Intel vs PPC: The great debate

Do you think the G's are still useable for most things or is Intel nessicary

  • Yes. The G's wont be as fast but they will work

    Votes: 28 35.4%
  • No. Apple has stopped supporting the G's so why invest in old technology

    Votes: 51 64.6%

  • Total voters
    79

Theclamshell

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Mar 2, 2009
2,741
1
Greetings,
I recently posted a thread about whether i should buy a G5 or intel mini. I was surprised at all the replies that said the G5 would be awful to use. This really made me think why do people think the G series are unusable.

I know they are being phased out by apple but they are still usable for at least 60% of the population who needs a computer. I know intels are faster and more reliable but still just because apple has stopped supporting a computer does not mean its obsolete.

So what do you all think? :apple:G's:apple:Intel:apple:
 

kate-willbury

macrumors 6502a
Feb 14, 2009
684
0
uhhhh this is hardly a debate. you just answered it yourself. intels are faster and more reliable. powerpcs (not macs) are still used as servers but thats about it.
 
Comment

Scarlet Fever

macrumors 68040
Jul 22, 2005
3,262
0
Bookshop!
It's not that the G5s were unstable, its just that the intels are significantly faster per watt, and Apple have almost completely phased them out. After experiencing the speed of Intel, I would only use a PPC machine as a file and print server.
 
Comment

Bennieboy©

macrumors 65816
Jan 15, 2009
1,276
1
england
it all depends on what system your getting or have and what your putting it to work doing,

i recently made the swap from PPC G5 to c2d MBP, and for what i do the G5 was actually faster,

for more then 50% of people out there that only use there machines for web surfing, email and music listening, a PPC is still perfect, they really dont need anything more,

as for the PPC G5s, some of the last ones off the lines ( quads ) are still perfectly usable, and in some cases still run rings around a intel based Mac, unless your spending silly money on a Mac pro or the New i7 iMacs,

as per your other thread,
i think it's great that you bought the G5, i had a dual core 2.0Ghz and it romped, load it up with ram, and sure it wont run all the latest software but pfft latest dont always mean best ;), mine flew, heck it was faster then this MBP, plus you've got the looks, and the upgradability, again unless your buying a Mac Pro, apples desktop offerings now are extremely hard for upgrading,
 
Comment

KeriJane

macrumors 6502a
Sep 26, 2009
578
0
ЧИКАГО!
PPC wasn't as bad as people think they are now. It's easy to compare a 4-5 year old G5 to the incredible Intel Core series and that's not really a fair comparison.

A better comparison would be G4 or G5 to the Intel Pentium4 systems of the 2003-2005 era. The P4 systems of the time were poor-performing, power hungry hot running single-core turkeys. P4 was so bad that AMD made considerable inroads at the time.
Compared to an OEM brand P4 system with little memory, cruddy video, virus-ridden XP SP1, howling fans and an ultra-cheap monitor, the iMac G5 was an amazingly fast, stable and quiet system with a stunning display.
Never mind that an awful lot of that junk wasn't even a "real" P4... many were ultra-crippled P4 Celerons.

The G5 Power Mac was considered decent at the time also. During that era I was doing Video Editing with various P4 systems that together probably cost me nearly as much as a Power Mac. Would I have been better off with G4 or G5 technology? Probably. A G4 Cube probably would have done better.

I've got an old, tired PPC iMac G5.
It seems OK.
It's capable of running all "normal" apps, works pretty well, is fast and not too noisy.

When running Tiger that is.

I tried putting Leopard on it once. It actually ran pretty decent but the fans speeded up quite a bit! So back to Tiger and iLife '08.

PPC was neat though it limited Apple's market. A big selling point of Intel Macs is the ability to run Windows. Many people go and install Windows on their Intel Mac but end up never using Windows. But they probably wouldn't have bought it if it wasn't Windows-capable.

