Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Really! Why do people still use those ancient Macs like 700-800 MHz G4s or even 450 Mhz ?

What are using those old Macs for? Playing music in iTunes? Surfing net? Cant think of another use... even disk storage was slow.

Playing music, surfing the net, checking email, IM, PIM functions? You mean, like, the stuff for which the vast majority of non-pro users actually use their computers?

For most purposes, there's not much real justification to buying a new, more expensive computer if the older one still works fine. The only reason I have three CD/C2D machines is that I do a massive amount of video/music file transcoding.
 
I worked and sold my powerbook G4 to get my MBP. There are ways to get new computers. Trust me if you spend time on a new machine you start to ask yourself why I waited so long. mmmm I love my MBP and Im gona love leopard. mmmmmm and safari sucks.

Yeah I work too. I've worked this whole year and saved up more than enough for a new MacBook. But I'd much rather spend it on travelling than on a new machine. This old machine still works fine for my needs and I get to travel. If I bought the MacBook, no travel for me.

I'm glad you think safari sucks, I quite like how it doesn't take 10 minutes to load one website.

:apple:Matt
 
The IR remote has nothing to do with the iSight (internal or external). The IR receiver is completely separate from the iSight.....two different devices.

Hmm. I guess I'd ask the question, why? Why do I need to have an IR port to be able to run Front Row? In point of fact, I don't. I have had Front Row installed on my PB G4 for a long time. I love it. Do I need a remote? No. What's so great about it? Well, it makes it easy to watch video files, and if I have to stop part way through, it remembers where I left off. So, this requirement annoys me. I'll look forward to the point at which someone figures out how to install the new Front Row on non-IR port Macs like mine.

-I have a QS sans DVD drive (tried to save some money when I configured, you know)

I have current Macs, but it was my baby for so long that I can't take it out of use. Is there going to be a disc swap for CDs?

If not that really sucks. :mad:

Or you could spring for a DVD ROM drive. You know, they cost a bank-breaking $18, or less. (A CD disc swap would probably cost you $20 anyway, and you'd get a lot less out of it...)
 
Okay, so why is Leopard 116 bucks at the Apple online store for education but its only 109 for everyone over at Amazon ??????????????????????????:confused:
 
"We can't all afford top of the range brand new macs, some of us are students who's parents don't buy us everything we want.

Matt"

Rock on Matt...I hear ya. Go the students! And thanks to all those people who ruined the Education prices :p shame on you hehe
 
Students at University can access the Higher Education store and get Leopard at the same old cheap price. I did that and I have no idea why everyone else is whining. Leopard was £60 for me, the same edu discount as Tiger.
 
I have a PowerMac G4 533Mhz (Digital Audio). I would like to use it as the server for Time Machine - and therefore, must be operated with Leopard (according to Apple site).

Will Leopard allow me to install on a slower machine - I am only using it as a Personal File server. If not, if I upgrade my G4 with a Sonnet or 3rd party CPU upgrade, to something above 867Mhz, will I be able to install Leopard?
 
^^^^ personally I like the challenge and pride of keeping old machines running for as long as possible.
...

Yes, same here. Besides that, think of the waste of millions of people trashing their computers just so they can get a little incremental speed increase or a fancy (but useless) new 3D effect. Does anybody remember when speed increases came from optimized code rather than new hardware? (yes, I know... there's far more money in hardware sales)

I think in future people will have to keep their computers longer or else we'll all be drowning in piles of waste electronics.

(Don't get me wrong. I've been waiting to get a nice new Mac with Leopard. But I expect it to last me at least 10 years.)
 
Increased Memory Footprint?

I'm not so bothered about the disk space, but I DID notice the increase in minimum memory requirement. Does this mean the standard memory footprint of the OS has increased markedly? This might impact many more people with recent or indeed brand new machines.

Tiger runs quite nicely on 1Gb. Will Leopard be slower? I'd note that previous upgrades in some cases improved performance. Going from 10.2 to 10.3 for example. So is Apple finally succumbing to the Microsoft disease of adding features at the expense of performance?

Does anyone with Leopard have a comparison of memory usage compared with Tiger?
 
Those new specs aren't for the faint of heart, now I look at it. You need an Intel Mac to get most out of your system. Even the Core Solo Mac mini won't do everything.
 
Sorry if that has been already covered.

But does that mean I won't be able to play DVDs on my 12'' PB?
 
Sorry if that has been already covered.

