch that.

 

[Imixmuan]

The OP would have been better off applying that 50 quid to a Chromebook. If you aren't an above average (and I'd say every regular in this forum qualifies as above average) computer user, then use your PowerPC macs as offline/nostalgia machines, and buy a Android tablet, Chromebook or cheap Windows laptop for the web. I almost wrote buy a Raspebrry Pi 4, but that still requires a little bit of computer savy. About the level of a tech savy 7 year old for a RaspberryPi 4, I'd estimate.

You, the OP, are way better off, and so are we. Trying to explain the hard to explain to the uneducated is a fool's errand at best.

 

[z970]

On that note, the OP hasn't responded yet with details of their system spec so suggesting that they switch from OS X to PPC Linux is a bit premature if we don't know their machine can run it properly.

I wasn't directly suggesting the OP install Linux now. I was just abstractedly addressing the broader topic.

Have you got some facts and figures for this? My understanding was that Linux drivers for native PPC graphics cards were always inferior?

Not without digging around, which I don't have the time to do.

The issue on OS X vs Linux graphics acceleration was never drivers. On that front, you're absolutely right, OS X is going to outrun Linux as far as GPU support, especially for GeForce cards (less so on the whole for Radeons when factoring non-free firmware).

The issue was that OS X 10.4 / 10.5 and Linux take different approaches to how they utilize the graphics card for system operation. For example, OS X did not offload video processing to the GPU until 10.6.3 (if memory serves), with everything beforehand being entirely CPU driven. Contrarily, my understanding is that modern Linux distributions do not do this, and do offload video processing to the graphics card, which fully explains the massively smoother YouTube performance and offline video playback people have reported (and I have likewise felt for myself) under, for instance, Ubuntu 16.04.

We went deeper into this in another thread semi-recently, but I believe the consensus (or at least the unspoken one) was that when given the said hardware's full support under Linux, its options make superior use of the graphics card for page rendering and video playback than any of the options offered in OS X 10.4 / 10.5 for the same tasks.
[automerge]1582758805[/automerge]

Trying to explain the hard to explain to the uneducated is a fool's errand at best.

Why not go the mile and educate the uneducated? Otherwise, how does one ever ascend from ignorance, in any topic?

 

[TheShortTimer]

I wasn't directly suggesting the OP install Linux now. I was just abstractedly addressing the broader topic.

That comment wasn't directed at you.

Why not go the mile and educate the uneducated?

Agreed. Members of this forum have educated me in many areas. What good is knowledge if you're not prepared to share it for the betterment of others?

Edited to add: thanks goodness that the teachers, lecturers and my doctoral supervisor who've spent time explaining to me concepts that were often "hard to explain" didn't feel that way!

 

[Dronecatcher]

Contrarily, my understanding is that modern Linux distributions do not do this, and do offload video processing to the graphics card, which fully explains the massively smoother YouTube performance and offline video playback people have reported (and I have likewise felt for myself) under, for instance, Ubuntu 16.04.

@wicknix do you find this to be true? Hardware acceleration for h264 under Linux - a simple test would be Coreplayer/OSX vs MPlayer/Lubuntu?

 

[2984839]

Given the current state of things, I would not say PowerPC Linux requires a fair amount of computing knowledge. The only real barrier to entry is the ability to clearly follow directions and two hours max of the user's time. And then when they're all done, they get tons of modern software (including actual browser choice) coupled with an OS that makes full use of the system's GPU, naturally making browsing and video playback smoother.

The reality of the situation is that it's either the former, or wading through Web 3.0 on either a crash-prone and coming up to two year old WebKit browser, or a purely CPU-bound Firefox that is still unfortunately locked down to 45 ESR with no hope of escape.

However, if you have no plans of accessing the Internet on said hardware, then that's a different story entirely.

But all things considered, I'm going to have to disagree on this one.

Installing Linux on a PPC Mac may only requires a how-to guide and some time, but actually running it on a daily basis is different. Software choices are still limited compared to amd64 and not all of that software even works properly on PowerPC. Linux has its own warts, like systemd's complicatedness, absolutely everything related to Network Manager, etc. For someone who is interested in learning and working around these things, it's totally doable even if they are starting from 0. For someone who just wants to use their computer, it's asking a lot on PPC.

 

[sawpits]

I would submit that if you're looking for speed, you want Leopard Webkit over TenFourFox, but that assumes you have a Mac that can run 10.5 well. And even then, it's also far less stable. Or, at least it is on my G5.

Leopard Webkit hasn't been updated since October 2018, so security will be a problem. No one should use it for anything other than surfing, no buying, banking, etc.

