Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
I'd love jumping to 10.5 or 10.6 - but I have enough docs in Pagemill and Appleworks that the jump looks like a bloomin big mountain to climb. Reading this guide to using OS9 apps on Intel macs puts me right off my feed. http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879 So if it really is just unworkable am I stuck with only going to a G4 mini? One person recommended getting instead a G5 tower and installing 2 HD's, one with tiger. Perhaps that is the only good solution, but I had hoped to go with a Mini for their noise and wattage reduction. thanks for any comments, Del Save Tiger for the fearless Sawtooth. Close your eyes and jump all the way to Snow Leopard. You'll never regret it. Tiger is still a superb OS, but Snow Leopard is not only superior, it's breathtakingly beautiful. As an added advantage, if you know your way around in Tiger, you won't feel disoriented in SL --just amazed. Best of luck, Felix I am thinking to move on from my fearless old sawtooth to a mini, but I'm not ready for the jump to 10.5.. Del -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 6:53 AM, MnDel wrote: I'd love jumping to 10.5 or 10.6 - but I have enough docs in Pagemill and Appleworks that the jump looks like a bloomin big mountain to climb. Reading this guide to using OS9 apps on Intel macs puts me right off my feed. http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879 So if it really is just unworkable am I stuck with only going to a G4 mini? I enjoy Classic as much as anybody, but honestly, it really is time to move on. Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac is an amazing, highly-refined, ultra-powerful combination. I wouldn't downgrade for anything. If I'm not mistaken, Pagemill documents should just be HTML files, no? There are a large number of very nice WYSIWYG web editors out there, even besides Dreamweaver if that doesn't suit your taste (it suits mine). You can give Freeway a try, for example. http://www.softpress.com/ As for AppleWorks, I recall opening AppleWorks documents in iWork (http://www.apple.com/iwork/) years ago when I made the switch. iWork is seriously 500% better in every way. All it lacks is databases, and for that you have the elegant Apple-designed Bento (http://www.filemaker.com/products/bento/) at your disposal. I cannot emphasize how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard, and the modern world of Mac applications. Pagemill and AppleWorks were great in the 1990s, but the Mac OS X has advanced so far and to make the best of it you need apps designed to run properly on them, something neither Pagemill nor AppleWorks were ever intended to do. Regards, Dan Palka Info-Mac Moderator http://www.info-mac.org d...@info-mac.org -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 6:53 AM, MnDel wrote: I'd love jumping to 10.5 or 10.6 - but I have enough docs in Pagemill and Appleworks that the jump looks like a bloomin big mountain to climb. Reading this guide to using OS9 apps on Intel macs puts me right off my feed. http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879 So if it really is just unworkable am I stuck with only going to a G4 mini? One person recommended getting instead a G5 tower and installing 2 HD's, one with tiger. Perhaps that is the only good solution, but I had hoped to go with a Mini for their noise and wattage reduction. thanks for any comments, Del There seems to be some info missing here. Number 1: There is an OSX native version of AppleWorks. It's AppleWorks 6 and it works just fine with Snow Leopard even though it's a PPC application. I've got it on this computer to open ancient files I've got and it works a treat with Snow Leopard. Number 2: PageMill files will open with Adobe GoLive. It's an obsolete program now, but GoLive 9 was released with the Adobe CreativeSuite 3 and was intended to be the final version of GoLive, so it's got some tools and utilities in it to help you make the move to DreamWeaver when you decide to go that way. I personally HATE DreamWeaver with a passion.it takes a simple WYSIWYG program and makes it horrible and complicated for the simplest tasks. That said, GoLive is the direct successor to PageMill. When we migrated to OSX about 8 years ago, we were still using PageMill 3.0 for our company website. We bought GoLive and it opened the PageMill files natively. If those are the only two things holding you back, get on the LEM Swaplist and see if anyone's got copies you can have of the above mentioned programs. Upgrading to Snow Leopard on an Intel Mini is a MASSIVE leap forward. Not only is it a lot more stable and polished, but it's MUCH faster than Tiger on the Intels. Join us in the 21st century and make your life a little easier! -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 6:53 am, MnDel dsmn...