Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
$20 a month is a pretty steep fee for running a single machine. I get that it's not an insane amount for someone paying for a house etc but I mean would you sign up for a $20 subscription without even thinking twice? I would not.

I can somewhat heat a small room with a 2009 iMac. Computers are known to put out a lot of heat and logically ones that use more power will do this more than others.

Neither of these are remotely myths.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
The 2019 MP is a bit of an extreme example; the older cheesegraters started at a much more reasonable $2,500 back in the day (the 2008 being the exception at $2,800).

And a 2008 Mac Pro at $2,800 then would only be $3,614 now, and that’s with an eight-core CPU — contrasted with the Talos II base model with a four-core single CPU, at $3,819, in 2022.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
And a 2008 Mac Pro at $2,800 then would only be $3,614 now, and that’s with an eight-core CPU — contrasted with the Talos II base model with a four-core single CPU, at $3,819, in 2022.
$2,783 was the price I could come up with on their website, and $2,547 for the Blackbird ($2,691.87 and $2,439.51 resp. buying the CPU on eBay), which is the same thing in Micro ATX. The dual-slot motherboard is more expensive than the other two by $1,000.​
 
  • Like
Reactions: Amethyst1
Another myth about PowerPC Macs: everymac.com is a reliable source of information.​

There literally are millions of accurate and reliable data points on EveryMac.com diligently documented — often based on hands-on inspection — for more than 25 years. If you have encountered information on the site that you think is inaccurate or out-of-date — keep in mind that much can change over the decades — it would be greatly appreciated that you simply email the site about it rather than post defamatory statements in forums. Thank you.
 
There literally are millions of accurate and reliable data points on EveryMac.com diligently documented — often based on hands-on inspection — for more than 25 years. If you have encountered information on the site that you think is inaccurate or out-of-date — keep in mind that much can change over the decades — it would be greatly appreciated that you simply email the site about it rather than post defamatory statements in forums. Thank you.
Same can be said about Wikipedia, but you're not allowed to use it in college essays. It's a starting point for research, not the whole book.​
 
There literally are millions of accurate and reliable data points on EveryMac.com diligently documented — often based on hands-on inspection — for more than 25 years. If you have encountered information on the site that you think is inaccurate or out-of-date — keep in mind that much can change over the decades — it would be greatly appreciated that you simply email the site about it rather than post defamatory statements in forums. Thank you.

If that’s an invitation, give me a few hours…
 
Great! Looking forward to your email with any potential corrections or suggestions.

Raw dump here, and I’m going to open this up for other MR members on the PowerPC and Early Intel forums to report discrepancies and/or demonstrably insufficient info found in the Everymac pages. This is just me doing a quick memory dump before leaving work.




Everymac citation: Some A1138 and A1139 PowerBook G4s shipped with the PPC 7448 chip [citation 2], not the PPC 7447a/b.

1641425110766.png



Nope. And nope.


* * *

Everymac citation: The September 2000 iBook G3 (Rev. C, 366/466) shipped with an EIDE/ATA-2 bus. [citation 2]

1641424946970.png


Nope.


* * *

Everymac citation: The iMac G5 iSight (A1145) supports a maximum of 2.5GB RAM [citation 2]

1641424830798.png



Nope.


* * *


A functional gripe about the Everymac specs, especially as one moves into Intel Macs:

Every instance where “maximum” and “minimum” OS supported by a hardware release is based solely on Apple call-outs. Everymac’s specs allow for no provision (i.e., section) to document unofficial, well-known OS support for a particular Mac shown. This is a shame, owing how more casual visitors of Everymac may be unaware of this extended OS support their Mac might have, consequently either shelving or trashing their Mac prematurely — thus adding to the waste stream and taking away from upcycling.

Even right here on MR forums, even if one is mostly a lurking reader, one can see, often every week or so, how folks are regularly demonstrating, at the one end, a PowerPC Mac is capable of running earlier builds of OS X (and even OS 9) than what Apple shipped or officially reported as supported; and on the other, the ability for those PowerPC Mac to run early versions of Snow Leopard.