 

[defjam]

Installing Linux on a PPC Mac may only requires a how-to guide and some time, but actually running it on a daily basis is different. Software choices are still limited compared to amd64 and not all of that software even works properly on PowerPC. Linux has its own warts, like systemd's complicatedness, absolutely everything related to Network Manager, etc. For someone who is interested in learning and working around these things, it's totally doable even if they are starting from 0. For someone who just wants to use their computer, it's asking a lot on PPC.

IMO if someone falls into this category I would have a very difficult time recommending a PPC to them. There are newer, low cost Macintosh models which would be better suited to such a user.

 

[2984839]

IMO if someone falls into this category I would have a very difficult time recommending a PPC to them. There are newer, low cost Macintosh models which would be better suited to such a user.

Agreed, even a Chromebook or an old, cheap laptop that can run Windows 10 would be better. I could be wrong but I get the sense from the OP that he just wants a computer, not an adventure.

OP, I strongly recommend getting rid of that XP machine and replacing it with something more modern. It is not even remotely secure and it's only a matter of time before it gets hacked.

 

[repairedCheese]

Leopard Webkit hasn't been updated since October 2018, so security will be a problem. No one should use it for anything other than surfing, no buying, banking, etc.

That's entirely valid. And, it's a very good idea to run some sort of system-level ad block, just to rule out that particular security hole. But blocking ads helps all low end systems stay fast just because of the nightmare that modern web ads are.

 

[TheShortTimer]

OP, I strongly recommend getting rid of that XP machine and replacing it with something more modern. It is not even remotely secure and it's only a matter of time before it gets hacked.

Or as I urged in an earlier post, to replace the XP installation with something along the lines of Linux Mint. It's relatively easy to use and I've substituted XP with LM on PC's that were deemed too old to run 7, 8 and 10 and the users were able to continue with their computing tasks without purchasing a new machine.

 

[wicknix]

@wicknix do you find this to be true? Hardware acceleration for h264 under Linux - a simple test would be Coreplayer/OSX vs MPlayer/Lubuntu?

That's a tough one. CorePlayer is unmatched by anything. It's coding genius. Now if we did macports mplayer vs lubuntu mplayer that'd be different, and again, a tough one. All ppc macs running osx are supported by the gfx driver, not all are "fully" supported under linux. Some use the fallback framebuffer driver, which works, but has subpar performance. It really depends on the machine and the software/OS/distro used. There are too many other grey areas and variables for me to give my opinion or do some real world tests.

Cheers

 

[Dronecatcher]

That's a tough one. CorePlayer is unmatched by anything. It's coding genius.

Over the years, with every PPC Linux I've tried, my first benchmark is to load up a 360P and 720P h264 clip to try in MPlayer and watch the CPU via top in the terminal app.
I have seen 360P played with the same efficiency as Coreplayer but not so with 720P - I honestly don't think there's any hardware acceleration going on, just more refined code under the hood of MPlayer.
By contrast, I once tested MPlayer under Micro XP on a 1.6Ghz Atom netbook - it played 720P using 35% CPU - now that is an obvious example of hardware acceleration.

I'll do some real world tests later on my 1.67Ghz Powerbook.

 

[wicknix]

Here's my G5 under ubuntu12remix with h264 @ 720p. VLC shows 25% cpu. I'll test the powerbook G4 tomorrow which is also running ubuntu12remix. Both have decently supported Radeon 9600 gfx cards.

Cheers

 

[Dronecatcher]

Here's my G5 under ubuntu12remix with h264

That's the Dual G5 yes?

I've just done some testing on my 15" DLSD, downloading and playing this 720P clip:

I used a 720P clip because of the frequency scaling on the Powerbook's CPU - a 360P clip would have give inaccurate readings as the CPU switched to a lower speed.

Across the board in Tiger, Leopard, Lubuntu 12 Remix and 16 Remix, the clip was using 95-100% CPU in MPlayer without any playback parameters with stuttering playback and quickly falling out of audio sync.

Only when hard framedrop options were added was the playback in sync with Tiger averaging 90% CPU, Leopard 95%, Lubuntu 12 80% and Lubuntu 16 75% - image quality was noticeably better under Lubuntu too.

With Tiger and Leopard, Coreplayer without any 'speed up' options applied played the video perfectly avergaging 75% CPU.

My feeling is, MPlayer in Lubuntu is benefiting from Linux specific optimisations and not being as ancient as the OSX derivative rather than hardware acceleration for h264.