@gmail.com wrote: I'd love jumping to 10.5 or 10.6 - but I have enough docs in Pagemill and Appleworks that the jump looks like a bloomin big mountain to climb. Reading this guide to using OS9 apps on Intel macs puts me right off my feed.http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879 So if it really is just unworkable am I stuck with only going to a G4 mini? No, you just need to find install disks for a 2007 Mac Mini. Or buy a used Mini of the proper vintage which includes the original disks. Such things do appear on Ebay, and posts to the LEM Swaplist can be productive too. I agree with the others, that if you can make it work, go with the latest and greatest. The newer Minis have dual monitor support which is really nice (unless you don't use dual monitors). On the other hand, when Apple added dual monitor support in 2009, they took away the CPU socket. The earlier models have the interesting ability to swap their CPUs just by buying the appropriate Intel processor and dropping it in the socket. Neither of those feature may matter to you, but it's a trade off between the 2007 and earlier (single monitor, socketed CPU) and the 2009 and later (dual monitor, soldered CPU) Minis. I have an Intel Tiger install disk I'd happily part with, but I have no idea if it will install on a Mini. I bought the little white accessory box that included a remote control and it came with the install media as well, but I think it's from an Intel iMac, not a Mini. Jeff Walther -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Mini G4 10.4.11 ViewSonic monitor resolution
On Aug 22, 8:31 pm, Fabian Fang f...@mac.com wrote: You have been working with VGA output from the Mac mini, which supports analog resolutions as high as 1920x1080. I believe that your ViewSonic monitor accepts DVI input. The ViewSonic accepts both VGA DVI. The odd thing is that it can get confused. But, as noted, I've achieved full screen with VGA. Thinking of buying a DVI cable to try that extra crispness Kris mentions. Thank you Cliff -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 4:53 AM, MnDel wrote: I'd love jumping to 10.5 or 10.6 - but I have enough docs in Pagemill and Appleworks that the jump looks like a bloomin big mountain to climb. Reading this guide to using OS9 apps on Intel macs puts me right off my feed. Appleworks works in 10.5 or 10.6, PPC or Intel, as appropriate. It is a Carbon app so it runs as an OS X app unless you force it to run under Classic in Tiger. I don't know about Pagemill. http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879 So if it really is just unworkable am I stuck with only going to a G4 mini? One person recommended getting instead a G5 tower and installing 2 HD's, one with tiger. Perhaps that is the only good solution, but I had hoped to go with a Mini for their noise and wattage reduction. thanks for any comments, Del Well, you could partition the drive and put Leopard on one partition and Tiger on the other. Clark Martin Redwood City, CA, USA Macintosh / Internet Consulting I'm a designated driver on the Information Super Highway -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 4:53 AM, MnDel wrote: I'd love jumping to 10.5 or 10.6 - but I have enough docs in Pagemill and Appleworks that the jump looks like a bloomin big mountain to climb. Reading this guide to using OS9 apps on Intel macs puts me right off my feed. http://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879 So if it really is just unworkable am I stuck with only going to a G4 mini? One person recommended getting instead a G5 tower and installing 2 HD's, one with tiger. Perhaps that is the only good solution, but I had hoped to go with a Mini for their noise and wattage reduction. thanks for any comments, Del AppleWorks 6 installs and runs on Leopard 10.5 and 10.6 Snow Leopard. John Carmonne Yorba Linda USA Sent from my MBP -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 8:22 AM, Dan Palka wrote: it really is time to move on. Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac is an amazing, highly-refined, ultra-powerful combination. I wouldn't downgrade for anything. Great, I think we all know this already, but most either already own PPC Macs or can't afford a new Intel Mac. The name of this list is G3-5 list, it's specifically for PPC Macs. Perhaps you should be moving on to one of the Intel lists? I cannot emphasize how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard, and the modern world of Mac applications. I agree with your premise that OS X applications can normally replace Classic applications, and that using MacOS is probably not the best idea these days. However, I disagree with the idea that Snow Leopard offers any substantial improvements over Leopard, after all, the ONLY thing Snow Leopard is doing is converting Leopard from 32-bit Universal Intel/PPC code over to 64-bit Intel-only code. The idea of paying Apple $29 to clean-up and purge their deadwood code seems a little far fetched to me. Leopard 10.5.8 works perfectly for almost all applications, Intel or PPC. Snow Leopard offers few improvements, and many minor growing headaches. As I said above, if you believe how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard then you should also jump into one of the Intel lists, and leave G3-5 list to us who still find value in G3-5 PPC Macs. On Aug 23, 2010, at 8:41 AM, Eric Herbert wrote: Upgrading to Snow Leopard on an Intel Mini is a MASSIVE leap forward. Not only is it a lot more stable and polished, but it's MUCH faster than Tiger on the Intels. Join us in the 21st century and make your life a little easier! Comparing Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac to Tiger on a PPC Mac isn't a fair comparison. The cost factor is just as MASSIVE as the performance increase, perhaps larger? The sweet spot of price/performance ratio is still within the PPC Mac range unless you're using a hackintosh. To reiterate, this list is for G3-5 PPC Macs. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 12:43 PM, Kris Tilford wrote: However, I disagree with the idea that Snow Leopard offers any substantial improvements over Leopard, after all, the ONLY thing Snow Leopard is doing is converting Leopard from 32-bit Universal Intel/PPC code over to 64-bit Intel-only code. At the risk of continuing an OT thread...WTF??? All-64--bitness is a biggie but there are a myriad little improvements. Just off the top of my head, appropriate Services that once resided solely in the Services menu under the Apple are now available in the contextual menu. That was a biggie for me...it actually makes the services menu useful. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net wrote: On Aug 23, 2010, at 8:22 AM, Dan Palka wrote: it really is time to move on. Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac is an amazing, highly-refined, ultra-powerful combination. I wouldn't downgrade for anything. Great, I think we all know this already, but most either already own PPC Macs or can't afford a new Intel Mac. The name of this list is G3-5 list, it's specifically for PPC Macs. Perhaps you should be moving on to one of the Intel lists? Or I can stay here and give the best and most appropriate advice where necessary. G-Macs are great fun and all, and I probably own more of them than most people on this list, but when someone says they are refusing for whatever reason to upgrade to Snow Leopard and/or Intel Macs, there is clearly some misconception going there that needs to be cleared up. Early 2006 Intel Mac prices are free-falling. Someone here is talking about buying G5s and all kinds of nonsense just for the sake of Classic. I say don't waste your money. I cannot emphasize how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard, and the modern world of Mac applications. I agree with your premise that OS X applications can normally replace Classic applications, and that using MacOS is probably not the best idea these days. However, I disagree with the idea that Snow Leopard offers any substantial improvements over Leopard, after all, the ONLY thing Snow Leopard is doing is converting Leopard from 32-bit Universal Intel/PPC code over to 64-bit Intel-only code. The idea of paying Apple $29 to clean-up and purge their deadwood code seems a little far fetched to me. Leopard 10.5.8 works perfectly for almost all applications, Intel or PPC. Snow Leopard offers few improvements, and many minor growing headaches. OK, fine. Time to upgrade from Mac OS 9 to Leopard if you need to nit-pick about your pennies that much. There is no reason for anyone to purposely refuse to upgrade to (Snow) Leopard which is what sounds like the OP was doing. As I said above, if you believe how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard