Re: iCloud vs. G4
I agree with Douglas. PPC outperformed x86 architecture in the 'real world' for well after the introduction of dual-core Intel based macs (which are also now no longer going to be supported by Apple ;) However, Windows 7 will run on them just fine, stopping them from becoming doorstops. The original poster assumed that my post indicated that I had not used Intel macs, however, nothing could be further than the truth. Apple didn't go to Intel because users wanted it after spending years and millions of dollars on smashing the Megahertz myththey went to Intel because IBM couldn't manufacture the new CPU's quickly enough to fill orders for high-end PPC macs. Ironic, but true. When the decision was made to go with Intel, part of the contract with Intel was that Apple would, in return for guaranteed numbers of CPU's, stop supporting rival manufacturers silicone - and that was the end of PPC. It was a legal obligation. Intel are cutthroat, they didn't get in the market position they're in without viciously defending their territory from the likes of AMD, Cyrix, IBM, etc. - Original Message - From: Douglas Mencken dougmenc...@gmail.com To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 4:25:39 PM Subject: Re: iCloud vs. G4 At that time, Apple had iPod, had iPhone. Now *they* are Apple's market. Macs are only decimals of a single percent in their profit. So it was okay to go everybody is using side, against think different. Because *Apple doesn't care for Macs anymore*. Just a tradition. I bet they would abandon Mac Pros and Xserve in upcoming years. (some wikipedia quotation) If you are with macs for, say, at least 7 years, as you said, then you should know. Pentium IV 4GHz vs 2xdual-core (quad') G5 970MP 2.5GHz. Megahertz myth. And then even x86 Window® systems were started to ship with single/dual-core 1.6GHz x86 CPUs. I see a gargantuan amount of engineering that went into keeping those space heaters for all x86 systems since 2006-7. Don't you see them? No more single cooler on power supply. Now it is a lot of coolers everywhere. NO THEY WOULDN'T. Have you actually USED any Intel-based macs, head to head against a PPC system? Even the first MacBooks crushed the previous top-end Powerbooks, let along the iBooks they allegedly replaced. I'm using x86 system (i7 quad core) on work. And it is slower (everywhere: browsing web, watching movies) than my G5 dual 2.3GHz made back in late 2005. -- 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: iCloud vs. G4
Bruce, as an IT professional, I would have thought that you'd be aware of 'real world' testing vs. benchmarks. I could write a benchmarking app that runs better on Intel, hence would give better results, than PPC, or vice versa. Benchmarking on clock makes no sense with a reduced instruction set... - Original Message - From: Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2012 5:14:06 PM Subject: Re: iCloud vs. G4 I'm using x86 system (i7 quad core) on work. And it is slower (everywhere: browsing web, watching movies) than my G5 dual 2.3GHz made back in late 2005. ORLY? Actual benchmarking begs to differ: http://browse.geekbench.ca/mac-benchmark/ -- 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: iCloud vs. G4
On Apr 17, 2012, at 11:18 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: Yes, on the one hand those old G4 Powerbooks were (and still are, I have a 15 one) wonderful, useful machines. If they meet your needs, they're great tools. On the other hand, they were THE primary reason that Apple was forced to move to Intel; they needed a powerful, energy-efficient laptop platform for their software, they were getting killed in that market segment, and neither Motorola or IBM were able to deliver. Yes, Motorola/Freescale IBM did take way too long to come up with a processor that could compete with the new Intel CPU's and I don't blame Apple for making the switch to Intel processors. The Intel CPU's are head and shoulders above anything else that is practical to use in any personal computer desktop, or laptop. But I am one of the crazy few that still believe in PPC and have gone so far as to purchase the first and only personal computer that contains a PA Semi PA6T 1682M dual core 1.8GHz PPC CPU in it. Yep, that is the company that Apple purchased and then almost immediately shut down, but before they did, PA Semi produced an unknown number of these PA6T 1682M processors which were used in some military applications and which a company called A-Eon and Varisys purchased to put into a brand new motherboard design, which was created solely for the purpose of running AmigaOS4.1.5. The computer is called an AmigaOne X1000. The rumors that Amiga was dead are greatly exaggerated. This PA6T could have been a very nice step up from the last 1.67GHz G4's, for the next PowerBook, had Apple not made the switch to Intel chips, but it was too little and too late, as the Intel Core2Duo at the same clock speed was still (as far as I know) a more powerful CPU than the PA6T, which is slower still than the newer i3, i5, i7 CPU's, so Apple definitely made the right choice. That does not mean that PPC computers are useless and it is a shame that Apple did not support their PPC computers at least another 2 to 5 years or so, as people should not have been forced to upgrade so quickly, when there computers are working perfectly for most tasks still. I use my G4 PowerBook as my main computer for all email and Internet browsing, as well as many other programs and games. I probably use it 4 to 6 hours a day, every day (mostly because I am partially disabled and confined to my bed). I know that Apple could have supported PPC models for a lot longer than they did and I strongly dislike the way they dropped support as soon as they did. In my mind it was disrespectful to their customers and I understand why many Apple customers might be very upset with Apple for their decisions. I am one of them, and it has made me consider switching to Linux. David W. Morris aka AmigaDave Dual booting MacOSX10.5.8 MorphOS2.7 on my dual 1.42GHz G4 PowerMac MacOSX10.5.8 MorphOS3.0 beta on 15 17 1.67GHz G4 PowerBook's, plus MacOSX10.5.8 Ubuntu10.10 PPC on my dual 2.7GHz G5 PowerMac -- 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: Duplicate files remove
Haven't used it. I have used DupFinder in OS9, was pretty easy to use; there's an OSX version also IIRC Barry I have a G5 PM with 5 2TB drives that share files like DVD's, music folders, emails, CAD/CAM files and such. I have stuff scattered all over this machine plus I have others with the same condition. I saw a program today called Gemini that is said to get rid of the dups. I know there are a lot of applications that do it but all I've tried seem way to complicated and vague for me. This one looks easy I think? Has any one had experience with this Gemini tool? http://www.cultofmac.com/161252/slick-gemini-app-finds-duplicate-files-on-your -mac-in-style/ John Carmonne Yorba Linda CA 92886 USA MacBook Pro i7 -- 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: iCloud vs. G4
