Re: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 21/03/11 1:37 PM, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: Do I own true Macintoshes? Yes. Do I use said Macintoses? No, their performance is too low to meet my needed and expected performance requirements. Do I own and use Hackintoshes? Yes, their performance meets, or exceeds, my needed and expected performance requirements. Do I make said Hackintoshes for others, on a not-for-profit basis? Sure. So, sue me! This post here has been my Friday morning comic relief. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 24/03/11 11:31 AM, Tina K. wrote: Look, I'm no Intel fan. Point of fact I hate Intel and always buy AMD when building a computer. But the bottom line is that I can do more in less time, and use half the electricity in the process, with my QC Mac Pro than I could with my DP G5 Power Mac. Tina, what proof have you for power consumption? -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Yes, yes, I know what you're saying, and I feel your pain. I loved the Gs (all of them), and from experience, know that my G4 Sawtooth easily outperformed my Celeron of the same speed. But Motorola/IBM couldn't keep up. They were unable to deliver processors that could be kept cool in the increasingly important portable market. I also had high hopes for AMD, but they had already begun their slide into irrelevancy. What choice was there? Intel was eager to have Apple's business, and willing (and able) to provide whatever was needed. But the thing everyone seems to have forgotten is that Apple is a software company. The hardware is only there to support the software, and as such, is not important. Stability, reliability, and user experience are what you buy when you buy Apple, and if squirrels lived inside to provide power, it wouldn't matter. Remember when Woz built the Apple I with the cheapest hardware (because it was what he could afford), but created a way to use the processor off-cycles to boost graphic performance? The OS is what you use; the nuts and bolts don't matter... My $.02, V Mabus -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
The OS is what you use; the nuts and bolts don't matter... My $.02 ... And, the kernel of that OS is copyright by The Regents of The University of California, before there ever was a 68K Mac, much less a PPC Mac or an Intel Mac. One of the reasons Hackintoshing is so easy, now, is the kernel which Apple uses is open source and anybody and everybody can download the 10.7 kernel (for 10.6.7) as soon as Apple releases it, which it is required to do so under the open source terms and conditions. Sure, the kernel is intentionally encrypted, but the method and means to decrypt the kernel became common knowledge ages ago. With a one-two punch combination of an EFI partition and a fake SMC device, almost any non-Mac can run MacOS X ... almost any version, too. I had 10.6.7 running on my Shuttle K48 (2.5 GHz C2D, 4 GB DDR2 RAM) within less than an hour after Apple released the 10.6.7 Combo Update, and I could have had it running under 10.6.7 much sooner if I accepted the 10.6.6-to-10.6.7 update and not the much larger combo update. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Might this help? QC 2.66 mac pro (as example) BTU info.. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht2836 G5 Power Mac BTU info... http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486 On Mar 25, 1:08 pm, Nestamicky nestami...@gmail.com wrote: On 24/03/11 11:31 AM, Tina K. wrote: Tina, what proof have you for power consumption? -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Peter Which SMC do you use? -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 24, 3:39 pm, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: forget it. ah clem has a set belief system and mere facts will not dislodge it. I'm done feeding the troll. bruce, i respect your knowledge and i respect that you volunteer help and advice to all who post to this list and others. i am not blowing sunshine. i truly do. but don't you think you've crossed a line? first, you try to put words in my mouth and now you resort to name calling. why are you so threatened? i never said that a G4/G5 could outperform the latest intelmacs. what i said was that PPC based macs were vastly superior to win/tel PCs of comparable vintage and clockspeeds. that is an undisputable FACT, not a belief system. not in this thread, but in the past, i have stated that the last and best of the G5s can and do significantly outperform the first generation of intelmacs (which on paper were supposed to be better). this is also a well documented