Your post makes absolutely no sense at all. There are contradictory statements every other sentence.
Apple
I've always been a total apple fanperson, until I realized how apple was going.
When I got my PowerMac G5 Quad, I knew that it wouldn't be able to natively run 10.8 (even up to this day every emulation attempt has failed, but I still have hope, I spend an over two hours a week trying to get it to run).
Unless you are rewriting the Q emulator (which you aren't), you should know that 10.8 can't be emulated with Q. Period.
Anyways, when I got it I assumed, "well this will just be a slow mac to play around with, maybe be a web server and for writing HTML". When I got it, and installed my 20GB of RAM, a 120GB SATA III SSD, an AMD 7970, and OS X 10.8
Whoa! You just said
I knew that it wouldn't be able to natively run 10.8
and that
even up to this day every emulation attempt has failed
Therefore you could not have installed 10.8. Also, there is no PowerPC OS X support for the AMD 7970. Therefore you could not be using it on OS X, and I believe that you said it wouldn't work under Linux, as PowerPC drivers were not available. 20GB of RAM is not possible,
as you state below.
How hard would it be to for apple to update their northbridge firmware to make it work with up to 64GB or RAM like IBM said it should? [as opposed too 16]
Why didn't the first hardware work?
It has come to me that the answer is apple.
How hard would it be to for apple to update their northbridge firmware to make it work with up to 64GB or RAM like IBM said it should?
As easy as getting a team to work on it for a week.
What makes you think a week? Why would they do it when the Quad was new and 16GB of RAM was more than enough for any tasks at the time. It would be totally futile. And why on earth would they do it now when they have released 3, almost four releases of OS X that don't support the computer in question?
How hard would it be to for apple to update their SATA firmware to remove bugs that make it not aggregate link bandwidth with SATA III HDDs?
As easy as getting a team to work on it for a week.
Again, you pull the "week" time period out. You know nothing that would justify that statement. Also, SATA III was released in 2009. 3-4 years after the Quad. When Apple's OS
did not support the Quad.
How hard would it be to for apple to create firmware for modern GPUs?
As easy as getting a team to work on it for a week.
This is where you are completely and totally wrong. There are so many differences between cards that can be flashed on PowerPC and cards that can't. Obviously, you didn't read a thing when you were posting about the development of ROMs. Intel=EFI, PowerPC=Open Firmware.
How hard would it be to for apple to recompile OS X for PowerPC?
As easy as pressing the compile button.
You are completely clueless and have no idea what you are talking about. Do you have any idea of CPU instructions, stuff like Altivec and SSE? You can't just "compile" for different architectures.
So why don't do it?
Apple is perfectly able of doing so
For crying out loud they have billions of dollars sitting around!
Because they want us to buy some more Macs from them so that they can use some of our cash to build green paper airplanes, and dollar sign napkins, instead of supporting their products!
Your argument: Apple has money, they should have done X. It makes no sense. Why would they support a computer on an architecture that they abandoned years ago when they need to throw resources at current products.
Never to use a mac again
I am on a commitment to not get any new apple hardware, as I can no longer justify buying products from apple. Who knows, if they switch to ARM will they drop support for intell users like they did to us PowerPC users?
Fine. If you want a company that will support products that have outlasted their main purpose by several years, Apple is not for you. Neither is any company.
