Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
ppc advantages and comparison
- Thread starter hansolo669
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
@OP: We aren't "intel" guys, we are "mac" guys, and most of us appreciate both halves of the spectrum and have invested heavily in both. But truth be told, there are no "advantages" to a PPC platform in the desktop environment (or in the server market really). They are heavy on power and aren't cheap to manufacture. Just not cost effective for Apple to continue that path if they want to keep making the massive profit they are.
The "unix" big iron boxes are IBMs POWER platform, not to be confused with PowerPC. Very similar in architecture, but the most recent power platform (7) is miles ahead of PPC. The G5s are closer to the Power 4 platform which is years old and obsolete (there is a 5 and 6 after that, and I think even IBM is either dropping or dropped AIX support for 4).
Now, if this thread was "Advantages to the Power7 platform", I would be writing 12 pages of posts of how I would LOVE to spend 40k on an entry level power7 server. But that isn't in the budget, not yet anyways.
Edit: A little correction on this, AIX's minimum supported is now power4. My bad.
wow, dude chill a bit. im sorry if that offended you.
i was generalizing.(ex. main mac usage is intel thus "intel guy" conversly main mac usage is ppc thus "ppc guy") i was not attempting to even start anything
also i do think quit a few of us realize the diferences between PowerPC and IBM POWER.
you seem to be a unix/high end server guy and i respect that, but if you want to trash my humble littly ppc advantages thread with, negitivity you can leave.
however i did enjoy parts of this and most of your other posts; ... very nice
hmmm ppc g7 anyone??(i kid i kid)
What is up with all the hostility here?
People must be able to express their opinion, no matter what it is.
I've been a mac use for twenty years now, I've had several 68k macs, PowerPC 601,603,604,G3,G4 and G5.
I love the PowerPC, but today I choose Intel macs, for the sole reason of productivity.
I can do everything I did on my G5 in half the time on my i5, everything!
The G5 cannot run much of the new software, the MBP i5 run everything I ran on the G5.
Running virtual machine on a G5 is useless, since Mac OS and YDL linux is about anything that runs.
People must be able to express their opinion, no matter what it is.
I've been a mac use for twenty years now, I've had several 68k macs, PowerPC 601,603,604,G3,G4 and G5.
I love the PowerPC, but today I choose Intel macs, for the sole reason of productivity.
I can do everything I did on my G5 in half the time on my i5, everything!
The G5 cannot run much of the new software, the MBP i5 run everything I ran on the G5.
Running virtual machine on a G5 is useless, since Mac OS and YDL linux is about anything that runs.
wow, dude chill a bit. im sorry if that offended you.
i was generalizing.(ex. main mac usage is intel thus "intel guy" conversly main mac usage is ppc thus "ppc guy") i was not attempting to even start anything
also i do think quit a few of us realize the diferences between PowerPC and IBM POWER.
you seem to be a unix/high end server guy and i respect that, but if you want to trash my humble littly ppc advantages thread with, negitivity you can leave.
however i did enjoy parts of this and most of your other posts; ... very nice
hmmm ppc g7 anyone??(i kid i kid)
I am generally cool as a cucumber when I post on these forums. Getting upset on the internet doesn't help anyways. Sorry if you felt offended, but no harm intended.
it seems to me that someone doesnt like to use a good reliable system... they must still be a fan of windoze as well. must miss the bsod, random shutdowns and the famous internet explorer has encountered a problem and must close message numerous times a day. I for one would much rather use one of my g 3 or g4 macs than ever deal with windoze or intel or microsoft again period. hopefully apple will decide to go back to the ppc or design their own chip again and leave intel starving.
Hahaha... never going to happen, for PPC. Possibly for their own chip, but I doubt it.
I love my PPC Mac, but Intel is the way to go these days. I frequent this sub-forum a lot since I have a PPC Mac, but I see a lot of people here who are holding on to their old technology because they see a lot of "problems" with Intel Macs.
