PowerMac G5

[gugucom]

It is a crying shame what Apple does in terms of firmware upgrades to fairly modern machines. The PM G5s are fully fledged 64-Bit MP and MC systems. They were designed for full 64-Bit OS like Snow Leopard and due to Apple's profit maximising strategies they will never even get to see one operating system that truely utilises their potential.

This would be comparable if I could not run Vista 64 on an Athlon X64 X2 +4200. How ridiculous would that be. No motherboard, bare bone or PC manufacturer in the world would dare to under support his products in such a ridiculous way. Only Apple gets away with that. If I could I would put my boot into the anal opening of one of those wankers who set "customer service policy" at Apple. It makes me really hot under the collar to think about it.

 

[Toronto Mike]

It is a crying shame what Apple does in terms of firmware upgrades to fairly modern machines. The PM G5s are fully fledged 64-Bit MP and MC systems. They were designed for full 64-Bit OS like Snow Leopard and due to Apple's profit maximising strategies they will never even get to see one operating system that truely utilises their potential.

This would be comparable if I could not run Vista 64 on an Athlon X64 X2 +4200. How ridiculous would that be. No motherboard, bare bone or PC manufacturer in the world would dare to under support his products in such a ridiculous way. Only Apple gets away with that. If I could I would put my boot into the anal opening of one of those wankers who set "customer service policy" at Apple. It makes me really hot under the collar to think about it.

They get away with this because they use their operating system to hold us hostage to their hardware agenda. Just say no to upgrading unless you really need the features for your work. As long as everyone dutifully wants to move into the next version of Apple's next operating system, as well as upgrade all the other software that now needs to be made compatible - Apple will continue on the same path.

Apple computers, for the average consumer, are a huge expense. To have them deliberately curtail the life expectancy, or limit them arbitrarily to suite their profit stream seems underhanded. Just say no to the next round of eye candy. Few new sales will make any business sit up and wonder what went wrong - boycott Snow Leopard if they will not support your G5 - by refusing to replace it with a new one just so you can have Snow Leopard.

Mike

 

[giffut]

Please, ...

... read this regarding the Powermacs G5 64Bit advantage before you draw hefty conclusions on shaky grounds: http://www.pwrmac.com/2009/01/02/g5s_and_snow_leopard/

 

[300D]

boycott Snow Leopard if they will not support your G5

LOL! If you have a G5 you don't have much choice in the matter!

This would be comparable if I could not run Vista 64 on an Athlon X64 X2 +4200.

Thats not even remotely comparable. The Athlon doesn't use a completely different architecture from new computers.

The only reason Apple's PPC and intel machines have been able to coexist thus far is because Apple built and maintains two completely different operating systems.

If you own a G3/G4/G5 and want SL, TFB. Your only option is to buy an intel machine. If leopard and your G5 work fine, keep them. Apple isn't forcing anyone to buy anything.

boycott Snow Leopard if they will not support your G5

Did all the 680x0 users cry like little babies and demand a boycott because OS8.5 required a PPC processor? It was introduced less than TWO years after 8.0 and the newest 680x0 machines (Powerbook 550/190) were less than TWO years old as well! Throwing a tantrum isn't going to force Apple to build a completely new version of their OS just to cater to a few remaining legacy PPC users. Do you really think it makes any difference to Apple if you buy that $30 Snow Leopard DVD or not?

Why don't you boycott them until they bring back built-in SCSI as well?

 

[California]

Did all the 680x0 users cry like little babies and demand a boycott because OS8.5 required a PPC processor? It was introduced less than TWO years after 8.0 and the newest 680x0 machines (Powerbook 550/190) were less than TWO years old as well! Throwing a tantrum isn't going to force Apple to build a completely new version of their OS just to cater to a few remaining legacy PPC users. Do you really think it makes any difference to Apple if you buy that $30 Snow Leopard DVD or not?/QUOTE]

Well, this gives me complete hope for the Powermac G5s.

Why? Because I ran my 145b Powerbook, purchased in mid 1994, until August 2001. And the ONLY reason I bought the new Titanium Powerbook was because I had upgraded the ram on the circa 1993 Powerbook and the Kingston chip failed... forgot to keep the original ram. Kingston could not find that old ram for me, so they gave me a memory upgrade on the Powerbook Titanium... (This was when a 128gb ram chip was something like 120 dollars)

but I was NOT happy. Loved that old Powerbook that I believe was running OS 7.5 faithfully for seven straight years.

 

[zmttoxics]

(This was when a 128gb ram chip was something like 120 dollars)

Lawl. Well, congrats to you. I run 10 year old hardware all day long, but its Sun hardware that happens to still be supported.

