You Can/Can't Still Use PowerPC Macs in 2020!

[defjam]

Why would I address any issue other than the one she presented? She was pretty desperate, it was that iBook or nothing, the last thing she wanted was another online 'expert' telling her it's ancient and she needs to buy another machine - and she'd already been very frank about her financial circumstances.

Your point is correct in most circumstances but this wasn't one of those circumstances.

I already addressed this:

However, as someone who has helped countless users with "one specific" task there's always another task. And another. And another. I'd be surprised if she didn't, at some point, want to use that iBook for more than that one task.​

You addressed the immediate need but most likely not the long term issue.

 

[alex_free]

If it does everything you require of it , why not?

I find it hard to believe that anyone

If it does, then great. Most people like to have basic software, like web browsers that support WebRTC, modern messaging clients, modern cloud storage clients, etc.. I'm talking about the average Joe. Not old computer enthusiasts.

All of that has alternatives that can work on PPC and do basically the same thing. If there is a will there is a way. Not everyone has that will and it’s ok.

 

[defjam]

Actually, the OP sounded more like a hypocrite than an authority of the topic, because usually when we talk about this issue, we tend to compare a machine to a specific standard. Does this machine meet this or that standard. If it doesn't, then it's not usable. You already showed you have a standard that the PPC machine does not meet yours. I respect that, but why does anyone else need to meet your standards and the OP's? Who is the OP to dictate what is the proper computer standards in 2020? I think that's the issue here is that, we sometimes like to impose a certain standard on other people, but lack the ear to listen to what they actually need rather than what you think they need. That was what I got the take from Dronecatcher with the iBook and that is what I do -- listen -- with my clients and not imposing what I think they need; rather than what they want out of the computer.

IMO, browsing the Internet, is not something unique to me. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's one of the core tasks almost everyone does with a computer.

 

[sparty411]

All of that has alternatives that can work on PPC and do basically the same thing. If there is a will there is a way. Not everyone has that will and it’s ok.

That's what I'm implying. The average Joe does not find joy in tinkering and fiddling with workarounds to get basic stuff functioning. If they do, then that's great, as I'm one of those people too.

 

[defjam]

All of that has alternatives that can work on PPC and do basically the same thing. If there is a will there is a way. Not everyone has that will and it’s ok.

That's the entire point of the first YouTuber in the OP!

 

[sparty411]

IMO, browsing the Internet, is not something unique to me. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's one of the core tasks almost everyone does with a computer.

Exactly. What are modern operating systems, but a bootloader for Chrome or Firefox? I don't necessarily like it, but it's the world we live in.

 

[alex_free]

IMO, browsing the Internet, is not something unique to me. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's one of the core tasks almost everyone does with a computer.

Browsing the internet works fine. It’s not even as terrible as the first computer I ever used to get online. Everyone is just so used to instant responses.

That's the entire point of the first YouTuber in the OP!

Gotta be honest didn’t watch either video but I’ve agreed with that guy twice now...

 

[defjam]

I highly doubt I'm being pendantic. Certain words have certain connotations and I was stating the connotation that "unusable" has.

Unusable: not capable of being used or fit for use

IMO PPC systems are no longer fit for use for the average user. Can I use my PowerMac G5 to browse the web? Sure. Is it reasonable to do so? Not IMO thus making it unusable for that task.
[automerge]1583194727[/automerge]

Browsing the internet works fine. It’s not even as terrible as the first computer I ever used to get online. Everyone is just so used to instant responses.

Not in my opinion. I literally just went through this at the end of last week / over the weekend. Many people in this forum gave me good advice on how to improve the browsing experience on my PowerMac G5. Unfortunately none of them worked without compromise. Contrast this to using my 2010 Mac Pro where I just fired up Safari and browsed the web. No muss, no fuss, no fiddling, no compromises. I'm sure I could accept the limitations / slow performance of my PowerMac G5. But I see no reason to given the vastly improved browsing experience my Intel Macs offer. This from someone who enjoys using older systems.

