PowerPC Macs Are Useless...

[timidpimpin]

Another big part of it is having proper perspective on what you're using and what you need to do. People who have unrealistically high expectations on older hardware are sure to feel letdown.

Understanding that you will likely have to dig a little deeper and try a little harder with an older machine is a big part of enjoying it.

 

[Project Alice]

Another big part of it is having proper perspective on what you're using and what you need to do. People who have unrealistically high expectations on older hardware are sure to feel letdown.

Understanding that you will likely have to dig a little deeper and try a little harder with an older machine is a big part of enjoying it.

That's how I feel with my 3,1 Mac Pro. Not PPC obviously, but it is a beast and keeps up plenty with computers made today.
Even my dual 2ghz PowerMac G5 is a surprisingly quick machine, I could use it for pretty much anything. It's close to the performance of 2Ghz and lower Core 2 duo's, core duo's, and AMD dual cores.

 

[Dronecatcher]

Wish it were so simple. The power of a modern CPU is for extremely low latency required by today's much improved, complex, native plugins during recording and playback for pro music production (in the box).

No way to use these old CPUs, although we made much great music on them (keeping external cards like TDM/Pro Tools out of this).

Again, does writing a decent piece of music depend on a complex, cycle hungry plugin and a better computer?

You always work with the tools you have available but I tire of this endless spec creep of whatever you have isn't enough and if you only had this upgrade you'd be able to make a start.

Since getting a Mac Pro 1,1 (which is more than adequate for anything I throw at it) I've noticed that when anyone mentions one in forums, the inevitable response is, "you need to upgrade the CPUs, get a decent graphics card and hack 10.13 onto it."

 

[amagichnich]

Since getting a Mac Pro 1,1 (which is more than adequate for anything I throw at it) I've noticed that when anyone mentions one in forums, the inevitable response is, "you need to upgrade the CPUs, get a decent graphics card and hack 10.13 onto it."

Why would you do that? Unfortunately OS X doesen't get better, quite the opposite is the case IMO... I think one must be an Apple fanboy to use the latest iterations and say "this is the best Mac OS X they ever made"
The more I use "modern" OS X the more I come to appreciate Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard

 

[eyoungren]

The more I use "modern" OS X the more I come to appreciate Tiger, Leopard and Snow Leopard

I second that.

OS X is getting more complex and along with that comes more points of failure. Getting around the system to install something you trust is more complicated. OS X doesn't trust me to run my own computer. I'm not really into being second guessed by the operating system and I don't need hand-holding (although it seems lots of others want that). A perfect example here is Disk Utility.

Trying to figure out a problem is more complex because there are more failure points as I mentioned. It might be easier to deal with if Apple was adding features I use, but what I use the OS for has stayed the same. I just want to do the same things I've always done. Yet Apple is actually removing things I find useful.

It's always nice going back to my Leopard systems.

 

[nglevin]

It's always nice going back to my Leopard systems.

Thirded! DTrace on PowerPC ( https://blogs.oracle.com/bmc/dtrace-on-mac-os-x ) is just wonderful to use, knowing it’s there.

I’ll be sad when DTrace goes away for good in a post-Mojave release. SIP already crippled it. No signs we’ll get another tool that does a significant fraction of what it could do.

 

[latweek]

Again, does writing a decent piece of music depend on a complex, cycle hungry plugin and a better computer?

Depends on how one relocates ones goalposts. Most, if not many people need to record the songs they write. And of course, music can be written with no DAW at all.

Snark aside, I use a TonyMac hackintosh I built with HW in 2010 now running High Sierra, running the most updated plugs described in my reply with no issues, so I'm calling straw man on your argument.

 

[Dronecatcher]

Depends on how one relocates ones goalposts. Most, if not many people need to record the songs they write. And of course, music can be written with no DAW at all.

Snark aside, I use a TonyMac hackintosh I built with HW in 2010 now running High Sierra, running the most updated plugs described in my reply with no issues, so I'm calling straw man on your argument.

