the PowerPC Fanclub

MUCKYFINGERS

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 7, 2005
768
15
CA
who here still loves powerpc because they just work great? :)

okay this is a useless thread but i wanted to stand tall for my love for the great PowerPC processor.
 

nfs2

macrumors member
Jan 14, 2006
43
0
I love the power PC because i wont be getting an intel mac for at least a year.
 

smharmon

macrumors member
Jan 26, 2004
97
0
MUCKYFINGERS said:
who here still loves powerpc because they just work great? :)

okay this is a useless thread but i wanted to stand tall for my love for the great PowerPC processor.

I know I haven't posted in a long while... BUT

My 486 "worked great" also. Does the intel procs just beat the pants of the powerpc... yes...
 

DeSnousa

macrumors 68000
Jan 20, 2005
1,620
0
Brisbane, Australia
I really don't care what chip is used as long as Apple continues to do the great thing they have alway's done. Great hardware and OS. Also along as this new intel chip does not mean a crack to running osx on windows.
 

MUCKYFINGERS

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 7, 2005
768
15
CA
i love intel as the next PC guy and have several intel based machines at home, but ppc still holds a place in my macintosh using career.
 

smharmon

macrumors member
Jan 26, 2004
97
0
We have too much emotion tied up in our apple products... I know I do!!! But, we have tried to justify the PowerPC for sooo long, and it is nice to see apple move on to something better. I often feel like I have to admit defeat because I have defended the processors and I think others feel the same way. In a way It IS defeat though... the G5 wouldn't couldn't and never will be in an Apple notebook, I am just glad to be getting some up to date hardware releases.
 

cliffrouse11bas

macrumors regular
Oct 25, 2005
216
0
I love my old G4 Ibook, but I have to admit it is a little behind time. For $999 what can I expect. I am ready for my new 20" Imac Intel Core Duo.
 

sixstorm

macrumors regular
Jan 16, 2006
213
0
Nashville, TN
I've had a great experience with my iBook G4, very nice for a laptop that does so much. I'm actually going to my local (45 min drive) Apple store to see just how fast the difference really is.
 

solvs

macrumors 603
Jun 25, 2002
5,693
1
LaLaLand, CA
PowerPC, specifically the G4 and G5, are good chips but are woefully underdeveloped. Motorola dropped the ball on what could have been an amazing chip. IBM had it's chance, but it blew it too. The P4 sucks, but the Pentium M isn't too bad. It was partially based on the better parts of the P3. What Apple is using now, and will use in the immediate future are also derivatives of that technology. So they should be pretty good. Personnally, I'm an AMD fan, but there are plenty of reasons why Apple didn't choose them that have been discussed ad naseum here.

If there was a better developed chip out there that was PowerPC based that Apple could count on, they would have gone with that.
 

Macmadant

macrumors 6502a
Jun 4, 2005
857
0
i love powerpc it's sort of got a ring to it "G5" i love saying that but we can't call the ppowermac "G5" anymore :( :( :(
 

ibilly

macrumors regular
May 2, 2003
248
0
Boulder
Don't believe what you hear...

The G5 is far superior to the intel core series at equivalent clocks. The dual core versions of each processor are much faster. IMO, the heat/energy consumption thing is the only thing that the core duo has that trumps the G5. I'm also pretty sure that the G5 is a lot cheaper.

So I guess you could say that I'm on the PPC side...
 

Macmadant

macrumors 6502a
Jun 4, 2005
857
0
ibilly said:
The G5 is far superior to the intel core series at equivalent clocks. The dual core versions of each processor are much faster. IMO, the heat/energy consumption thing is the only thing that the core duo has that trumps the G5. I'm also pretty sure that the G5 is a lot cheaper.

