All Macs G4s with a G4 processor are capable of running Leopard. As far as I know, all Aluminum ones officially support it provided that they have enough RAM(I think the installer checks for 512mb, although have never tried it on a computer with less than that).
As long as you have 512mb or more RAM, pop a Leopard disk in and you should have no issues.
All Macs G4s with a G4 processor are capable of running Leopard.
The guy said he wasn't sure on the specs, but I'm pretty sure 512 is the base amount anyway so that shouldn't be a problem then. I was worried that maybe 512 wasn't enough and I'd have to buy two 1 gigabyte sticks (I'm planning on doing that, anyway)
Leopard loves RAM, and the more the merrier(although I expect eyeyougren to pop in here and show his Sawtooth running Leopard with an obscenely small amount of RAM).
For normal day-to-day desktop use I would not want any less than 1gb. I have several Titanium Powerbooks running Leopard with this amount of RAM(the max for TiBooks) as well as a couple of GigE/Quicksilvers with 1.5gb.
Depending on which model Powerbook you bought, I will offer a caution that some 15" AlBooks have "issues" with one of the RAM slots on the logic board. If your computer is so affected, you will not be able to use any more than 1gb of RAM. As far as I know, the last generation 1.67ghz "DLSD" PB(the only 15" Al model I've owned) is immune from this problem.
All Macs G4s with a G4 processor are capable of running Leopard.
While they can certainly be made run Leopard using XPostFacto, Power Mac G4's from the original PCI model up until the first single processor line of Quicksilvers, only officially supported up to Max OS X 10.4.11. That's about 7 models in total, including the Cube and the DA.
Even the Yikes!?
Max the ram. Turn off the eye candy. Optimize the system.
There are several threads here on doing all of that.
Otherwise, you may end up reconsidering your decision to install Leopard because you think it's too slow.
Don't add to Leopard's bad rap of being labeled as too slow.![]()
Leopard does offer a lot of newer graphics technologies than Tiger and as a result needs a better GPU for good performance. Optimization helps but a QE/CI compatible GPU is a must for stellar Leopard performance. Fortunately, to my knowledge, all Aluminum 15" and 17" PowerBooks had full QE/CI support.
If Wikipedia is to be believed, the first generation 15"(1.0 or 1.25ghz) had a Radeon 9600 GPU, which is a great CI GPU(I love the desktop versions of these). The later ones had 9700s, which are even better.
The first generation(1.0ghz) 17"-which came out while the Ti was still being made-used the GeForce 4 Go440. I don't think any "4" series GPUs supported CI. Even the best GeForce 4 desktop card-the 4Ti 4600-didn't support it.
That is true. However, I believe in wringing the most out of your system that you can.Several of the later 15 and 17" PBs(including a couple of non-DLSD models) had Radeon 9700s, which actually handle the "eye candy" fairly well. Both my 15" and 17" DLSDs have pretty much bone-stock Leopard installs(with a few built-in cosmetic changes to suit my taste, like the dock size) and even some extra "eye candy" turned on like dock magnification. I find Leopard at least as fast as Tiger on those systems(the only two versions of OS X they can run).
although not until after I've gone to OWC and dropped $100 on RAM.
Yes, I'm fantasicing about doing exactly this with my 8600 over the summer xD.
Splashing out on 18 year old SIMM's when some people work 2 jobs on minimum wage to survive...I try not to think about it...
I also additionally offered this advice just to combat the well entrenched negative opinion of Leopard from the Tiger fans in the forum.
Still, though, I have four of the things, so don't exactly need another.
someone slipped $100 in my pocket at my graduation party the other day(despite the "no gifts" request) that might go toward it.
I don't have any Cubes, if you feel like balancing your karma
----------
My deepest sympathies, I'm sure this must be a tough time for you.
What clouds my impression over Tiger vs Leopard is my own peculiar installation experiences, the most recent being this: bought a 1.25Ghz 15" Powerbook with 1Gb RAM off ebay, installed 10.5.8, did all the speed tricks and optimisations and was disappointed with performance. Installed Tiger instead and it ran like a dream. After a while, I tried Debian Linux on the machine but didn't like it so tried Leopard again. This time, it was as fast as it should be even before the optimisations and yet the machine had received no upgrades.
I've no idea what would cause the difference but maybe if others have similar experiences, that would contribute to the impression of Leopard being slower.
I bought another 15" DLSD last week that had Ubuntu installed. The seller offered to wipe it before sending, but I wanted to give Ubuntu a try. After using it on and off for a day or two, I'm ready to ditch it for Leopard.
Ubuntu(and other Linux distros) have a lot to offer for PPC that Leopard doesn't, but the way the trackpad works under Ubuntu drives me crazy.
I want to keep the Ubuntu install(since I know it took a fair bit of work to set up), so I'm probably going to drop another HDD in it for Leopard. I just wish I had an SSD handy.
I'll just mention this, and perhaps it's something you know already but for completeness sakeWhat clouds my impression over Tiger vs Leopard is my own peculiar installation experiences, the most recent being this: bought a 1.25Ghz 15" Powerbook with 1Gb RAM off ebay, installed 10.5.8, did all the speed tricks and optimisations and was disappointed with performance. Installed Tiger instead and it ran like a dream. After a while, I tried Debian Linux on the machine but didn't like it so tried Leopard again. This time, it was as fast as it should be even before the optimisations and yet the machine had received no upgrades.
I've no idea what would cause the difference but maybe if others have similar experiences, that would contribute to the impression of Leopard being slower.
In short I have no idea why your experience happened this way.