Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

What if apple never abandoned power pc...

goMac said:
We'd have slow ass notebooks with no Windows compatibility.

I was at WWDC 2006. The Pentium 4's were so much faster than the G5s it was shocking. The sense was that Apple had pulled the wool over everyone's eyes when it came to PowerPC vs. Intel. It was hard not to feel like Apple had been lying about PowerPC vs. Intel for the few years before.

Also stop comparing the Power7. They're not at all PowerPCs. They require giant, giant boxes and huge power supplies. It's like comparing a dump truck to a F-150. Yeah, you can haul more, but it's not something you'd actually ever regularly drive. The Power series also existed alongside the PowerPC and they were always significantly faster than the PowerPCs, so it's not and accurate comparison.

(Power7s are also $10,000. So you're talking about a Power Mac that would be $10,000. You could easily buy several Xeons for that price.)
Click to expand...

Macs were always behind the times they didnt get USB 2.0 for YEARS after PCs got USB 2.0 Windows has had USB 2.0 Support since Windows 98SE! Mac did not exceed the 1GHz threshold until well after Windows PCs had over 1GHz Macs did no exceed 2GHz until the G5 PCs at the time of the last G5 windows had alreaday passed the 3GHz mark not to mention that Apple didnt have 64bit til what Lion? while PCs had 64bit support since late 2005
 
goMac said:
We'd have slow ass notebooks with no Windows compatibility.

I was at WWDC 2006. The Pentium 4's were so much faster than the G5s it was shocking. The sense was that Apple had pulled the wool over everyone's eyes when it came to PowerPC vs. Intel. It was hard not to feel like Apple had been lying about PowerPC vs. Intel for the few years before.

Also stop comparing the Power7. They're not at all PowerPCs. They require giant, giant boxes and huge power supplies. It's like comparing a dump truck to a F-150. Yeah, you can haul more, but it's not something you'd actually ever regularly drive. The Power series also existed alongside the PowerPC and they were always significantly faster than the PowerPCs, so it's not and accurate comparison.

(Power7s are also $10,000. So you're talking about a Power Mac that would be $10,000. You could easily buy several Xeons for that price.)
Click to expand...

Ok, so what about the morden PPC chips used in games consoles? (e.g. the xbox 360 has a 3.2ghz tri core ppc, with a similar architecture to the G5 i believe) I know the clock speed isn't everything, but imo thats pretty good, and they don't cost the world
 
LeoTheLion89 said:
u never use "flops" in the term of average computers i specialize in Linux not Mac
Click to expand...

Flops is not a Mac term it's one that applies to any CPU ever made with an FPU. How can a Linux person not know the term? The word gigaflop has been around since the 90's and used to be the minimum benchmark for a supercomputer.
 
MochaBook said:
Flops is not a Mac term it's one that applies to any CPU ever made with an FPU. How can a Linux person not know the term? The word gigaflop has been around since the 90's and used to be the minimum benchmark for a supercomputer.
Click to expand...

like i said flops are in terms of super computers ppl go by GHz MB GB not Flops
 
Davy.Shalom said:
Yeah, I felt like Macs had more soul when Apple used PPC, but the move to Intel was smart. Due to the sheer size of Intel, Apple was able to equip the next generation of computers with cheaper, more efficient processors. The biggest issues were power consumption, and heat dissipation methods. My G5 dual heats up my room like crazy, and the quad sitting my my closet could probably heat the whole house if I were to multitask using intensive applications...
Click to expand...
I agree 100% with you. Macs did have more soul when Apple used PPC. :(
 
Intel processors may be cheaper than PPC but it didnt make the mac cheaper and AMD is even cheaper and runs cooler than Intel
 
I think Apple would be at the same place as they are now. They would be making the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad, and see their Macs as their secondary business. It has nothing to do with PowerPC vs Intel. I personally didn't buy an Intel Mac because it was Intel, I bought it because it ran Macintosh OS.
 
LeoTheLion89 said:
and AMD is even cheaper and runs cooler than Intel
Click to expand...

AMD are rubbish. Well, they've been obliterated by the speed of SandyBridge and Ivybridge. And that is the reason why AMD is cheaper, more so with Bulldozer. Did you know they were giving cashback deals to customers who bought Bulldozer? how bad is it for AMD when their x6's can't compete with Intel's latest quad cores.

AMD runs somewhat cooler because their max temp is around the 62c mark where it down clocks to save itself. As Intel is somewhere in the high 70's, early 80's? with a good HSF Intel's won't even hit 70c.

Even with enthusiast systems I've seen people's Sandybridge/Ivybridge, their max temperatures with Prime95 is 55c, overclocked to 4.5 - 4.8Ghz.
 
LeoTheLion89 said:
u never use "flops" in the term of average computers i specialize in Linux not Mac
Click to expand...

u specialize in linux yet u don't know what a flop is ?
x5qb12.png
 
Jessica Lares said:
I think Apple would be at the same place as they are now. They would be making the iPod, the iPhone, and the iPad, and see their Macs as their secondary business. It has nothing to do with PowerPC vs Intel. I personally didn't buy an Intel Mac because it was Intel, I bought it because it ran Macintosh OS.
Click to expand...

so do Hackintoshes

----------
Badagri said:
AMD are rubbish. Well, they've been obliterated by the speed of SandyBridge and Ivybridge. And that is the reason why AMD is cheaper, more so with Bulldozer. Did you know they were giving cashback deals to customers who bought Bulldozer? how bad is it for AMD when their x6's can't compete with Intel's latest quad cores.

AMD runs somewhat cooler because their max temp is around the 62c mark where it down clocks to save itself. As Intel is somewhere in the high 70's, early 80's? with a good HSF Intel's won't even hit 70c.