But does that mean I won't be able to play DVDs on my 12'' PB?

you'll be able to play them you just won't be able to use the new deinterlacing feature (unless of course you got one of those fabled G5 powerbooks)
 
Unfortunately, that isn't the case. Core Duo is 32-bit. I think it was a mistake of Apple to allow x86 in their OS. It should have been AMD64 only from the very beginning. 64-bit mode has twice as many registers as x86, while PowerPC has twice as many as AMD64. Going to 32-bit x86 was a huge shock.

The only two 32bit processors that Apple used were the Core Solo and the Core Duo mainly because at the time they were the lower end CPUs available and fitted well into the iMac, Mac Book and the Mac Mini.

The vast majority of Intel Macs have the Core 2 Duo or the Xeon in them which are 64bit.

I really have no idea why you would want Apple to go purely with AMD. Their CPUs are losing badly in the speed stakes. The advantages that you laid out above are hardly cause to use a slower CPU.
 
So no Photobooth backdrops for G4s or G5s? I somehow have a hard time believing that my G5 Quad can't handle a backdrop.

I completely agree! I don't see how a 32 bit intel can out pace a 64 bit loaded G5 tower!? :eek:

Intel Processors use SSE, SSE2, and SSE3. Advanced instructions for multi-media. How do you know that these backdrops arent coded heavly with SSE? Thus, Making the G4/G5 unable to execute these tasks.

Come on Apple! You can't get a PowerPC G5 Quad 2.5ghz with 14GB or memory to add photobooth backdrops, and you can get an Macbook to do it? WTF?!?
I think it's relatively obvious. Intel rather than Apple have written the backdrop code. Check out the video effects that come bundled with the latest Dell XPS laptops. It's an Intel written app, but it goes way beyond the backdrops feature in iChat. As an example, you can give every person in the picture cartoon eyes, which then stay with them, even tilting away from the screen as they move their heads.

Leopard is going to be sick!!!
Gross. Antelope cubes all over the place :p
 
A 1.6Ghz processor required for DVD Player deinterlacing? Ouch.

Ahem.... you are quoting this wrong. There are two ways to do deinterlacing. Cheap and cheerful, with visible artefacts (mouse teeth), and high quality deinterlacing, which requires calculating motion vectors within each frame, adjusting for them, and filtering, giving a pleasant result at enormous processor cost.

Yes, you need a 1.66GHz processor for _enhanced_ deinterlacing.
 
really have no idea why you would want Apple to go purely with AMD. Their CPUs are losing badly in the speed stakes. The advantages that you laid out above are hardly cause to use a slower CPU.

Adding to that: When the x86 Macs were announced, one could have reasonably argued from the publicly available knowledge that Apple should have gone with AMD instead of Intel.

But at this point in time, Apple going with AMD could have only be called an absolute disaster. Apple joined forces with Intel exactly at the moment in time when Intel turned around and started moving ahead of AMD.
 
you'll be able to play them you just won't be able to use the new deinterlacing feature (unless of course you got one of those fabled G5 powerbooks)

Great! I thought all that hassle putting a G5 chip into my PB was for nothing.

-cheers
 
They had to draw the line somewhere and I'm sure the 867MHz would be just as bad as the 800MHz.

Wherever Apple draws the line, there will be two kinds of complaints: "I have this Macintosh and can't install Leopard because the installer says my computer is too slow", and "I installed Leopard, but it runs too slow on this machine".

Move the line up, and you get more complaints of type A. Move the line down, and you get more complaints of type B. And you have to do more quality testing; if Apple says it runs on a 667 MHz G4 machine, then someone has spent lots of time trying every single feature on such a machine.

The 867MHz is probably the result of a spreadsheet trying to minimise the number of complaints and the testing requirements. And anyway, if you really want to install on an 800MHz machine, it is not really difficult.
 
Hm, 9GB doesn't seem that bad. How much room do the competitors take up? XP and Vista?

It doesn't botehr me since I'll be getting an intel Macbook. 80GB of space. Woot! :D On my current windows laptop I only have 20GB, of which about 5 is used for Win2k. -.-

Sounds like this is going to be awesome sOS :p
 
It doesn't botehr me since I'll be getting an intel Macbook. 80GB of space. Woot! :D
If you start doing anything in iLife you'll quickly find you need 80GB just for scratch space, and don't forget you may want to create a BootCamp partition. So if you can stretch to it go for at least 120GB, or even better 160.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.