iMac Pro against 1984 Macintosh

[mpe]

I was wondering if my original Macintosh 128k really boots faster from a single-sided DD floppy than my iMac Pro from its fancy dual PCIe RAID storage.

And in fact yes, it does

I guess this is mainly due to the new T2 chip and 2 stage boot process which has to call home every time to check that I am allowed to boot the OS installed on my Mac among other things.

 

[maflynn]

My [non-pro] iMac's boot up time is painfully slow, and it wasn't always that way. Only because I moved to HS and I think I'm converted over to APFS. So if I was to hazard a guess its more likely APFS that is slowing your boot times.

Nice video though

 

[nambuccaheadsau]

Look at it this way.

Booting from a floppy will always be quicker as it probably contains 1/10,000 of the information the iMac Pro does. Send me the iMac Pro and you keep the 128k!

 

[filmak]

Look at it this way.

Booting from a floppy will always be quicker as it probably contains 1/10,000 of the information the iMac Pro does. Send me the iMac Pro and you keep the 128k!

I would prefer the 128k!

 

[Krayzkat]

If the iMac pro has to check over the internet whether you are allowed to boot up then what happens if your WiFi etc has dropped?

 

[nordicappeal]

Wow. Love that little one doing it simple fast boot. I do also think the iMac Pro is a slow booter compared to spec. but I really only reboot/boot once or twice a week.

 

[BeatCrazy]

If the iMac pro has to check over the internet whether you are allowed to boot up then what happens if your WiFi etc has dropped?

It doesn't check anything over the internet. Per Ars Technica:

"The T2 validates the boot loader, which in turn validates the firmware, which in turn validates the kernel, which in turn validates the drivers."

 

[filmak]

It doesn't check anything over the internet. Per Ars Technica:

"The T2 validates the boot loader, which in turn validates the firmware, which in turn validates the kernel, which in turn validates the drivers."

... which in turn validates the purchase receipt...

 

[an-other]

How about showing a comparable file save?

I remember writing my thesis, and having to swap disks multiple times to save. A major pain as the effort to save made it something you didn't want to do often. Not a good thing when you have a dog perfectly sized at outlet level.

 

[mpe]

It doesn't check anything over the internet. Per Ars Technica:

Actually, it does.

As far as I know, there are three settings (full, medium and no security). In full security (the default mode iMac Pro comes with), it checks that I am using the latest trusted version of OS. How would they know that without calling home? That's why this requires an internet connection.

 

[Lesser Evets]

I was wondering if my original Macintosh 128k really boots faster from a single-sided DD floppy than my iMac Pro from its fancy dual PCIe RAID storage.

And in fact yes, it does

The difference...

One computer does nearly everything.
The other computer does nearly nothing.

Try file-save times on both for a 30-minute 4K video...

 

[BeatCrazy]

Actually, it does.

As far as I know, there are three settings (full, medium and no security). In full security (the default mode iMac Pro comes with), it checks that I am using the latest trusted version of OS. How would they know that without calling home? That's why this requires an internet connection.

If it really checked the internet every time it booted, you'd never be able to turn it on without a working internet connection, and we know that's not the situation.

 

[jerryk]

I bet my 1984 mac would crush it. Mine has 10 MB a (yes MB) hard underneath (same size as mac's bottom) connected via SCSI. And has been upgraded from 128K (yes K) to 512K (aka fat mac). Man that thing was a beast in 1985.

 

[flyinmac]

It doesn't check anything over the internet. Per Ars Technica:

"The T2 validates the boot loader, which in turn validates the firmware, which in turn validates the kernel, which in turn validates the drivers."

Wow... that’s way to much checking for my taste.

Sounds like a good way to keep us from extending the machine’s useful life with custom modifications once Apple applies the code to prevent newer OS versions from installing. Likewise with any hardware mods we might find to permit it to run the newer OS once Apple discontinues support.

Speaking as someone with El Capitan running on a 2006 Mac Pro, the described checking on the iMac Pro sounds detrimental to future attempts to extend a computer’s life in the way that we have with the old Mac Pro.

I realize it’s an “iMac” Pro. But it’s price tag puts it beyond disposable. I’ve gotten 12 years of productive use and current software out of my $2500 Mac Pro. I’d want the same from a $5000 iMac Pro.
[doublepost=1525483068][/doublepost]

I was wondering if my original Macintosh 128k really boots faster from a single-sided DD floppy than my iMac Pro from its fancy dual PCIe RAID storage.

And in fact yes, it does

I guess this is mainly due to the new T2 chip and 2 stage boot process which has to call home every time to check that I am allowed to boot the OS installed on my Mac among other things.