I don't see a straw man at all. You correctly say you need modern hardware to run contemporary plugins, I just say, those plugins aren't likely a necessity to writing music in the first place.

 

[1042686]

Like any industry, in order to exist & participate within the greater market/ecosystem and benefit, you need to be able to efficiently produce a product that is on spec with and meet the needed reqs of the folks upstream of you, so there will always be a need and market for the latest and greatest. Here, it is just as much about what you are using as it is how you use it.

From the artists pov, this is where this ends IMO. The reality of an artist or their personal studio is very different. Musicians (myself included) utilize 30+ year old instruments, amplifiers, cabs, FX ettc. Utilizing old music recording gear is in my opinion no different. I have an amazing array of sounds, textures, abilities etc running a PMG5 DC2Ghz, a couple Digi 002s, Protools le and a myriad of wonderful FX, plugins etc. for a fraction (literally) of the cost of a current DAW.

The perception that creative productivity starts and ends with the latest & greatest only holds true when participating within a professional ecosystem that runs on & requires said industry's current and evolving standard. This economic reality ends the second you step away from it or choose not to participate within it.

Business is as much about what you have as how you use it - creativity is about how you use the tools you have. This is where old DAW tech fits into the greater ecosystem and is IMO the smarter choice (if not the only economic one) for many folks. As always YMMV.

 

[09872738]

Same, out my three G5s I have one early 2005 dual 2.0Ghz. No X800 variant though. Those are pretty hard to come by. And finding a fire GL that is the compatible one to flash is a shot in the dark I'd say.

I do own a X800 XT Mac Edition, pretty much in pristine condition. For now it sits inside my G4 MDD; I'd estimate it hitherto did not collect more than 10 hrs of operation (probably not even 5 hrs).
Unfortunately the G4 really is a wind tunnel - very loud - which is why I close to never use it.

 

[Traace]

I do own a X800 XT Mac Edition, pretty much in pristine condition. For now it sits inside my G4 MDD; I'd estimate it hitherto did not collect more than 10 hrs of operation (probably not even 5 hrs).
Unfortunately the G4 really is a wind tunnel - very loud - which is why I close to never use it.

It tuns out a flashed X800 isn't compatible as a "FrankenAlpha" card due to different port layout...
Flashed FireGL X3 are working tho

You are very lucky with that real Mac Edition X800

 

[09872738]

Kinda, I agree. No G5 though. Got the cards a couple of years ago off ebay US; a company dedicated to Macs apparently cleared their warehouse with stuff noone is interested any more. They sold about 80 or so. Since then these Mac Edition cards have pretty much vanished

 

[latweek]

I don't see a straw man at all. You correctly say you need modern hardware to run contemporary plugins, I just say, those plugins aren't likely a necessity to writing music in the first place.

Riiiiigght. 10 year old Hackintosh, cost less than $1k 10 years ago is not "modern", and not much of an investment to make in your music...looks like you're just not going to admit your straw man is blowing away....

I recently replied to someone on the Low End Mac Facebook page who when responding to someone's query about a G5 used for music production, declared the Powermac G5 as, "useless."

In part of my defense, I referenced this G5 review from Sound On Sound magazine, who were blown away by the G5 pushing 87 tracks of audio in Logic:

is it writing now? or is it production? How did ~100 tracks of audio get into that DAW?

 

[Dronecatcher]

Riiiiigght. 10 year old Hackintosh, cost less than $1k 10 years ago is not "modern", and not much of an investment to make in your music...looks like you're just not going to admit your straw man is blowing away....



is it writing now? or is it production? How did ~100 tracks of audio get into that DAW?

Your responses are not really making any sense.

 

[amagichnich]

is it writing now? or is it production? How did ~100 tracks of audio get into that DAW

Please do tell us what you are trying to tell us

 

[latweek]

Im telling you that you should head over to a DAW oriented site and educate yourself on what you're discussing. There is no real information you're presenting, other than a kind of dusty nostalgia, with a palpable macrumors fanbias.