 

[Toronto Mike]

Apple computers, for the average consumer, are a huge expense. To have them deliberately curtail the life expectancy, or limit them arbitrarily to suite their profit stream seems underhanded. Just say no to the next round of eye candy. Few new sales will make any business sit up and wonder what went wrong - boycott Snow Leopard if they will not support your G5 - by refusing to replace it with a new one just so you can have Snow Leopard.

Mike

I think I my post has been misinterpreted.

If the previous versions of the operating systems are working for you, and your machine is able to do all the work that is required - one can save a considerable amount of money by refusing to upgrade for the sake of getting a new operating system. Apple is always pushing us to spend more money. Think about what you are being led to do and reconsider the financial implications.

Boycotting might have been too strong a word for a determined effort to avoid spending money unnecessarily.

Mike

 

[gugucom]

... read this regarding the Powermacs G5 64Bit advantage before you draw hefty conclusions on shaky grounds: http://www.pwrmac.com/2009/01/02/g5s_and_snow_leopard/

My G5 had 16 GB of RAM. A true 64-Bit OS would have been handy to make use of this.

The article is quite clear on the matter that an earlier true 64-Bit OS would have unlocked more potential from the PPC970 architecture and had spawned the apps to take advantage of the potential. This is particularly true when you think about the PPC970MC. I bet the PM G5 Quad with max RAM would have profited from SL. After all this is just a three year old machine. The last of these beasts are going out of Apple care as we speak.

 

[zmttoxics]

My G5 had 16 GB of RAM. A true 64-Bit OS would have been handy to make use of this.

The article is quite clear on the matter that an earlier true 64-Bit OS would have unlocked more potential from the PPC970 architecture and had spawned the apps to take advantage of the potential. This is particularly true when you think about the PPC970MC. I bet the PM G5 Quad with max RAM would have profited from SL. After all this is just a three year old machine. The last of these beasts are going out of Apple care as we speak.

Put 64bit Linux on it.

 

[300D]

I bet the PM G5 Quad with max RAM would have profited from SL. After all this is just a three year old machine. The last of these beasts are going out of Apple care as we speak.

So, Apple should go out of their way to build an operating system for one 3 year old model of computer that sold poorly and has a well known flaw that will kill 99% of them within a few years. Sounds like a good business plan to me.

 

[gugucom]

Thats not even remotely comparable. The Athlon doesn't use a completely different architecture from new computers..

BS! Athlon X64 was launched without a 64-Bit operating system in sight. You could just run XP 32-Bit kernel on those machines. Pretty much the same situation as PPC970. When XP 64-Bit Edition came in 2005 the MoBo manufacturers quickly issued BIOS updates to deal with that. Same applied to Vista 64-Bit. Apple simply do not care about the after market. All they want is sell new machines.

The only reason Apple's PPC and intel machines have been able to coexist thus far is because Apple built and maintains two completely different operating systems...

Not true. You can take a HD out of a PM G5 and clone it to a MP and vice versa. All you have to do is switch the partition table from APT to GPT. How do you explain this if there were different operating systems.

 

[gugucom]

So, Apple should go out of their way to build an operating system for one 3 year old model of computer that sold poorly and has a well known flaw that will kill 99% of them within a few years. Sounds like a good business plan to me.

So now we excuse shoddy after market service with bad design and reliability of the product in the first place?

 

[gugucom]

Put 64bit Linux on it.

thats an idea! but I sold it.

 

[300D]

Athlon X64 was launched without a 64-Bit operating system in sight. You could just run XP 32-Bit kernel on those machines. Pretty much the same situation as PPC970.

Clearly you don't understand what you're talking about. 32bit vs 64bit is NOTHING like PPC vs intel.

Apple simply do not care about the after market. All they want is sell new machines.

Right, they don't care enough to write an entire operating system just for the last dying PPC users.

Not true. You can take a HD out of a PM G5 and clone it to a MP and vice versa.

You know why? Probably not.
There are TWO operating systems installed when you run a normal install.

How do you explain this if there were different operating systems.

Please read the above.
Do you know how SL frees 6gb of drive space when installed over Leopard? All the PPC code is deleted from the OS.

So now we excuse shoddy after market service with bad design and reliability of the product in the first place?

If IBM had kept up on their end of the deal, we wouldn't even be discussing Intel right now.

 

[goMac]

Please read the above.
Do you know how SL frees 6gb of drive space when installed over Leopard? All the PPC code is deleted from the OS.

Not all PPC code. You still need huge chunks of PPC code around to run Rosetta.

It's a maintenance issue. Apple doesn't want to keep a large number of engineers around to support one of their least selling machines. If you think about it, the only machines they'd really be supporting with SL PPC would be those last G5 owners. It's a waste of resources.

If IBM had kept up on their end of the deal, we wouldn't even be discussing Intel right now.

Meh. The G5 had other issues. Like requiring liquid cooling in the first place.