FACT. i also said that the reason for this is because the architecture of the PPC with altivec was/is inherently superior in design to the intel chip. also a FACT. how else do you explain facts number one and two? and finally i point out that todays intelmacs no longer outperform win/ tel PCs of comparable specs, which is also a FACT, not a belief system. all of these facts are indisputable. if that is what you wish to disparagingly call a set belief system, that is your privilege. i think that doing so is more of a reflection on you than on me. my CONCLUSION, based on these facts, is that there is no longer any reason to pay the premium for an apple, when a substantially cheaper PC will perform just as well. now THAT is an opinion, and you may well disagree. that is your right. everybody has an opinion. it is also my opinion that all the ballyhoo about OSX vs Winbloze is just that. i don't run a computer to use the OS. i briefly have to go thru the OS to get to an app, but the app is what i work with, and apps nowadays work equally well on win/tel PCs and macs. the only practical reason i can see for hanging on to a mac is that it is more secure for surfing the net. for me, that is a very low priority. i use my computer as a tool to do work, not a toy to waste time and avoid real human contact. at this point, i will hang onto a cheap, outdated mac, and use it as a dedicated web access point. i am typing right now on a QS'02 that i got for free when the genii in our IT dept tossed it into a dumpster as useless junk four years ago. but my next major computer purchase will be a win/tel PC or perhaps a unix PC. and one final opinion that i will add is that the folks who cling to the myth of apple superiority and continue to support apple are the ones with a delusional set belief system. but i won't call them trolls. that would be unkind. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Which SMC do you use?
I build my own DSDTs, by hand.
The device within the DSDT is a usual one.
Device (BUS0)
{
Name (_CID, smbus)
Name (_ADR, Zero)
Device (DVL0)
{
Name (_ADR, 0x57)
Name (_CID, diagsvault)
}
Method (_DSM, 4, NotSerialized)
{
Store (Package (0x02)
{
address,
0x57
}, Local0)
DTGP (Arg0, Arg1, Arg2, Arg3, RefOf (Local0))
Return (Local0)
}
}
The fake SMC device is indeed named fakeSMC.kext.
I believe its origins are overseas, where many of the Draconian Ts and Cs
of Apple's EULA do not apply.
--
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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 2011/03/25 07:08, Nestamicky so eloquently wrote: On 24/03/11 11:31 AM, Tina K. wrote: Look, I'm no Intel fan. Point of fact I hate Intel and always buy AMD when building a computer. But the bottom line is that I can do more in less time, and use half the electricity in the process, with my QC Mac Pro than I could with my DP G5 Power Mac. Tina, what proof have you for power consumption? I looked them up at apple.com, sorry I didn't save the links. Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForceFX5200 Ultra 64MB VRAM 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.4.11 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 25/03/11 8:03 AM, Jonathan Smith wrote: Might this help? QC 2.66 mac pro (as example) BTU info.. http://support.apple.com/kb/ht2836 G5 Power Mac BTU info... http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486 Thanks for this. It will be interesting to see if someone has comparatively cranked these numbers. That is one useful thing that could come from this thread. Anyone? Oh, well, I should say the comments on pc vs intel macs, and even ppc macs has been mostly interesting. And from that, I'm inclined to keep keeping my ppcs. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 3:09 pm, Daniel Stewart daniel.stewart...@gmail.com wrote: Not surprising that you have had hardware issues with the Intel Macs. I have been doing service work on PCs for years and that is pretty standard with intel based systems. I have to ask though with the X86 Mac what on earth was Apple thinking with Intel integrated graphics. Intel integrated GPUs were considered a joke on the Wintel side long before Apple made the switch so why got with a graphics platform that many consider to be an oxymoron especially given who Apples clients tend to be.On Mar 23, 12:44 pm, imrazor evol...