Doesn't PPC still dominate the Space market? As I understand it satellites and even the Mars Rovers run specially-protected PPC CPUs.
Maybe even Wall-e is PPC! :)

Have Fun,
Keri

PS. Currently, my G5 is being profoundly underutilized at Mom's house as a Digital Picture Frame unless I come over and plug in the KB & mouse.

PPS. The G5 tower case often gets converted to a hackintosh when they die.
Dead G5s and even the cases sell pretty well on eBay because of this.
 
Comment

Theclamshell

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Mar 2, 2009
2,741
1
wow, thanks for all the replies guys, i enjoy reading your thoughts on this topic. And KeriJane, im sure wall-e is ppc also hahaha
 
Comment

dukebound85

macrumors P6
Jul 17, 2005
18,145
1,500
5045 feet above sea level
Greetings,
I recently posted a thread about whether i should buy a G5 or intel mini. I was surprised at all the replies that said the G5 would be awful to use. This really made me think why do people think the G series are unusable.
it was a dead end
I know they are being phased out by apple but they are still usable for at least 60% of the population who needs a computer. I know intels are faster and more reliable but still just because apple has stopped supporting a computer does not mean its obsolete.

So what do you all think? :apple:G's:apple:Intel:apple:
why get a computer that software wont be writing towards

while the chip remains capable, its obsolete once you cant use it from a software pov

this isnt a great debate at all
 
Comment

Theclamshell

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Mar 2, 2009
2,741
1
it was a dead end


why get a computer that software wont be writing towards

while the chip remains capable, its obsolete once you cant use it from a software pov

this isnt a great debate at all

well, for me a computers obsolete when it no longer does what i want it to do and in this case the G's are still fine for me. For some people though they need the newest mac pro because of what they do and i understand that. I just dont think that a computer is unusable because no more software is avaliable for it.
 
Comment

dukebound85

macrumors P6
Jul 17, 2005
18,145
1,500
5045 feet above sea level
well, for me a computers obsolete when it no longer does what i want it to do and in this case the G's are still fine for me. For some people though they need the newest mac pro because of what they do and i understand that. I just dont think that a computer is unusable because no more software is avaliable for it.
then kudos to you getting the g5

most want a computer where software being developed is being written for it

nobody writes software for a ppc chip so whatever you need better already be written
 
Comment

splitpea

macrumors 65816
Oct 21, 2009
1,009
241
Among the starlings
I have a G5 Power Mac and only now are the Macbooks and Minis catching up with its performance; they still can't touch its versatility and expandability. I do fairly intensive graphics work, but this thing does everything I need and could serve me for another 4 years as far as processing power goes. The only reasons I'm planning to upgrade are a) I want a portable, and b) a few bits of software (stuff that most people don't need -- UNIX utilities and such) aren't being maintained for PPC any more, which is causing compatibility issues when I do things like upgrade Apache or install new PHP modules.
 
Comment

dmmcintyre3

macrumors 68020
Mar 4, 2007
2,131
1
for more then 50% of people out there that only use there machines for web surfing, email and music listening, a PPC is still perfect, they really dont need anything more,
Web surfing is the most demanding task for my PPC Macs. Adope needs to loose their monopoly on flash for PPC to be usable for web surfing.
 
Comment

dukebound85

macrumors P6
Jul 17, 2005
18,145
1,500
5045 feet above sea level
I have a G5 Power Mac and only now are the Macbooks and Minis catching up with its performance;
In terms of cpu performance, the initial intels were already on par with the g5's
they still can't touch its versatility and expandability.
expandability only in the sense you can add hdds

the graphics options for "expandibility" are non existent

and what do you mean by versatility? ppc were less verstile the moment intels ht the scene
 
Comment

Dr.Pants

macrumors 65816
Jan 8, 2009
1,181
2
I would be willing to assert that if somebody needed a cheap computer with OSX, PPC would be the way to go - usable until even the PPC OSX community support went out the window, in which case PPC Linux would work well. Except in Flash.