So I guess you could say that I'm on the PPC side...
i knew that all along the only reason they moved was the lack of a laptop G5, its more of apples privite battle with ibm than speeds, i mean they got on the wrong side of steve, and humiliated him by not delivering a 3 ghz powermac, they would have reached 3ghz eventually we all know that
 

iMeowbot

macrumors G3
Aug 30, 2003
8,643
0
johnnybluejeans said:
The whole Intel vs. PowerPC thing seems to be a rehash of the AppleII vs. Macintosh days..
And people used to earnestly debate the relative merits of integer and Applesoft BASIC, and then the ][ vs. /// ... Blech, Teh Steve is right, Apple's DNA hasn't changed :p
 

awulf

macrumors 6502
Mar 1, 2002
483
1
South Australia
The PowerPC is a better design for many reasons:

RISC (Reduced Instruction Set Computer) i.e. PowerPC vs CISC (Complex Instruction Set) i.e. Intel:
• RISC have a much simpler instruction set, making the hardware much simpler, faster and cheaper.
• CISC are easier for compilers to translate a high level programming language to machine code, also makes programs smaller in size.

The x86 is backwards compatible all the way back to the 8086 from 1978, which makes the x86 awfully complex. The PowerPC 601 is from 1991, which is relatively new.

Also the PowerPC has a much simpler instruction set compared to the x86, so programming in assembly is much simpler on the PowerPC.

If as much R&D money were to be poured in the the PowerPC as it has been into the Intel, the PowerPC would be much more powerful, more power efficient and cooler than the Intel, but unfortunately Motorola and IBM aren't willing to spend that money on the PowerPC.
 

cube

macrumors P6
May 10, 2004
16,453
4,461
Apple moves to x86. Intel removes hardware-based x86 emulation from Itanic.

What does that tell you?
 

FFTT

macrumors 68030
Apr 17, 2004
2,952
0
A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
I'm suddenly reminded of what smog control engineering did to muscle cars after 1967.

The Intel switch is a good move for portables, still I can't help but wonder how we'll feel if and when IBM releases their Power5 dual cores.
 

superbovine

macrumors 68030
Nov 7, 2003
2,872
0
MUCKYFINGERS said:
who here still loves powerpc because they just work great? :)

okay this is a useless thread but i wanted to stand tall for my love for the great PowerPC processor.
once the change over is complete your'll wonder how you lived without an x86.
 

Rend It

macrumors 6502
Oct 27, 2003
265
5
United States
PA Semi??

solvs said:
PowerPC, specifically the G4 and G5, are good chips but are woefully underdeveloped. Motorola dropped the ball on what could have been an amazing chip. IBM had it's chance, but it blew it too. The P4 sucks, but the Pentium M isn't too bad. It was partially based on the better parts of the P3. What Apple is using now, and will use in the immediate future are also derivatives of that technology. So they should be pretty good. Personnally, I'm an AMD fan, but there are plenty of reasons why Apple didn't choose them that have been discussed ad naseum here.

If there was a better developed chip out there that was PowerPC based that Apple could count on, they would have gone with that.
I hope I don't incite a riot, but there's still hope in the PowerPC platform for things besides embedded apps:

PWRficient Processors from PA Semi

Yeah, I know they won't sample until later this year, but if they can do what they say at only 5-13 W, who knows? Maybe Apple will switch back, or even better, just start using whatever chip does the job best, since OS X apps will soon be universal binary. Oh, and yes these do have an SIMD vector unit (i.e., Altivec).
 

spencecb

macrumors 6502a
Nov 20, 2003
960
17
Rend It said:
I hope I don't incite a riot, but there's still hope in the PowerPC platform for things besides embedded apps:

PWRficient Processors from PA Semi

Yeah, I know they won't sample until later this year, but if they can do what they say at only 5-13 W, who knows? Maybe Apple will switch back, or even better, just start using whatever chip does the job best, since OS X apps will soon be universal binary. Oh, and yes these do have an SIMD vector unit (i.e., Altivec).
Going along with this idea, wouldn't it be possible for Apple to keep using Intel and PowerPC if they continue to embed the Universal Binary in their Developer's tools? That way the companies that are profficient at writing code for Intel chips will be able to make software for the Mac and have it compatible with PowerPC, and those of us that won't be able to buy a new Mac in the next couple years will be assured contiued support for our PowerPC based Macs.

Just a thought, but I believe it is one that is quite "do-able" and one that Apple should keep in mind.
 

MUCKYFINGERS

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jun 7, 2005
768
15
CA
superbovine said:
once the change over is complete your'll wonder how you lived without an x86.
i have a couple of x86 windoze boxes at home but i'm still more satisfied with the performance and reliable of my macs than with them. but of course, im sure x86 will make it more enjoyable.