then you should also jump into one of the Intel lists, and leave G3-5 list to us who still find value in G3-5 PPC Macs. On Aug 23, 2010, at 8:41 AM, Eric Herbert wrote: Upgrading to Snow Leopard on an Intel Mini is a MASSIVE leap forward. Not only is it a lot more stable and polished, but it's MUCH faster than Tiger on the Intels. Join us in the 21st century and make your life a little easier! Comparing Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac to Tiger on a PPC Mac isn't a fair comparison. The cost factor is just as MASSIVE as the performance increase, perhaps larger? The sweet spot of price/performance ratio is still within the PPC Mac range unless you're using a hackintosh. To reiterate, this list is for G3-5 PPC Macs. It most certainly is not. As I pointed out, early Intels are reaching new lows every month. You can spend $500 - $700 on a G5 that's been officially obsoleted by Apple for a year now, or you can spend the same money and get a decent Mac Mini that will run all the current software and be useful longer. It doesn't matter what list your on. The best advice applies everywhere. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: USB Question (UPDATE)
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Stephen Conrad khel...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: At 7:05 AM -0500 8/22/2010, Stephen Conrad wrote: I plugged a Targus 4-Port hub into another of my UB Hubs (it i powered) and now that Hub appears to have died. Now That hub i plugged into another Hub and has always worked fine. Perhaps the Targus has a short? - Maybe, the light came on on the Targus So, I then plugged the Targus into one of the UB port on my G4 Quickilver (OS X 10.4.11) and now that one seems to not be working. You took a hub with a problem and plugged it into your Mac? Wow. Um Not a good plan. - I didn't know it had any issues. The 4 PORT USB 2.0 HUB I first plugged it into has recently had the second of its ports stop working. I thought this may be the issue (a port having died) Will a reboot of this Mac fix this issue? If the OS shut down the port because it sensed some problem, then yes - a reboot should restore it, IF it managed to shut it down before the port fried. If the OS did that then there will be a message in the system log. - Where would I find this info? I had to reboot (well, while I was at the store the power went out and came back on) and so I shut down, plugged in the Targus and it is working fine. No idea what happened earlier. -- Steve Conrad Henrietta, MO 64036 The time has come for mankind to grow up and leave its cradle behind; to go forth and claim our place in outer space. - Capt. Henry Gloval (\__/) (='.'=) ()_() Help Bunny Take Over The World! -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: USB Question (UPDATE)
On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 3:57 PM, Stephen Conrad khel...@gmail.com wrote: On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:57 AM, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: At 7:05 AM -0500 8/22/2010, Stephen Conrad wrote: I plugged a Targus 4-Port hub into another of my UB Hubs (it i powered) and now that Hub appears to have died. Now That hub i plugged into another Hub and has always worked fine. Perhaps the Targus has a short? - Maybe, the light came on on the Targus So, I then plugged the Targus into one of the UB port on my G4 Quickilver (OS X 10.4.11) and now that one seems to not be working. You took a hub with a problem and plugged it into your Mac? Wow. Um Not a good plan. - I didn't know it had any issues. The 4 PORT USB 2.0 HUB I first plugged it into has recently had the second of its ports stop working. I thought this may be the issue (a port having died) Will a reboot of this Mac fix this issue? If the OS shut down the port because it sensed some problem, then yes - a reboot should restore it, IF it managed to shut it down before the port fried. If the OS did that then there will be a message in the system log. - Where would I find this info? I had to reboot (well, while I was at the store the power went out and came back) -- Steve Conrad Henrietta, MO 64036 The time has come for mankind to grow up and leave its cradle behind; to go forth and claim our place in outer space. - Capt. Henry Gloval (\__/) (='.'=) ()_() Help Bunny Take Over The World! -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: PCI graphics card for Yikes G$
