unsupported Aperture

[stoneage]

Has anyone seen a workaround for installing Aperture on an older machine?
iBook G4 with 768ram.

 

[Benjamindaines]

Even if there is I wouldn't do it, your video card isn't even close to powerful enough, it will run like flaming piss.

 

[Aniej]

yes the workaround is an upgrade to a mac pro with a system and vid card that could handle it.

 

[bousozoku]

Supposedly, Aperture runs on 1.25 GHz PowerBooks and up but not well. Why would you want to run it on an even less powerful machine? You'd watch each pixel change.

Wait until you can buy a powerful machine.

 

[Westside guy]

Supposedly, Aperture runs on 1.25 GHz PowerBooks and up but not well. Why would you want to run it on an even less powerful machine? You'd watch each pixel change.

Wait until you can buy a powerful machine.

1.5 ran reasonably well on my 1.25GHz Powerbook G4 - but one or two things were unbearably slow (image rotation by arbitrary angle is the one that comes to mind). The reason it likely was workable was the graphics card.

I wouldn't want to try it on a "lesser" Mac than that, though.

(I don't know the work-around; if I did, I'd tell you)

 

[MGLXP]

Has anyone seen a workaround for installing Aperture on an older machine?
iBook G4 with 768ram.

I would not even dare run Aperture on an iBook G4. First, even on my Macbook Pro 2.0GHz w/2GB RAM, Aperture is not totally usable as image loading times and other types of processing are still quite slow (especially compared to Adobe Photoshop Lightroom). Secondly, Aperture by itself uses up over 700MB of RAM when working with a decent size RAW library. Also, you need a decent screen resolution to use Aperture as there are a lot of panes and the iBook G4 only goes up to 1024X768. And yes, I am using Aperture 1.5.2.

 

[GoCubsGo]

I run it on a 1.67 pb and basically it's the lowest i'd go.