 

[wicknix]

Actually lastics macports mplayer for tiger/leopard is newer than either of the Ubuntu' s. However it's neat to see how similar they all are in performance. (And yeah dual cpu 2ghz.)

Cheers

 

[Dronecatcher]

Actually lastics macports mplayer for tiger/leopard is newer than either of the Ubuntu' s.

I did try it but on that particular video it fell out of sync even with the hard framedrop options.

 

[defjam]

Really Leopard Webkit's problems are that it's maybe a little likely to crash, and that extensions are just outright broken.

After having given LWK a try I have concluded:

1. It is considerably faster than TFF. Enough so it made my browsing experience very nice. I was very impressed with its performance and thought it would resurrect my PPC Internet browsing.
2. It is unreliable. I wouldn't go so far as to describe "likely to crash" as an understatement but in the past hour or so of using it it has crashed numerous times. In addition it "hangs" when viewing pages and would not permit me to post to MR after crashing. It seems the only way to "reset" LWK is to reboot the system.

It's unfortunate LWK had reliability issues as I was very impressed with its speed. I'm going to continue giving it a try but initial results, while encouraging, have been disappointing.

 

[MacFoxG4]

I have both TFF and LWK on my 1.5ghz G4. I use LWK to watch YouTube and TFF for everything else. YouTube at 360p is pretty good on LWK, but I do occasionally get stuttering video. YouTube on TFF is a slide show on anything more than 240p.

 

[defjam]

I have both TFF and LWK on my 1.5ghz G4. I use LWK to watch YouTube and TFF for everything else. YouTube at 360p is pretty good on LWK, but I do occasionally get stuttering video. YouTube on TFF is a slide show on anything more than 240p.

IME I can't imagine anything on a G4 based system being anything more than a slide show using TFF. I really like these old systems but using one for web browsing is nothing more than a trial in patience.

I'm posting this using LWK and I had to close all windows and restart it just to get here to do so.

 

[z970]

It seems the only way to "reset" LWK is to reboot the system.

You don't have to reboot the system. After WebKit crashes, reopen it, this time purposefully quit out, and then open it again. It should now work properly.
[automerge]1582833734[/automerge]

IME I can't imagine anything on a G4 based system being anything more than a slide show using TFF. I really like these old systems but using one for web browsing is nothing more than a trial in patience.

This is with foxPEP?

 

[alex_free]

Lynxlet: Lynx for Mac OS X

habilis.net

It is a text based browser that runs on ppc.

This would be interesting to update. Last update looks like it’s from 2007.

 

[wicknix]

@defjam dis you happen to watch my video I posted on page 1 of this thread? G4 browsing this forum and YouTube. Not slow or for the patient at all. I find it amazing that 15 year old machines can still surf this good.

 

[eyoungren]

1. It is unreliable. I wouldn't go so far as to describe "likely to crash" as an understatement but in the past hour or so of using it it has crashed numerous times. In addition it "hangs" when viewing pages and would not permit me to post to MR after crashing. It seems the only way to "reset" LWK is to reboot the system.

It's unfortunate LWK had reliability issues as I was very impressed with its speed. I'm going to continue giving it a try but initial results, while encouraging, have been disappointing.

I have noticed that after a few times of running any relinked LWK app that kernal_task will completely take over one core on my Quad, pegging it to 120%. That usually comes to my attention when I find that the fans have ramped up.

The only solution for an out of control kernal_task process is a reboot. Consequently, I avoid using LWK as much as possible.

 

[defjam]

You don't have to reboot the system. After WebKit crashes, reopen it, this time purposefully quit out, and then open it again. It should now work properly.

Key word there is "should". It should but it didn't.

This is with foxPEP?

I don't know what this means.
[automerge]1582839055[/automerge]

@defjam dis you happen to watch my video I posted on page 1 of this thread? G4 browsing this forum and YouTube. Not slow or for the patient at all. I find it amazing that 15 year old machines can still surf this good.

Yes, I did watch the video you posted. Did you read my response where I said "...using TFF..."?
[automerge]1582839200[/automerge]

I have noticed that after a few times of running any relinked LWK app that kernal_task will completely take over one core on my Quad, pegging it to 120%. That usually comes to my attention when I find that the fans have ramped up.

The only solution for an out of control kernal_task process is a reboot. Consequently, I avoid using LWK as much as possible.

I am very pleased with the performance of LWK until such time as the spinning beachball appears. Once that happens for anything more than a few seconds I can count on the browser to crash. I wouldn't mind if this was an occasional occurrence but it's happening with too much frequency for my tastes. I'm continuing to evaluate it because the alternative is so much worse.