 

[Dronecatcher]

You addressed the immediate need but most likely not the long term issue.

There was no long term issue.
If I go to the garage to have my tires replaced do I expect the mechanic to sell me a new car?

 

[RogerWilco6502]

Unusable: not capable of being used or fit for use

IMO PPC systems are no longer fit for use for the average user. Can I use my PowerMac G5 to browse the web? Sure. Is it reasonable to do so? Not IMO thus making it unusable for that task.

But also it says "not capable of being used." This may be partially true, but isn't entirely true and is thus misinformation.

Also IMO quoting the dictionary is more pendantic than anything I've said beforehand.

 

[defjam]

Con:
If someone is looking for a (single) device, that is able to fit all needs out of the box and if he/she does not find himself in the Pro1-3 group and if he/she is looking for fast web, streaming, video-editing, 4k-video, support for all cloud-services and video-communication, secure online-banking etc etc ... And if their Zen of Mac is, not to be distracted by the needs of tinkering with stuff ... Then a PPC is not that unique device to go for. It might be/ certainly will be a big disappointment and a frustrating experience.

I'm really puzzled as to how people use PPC systems to browse the web. As someone who attempted to do so with a dual processor, 2.3GHz G5 I found it not only slow but frustratingly so. Enough so I had to abandon it for that purpose. Not that I wanted to but the frustration of using it was too great. I can't even imagine attempting to use a G3/G4 system to do so. Until just a few months ago I used to own a G3 and G4 iBook and I didn't even attempt, based on my poor experience with the G5s, to browse the web with either of them. Either I'm doing something wrong or those doing so have a lot of patience.

 

[eyoungren]

I fail to see the point in buying an ancient Apple computer as a primary machine. Apple only supports their operating systems for a handful of years, and 3rd party software vendors usually follow suit a year or 2 later. The less fortunate are better off pulling a core 2 shitbox out of the dump, and installing a supported operating system on it. In this day and age, I even find Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, and even Haswell laptops / desktops in the garbage.

I buy based on price. The printing industry in which I work is system agnostic. No one cares how or with what you rendered your PDF as long as it's right.

So from that perspective, these ancient machines do just fine.

Other people's needs are different.

 

[defjam]

There was no long term issue.
If I go to the garage to have my tires replaced do I expect the mechanic to sell me a new car?

Possibly. If the engine is burning a quart of oil ever 100 miles, the brakes will soon need replacement, the body is rusted through, the interior is shot, the battery is weak and replaced, etc. At some point you reach the conclusion that fixing the one issue isn't worth it and a replacement is the better option for the long run.

 

[eyoungren]

I'm really puzzled as to how people use PPC systems to browse the web. As someone who attempted to do so with a dual processor, 2.3GHz G5 I found it not only slow but frustratingly so. Enough so I had to abandon it for that purpose. Not that I wanted to but the frustration of using it was too great. I can't even imagine attempting to use a G3/G4 system to do so. Until just a few months ago I used to own a G3 and G4 iBook and I didn't even attempt, based on my poor experience with the G5s, to browse the web with either of them. Either I'm doing something wrong or those doing so have a lot of patience.

That probably comes down to usage.

I've cut out all media stuff on my tweaking of T4Fx. I browse the web mainly to read newspaper articles. If you're browsing and video consumption is a main part of that then yeah, you're likely to hit a brick wall.

But with what I've done and what I use my Quad G5 for as a primary Mac it loads pages just as fast as the 2015 MBP my boss has me use for work.

 

[iluvmacs99]

IMO, browsing the Internet, is not something unique to me. In fact I'd go so far as to say it's one of the core tasks almost everyone does with a computer.

There are various levels of internet usage; some still use dialups.