In another case example oft-revealed here on the MR Early Intel Macs forum, the extensive work done by both @dosdude1 and the OpenCore team has expanded OS X/macOS options well beyond commonly cited caps established by Apple (and as reported by Everymac). Lion, for example, is often such an official cap for the last 32-bit EFI C2D Macs, while El Capitan officially being so on others from around the same time vintage.

These systems, however, do run higher — and often reliably so — with community-based patches (e.g., the early 2008 A1260/A1261 MacBook Pro [MacBookPro4,1], which will run up to at least Mojave/Catalina/Big Sur quite nicely, as will a 2010 MacBook Air with 2GB onboard RAM).

These community knowledge citations, were they reported by community-based specs in some capacity (very much within Everymac’s remit) is invaluable for helping to keep machines is use longer than what Apple “officially” supports.

If I may offer a suggestion, a desk reference like Everymac would be enriched by including a section just beneath the official OS support section [see below * as a generic example], where Everymac could report higher (and lower) OS versions which are demonstratively known by the Mac user community to run on a particular Mac model — replete with community-based links to static sites which can walk one through the steps on how one may do so on their own Mac. No, those community links aren’t commercial or sponsored, but they are instructive, informative, and are frequently peer-reviewed.

*
1641425804392.png


Unlike, say, a WikiPost or a wiki site, the ability to be certain that corrections be received and implemented promptly, especially these days with the over-saturation of people’s online attention spans, there might be a sense of user discouragement to email a site owner to request a correction, for an expectation that these days, those correction notifications will go unanswered. It’s not your fault or anyone’s fault, but a byproduct of how things are now which might thwart some folks to contact you via your site when they see something amiss.

As a wind-down here (at least from me), I want to thank you for providing Everymac as a service. By and large, the specs info contained within are very useful — especially so for when one is looking at a model’s specs at a quick glance. Also, I acknowledge how this response, kind of quickly all dumped in together at once, might seem like a lot. But in sharing this stuff (and inviting other MR folks to chime in with things they’ve run across on Everymac which left them scratching their heads), I hope it will only improve the quality of information provided on your site.

Thanks for your time. Time for me to go home.
 
As a wind-down here (at least from me), I want to thank you for providing Everymac as a service. By and large, the specs info contained within are very useful — especially so for when one is looking at a model’s specs at a quick glance.
Yeah, I feel bad about being so... blunt about my earlier statements for this reason. I read EveryMac a fair bit for stuff, it does come in useful, but it could definitely use some updating.​
 
Yeah, I feel bad about being so... blunt about my earlier statements for this reason. I read EveryMac a fair bit for stuff, it does come in useful, but it could definitely use some updating.​

This is how peer review works.

Generally speaking, the folks on here do a pretty good job of running claims (claims like those from the rabidz7s and asaggynoodles) through the paces to see whether they hold up. This cycle of peer review is how we’ve come to learn that official specs or posted specs may fall a bit short.

Without the rigours of peer review, the more we become impoverished by the lack of knowledge to confirm the limits of our Macs.
 
If memory serves me, I initially tried creating the USB installer from a DMG and it didn't work. Burning a DVD and then imaging that to USB, however, has been faultless. I don't understand why but for me, the main thing is that it works. :D

Hopefully that method will have a positive outcome for you as well. :)
Well, I have gotten some mixed results so far. The memorex 16gb branded flash drives wouldn’t work - partitioned to 7.45gb APM restored from media, the dmg - didn’t matter. Just wouldn’t work on an ibookg4, a powermacg5 dual 2ghz or quicksilver dual 1ghz. I then tried a Lexar 16gb set up identically and it wouldn’t work either from the dmg in any machine. I then restored from my tiger disk and while the pmg5 & iBook boot selector still refused to see it, my QS did see it. The bummer is that every time, this froze the boot selector, rendering the flash drive useless. So progress, yes but still doesn’t work. I’ll keep F’n around with it in between other things. Here’s a pic of the QS boot selector. You can see the FD tiger installer to the right.
C534DCC3-159C-42D3-A45F-E1165990085F.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheShortTimer
Raw dump here, and I’m going to open this up for other MR members on the PowerPC and Early Intel forums to report discrepancies and/or demonstrably insufficient info found in the Everymac pages. This is just me doing a quick memory dump before leaving work.