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Dan, that's a very good summary for a non-coder like myself. Apple claims that Altivec is twice as fast as SSE1/2/3 at 8 flops/ cycle vs SSE's 4flops/cycle, so theoretically shouldn't a G5 be twice as fast as an Intel processor at SIMD operations at equivalent clock speeds? thank-you. QED. i rest my case. intel is junk, and the switch to intel was a HUGE step backwards for apple. and puhleeze, spare us all the stories about how fast your MacPro is compared to an MDD. that proves NOTHING. the relevant question is, how fast would a MacPro be if it used the latest G7 processor? i, for one, used apples rather than PC's for ONE reason and one reason ONLY. by a very wide margin, they outperformed comparable PCs and even PCs that were superior on paper. NOW, they DON'T. reluctantly, i bought an intelmac, hoping that the braintrust at apple would justify my faith in them by building a better blackbox using the same guts. they haven't, and it looks like they won't. you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. i know i have to live with it, and living with it seems to me to point to abandoning apple altogether and going with a PC running either 64-bit win7 or unix. and i would even go so far as to encourage all apple users to do the same. how else will apple and SJ ever get the message? -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Ah...clem, I couldn't agree with you more on that!!! I am not too happy with my Macbook either, that I'm still using my Tibook!!! On Mar 22, 3:09 pm, Daniel Stewart daniel.stewart...@gmail.com wrote: Not surprising that you have had hardware issues with the Intel Macs. I have been doing service work on PCs for years and that is pretty standard with intel based systems. I have to ask though with the X86 Mac what on earth was Apple thinking with Intel integrated graphics. Intel integrated GPUs were considered a joke on the Wintel side long before Apple made the switch so why got with a graphics platform that many consider to be an oxymoron especially given who Apples clients tend to be.On Mar 23, 12:44 pm, imrazor evol...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks Dan, that's a very good summary for a non-coder like myself. Apple claims that Altivec is twice as fast as SSE1/2/3 at 8 flops/ cycle vs SSE's 4flops/cycle, so theoretically shouldn't a G5 be twice as fast as an Intel processor at SIMD operations at equivalent clock speeds? thank-you. QED. i rest my case. intel is junk, and the switch to intel was a HUGE step backwards for apple. and puhleeze, spare us all the stories about how fast your MacPro is compared to an MDD. that proves NOTHING. the relevant question is, how fast would a MacPro be if it used the latest G7 processor? i, for one, used apples rather than PC's for ONE reason and one reason ONLY. by a very wide margin, they outperformed comparable PCs and even PCs that were superior on paper. NOW, they DON'T. reluctantly, i bought an intelmac, hoping that the braintrust at apple would justify my faith in them by building a better blackbox using the same guts. they haven't, and it looks like they won't. you can't make a silk purse from a sow's ear. i know i have to live with it, and living with it seems to me to point to abandoning apple altogether and going with a PC running either 64-bit win7 or unix. and i would even go so far as to encourage all apple users to do the same. how else will apple and SJ ever get the message? Scars only tell us where we have been, they do not have to dictate where we are going... “Choose love and peace above all other options. Commit to the goal of unconditional love and compassion for all life, in all its expressions, and surrender all judgment to God. --- Dr. David R. Hawkins -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 2011/03/24 09:38, ah...clem so eloquently wrote: intel is junk, and the switch to intel was a HUGE step backwards for apple. and puhleeze, spare us all the stories about how fast your MacPro is compared to an MDD. that proves NOTHING. the relevant question is, how fast would a MacPro be if it used the latest G7 processor? Did you follow the IBM POWER links posted on this subject? The POWER CPU is HUGE and I'm guessing that it would need a huge enclosure, huge amounts of cooling, huge amounts of electricity, and cost a fortune. Look, I'm no Intel fan. Point of fact I hate Intel and always buy AMD when building a computer. But the bottom line is that I can do more in less time, and use half the electricity in the process, with my QC Mac Pro than I could with my DP G5 Power Mac. You have every right to move to Win7, unix, or any other OS of your choice. Last time I looked there was even an option or three for building an AMD Hackintosh. But your dislike of Intel, just like mine, does not make the G5 better than Nehalem. And POWER is not a viable option for a PC, it was designed for enterprise deployment. Even IBM's Cell CPU is well suited for some tasks such as graphics or some BOINC projects, but it too is not suited for PC use. Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForceFX5200 Ultra 64MB VRAM 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.4.11 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 24, 2011, at 10:31 AM, Tina K. wrote: Did you follow the IBM POWER links posted on this subject? The POWER CPU is HUGE and I'm guessing that it would need a huge enclosure, huge amounts of cooling, huge amounts of electricity, and cost a fortune. forget it. ah clem has a set belief system and mere facts will not dislodge it. I'm done feeding the troll. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
At 11:31 AM -0600 3/24/2011, Tina K. wrote: Did you follow the IBM POWER links posted on this subject? The POWER CPU is HUGE and I'm guessing that it would need a huge enclosure, huge amounts of cooling, huge amounts of electricity, and cost a fortune. http://dl.dropbox.com/u/610326/PowerBook%20G5.jpg http://dl.dropbox.com/u/610326/penguin-lust.gif - 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 23, 12:29 am, ah...clem boneheads...@gmail.com wrote: On Mar 22, 11:57 am, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: Oh puleeeze. You're claiming a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 on a 333 mHz bus can compare to a Mac Pro (which at a MINIMUM has 2 2.66Ghz dual core Xeons with 667 Mhz memory bus) with a few COMPILER TWEAKS??? (which tweaks, BTW, Apple's dev tools pretty much apply automatically when you select PPC as a compile target) i never claimed any such thing! re-read the post, bruce. if you want to win the discussion so desperately that you will resort to putting words in my mouth, then you only underscore the weakness of your own position. what i said was that PPC versus intel of comparable clock speeds was no contest. given software well written for each, the PPC was damned near twice as fast as the intel on real world computationally intensive tasks. Ok, I'll ask - I am well aware of how AltiVec functioned. And no argument that an Intel-written SW may not properly run on a PPC to take advantage. Honest question though - Doesn't Intel have a similar functioning SIMD unit? Also 128bit wide? If that's the case, I'd expect that a 4x2.8GHz machine to be 4.48X as fast as a 2x1.25GHz machine, given the similarity between both SIMD units. The near 10X improvement I see proves your point, to me, at least, that the code was not optimized for PPC, specifically AltiVec. I have the latest DVD rip I'm sending to a TiVo, will run on both machines to confirm exact ratio I see. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Ok, I'll ask - I am well aware of how AltiVec functioned. And no argument that an Intel-written SW may not properly run on a PPC to take advantage. Honest question though - Doesn't Intel have a similar functioning SIMD unit? Also 128bit wide? If that's the case, I'd expect that a 4x2.8GHz machine to be 4.48X as fast as a 2x1.25GHz machine, given the similarity between both SIMD units. The near 10X improvement I see proves your point, to me, at least, that the code was not optimized for PPC, specifically AltiVec. I have the latest DVD rip I'm sending to a TiVo, will run on both machines to confirm exact ratio I see. You're right - Intel does have a competing technology called SSE. You can read more about it here, though don't ask me to translate into English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_SIMD_Extensions I've never seen a performance comparison between Altivec and SSE, though it would make an interesting read. Eric -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
At 7:15 AM -0700 3/23/2011, imrazor wrote: Ok, I'll ask - I am well aware of how AltiVec functioned. And no argument that an Intel-written SW may not properly run on a PPC to take advantage. Honest question though - Doesn't Intel have a similar functioning SIMD unit? Also 128bit wide? If that's the case, I'd expect that a 4x2.8GHz machine to be 4.48X as fast as a 2x1.25GHz machine, given the similarity between both SIMD units. The near 10X improvement I see proves your point, to me, at least, that the code was not optimized for PPC, specifically AltiVec. I have the latest DVD rip I'm sending to a TiVo, will run on both machines to confirm exact ratio I see. You're right - Intel does have a competing technology called SSE. You can read more about it here, though don't ask me to translate into English: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streaming_SIMD_Extensions I've never seen a performance comparison