Again, I don't think you really understand the scope of the poverty in western nations and how a lot of people do actually struggle financially, but using dialup or slower internet with a less capable computer does not cut them off the web completely. They just won't have Netflix or Amazon Prime or 4K, because most of them simply can't afford them. What I and I think Dronecatcher tries to bring to light is that, given certain conditions, you can still use PowerPC if personal finances limit choices. Even when I'm working for a non-profit computer recycler and I am in a position to afford better machines, I continually find people who can't even afford the basic computer that the OP mentioned. So this brought me to my attention that the OP had never met some of these people; perhaps the same people who ask him and come to me and ask me for help. I of course provide them with examples of things you can do with a lower end machine. That's what I think I should be doing. Demonstrate that if the PPC machine can do what my clients ask and if so, can the price be met.

 

[sparty411]

I buy based on price. The printing industry in which I work is system agnostic. No one cares how or with what you rendered your PDF as long as it's right.

So from that perspective, these ancient machines do just fine.

Other people needs are different.

Touche'

 

[defjam]

But also it says "not capable of being used." This may be partially true, but isn't entirely true and is thus misinformation.

Hence my statement: I think you're being pedantic.
[automerge]1583195811[/automerge]

There are various levels of internet usage; some still use dialups.

The post I responded to implied my task, browsing the Internet, was unique. As for dialup users the modern web is unusable on dialup. My father can only get 768Kbps Internet. It's not pretty.

Again, I don't think you really understand the scope of the poverty in western nations and how a lot of people do actually struggle financially, but using dialup or slower internet with a less capable computer does not cut them off the web completely. They just won't have Netflix or Amazon Prime or 4K, because most of them simply can't afford them.

The subject isn't people in poverty. It's people who are considering the purchase of a PPC system. As there are more capable Intel Macs which are comparably priced it makes zero sense for someone to purchase a PPC system unless they have a specific reason to do so.
[automerge]1583196131[/automerge]

That probably comes down to usage.

I've cut out all media stuff on my tweaking of T4Fx. I browse the web mainly to read newspaper articles. If you're browsing and video consumption is a main part of that then yeah, you're likely to hit a brick wall.

My primary web usage is forums such as this one. Nothing very media centric. My TFF is configured using your preferences file.

But with what I've done and what I use my Quad G5 for as a primary Mac it loads pages just as fast as the 2015 MBP my boss has me use for work.

Maybe a quad G5 is acceptable (I've never used one). But it represents the very best PPC PowerMac Apple ever released. The dual 2.3GHz PowerMac G5 I used to own is, IMO, one of the more capable PowerMac system. One of the reasons I decided to get rid of it was it was the web browsing experience was so poor. I couldn't start a long running task, such as ripping DVDs for my iPad, and acceptably browse the web with it while it performed that task. I had to switch to something else to do that. So I figured...why keep it?

 

[Dronecatcher]

Possibly. If the engine is burning a quart of oil ever 100 miles, the brakes will soon need replacement, the body is rusted through, the interior is shot, the battery is weak and replaced, etc. At some point you reach the conclusion that fixing the one issue isn't worth it and a replacement is the better option for the long run.

But there are no other faults, everything works as it should - it's just one problem , the tires.

Let me try and spell it out again:
Your solution - don't waste your time with the iBook, you need a first generation MacBook.
Result: There's no money for another computer so her son completes the course without ever having access to the tutorials.

And to follow your logic, what about when her son wants to play the latest games, watch Youtube in 1080P and then 2K/4K...shouldn't he really be having a MacBook Pro or a Mac Pro? Pre-empting what someone is going to need in the future doesn't have any end.

 

[defjam]

But there are no other faults, everything works as it should - it's just one problem , the tires.

Everything I mentioned was working as it should.

Let me try and spell it out again:
Your solution - don't waste your time with the iBook, you need a first generation MacBook.
Result: There's no money for another computer so her son completes the course without ever having access to the tutorials.

IMO your solution is very limited. IMO it would be better to get her something more capable. Given that people discard much more capable systems the counter argument "there's no money" doesn't really cut it.

And to follow your logic, what about when her son wants to play the latest games, watch Youtube in 1080P and then 2K/4K...shouldn't he really be having a MacBook Pro or a Mac Pro? Pre-empting what someone is going to need in the future doesn't have any end.