I have put a Radeon 7000 in mine and i got a very slight bump, but it still isn't playable. The only solution i have found is to use something along the lines of Videobox and let the computer convert it into something that the machine can play. I have a 400 bumped to 450 G4 Yikes with 768 of memory. I haven't tried enabling the Quartz Extreme Patch because I am updated to 10.4.11 and I heard it stop working prior to that. I don't have any other PCI cards in my machine so even if I did enable the patch I wouldn't know if it would slow down my ata bus. I don't know how the bus's are laid out on this yikes board. I think.. THINK.. they went to two PCI bus's in the earlier G3 machines but they had scsi in them. If anyone does have a block diagram of the Yikes/G4 or BW/G3 block diagram of where all the buses are I would love to take a look.. I have goggled to no end trying to find them. Thanks!!! and Good luck on flash problem Hope you find a solution (short of tossing the G4 in heap and replacing it).. Gus. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: PCI graphics card for Yikes G$
On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:02 PM, Gus wrote: I haven't tried enabling the Quartz Extreme Patch because I am updated to 10.4.11 and I heard it stop working prior to that. This is not true. PCI Extreme 3.1 stopped working for one single OS X Update, I believe it was 10.4.4 perhaps, and works fine in all other versions of Tiger including 10.4.11. I don't have any other PCI cards in my machine so even if I did enable the patch I wouldn't know if it would slow down my ata bus. If you place your PCI video card in the special video PCI slot, there will be no slowdown because the special video slot is double the speed of the regular PCI slots, and makes your PCI video card the equivalent speed of AGPx1, the minimum speed for Quartz Extreme according to Apple. Using PCI Extreme on a BW or Yikes should be the optimal use for PCI Extreme because of the special video PCI slot. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
I like my G5 tower more than my computer lab's Mac Minis. It is faster, has more RAM and hard disk space, runs PPC apps natively, resulting in huge speed boosts, is more servicable, can use VGA and ADC monitors natively with the right video card(s), more reliable, uses slightly more standard and less expensive parts, runs cooler, and is more expandable than a brand new Mac Mini. Care to look at a direct comparison? Quad PMac G5 2500MHz Quad G5 with 4 additional AltiVec processors Most will have 4-8GB of RAM (mine has 8), and 8 1GB DDR memory sticks off of LEM swap list should be under $100 even if its not included Most have at least 500GB of HDD space (mine has 2x500GB), and 2TB drives cost $100 even if its not included $600ish (Mine was $300 INCLUDING monitor) VS Dual Core Intel Mac Mini 2.4GHz Core 2 Duo (slower) 2GB of RAM (less) 320GB HDD (less) $699 OK, so no one really gets the base model. Let's configure one to have the specs of a G5 Quad (or as close as we can get). Dual Core Intel Mac Mini (high end) 2.66GHz Core 2 Duo (still slower) 8GB of RAM 500GB HDD $1449 Oh, well if you want that much computer, just get a Mac Pro. Base model Mac Pro 2.8GHz glorified Core i7 (only 25-30% faster than the G5's CPU) 3GB of RAM (STILL LESS!) 1TB HDD $2499 With 8GB of RAM it's $2874. Hmm... Which seems like a better deal to me? Sent from a computer running either the SPARC, Itanium, or PowerPC architecture. On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Dan Palka turboda...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 2:43 PM, Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net wrote: On Aug 23, 2010, at 8:22 AM, Dan Palka wrote: it really is time to move on. Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac is an amazing, highly-refined, ultra-powerful combination. I wouldn't downgrade for anything. Great, I think we all know this already, but most either already own PPC Macs or can't afford a new Intel Mac. The name of this list is G3-5 list, it's specifically for PPC Macs. Perhaps you should be moving on to one of the Intel lists? Or I can stay here and give the best and most appropriate advice where necessary. G-Macs are great fun and all, and I probably own more of them than most people on this list, but when someone says they are refusing for whatever reason to upgrade to Snow Leopard and/or Intel Macs, there is clearly some misconception going there that needs to be cleared up. Early 2006 Intel Mac prices are free-falling. Someone here is talking about buying G5s and all kinds of nonsense just for the sake of Classic. I say don't