Everymac citation: Some A1138 and A1139 PowerBook G4s shipped with the PPC 7448 chip [citation 2], not the PPC 7447a/b.

View attachment 1939443


Nope. And nope.


* * *

Everymac citation: The September 2000 iBook G3 (Rev. C, 366/466) shipped with an EIDE/ATA-2 bus. [citation 2]

View attachment 1939442

Nope.


* * *

Everymac citation: The iMac G5 iSight (A1145) supports a maximum of 2.5GB RAM [citation 2]

View attachment 1939441


Nope.


* * *


A functional gripe about the Everymac specs, especially as one moves into Intel Macs:

Every instance where “maximum” and “minimum” OS supported by a hardware release is based solely on Apple call-outs. Everymac’s specs allow for no provision (i.e., section) to document unofficial, well-known OS support for a particular Mac shown. This is a shame, owing how more casual visitors of Everymac may be unaware of this extended OS support their Mac might have, consequently either shelving or trashing their Mac prematurely — thus adding to the waste stream and taking away from upcycling.

Even right here on MR forums, even if one is mostly a lurking reader, one can see, often every week or so, how folks are regularly demonstrating, at the one end, a PowerPC Mac is capable of running earlier builds of OS X (and even OS 9) than what Apple shipped or officially reported as supported; and on the other, the ability for those PowerPC Mac to run early versions of Snow Leopard.

In another case example oft-revealed here on the MR Early Intel Macs forum, the extensive work done by both @dosdude1 and the OpenCore team has expanded OS X/macOS options well beyond commonly cited caps established by Apple (and as reported by Everymac). Lion, for example, is often such an official cap for the last 32-bit EFI C2D Macs, while El Capitan officially being so on others from around the same time vintage.

These systems, however, do run higher — and often reliably so — with community-based patches (e.g., the early 2008 A1260/A1261 MacBook Pro [MacBookPro4,1], which will run up to at least Mojave/Catalina/Big Sur quite nicely, as will a 2010 MacBook Air with 2GB onboard RAM).

These community knowledge citations, were they reported by community-based specs in some capacity (very much within Everymac’s remit) is invaluable for helping to keep machines is use longer than what Apple “officially” supports.

If I may offer a suggestion, a desk reference like Everymac would be enriched by including a section just beneath the official OS support section [see below * as a generic example], where Everymac could report higher (and lower) OS versions which are demonstratively known by the Mac user community to run on a particular Mac model — replete with community-based links to static sites which can walk one through the steps on how one may do so on their own Mac. No, those community links aren’t commercial or sponsored, but they are instructive, informative, and are frequently peer-reviewed.

*
View attachment 1939450

Unlike, say, a WikiPost or a wiki site, the ability to be certain that corrections be received and implemented promptly, especially these days with the over-saturation of people’s online attention spans, there might be a sense of user discouragement to email a site owner to request a correction, for an expectation that these days, those correction notifications will go unanswered. It’s not your fault or anyone’s fault, but a byproduct of how things are now which might thwart some folks to contact you via your site when they see something amiss.

As a wind-down here (at least from me), I want to thank you for providing Everymac as a service. By and large, the specs info contained within are very useful — especially so for when one is looking at a model’s specs at a quick glance. Also, I acknowledge how this response, kind of quickly all dumped in together at once, might seem like a lot. But in sharing this stuff (and inviting other MR folks to chime in with things they’ve run across on Everymac which left them scratching their heads), I hope it will only improve the quality of information provided on your site.

Thanks for your time. Time for me to go home.
Wow. They specifically requested an email.