Obviously he should continue using his iBook. Applying your argument anyone buying something more modern is a fool

 

[eyoungren]

My primary web usage is forums such as this one. Nothing very media centric. My TFF is configured using your preferences file.

My prefs file has an entry in there for web caching. On my system it's caching to a virtual ram disk. The entire app and the browser profile are in ram. But the preference for that directs to my system. If you aren't using that and have not removed it that could be something that is affecting things.

Maybe a quad G5 is acceptable (I've never used one). But it represents the very best PPC PowerMac Apple ever released. The dual 2.3GHz PowerMac G5 I used to own is, IMO, one of the more capable PowerMac system. One of the reasons I decided to get rid of it was it was the web browsing experience was so poor. I couldn't start a long running task, such as ripping DVDs for my iPad, and acceptably browse the web with it while it performed that task. I had to switch to something else to do that. So I figured...why keep it?

It's certainly acceptable in my case.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not there with you so I can't say otherwise or convince you one way or the other. There is compromise involved here, even on a Quad. That said, I have ALWAYS sought out the most powerful systems I could for the price and then upgraded them as far as I could do.

As decent as my tweaks may be, I'm not going to browse the net without purpose on my 17" PowerBook. It's only 1Ghz and has max 2GB ram. There was a time I would, but again, compromise.

The Quad gives me 16GB ram, 8GB of which is being used as that ram disk I mentioned. I routinely leave T4FX up and running and use other apps without an issue.

But not everyone has a Quad, and even less people have 16GB of ram to spare.

That said, what I've done in all my tweaking stems from having to work with a 17" PowerBook with a failed cache and only 2GB ram. So, all in all it's a pretty good job I think. But it's not going to meet everyone's expectations and I acknowledge that. There's only so much tweaking you can do to compensate for hardware that isn't there.

PS. uMatrix or NoScript is a major part of this. If you are not using at least one of those with T4Fx then I can certainly see your issues. Both block javascript, which is one of the major offenders. Both allow you to tune things so that certain JS that you need DOES run.

 

[alex_free]

There are various levels of internet usage; some still use dialups.

Again, I don't think you really understand the scope of the poverty in western nations and how a lot of people do actually struggle financially, but using dialup or slower internet with a less capable computer does not cut them off the web completely. They just won't have Netflix or Amazon Prime or 4K, because most of them simply can't afford them. What I and I think Dronecatcher tries to bring to light is that, given certain conditions, you can still use PowerPC if personal finances limit choices. Even when I'm working for a non-profit computer recycler and I am in a position to afford better machines, I continually find people who can't even afford the basic computer that the OP mentioned. So this brought me to my attention that the OP had never met some of these people; perhaps the same people who ask him and come to me and ask me for help. I of course provide them with examples of things you can do with a lower end machine. That's what I think I should be doing. Demonstrate that if the PPC machine can do what my clients ask and if so, can the price be met.

Sure Netflix/Prime doesn’t work, but I can transcode some media files and play them through VLC. Not everyone uses services like that, I don’t really use them anyways on higher spec computers. You don’t need to be broke to use a PPC Mac. PPC Macs and their operating systems have advantages over modern Macs and Mac OS. I like that I can open apps without clicking through 10 buttons in System Preferences to confirm security settings. I like not having soldered RAM and SSDs. I like the optimization and polish of Tiger, OS 9, etc. that simply isn’t there anymore.

 

[defjam]

My prefs file has an entry in there for web caching. On my system it's caching to a virtual ram disk. The entire app and the browser profile are in ram. But the preference for that directs to my system. If you aren't using that and have not removed it that could be something that is affecting things.



It's certainly acceptable in my case.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not there with you so I can't say otherwise or convince you one way or the other. There is compromise involved here, even on a Quad. That said, I have ALWAYS sought out the most powerful systems I could for the price and then upgraded them as far as I could do.