PPC for Mac is nearly dead. Apple supports it with only minor updates at this point (though, who knows, 10.5.9 could be just around the corner!). Yes, PPC chips are still being made, mostly for use in the XBox 360 and PS3, but you can't run Mac OS on them anyway, so what's the point?
For all those here who are holding out because they hear about so many more problems on Intel than on PPC, don't forget that Apple is selling well over 2x as many Macs now as they did at even the best during the days of PPC. Thus you are likely to hear about well over 2x as many problems if Apple's build quality remains the same. Current Intel Macs have issues? Well, many aluminum PBG4s commonly have one of the RAM slots completely fail. Liquid-cooled G5s sometimes spring leaks. PPC Macs have problems too. Less problems, maybe, but there are less PPC Macs to have problems.
Don't get me wrong... I think the PPC architecture was a fantastic one, and they're rock-solid and built to last. Still, even the fastest ones are getting a little long in the tooth. When I have enough money, I'll be getting an Intel Mac but I'll surely keep this one around until it's dead.
It seems to be someone is making assumptions and accusations. Windows crashing and being a piece of crap has nothing to do with the cpu it runs on. Assuming new Macs are junk because they are Intel based is a farce.
Now new Macs have issues, granted, but they aren't CPU related. On the same token, old Macs had issues too, and many were CPU related (more notable to the g5 series).
I have had far more problems with my compaq desktop namely 2 motherboard failures 2 ram card failures and 2 intel processors replaced when it was under warranty so yes intel is crap. still use it sometimes but it is now running ubuntu
10.04 and so far it tries to behave course i think the hd is about to puke. i have a g3 imac that has never had an issue, a g3 powerbook pismo that has never had an issue and a g4 titanium powerbook that works perfect. i would much rather use the ppc apples since they are far more reliable than intel and redmonds crap.
10.04 and so far it tries to behave course i think the hd is about to puke. i have a g3 imac that has never had an issue, a g3 powerbook pismo that has never had an issue and a g4 titanium powerbook that works perfect. i would much rather use the ppc apples since they are far more reliable than intel and redmonds crap.
Still not related. If anything you should be upset with Compaq for using low grade motherboards.
I think, that most of you here are going wrong way (with all respect). It's not the point which architecture is better or worse, but who needs what. For some PPC is old, dead and outdated, for others it's still good and doing its job as they need.
There is nothing to argue about, i think.
Apple abandoned PPC architecture due to their new marketing strategy (getting new customers from Windows side, virtualization abilities etc) and some technical limitations (like lack of G5 mobile chips) and don't know what else...
It was their choice and from financial point of view they're succeeded. Market share is bigger, shareholders are happy, incomes are growing.
Now it's all matter of users needs. You can be happy with PPC nowadays, but you need to precise your expectations. If they match with PPC abilities, it's just fine. If not - get Intel (which BTW is not "bad", it gives other abilities simply).
I own MP 2006 and it's good, powerful (for my needs) and reliable machine. I also own about 10+ working PPC Macs and they do what i expect from them. It's not possible for me to use all of them at once, but i can tell, that at least 4 are used everyday for different purposes.
Besides, i'm hardware maniac and nothing gives me more fun, than fixing, overclocking and upgrading (my or other's) PPC or Intel Macs. I prefer doing that with PPC ones, because i got better knowledge of this hardware (and more experience with it). And, as i wrote before, for me PPC Macs got "that thing", i cannot find it in present Intel Macs. Maybe it's nostalgy, who knows, i can't name it... I'm Mac user since middle '90s and i can't tell honestly which architecture is better. For sure both are different and giving different abilities to users.
That's what i think about PPC vs Intel "wars"
Excuse me too long story (not boring, i hope).
There is nothing to argue about, i think.
Apple abandoned PPC architecture due to their new marketing strategy (getting new customers from Windows side, virtualization abilities etc) and some technical limitations (like lack of G5 mobile chips) and don't know what else...
It was their choice and from financial point of view they're succeeded. Market share is bigger, shareholders are happy, incomes are growing.
Now it's all matter of users needs. You can be happy with PPC nowadays, but you need to precise your expectations. If they match with PPC abilities, it's just fine. If not - get Intel (which BTW is not "bad", it gives other abilities simply).