This figures just show how we are forced into a constant upgrade cycle and software development quickly fills in any gaps left by CPU headroom.

If you feel forced, its truly your own doing. You should learn more about what can now be done creatively with the additional CPU, and its quite valuable to any phase of writing and production. As I said, I've got 10 years of no upgrading, and probably 5 more to go on this one old CPU.

Much more can be done in the box that had to once be handled by extremely expensive outboard gear that is useful whether its writing, recording, or mixing. If you don't want it, fine, but that doesnt make it "forced", or just software taking up "headroom".

Pros know how to use it. As someone who has used instruments, tape machines, then sequencers, and then DAWs to write songs, and make many records since the dawn of MIDI, I can see clearly what you cannot. That you're lost in a haze of cognitive bias. There is just no downside to the value of today's CPUs.

I'll leave you with this link to your memories, while I go back to mixing music in the present for the future.

Bubye.

https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=PowerMac-Intel-KBL

 

[YaBe]

Pros know how to use it.

Why so salty? The word PRO means NOTHING!!The Word pro todays is attached to an iPad....that should tell you something.

Yes newer HW and SW might have an advantage, but if you know your way around there's nothing you can't do with older software / hw.

Where i live, most professional printing agency still use dated software (because of the cost of newer hw) they definetly do not use PPC, but still it means it works for them, and guess what? When i bring them my files they are perfectly compatible!

The "additional" CPU is useless for most users who feel the need to upgrade because they think the newer sw will make them better, again, depending on what you do you do NOT need the additional CPU.

Getting the most of your HW and SW is what counts (and what real PRO knows how to do), I can perfectly sell my work (graphic design stuff) done with CS4 and a PPC, a newer computer would save some time yes mostly because fo automation on some softwares, is it worth to me? Definetly NO, otherwise I would have upgraded, as a matter of fact i had a 2013 MacBook Pro till last year, but sold it because it could not do anything better than my ppc (again for my needs).

Video editing you have a point, Audio...well that's a may be, graphic? If you know how to use older sw there's nothing you can't do, at a fraction of the price, and with very little time difference.

The bottom line is, use what fits your needs, do not use tags like PRO wich means nothing and do not get mad others can do stuff with older HW while you cannot.

You should learn more about what can now be done creatively with the additional CPU, and its quite valuable to any phase of writing and production.

May be you should learn what you can do with older HW, you might be impressed,I am really curiuous to see what you do with your newer computer that I can't do ....

I'll leave while I go back to mixing music in the present for the future.

Bubye.

I leave you alone while I go make some graphic design for the present with older machine.

Bubye.

 

[Dronecatcher]

There is no real information you're presenting, other than a kind of dusty nostalgia, with a palpable macrumors fanbias.

Other than reviews and benchmarks from an industry standard publication on recording technology.

As someone who has used instruments, tape machines, then sequencers, and then DAWs to write songs, and make many records since the dawn of MIDI, I can see clearly what you cannot. That you're lost in a haze of cognitive bias.

Funnily enough, so have I - from guitar, bass, synths and drum machines on crude four track portastudios, to early PCs, to PPC Macs to Intel Mac Now. I'm 49 years old.

There is just no downside to the value of today's CPUs.

Didn't say there was - only you might not actually need it.

I'll leave you with this link to your memories

That really is sad. You've obviously not bothered with the context of this thread. You've provided some benchmarks for a G5 alongside modern CPUs and surprise, surprise they utterly eclipse it.

Like anyone who participates on this forum doesn't even know that?

Furthermore, the benchmarks are running under Linux, which again, we all know isn't optimised to run on PowerPC.

while I go back to mixing music in the present for the future.

Yes...like myself but writing and producing too, plus video editing and graphic design all with a clutch of PPC Macs and a Mac Pro 1,1 using software from yesteryear.