As decent as my tweaks may be, I'm not going to browse the net without purpose on my 17" PowerBook. It's only 1Ghz and has max 2GB ram. There was a time I would, but again, compromise.

The Quad gives me 16GB ram, 8GB of which is being used as that ram disk I mentioned. I routinely leave T4FX up and running and use other apps without an issue.

But not everyone has a Quad, and even less people have 16GB of ram to spare.

That said, what I've done in all my tweaking stems from having to work with a 17" PowerBook with a failed cache and only 2GB ram. So, all in all it's a pretty good job I think. But it's not going to meet everyone's expectations and I acknowledge that. There's only so much tweaking you can do to compensate for hardware that isn't there.

Like you I am not trying to change anyone's mind, especially in this forum. However DC started this thread as a discussion about the usefulness of PowerMac systems. While I very much like PPC based systems I accept they're old and generally not useful for most people.

I think it is admirable you and others are able to put these systems to good use. I have absolutely no issues with people who are willing to accept any limits older systems may have. If a system works and does the job you expect of it in an amount of time that's acceptable to you then by all means. I use mine for ripping DVDs for my iPad. The 1.8GHz system does that just as fast as the dual 2.3GHz system as the task is not CPU / RAM constrained.

I really wish I could browse the web with one of them. If it were acceptable to me they would have seen more frequent use.
[automerge]1583197866[/automerge]

Sure Netflix/Prime doesn’t work, but I can transcode some media files and play them through VLC. Not everyone uses services like that, I don’t really use them anyways on higher spec computers. You don’t need to be broke to use a PPC Mac. PPC Macs and their operating systems have advantages over modern Macs and Mac OS. I like that I can open apps without clicking through 10 buttons in System Preferences to confirm security settings. I like not having soldered RAM and SSDs. I like the optimization and polish of Tiger, OS 9, etc. that simply isn’t there anymore.

All things which are possible on earlier Intel Macs.

 

[RogerWilco6502]

Hence my statement: I think you're being pedantic.

Maybe I am, and if I am I apologize as that was never my intention.

All things which are possible on earlier Intel Macs.

But they're also possible on PowerPC Macs. So really, it seems like a moot point to me. To each their own and I guess that's all I can say on the issue now, as I feel I've stated my views and that's all I can do.

 

[z970]

I have no interest in doing any of this since I have many Macs which do not require anything other than starting them up and browsing the web.

I really wish I could browse the web with one of them. If it were acceptable to me they would have seen more frequent use.

I don't know what to tell you, man. You're using a fully CPU-bound browser to wade through an ocean of JavaScript on a fifteen year old machine running a thirteen year old OS, and expect to get results that fall within your standard, which from the best I can gather, are GPU-accelerated browsers on ten year old machines running less than five year old OSes with Web-optimized graphics and media libraries OOB.

And to top it all off, you won't even bother trying the solutions we've given you to improve your experience, which have been demonstratively shown to make life easier on the specific hardware you're using - in multiple use cases, no less.

I hate to be the bearer of reality, but it's been proven time and again that you need to will to get your way.

 

[Raging Dufus]

PS. uMatrix or NoScript is a major part of this. If you are not using at least one of those with T4Fx then I can certainly see your issues. Both block javascript, which is one of the major offenders. Both allow you to tune things so that certain JS that you need DOES run.

This right here. uMatrix makes the difference for me between usability and non-usability of FireFox-variant browsers. This is true whether I'm using Intel or PPC. Unfortunately for PPC, Firefox variants are all we have left in the browser space, at least on OS X. This very forum is worse than unacceptable, it's downright unusable (quite literally) for me with T4Fx on any PPC system, unless I'm using uMatrix. @defjam, if you never tried uMatrix or something like it to tame the javascript and other garbage code all over the web, then your experience is understandable.

I really wish I could browse the web with one of them. If it were acceptable to me they would have seen more frequent use.

I think maybe you gave up too soon. A satisfactory web experience is attainable on PPC, but not without its challenges. It isn't worth the effort to everyone, and that's understandable too.