Bruce, as an IT professional, I would have thought that you'd be aware of 'real world' testing vs. benchmarks. I could write a benchmarking app that runs better on Intel, hence would give better results, than PPC, or vice versa. Benchmarking on clock makes no sense with a reduced instruction set. Only Nixon could go to China, so here goes. The age of the technical supremacy of the PowerPC as a general purpose computing chip is gone. PowerPC retains important design wins in the embedded space, particularly cars, high-end service CPUs and game consoles, but the Amiga is pretty much the last stand of the PPC as a desktop platform (and yes, I have my pennies saved for an X1000 also). Intel has put big dollars into making x86 and x86_64 performant, and it shows. Although the same old disgusting ISA is slathered on top, internally the Core microarchitecture is nothing like, say, horrid designs such as NetBurst. General-purpose CPUs are their core business in a way that no PowerPC manufacturers' ever was. As was previously mentioned, Motorola was mostly interested in the embedded space, and IBM in big iron. These have very different design requirements than GP CPUs. In terms of comparison, the G5 remained competitive with, though ultimately marginally inferior to, the first generation Core machines (the G4 never was, although with large L2 cache it could get closer). When Core 2 Duo came out, all but the quad were outclassed, and now the G5 is probably half or less as performant as the current generation of i5/i7. But we expect that, because the G5 is a 2004 design. It was built to compete against Pentium 4. As far as PowerPC nowadays, the only high-performance PPCs are IBM's big iron POWER series. I personally own a POWER6, and as a workstation, it is loud and noisy and hot, just like the G5 was (because the G5 was just a POWER4 with AltiVec bolted on), but it is a great server as a dual-core 4.2GHz system and it is very very fast. It also cost me close to $10,000. That's no recipe for a home computer, and even the cooler-running POWER7 is still no easily tamed deskside tower. Consoles are built for good power for the money. Even the Wii U (POWER7 derivative, it is believed) is still in terms of CPU grunt likely to be slower than a Core CPU, but it can be made cheaply, IBM offers custom tweaks, AltiVec is a very good SIMD technology, and it's good enough. But it doesn't compare with contemporary designs either. This is all said as someone who loves PowerPC ISA. I despise x86 ISA, though mostly because I think it's ugly compared to load/store designs or my favourite CPU, the MOS 6502. But Intel, love them or hate them, has invested billions of dollars in getting the hippo to dance, and it shows. It's not something IBM, as the current standard bearer of high performance POWER, is interested in anymore. Mind you, I do think that most Power Mac software is criminally badly optimized, something I'm working on specifically for TenFourFox. G5 optimization in particular is a lost art, and important because later POWER designs share some of the same quirks. But this is still playing at the margins, and while the PA6T is a great chip, it is no match for the G5 and a 2GHz G4 will beat it. One note about Geekbench: this is actually a pretty good benchmark, not merely a clock-speed comparison. You *could* argue underoptimization for the PPC, and gcc is not a great PowerPC compiler, but Apple's gcc changes have at least made it competitive. IBM xlC is the PPC master, but it is non-standard, has a spotty track record on OS X, and a license costs about $1300. So I could see a criticism made for marginal differences, but not for the large scale differentials that you see now. Do I still think Power Macs are useful? Damn straight, which is why I'm typing this message on an iBook G4, and I use an iMac G4 and a quad G5 at home. But I don't suffer illusions about their performance. They just happen to do what I want, and they are still fast enough. -- personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ -- Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com -- It's a big old goofy world. -- John Prine -- -- 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: iCloud vs. G4
At 1:02 PM + 4/18/2012, antique...@comcast.net wrote: When the decision was made to go with Intel, part of the contract with Intel was that Apple would, in return for guaranteed numbers of CPU's, stop supporting rival manufacturers silicone I think this thread has jumped the shark. It's gone from simple email problem, which was quickly resolved, to a rehash of the overly rehashed ancient ppc vs x86 argument, and now to silicone. I have no idea what polymerized siloxanes has to do with a processor architecture argument. Silicones are more apropos to breast implants than SOI chips... Can we end this thread now, please. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. -- 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: Getting 80 pin SCSI to work in an 8600
On 4/16/12 7:36 PM, peterh...@cruzio.com peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: Besides which, I have had my best results using a hacked version of Drive Setup, in which I use ResEdit to change one of the Seagate drives to support whatever new-to-me drive I encounter. That's the way I always did it. Just hack your drive setup entry with ResEdit to make it see all drives. Works like a charm. --Kyle Hansen -- 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: Getting 80 pin SCSI to work in an 8600
Besides which, I have had my best results using a hacked version of Drive Setup, in which I use ResEdit to change one of the Seagate drives to support whatever new-to-me drive I encounter. That's the way I always did it. Just hack your drive setup entry with ResEdit to make it see all drives. Works like a charm. You may choose whichever prototype drive makes the most sense in your own situation. As most of my SCSI drives were Seagate Barracudas, I simply modified the ST-32550, or a similar entry, to allow ANY SCSI Seagate to be supported by that entry. This works for so-called full-height (ST-1) or so-called one-inch high (ST-3) drives. Usually, I created a new resource, using the duplicate function, so that the original resource was still usable. -- 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