As for my G5, its going to be relegated to be an XGrid controller when I upgrade. Sure, XServes won't come immediately, but I would venture that the G5 would live up to the task even after a year or so. And in the meantime, it would make a good backup workstation in the event that I needed to send a MacPro back to AppleCare.

When I bought my G5, it was probably the best performing Apple tower I could afford. For anybody that has an aversion to AIO units (such as myself), a G5 would work dandy. A buyer just needs to realize that OSX applications will be trending away from PPC, and that a Linux migration would be necessary at some point.
 
Comment

Bennieboy©

macrumors 65816
Jan 15, 2009
1,276
1
england
Web surfing is the most demanding task for my PPC Macs. Adope needs to loose their monopoly on flash for PPC to be usable for web surfing.
good point, but basic web browsing, i meant like emails and forums and such,
even on my c2d the cpu gets pretty wound up when i want to use youtube and other flash based websites,
 
Comment

*LTD*

macrumors G4
Feb 5, 2009
10,703
1
Canada
Support for G5 machines is dropping fairly quickly, no point in investing in a dead-end.
Old Macs still have their uses. And they still sell for quite a bit.

But really, it's time to get on the Intel train. We're nearly 4 years into it now.
 
Comment

zap2

macrumors 604
Mar 8, 2005
7,241
1
Washington D.C
I don't know about you, but I buy a computer based on what software is available for it, not what will be in the future. Why buy the machine if the software you want for it doesn't exist yet? :confused:
I certainly look at a computer and ask myself "Will this be supported a few years down the road?"

Upcoming software plays into my buying choices, because I like the things I buy to last a while
 
Comment

SkyBell

macrumors 604
Sep 7, 2006
6,564
134
Texas, unfortunately.
I certainly look at a computer and ask myself "Will this be supported a few years down the road?"

Upcoming software plays into my buying choices, because I like the things I buy to last a while
But you wouldn't buy a computer that has no guarantee that it will eventually have the software to do what you want it to do. You certainly wouldn't purchase a professional machine based on a guess like that.

If you buy a computer that meets your needs, you shouldn't be needing to replace it for a very long time.
 
Comment

flopticalcube

macrumors G4
But you wouldn't buy a computer that has no guarantee that it will eventually have the software to do what you want it to do. You certainly wouldn't purchase a professional machine based on a guess like that.

If you buy a computer that meets your needs, you shouldn't be needing to replace it for a very long time.
But there is the issue of support. Bug fixes, updates to interfaces like web technology, things that change during you ownership over which you have no control. If you are a professional and rely on your computer for a living, you need a system that is and will be supported during its lifetime with you.
 
Comment

mac2x

macrumors 65816
Sep 19, 2009
1,146
0
But there is the issue of support. Bug fixes, updates to interfaces like web technology, things that change during you ownership over which you have no control. If you are a professional and rely on your computer for a living, you need a system that is and will be supported during its lifetime with you.
Agreed. However, if all you are doing is a little personal email, web browsing, and music, an older Mac will serve just fine. Wouldn't mind having one or two of 'em myself to play with.
 
Comment
for more then 50% of people out there that only use there machines for web surfing, email and music listening, a PPC is still perfect, they really dont need anything more,
RE: The PPC is goof for web surfing: I have to say a resounding NO. Flash videos are almost unplayable on my iMac G5, and pretty much impossible on my iMac G4. And if you even attempt to enter youtube or hulu, i have two words for you: HA HA. Unfortunately a good part of the web is flash based, and the PPC cannot handle it well at all, so it would not be good for web browsing, and it's just going to get progressively worse. My PPC's didn't have these problems a year and a half to two years ago, so it shows they are lagging behind with the times.

What PPC is good for is doing document work, and using applications that were designed for PPC.
 
Comment

Similar threads

  • philip_t
1
Replies
1
Views
199
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.