Such an ugly way to publicly respond. Oh wait, it’s “peer review”. :rolleyes:
 
This perception depends on how much the bill is without the machine, and how much of an increase it’s going to cause both in absolute and relative numbers.
To me, a 20 bucks-per-month increase would be big (+30%) since I’m paying about 70 bucks per month right now.
How much is 5,1 Mac Pro ? My gas bill is already 52 American dollars(equivalent).. so the Quad raise it to 72 ?
 
Myth: Macs can't boot a version of Mac OS older than the one they shipped with.
*Looks at Mac mini G4 running OS 9 and Jaguar*

Myth: Macs that are OS X only can't boot OS 9.
See above.

Myth: PowerPC Macs can't run Windows.
They can, just not natively.
Myth: Titanium G4 can’t boot OS 8.6.
False, the allowable machines script and some nodding can make it work.
 
An excellent (and important) thread! :D

Myth5: PowerMac G5's are useless. This is an egregiously dishonest assertion that I've seen propagated in numerous FB Mac groups and it's so frustrating because simply turning on a PM G5 and using it exposes the hollow premise of these statements. Those machines remain highly capable and can cope with a wide variety of present day computing tasks.

Myth6: PowerPC Macs cannot boot from USB. Just a few days ago I saw this misinformation that just refuses to die being shared in a FB group. Some PPC Macs can boot from USB by just holding down the Option key post-chime whereas others require fiddling with Open Firmware settings. I've got 4 machines of varying generations and models (desktops and laptops, G3s and a G4) that fall into the former category.



I live in Northern Europe and I don't recall my living room growing warmer during winter when the G5 has been running - I wish it would! :D
The only thing that makes our PowerPC Macs useless is the god damn internet the way it is today !!! No way a 2.5 quad G5 can’t hold its own on the modern web or blowtube(youtube because I hate it). You can thank the internet and all its bloat for why the PPC Macs can’t run s*** On them !
 
Lets be real, they can‘t run Windows.

They maybe able to walk it, but surely not „run“;)
Neither can the RISC M1 or M1X - they can’t run Windows either, though they are similar to PowerPC as they need to translate x86 code, this is why no Bootcamp for M1 Macs.
 
Well, I have gotten some mixed results so far. The memorex 16gb branded flash drives wouldn’t work - partitioned to 7.45gb APM restored from media, the dmg - didn’t matter. Just wouldn’t work on an ibookg4, a powermacg5 dual 2ghz or quicksilver dual 1ghz. I then tried a Lexar 16gb set up identically and it wouldn’t work either from the dmg in any machine. I then restored from my tiger disk and while the pmg5 & iBook boot selector still refused to see it, my QS did see it. The bummer is that every time, this froze the boot selector, rendering the flash drive useless. So progress, yes but still doesn’t work. I’ll keep F’n around with it in between other things. Here’s a pic of the QS boot selector. You can see the FD tiger installer to the right.
View attachment 1939516

Thanks for sharing your findings. :) As I mentioned previously, the support for USB booting varies across models and generations - often inconsistently. It's likely that the PM G5 and the iBook G4 might require the Open Firmware route and thanks for testing and confirming that the Quicksilver at least recognises USB installers. Hopefully with perseverance you'll succeed in getting it to boot.

The only thing that makes our PowerPC Macs useless is the god damn internet the way it is today !!! No way a 2.5 quad G5 can’t hold its own on the modern web or blowtube(youtube because I hate it). You can thank the internet and all its bloat for why the PPC Macs can’t run s*** On them !

My i5 MBP is struggling and its fans often go into overdrive whilst carrying out the most mundane tasks online. Utterly ridiculous and I fear that this situation will only worsen in the years to come. Not only is the modern Web bloated, so too are many of the browsers. I routinely have to force quit Firefox because it has ground my computer to a halt and the speed gain that I witness in terms of responsiveness once Firefox has been terminated is both telling and shocking.

A journalist summed it up in the mid 90s that programmers in years past would optimise their code till it was refined to yield optimum performance but this was giving way to telling the public to ditch their computer and buy a more powerful one.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.