Great to see the old classic running.

 

[redheeler]

Wow... that’s way to much checking for my taste.

Sounds like a good way to keep us from extending the machine’s useful life with custom modifications once Apple applies the code to prevent newer OS versions from installing. Likewise with any hardware mods we might find to permit it to run the newer OS once Apple discontinues support.

Speaking as someone with El Capitan running on a 2006 Mac Pro, the described checking on the iMac Pro sounds detrimental to future attempts to extend a computer’s life in the way that we have with the old Mac Pro.

I realize it’s an “iMac” Pro. But it’s price tag puts it beyond disposable. I’ve gotten 12 years of productive use and current software out of my $2500 Mac Pro. I’d want the same from a $5000 iMac Pro.

Looks like you can disable the check in Recovery, so although Apple is inching toward a full iOS-style lockdown, at least we're not there yet.

 

[flyinmac]

Looks like you can disable the check in Recovery, so although Apple is inching toward a full iOS-style lockdown, at least we're not there yet.

That’s good to know. Hopefully it’ll be a long while before they manage to lock it down completely.

 

[mpe]

I bet my 1984 mac would crush it. Mine has 10 MB a (yes MB) hard underneath (same size as mac's bottom) connected via SCSI. And has been upgraded from 128K (yes K) to 512K (aka fat mac). Man that thing was a beast in 1985.

There was no SCSI in original Macs (128k or 512k fat mac). SCSI was introduced in Macintosh Plus in 1986. If you have a hard drive underneath your 512k upgraded Macintosh, I bet it is Hard Disk 20 connected to the external floppy port or an equivalent 3rd party model. It is about the same speed as floppy so I don't think it would boot much faster.

I also have a SE/30 with SCSI and internal modern SD2SCSI adapter. I have no video, but I am sure it would boot much faster than either iMac Pro or Macintosh 128k.

 

[kschendel]

I confess to being puzzled as to why anyone would use boot times as a performance measure for a desktop computer. I generally use mine rather than booting it.

 

[redheeler]

I confess to being puzzled as to why anyone would use boot times as a performance measure for a desktop computer. I generally use mine rather than booting it.

My Apple II+ boots into BASIC faster than both the Macintosh 128K and iMac Pro can boot into Mac OS.

 

[kschendel]

My Apple II+ boots into BASIC faster than both the Macintosh 128K and iMac Pro can boot into Mac OS.

That's a bit like saying that you can spit onto the lawn faster than you can fetch the hose, hook it up, attach the sprinkler, and water it. True statement but hardly relevant to getting work done.

I'm still not sure why anyone is comparing boot times at all, unless this is just an artificial exercise, in which case I'll quit wondering about it.

 

[filmak]

At least the preference of OP is obvious, he/she really likes All-in-Ones for a long long time.

 

[mpe]

I confess to being puzzled as to why anyone would use boot times as a performance measure for a desktop computer. I generally use mine rather than booting it.

I think Steve Jobs once had a vision of computers that are like appliances - easy to use and ready when you are.

I almost never turn my iMac Pro off, so don't suffer that much. I just wanted to point out this amusing performance regression in the top of the line computer. Before iMac Pro, I had the regulard 5k iMac (2015 model. It booted from Fusion Drive in seconds, much faster than the iMac Pro.

 

[Guy Clark]

As others have said its great to see a classic Macintosh working in 2018. It s no surprise that boot times are faster as there is little or no footprint compared to modern day macOS.
The same applies to OS X 10.4.11 Tiger running on a 1GHz PowerPC with as little as 1GB RAM on a 5400rpm mechanical HDD which boots lightning fast compared to macOS High Sierra with a similar configuration.
Other factors can also be drawn. Dual Boot macOS high Sierra and OS X Snow Leopard on the same Mac and Snow Leopard knocks High Sierra out of the park. I have this Dual Boot arrangement on my mid 2011 21.5" iMac and even in 2018 Snow Leopard remains incredibly usable and flies on a Solid State Hybrid Drive with 8GB Ram.
There is little doubt over the years the macOS platform has become increasingly bloated becoming pronounced as far back as OS X 10.7 Lion.

 

[294307]

My [non-pro] iMac's boot up time is painfully slow, and it wasn't always that way. Only because I moved to HS and I think I'm converted over to APFS. So if I was to hazard a guess its more likely APFS that is slowing your boot times.

Nice video though

What drive do you have in your iMac? It will only be converted to APFS if it's a pure SSD.

 

[maflynn]

What drive do you have in your iMac? It will only be converted to APFS if it's a pure SSD.

I use an external SSD that has been upgraded.