 

[AphoticD]

My G5s are fantastic for running Pro Tools LE along with a myriad of plugins I bought back when PPC was still supported. I also run a more “modern” system (Mac Pro 3,1) with an up to date DAW (Ableton) connected to a 2017 NI midi controller and loads of expensive NI plugins. The two different systems are midi synced over their gigabit NICs and run into the same mixer and monitors. This setup works well for me for writing, recording AND mixing music for future ears.

I think most people here like the idea of utilizing the hardware we already own and are not looking for some snot to come along and tell us our tried and tested systems (and workflows) are rubbish.

Peace out.

 

[YaBe]

I think most people here like the idea of utilizing the hardware we already own and are not looking for some snot to come along and tell us our tried and tested systems (and workflows) are rubbish.
Peace out.

Exactly, what works for me might not work for him, but that does not make my usage any less pro than his or the other way around.

Use what works for you (latweek) if you are happy than good, but don't pretend I am not happy with my set up and or that it is useless.

 

[weckart]

Im telling you that you should head over to a DAW oriented site and educate yourself on what you're discussing. There is no real information you're presenting, other than a kind of dusty nostalgia, with a palpable macrumors fanbias.

What? Like MacOS9Lives.com? They're happy running DAWs on MacOS 9.x over there. Try telling them they are only doing it for some weird trip down Memory Lane.

 

[eyoungren]

Some people believe that you can only produce modern work and be productive on modern hardware running modern software.

It's a false presumption, but one that makes Apple a lot of money. You won't find Apple discouraging that customer or refusing to take their money. Often the amount of money spent in pursuit of this presumption drives a certain sense of classism. No one could possibly do the same quality or type of modern work without the same amount of money or time that you've invested in new hardware and software.

So when that's disproven there is a reflexive instinct to prove it wrong, mischaracterize it, discredit it or otherwise dismiss it. Failing all that, claim superiority and walk away.

That's what we have here. This is why I stay out of the Intel Mac forums.

 

[jagolden]

I find them entirely useless for web browsing, but other than that, they are awesome. You can edit audio, make an album, edit photos, do science, all kinds of awesome stuff.

Mine is fine for web browsing also, I just don’t shut Safari down.

 

[mzs.112000]

Think of it like this, hardware wise, the G5 Mac's could still hold their own even today. The Quad G5, has 4x 2.5GHz PowerPC 970 cores(which, theoretically, puts it on par with a Core 2 Extreme quad-core desktop CPU), it also can have 16GB of RAM, 2x SATA SSD's, a BluRay burner(though it won't be officially supported on OS X), a selection of GPU's that are decent for desktop work even today.

The main issue with them is, software support. As an example, a 2009 iMac 20", has a 2.26GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB of RAM(soon to get 8GB), 160GB 7200RPM HDD(soon to be upgraded to a 500GB SSD), and a nVidia 9400M with 256MB VRAM. That machine runs macOS Mojave quite nicely other than some brightness issues(you need to manually change brightness with a 3rd-party app), and graphical glitches(they are fixed by enabling reduced-transparency mode).

The Quad G5 however, has 16GB of RAM, a 2.5GHz quad-core PowerPC 970MP(which has slightly higher IPC than Penryn), a 1TB MX500 SSD, and a 2TB 7200RPM WD drive, a Quadro FX 4500 and a PCIe USB card(that only works on Linux).
So, because Apple no longer supports PowerPC, a piece of perfectly capable hardware is not very useful because of the lackount of software support(Linux/BSD don't count because people don't buy Mac's to run Linux, people buy Mac's to run OS X)

 

[Dronecatcher]

As a footnote to the root of this thread, the chap who was debating moving from a G5 to a Mac Pro for his Garageband music making needs went with a 1,1 afterall - then immediately ran into problems which he's hoping to fix buying 16Gb of RAM...amidst cries of "upgrade your CPUs," "new graphics card," "flash the rom," "hack and install El Capitan."