I own MP 2006 and it's good, powerful (for my needs) and reliable machine. I also own about 10+ working PPC Macs and they do what i expect from them. It's not possible for me to use all of them at once, but i can tell, that at least 4 are used everyday for different purposes.
Besides, i'm hardware maniac and nothing gives me more fun, than fixing, overclocking and upgrading (my or other's) PPC or Intel Macs. I prefer doing that with PPC ones, because i got better knowledge of this hardware (and more experience with it). And, as i wrote before, for me PPC Macs got "that thing", i cannot find it in present Intel Macs. Maybe it's nostalgy, who knows, i can't name it... I'm Mac user since middle '90s and i can't tell honestly which architecture is better. For sure both are different and giving different abilities to users.
That's what i think about PPC vs Intel "wars"
Excuse me too long story (not boring, i hope).
Don't forget about older versions of Ubuntu and current versions of Debian!
Ubuntu PowerPC is kept up to the newest version. It's simply just a month or two behind as now it is strictly a community project. I am pretty sure that Ubuntu still hosts the PowerPC recompiles.
you to are making assumptions, never herd of g5's having cpu problems, lcs and psu no cpu problems, heard of one of to g4's failing, but that's it
Well I am not making assumptions as I speak from experience. Used to get quite a few G5s in the shop; dead logic boards, CPUs and PSUs were very common (most common being dead PSUs). G5s definitely had a higher then average failure rate (especially with the liquid cooled models; those were nightmares). Had many days where all I would do was fix and troubleshoot G5s. It was not uncommon for us to have to replace the logic board and PSUs 2-3 times on the same machine. I remember one horror story especially; one of our customer's went through 5 G5 CPUs and two logicboards in about a year (needless to say he was happy he bought AppleCare).
...because it's a Compaq and they use crappy hardware. Did the processors themselves die, or just the poor quality motherboard?
Comparing Compaq to Apple is like comparing Kia (of 10 years ago) to Mercedes/BMW/Audi/high-end car manufacturer of your choice.
In some cases I have no doubt that was the case; but the majority of our customers were pros or prosumers who knew how to handle/treat the hardware. Stress testing the G5s they didn't get that hot (maxing at about 80c after 12+ hours, hot yes, but not really anything to worry about); IMO it boils down to below average quality hardware.
I have read a few G5 horror stories for sure. Of all the Gx chips it seemed the G5 chip and systems had the most issue. I actually read somewhere that the failure rate of the original dual 2GHz was around 17%.
Any of the non-liquid cooled G5 towers that are still living though tend to be pretty solid machines.
PowerPC chips and boards got worse stability wise when apple put their faith in IBM. All the joint Motorola/IBM chips and solo Motorola (all the Apple used G4 chips) were very stable and still run today. When IBM took the Apple PowerPC torch alone I think that is the main reason for the PowerPC no longer being used.
My favorite PowerPC chips are the 7448 and 7455. Long live Freescale!
@zmttoxics
lol man sorry sounded as though you were a bit annoyed , i wasnt offended at all infact arguments like that add to this thread, i guess i was venting on all the hate about ppc earler, also i was kinda tired not good
any how, i need a new vid card for my pmac, and some advice:
i bought the pmac from a company and within the "warrenty" period the vid card borked. so i send it back to them. that was in 2009, this is 2010, i still havent gotten it. advice? it just seems like poor buisness ethics.
(sorry about jacking my own thread)
lol man sorry sounded as though you were a bit annoyed
, i wasnt offended at all infact arguments like that add to this thread, i guess i was venting on all the hate about ppc earler, also i was kinda tired not good any how, i need a new vid card for my pmac, and some advice:
i bought the pmac from a company and within the "warrenty" period the vid card borked. so i send it back to them. that was in 2009, this is 2010, i still havent gotten it. advice? it just seems like poor buisness ethics.