Also Macs that can run Windows was a smart move.

 

[300D]

Not all PPC code. You still need huge chunks of PPC code around to run Rosetta.

You just contradicted yourself.

It's a maintenance issue.

No, its an economics issue. Apple didn't want to re-encode an entire operating system for an obsolete architecture that was already completely phased out of the product line.

The G5 had other issues. Like requiring liquid cooling in the first place.

That was IBM and Apple's fault. Apple wanted them to cram as much stuff as possible into the CPU and IBM half-@ssed the AltiVec design. Both resulted in a hot CPU that couldn't be clocked as high as planned or used in any laptop under 10lbs.

Also Macs that can run Windows was a smart move.

Yep, about as smart as it was to open the door for waves of illegal cloners and wanna-be hackintrash builders.

 

[gugucom]

Clearly you don't understand what you're talking about. 32bit vs 64bit is NOTHING like PPC vs intel..

YOU are the person who does not want to understand. As a user I do not care a flying fock who supplies the CPUs in my machine. But if the manufacturer claims 64-Bit as a huge customer advantage at introduction in 2003 and fails to include the machine in his first true 64-Bit OS launch six years later I feel a bit cheated.

I would not mind if they had made a special SL edition for PPC970 only and even priced it at the usual 129$. But cutting the G5s off is unaceptable in my view. Suit yourself with your opinion. I'm done with this argument.

 

[300D]

YOU are the person who does not want to understand.

Thats laughable. You've got no understanding of CPU design at all. Going from x86 to x86-64 isn't even ballpark comparable to switching from RISC PPC to x86

But if the manufacturer claims 64-Bit as a huge customer advantage at introduction in 2003 and fails to include the machine in his first true 64-Bit OS launch six years later I feel a bit cheated.

I would not mind if they had made a special SL edition for PPC970 only and even priced it at the usual 129$. But cutting the G5s off is unaceptable in my view. Suit yourself with your opinion. I'm done with this argument.

Keep crying, maybe Mr. Jobs will hear you. Will you please shed a tear for all those Intel CoreSolo and CoreDuo owners stuck with 32-bit machines? Don't you think they feel a bit cheated too?

I've got a G5 and I don't care if SL works for me or not. My G5 still works great, all the software I need is already PPC. The only things keeping me from buying an Intel machine is the lack of Blu-Ray support and no quad-core iMac. I'm perfectly happy holding out until those conditions are met.

 

[gugucom]

Keep crying, maybe Mr. Jobs will hear you. Will you please shed a tear for all those Intel CoreSolo and CoreDuo owners stuck with 32-bit machines? Don't you think they feel a bit cheated too?

I'm not crying! I just don't accept fan boy bull manure. If you buy a 32-Bit machine you cannot expect to receive a 64-Bit operating system.

 

[goMac]

No, its an economics issue. Apple didn't want to re-encode an entire operating system for an obsolete architecture that was already completely phased out of the product line.

Honestly, there aren't a lot of chunks of Snow Leopard that probably wouldn't run on a PowerPC without minimal recoding. It's just the maintenance. You're keeping PowerPC teams around to support probably less than 10k users who might actually care about SL.

Snow Leopard isn't really a rewrite, it's more of Apple just writing out old API's.

That was IBM and Apple's fault. Apple wanted them to cram as much stuff as possible into the CPU and IBM half-@ssed the AltiVec design. Both resulted in a hot CPU that couldn't be clocked as high as planned or used in any laptop under 10lbs.

If they didn't cram all that stuff into the CPU, it wouldn't have been as competitive with the P4, meaning Apple would have had to adopt Intel anyway.

Honestly, in the end, the P4 ended up running cooler than the G5, which was kind of sad really...

Yep, about as smart as it was to open the door for waves of illegal cloners and wanna-be hackintrash builders.

Apple knew this would happen, and so far it hasn't really cut into Mac sales... Apple in the end has gained more customers by switching to Intel than they have lost to Hackintoshes...

 

[300D]

If they didn't cram all that stuff into the CPU, it wouldn't have been as competitive with the P4

The P4 was by no means "competitive". Lets not forget, that pile-o-trash called a "CPU" was what allowed AMD to regain its footing in the market.

Honestly, in the end, the P4 ended up running cooler than the G5

Thats because it was all show and no go. The really sad thing is that the old 1.33GHz PIII was easily faster than a 2ghz P4.

 

[goMac]

The P4 was by no means "competitive". Lets not forget, that pile-o-trash called a "CPU" was what allowed AMD to regain its footing in the market.

I got to use a P4 Mac and a G5 Mac side by side... trust me... the P4 was pretty snappy, even without a dedicated GPU.

 

[300D]

I got to use a P4 Mac and a G5 Mac side by side.

Must have been a low-end PM or an iMac.