between Altivec and SSE, though it would make an interesting read. This is good too: http://developer.apple.com/hardwaredrivers/ve/summary.html - 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 23, 9:34 am, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: At 7:15 AM -0700 3/23/2011, imrazor wrote: This is good too: http://developer.apple.com/hardwaredrivers/ve/summary.html - Dan. Thanks Dan, that's a very good summary for a non-coder like myself. Apple claims that Altivec is twice as fast as SSE1/2/3 at 8 flops/ cycle vs SSE's 4flops/cycle, so theoretically shouldn't a G5 be twice as fast as an Intel processor at SIMD operations at equivalent clock speeds? Now the article mentions P4's, so I'm not sure if subsequent improvements in Intel's lineup would change that number. Or maybe Intel has added more registers? Plus I think SSE 4.1 is out now... Eric -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
At 9:44 AM -0700 3/23/2011, imrazor wrote: On Mar 23, 9:34 am, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: At 7:15 AM -0700 3/23/2011, imrazor wrote: This is good too: http://developer.apple.com/hardwaredrivers/ve/summary.html Thanks Dan, that's a very good summary for a non-coder like myself. Apple claims that Altivec is twice as fast as SSE1/2/3 at 8 flops/ cycle vs SSE's 4flops/cycle, so theoretically shouldn't a G5 be twice as fast as an Intel processor at SIMD operations at equivalent clock speeds? Now the article mentions P4's, so I'm not sure if subsequent improvements in Intel's lineup would change that number. Or maybe Intel has added more registers? Plus I think SSE 4.1 is out now... Google altivec vs sse. There are some interesting articles, albeit some quite old. Most complain about how nasty SSE is to use. As for performance, it really it depends on the actual operation being performed as to which is faster. The implementation of Altivec in the G4 and G5 processors was quite good, and usually outperformed Intelcarp. But there are a few benchmarks showing that SSE is faster. Again, like any benchmark, it depends on the individual task and coding and compiler and OS' runtimes. *shrug* This is all moot now tho as you just ain't gonna be running OS X on a POWER based system! Get over it. Suck it up. Learn to enjoy the Intel parts and their lower reliability. Or just hold your toes for a few more months, or perhaps a year... As ARM ramps up their design into the server market, I'll betcha a few million quatloos that we start seeing ARM-based Macs. - 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 23, 2011, at 10:30 AM, Dan wrote: *shrug* This is all moot now tho as you just ain't gonna be running OS X on a POWER based system! Also, it is moot now that Apple has the infrastructure in place to use the GPU as a vector processor which is probably faster than Altivec and SSE combined. http://developer.apple.com/technologies/mac/snowleopard/opencl.html (also any article that talks about SSE in a P4 is from the dark ages. Intel has produced THREE generations of CPU's since then.) -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I have the latest DVD rip I'm sending to a TiVo, will run on both machines to confirm exact ratio I see. So, the DVD I transcoded from rips, the MDD Dual 1.25 G4 = 115 min, the Quad 2.8 Intel = 19 min. 1/6 the time. It was an 1:35 long DVD, encoded to .mpg for TiVo. Some other format changes seem to have a larger ratio, 8-10 to 1 in some cases. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Once again this is going off topic but this seems to be the thread for it. One thing that was impressive with the G4 in it's day compared to the P4s of the same time was that you could get similar or better performance from a CPU that used only passive cooling (heatsink). P4s at the time ran crazy hot and we used to joke that Intel would have to start shipping their CPUs with fire extinguishers. Heck with a Prescott P4 80-90 degrees Celsius was considered normal operating temps. Yikes! The core duo based on the Pentium M really saved Intel's bacon. On Wed, Mar 23, 2011 at 6:37 PM, JoeTaxpayer joetaxpaye...@gmail.com wrote: I have the latest DVD rip I'm sending to a TiVo, will run on both machines to confirm exact ratio I see. So, the DVD I transcoded from rips, the MDD Dual 1.25 G4 = 115 min, the Quad 2.8 Intel = 19 min. 1/6 the time. It was an 1:35 long DVD, encoded to .mpg for TiVo. Some other format changes seem to have a larger ratio, 8-10 to 1 in some cases. -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 2011/03/23 11:30, Dan so eloquently wrote: I'll betcha a few million quatloos Brother can you spare a quatloo? ;-) Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForceFX5200 Ultra 64MB VRAM 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.4.11 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Tina - you hit the nail on the head here. I was running Dual 1.25GHz MDD G4 which I still love, 3 of them helping to keep my house warm. The only thing they are slow at is the video encode. You Tube, no issue. But the encode? 