(sorry about jacking my own thread)
I think the main issue here is that the true apples were the apples with the ppc chip. im sure that the users/owners of the real apples with the ppc chip will agree
i agree
i could no imagine to buy a Apple Mac without a powerpc processor ,
i mean the intel Mac's are not bad , but at least for me in a Mac belongs a powerpc processor ,
and the new Mac's lost the charm , they are just pimped pc's with a apple badge on and worst of all are made in china ,"made in china " never stood for high quality products anyway "made in china "stand just for cheaply made products that deliver a high profit margin to the company selling them
i could no imagine to buy a Apple Mac without a powerpc processor ,
i mean the intel Mac's are not bad , but at least for me in a Mac belongs a powerpc processor ,
and the new Mac's lost the charm , they are just pimped pc's with a apple badge on and worst of all are made in china ,"made in china " never stood for high quality products anyway "made in china "stand just for cheaply made products that deliver a high profit margin to the company selling them
Where were the G5-era Macs made?
I know the old Macs came from California but when did they move to China?
I'm a bit of a technician for a living. Not to get too far off topic but...
The build quality of my Mac Pro is fantastic. The fit and finish of the metal parts amaze me. Not even a $300+ Lian-Li PC case matches it.
The PSU is an unstoppable tank, cooling is phenomenal, it's just physically astounding inside and out.
Then I salvaged the poor broken G5 iMac and had a look around. Other than some cheaper capacitors in a very hot place of the PSU, the build quality was as good as the MP. The components such as internal fans, speakers, CPU cooling parts, even the metal chassis itself... all made to a high standard and finish even though practically no customers will ever see them.
Being used to "cost effective" PC construction, it's a bit of a shock.
Seeing the internal attention to detail, it's a wonder that Macs cost as LITTLE as they do.
So my questions to the more experienced are:
Has Apple always been this fanatical with their build quality?
I am aware of the difference between the words FASTER and BETTER, but what is the "better" part of the PPC architecture? There apparently is one, else the Space Industry, IBM, etc... would use something else.
Thanks for any insight.... I'm just curious.
Keri
PS> I strongly suspect that Apple is going to eventually drop Intel CPUs.
Why? Mostly because they have the resources to make something better (for their purposes) and maybe just a tiny bit to separate themselves from the PC crowd. The x86's ancient, backwards roots and holdovers (for PC compatibility reasons) has gotta be driving them nuts.
Maybe ARM / A-Series for portables and ??? for Desktops?
I know the old Macs came from California but when did they move to China?
I'm a bit of a technician for a living. Not to get too far off topic but...
The build quality of my Mac Pro is fantastic. The fit and finish of the metal parts amaze me. Not even a $300+ Lian-Li PC case matches it.
The PSU is an unstoppable tank, cooling is phenomenal, it's just physically astounding inside and out.
Then I salvaged the poor broken G5 iMac and had a look around. Other than some cheaper capacitors in a very hot place of the PSU, the build quality was as good as the MP. The components such as internal fans, speakers, CPU cooling parts, even the metal chassis itself... all made to a high standard and finish even though practically no customers will ever see them.
Being used to "cost effective" PC construction, it's a bit of a shock.
Seeing the internal attention to detail, it's a wonder that Macs cost as LITTLE as they do.
So my questions to the more experienced are:
Has Apple always been this fanatical with their build quality?
I am aware of the difference between the words FASTER and BETTER, but what is the "better" part of the PPC architecture? There apparently is one, else the Space Industry, IBM, etc... would use something else.
Thanks for any insight.... I'm just curious.
Keri
PS> I strongly suspect that Apple is going to eventually drop Intel CPUs.
Why? Mostly because they have the resources to make something better (for their purposes) and maybe just a tiny bit to separate themselves from the PC crowd. The x86's ancient, backwards roots and holdovers (for PC compatibility reasons) has gotta be driving them nuts.
Maybe ARM / A-Series for portables and ??? for Desktops?
My 5 cents in matter of PM G5 CPU failures: from my experience (not that big as your's OFC) mostly it was defective thermic sensor on CPU daughtercard, not CPU itself. But OFC only solution was to replace whole dcard.