waste your money. I cannot emphasize how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard, and the modern world of Mac applications. I agree with your premise that OS X applications can normally replace Classic applications, and that using MacOS is probably not the best idea these days. However, I disagree with the idea that Snow Leopard offers any substantial improvements over Leopard, after all, the ONLY thing Snow Leopard is doing is converting Leopard from 32-bit Universal Intel/PPC code over to 64-bit Intel-only code. The idea of paying Apple $29 to clean-up and purge their deadwood code seems a little far fetched to me. Leopard 10.5.8 works perfectly for almost all applications, Intel or PPC. Snow Leopard offers few improvements, and many minor growing headaches. OK, fine. Time to upgrade from Mac OS 9 to Leopard if you need to nit-pick about your pennies that much. There is no reason for anyone to purposely refuse to upgrade to (Snow) Leopard which is what sounds like the OP was doing. As I said above, if you believe how urgent and beneficial it is for you to jump into Intel and Snow Leopard then you should also jump into one of the Intel lists, and leave G3-5 list to us who still find value in G3-5 PPC Macs. On Aug 23, 2010, at 8:41 AM, Eric Herbert wrote: Upgrading to Snow Leopard on an Intel Mini is a MASSIVE leap forward. Not only is it a lot more stable and polished, but it's MUCH faster than Tiger on the Intels. Join us in the 21st century and make your life a little easier! Comparing Snow Leopard on an Intel Mac to Tiger on a PPC Mac isn't a fair comparison. The cost factor is just as MASSIVE as the performance increase, perhaps larger? The sweet spot of price/performance ratio is still within the PPC Mac range unless you're using a hackintosh. To reiterate, this list is for G3-5 PPC Macs. It most certainly is not. As I pointed out, early Intels are reaching new lows every month. You can spend $500 - $700 on a G5 that's been officially obsoleted by Apple for a year now, or you can spend the same money and get a decent Mac Mini that will run all the current software and be useful longer. It doesn't matter what list your on. The best advice applies everywhere. -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power
Re: latest mac mini for 10.4.11
On Aug 23, 2010, at 9:52 PM, Illirik Smirnov wrote: I like my G5 tower more than my computer lab's Mac Minis. That exact G5 is far slower than even the base-model Mac Mini of today in Geekbench scores, and you're not even considering that only with Snow Leopard has 64-bit software been brought to the end-user in a very big way, which will never happen on a G5. Ever. Only if you're specifically running multi-core, memory-intensive old PowerPC-native versions of apps would you see a G5 win in performance standpoint. It should generally be much faster to run CS5 on a Mac Mini than CS4 on your G5 for example. Ditto for just about anything else. And this is the Mac Mini we're talking about -- we're not even in the same ballpark if we start talking about iMacs or Mac Pros. I don't know what exactly you mean by more standards. At the very best, the G5 uses cutting-edge standards of 2004 or 2005. Mac Minis are perfectly standards-compliant today. Right now. The fact of the matter is Apple and the industry rejected PowerPC years ago. It's not going to be much longer before you won't even be able to use current versions of basic necessities like Safari on your G5. Are you still going to cling to PowerPC then? We are here to help each other out, as owners of PowerPC systems that continue to use them for whatever purposes that we do. I have G4s and even 603s running in my house still currently. However, we should not kid ourselves, or others who seek our advice, by seriously recommending new purchases of PowerPC equipment for any reason other than a hobbyist pursuit, as if to ignore the state of the Macintosh platform and the assured EOL that approaches these systems faster every day. PowerPC. PageMill. AppleWorks. Mac OS Classic. We've pushed these technologies farther than their own engineers ever imagined they could possibly go. The end really is near. Some of us old timers who so vigorously advocated and evangelized the way have long ago come to terms with and accepted the inevitable. I'm disappointed that so many still seem unable or unwilling to leave the past behind. It really is better on the Intel side of the fence. Some day soon you will see that. /rant -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