Even with enthusiast systems I've seen people's Sandybridge/Ivybridge, their max temperatures with Prime95 is 55c, overclocked to 4.5 - 4.8Ghz.
Click to expand...

My Pentium 4 gaming rig is always runing at 150F

----------

also i dont blame Apple from going to Intel however they were quick to leave PPC in the dust and act like they never even existed they could of made it where the PPCs ca run SL since PPC apps were dropped in Lion or they should atleast make a emulator like Rosetta that allows PPC uses to install Intel apps on their PPC macs
 
ihuman:D said:
G4's don't run hot and if you use altivec they are faster and anyway they probably would be on par if not faster than intel now since they use risc and there's also virtual pc for windows.
Click to expand...
There was never a PowerBook G5 released during the whole G5 Macintosh era: PowerBooks were G4 during the whole G5 era. This was because of its tendency to run hot and hence eat batteries.

Apple foresaw the whole movement to portability and PPC chips were not an option.

Their license of the technology underlying Rosetta allowed them to accomplish this move with transparency and ease of use. It was a minor miracle...

I was an owner and user of VirtualPC, the Windows emulation software for the Mac, it was slow and cumbersome. I only used it when I had a "must use" Windows application.

As a matter of fact the licensed copy of Microsoft Windows XP contained in my last version of VirtualPC from Connectix is still the licensed version I use for Windows XP in Bootcamp/Parallels -- and I am so glad to run it on an Intel instead of emulation!
 
Last edited:
max¥¥ said:
Ok, so what about the morden PPC chips used in games consoles? (e.g. the xbox 360 has a 3.2ghz tri core ppc, with a similar architecture to the G5 i believe) I know the clock speed isn't everything, but imo thats pretty good, and they don't cost the world
Click to expand...

The 360 doesn't really have a G5. They cut a lot of features out of the G5, and then added a third core. As it stands, that chip would not be capable of running OS X. Even if you got it to work, it would actually be clock for clock far slower.

Also, a i3 would easily best the G5 in the 360. For cheaper. Remember, even a dual core Intel processor is only $120. The processor in the 360 may be cheaper, but it is far far far slower, and far far far older.

Badagri said:
Still no USB3 for the Mac Pro, while I've had USB3 on my PC since late 2010.
Click to expand...

Apple uses Intel chipsets, and Intel just started supporting USB3 this year.
 
goMac said:
We'd have slow ass notebooks with no Windows compatibility...
Click to expand...

max¥¥ said:
Ok, so what about the morden PPC chips used in games consoles? (e.g. the xbox 360 has a 3.2ghz tri core ppc, with a similar architecture to the G5 i believe) I know the clock speed isn't everything, but imo thats pretty good, and they don't cost the world
Click to expand...

You cannot compare today's CPU world with that of 2005. I was forced to maintain my PowerBook G4 even though i upgraded my iMac to G5...

Apple was losing ground quickly in the laptop segment of the market and their move to Intel actually gave them substantial gains in that area!
 
LeoTheLion89 said:
]also i dont blame Apple from going to Intel however they were quick to leave PPC in the dust and act like they never even existed they could of made it where the PPCs ca run SL since PPC apps were dropped in Lion or they should atleast make a emulator like Rosetta that allows PPC uses to install Intel apps on their PPC macs
Click to expand...

A nice dream, but only that. The number of PowerPC Macs that would be able to successfully run such software would be extremely limited. Probably to the 2.7DP G5s and the Quad G5s. Even then, I imagine such emulation would be incredibly painful. Ever try to run a modern version of Windows(i.e. post-WinMe) on VirtualPC? It'd be kinda like that, but probably worse.

And all things considered, they didn't leave PPC in the dust that quickly relative to their leaving the Motorola 68K architecture behind. Given how much faster computers move in terms of power/ability these days compared to the 90s they moved at a practically glacial pace, and for that I thank them.
 
My guess of what it would be like if Apple had stuck with PPC is we'd still be hoping that the powerbook G5 would finally come out next Tuesday.
 
LeoTheLion89 said:
]also i dont blame Apple from going to Intel however they were quick to leave PPC in the dust and act like they never even existed they could of made it where the PPCs ca run SL since PPC apps were dropped in Lion or they should atleast make a emulator like Rosetta that allows PPC uses to install Intel apps on their PPC macs
Click to expand...

No quicker than when the eliminated the Classic Environment in 2006 after they introduced OS X 6 years before...

Are you seriously suggesting that an emulator be developed to run Intel apps on the PPC Macs?:D
 
MichaelLAX said:
No quicker than when the eliminated the Classic Environment in 2006 after they introduced OS X 6 years before...

Are you seriously suggesting that an emulator be developed to run Intel apps on the PPC Macs?:D
Click to expand...
yes i am i cant run Trillian dammit
 
What if apple never abandoned power pc...

I wouldn't be able to offer craigslist seller's $80 bucks for a nice ibook G4 and have them except it! ;)
 
LeoTheLion89 said:
Intel processors may be cheaper than PPC but it didnt make the mac cheaper and AMD is even cheaper and runs cooler than Intel
Click to expand...

Meh, I wouldn't say they run cooler. The PC's with Opterons, Phenoms, and Bulldozers that I have used all tend to run very hot when compared to Intel chips. I agree that the temps might be slightly lower in some cases because the processor is clocking down significantly.

----------
tom vilsack said:
What if apple never abandoned power pc...

I wouldn't be able to offer craigslist seller's $80 bucks for a nice ibook G4 and have them except it! ;)
Click to expand...

Oh I do this all the time ;)

Except I offer them around $20 and sell them for $80. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back