2-4 hours per hour of video depending on the format change. I bought the same Mac Pro you have, and it flies, less than 1/10th the time to do the same encodes. Truth is, I am not a power user, but as the G4s were nearing 8 years old, it was my family that pretty much told me I need to spend some money on myself. And yes, it's cool to take a video off a camera and see it on the tivo a few minutes later. On Mar 22, 12:41 am, Tina K. penguir...@gmail.com wrote: And if you don't believe this, try running Handbrake on a VIDEO_TS folder. It should be done in a day or three, whereas a Macbook Pro will probably finish in about half the time, maybe less. I have a sentimental attachment to my PPC Macs, and was sorry to see Apple switch to Intel (AMD anyone?), Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Daniel Stewart wrote: But truth be told they have found they are much more impressed with the old G4s because unlike the new faster Intel macs the G4s are actually consistently reliable. Their Intel Macs are consistently crashing or malfunctioning in some other way. This is directly contrary to my experience managing a college with about 100-120 Macs in use, all but a handful of which are Intel macs of one form or another; none 'consistently crash'. Of course there are occasional issues, but most of those have been fixed by either starting in safe mode (to clear the caches) using Applejack (once per machine so far, not as a routine maintenance) or most often, just getting enough RAM in the systems. (people trying to run a bunch of Mac apps plus Windows in a VM need more than 2GB ram, or the system slows to a crawl on a regular basis.) Not saying they don't have problems, just no way is that experience comparable to mine with Intel Macs. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 7:10 am, JoeTaxpayer joetaxpaye...@gmail.com wrote: Tina - you hit the nail on the head here. I was running Dual 1.25GHz MDD G4 which I still love, 3 of them helping to keep my house warm. The only thing they are slow at is the video encode. You Tube, no issue. But the encode? 2-4 hours per hour of video depending on the format change. I bought the same Mac Pro you have, and it flies, less than 1/10th the time to do the same encodes. Truth is, I am not a power user, but as the G4s were nearing 8 years old, it was my family that pretty much told me I need to spend some money on myself. And yes, it's cool to take a video off a camera and see it on the tivo a few minutes later. On Mar 22, 12:41 am, Tina K. penguir...@gmail.com wrote: And if you don't believe this, try running Handbrake on a VIDEO_TS folder. It should be done in a day or three, whereas a Macbook Pro will probably finish in about half the time, maybe less. I have a sentimental attachment to my PPC Macs, and was sorry to see Apple switch to Intel (AMD anyone?), Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 there you go AGAIN, confusing software performance with CPU performance. the apps you refer to were written for the Win/Tel architecture, and ported to the PPC by lazy and/or incompetent boobs who wouldn't or couldn't rewrite the program from the ground up in such a way as to fully exploit the Altivec processor. a 1 gig intel processor does a billion floating-point operations per second, while a 1 gig PPC does one billion 64-bit vector operations per second. it is theoretically 64 times faster than an intel CPU with the same clock speed, but only if you have programmers smart enough and industrious enough to exploit it's full power. why do you think the DOD still restricts the sale of G4s and G5s overseas, but you can give north korea all the intel machines they want. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 2011, at 7:42 AM, ah...clem wrote: there you go AGAIN, confusing software performance with CPU performance. the apps you refer to were written for the Win/Tel architecture, and ported to the PPC by lazy and/or incompetent boobs who wouldn't or couldn't rewrite the program from the ground up in such a way as to fully exploit the Altivec processor. Oh puleeeze. You're claiming a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 on a 333 mHz bus can compare to a Mac Pro (which at a MINIMUM has 2 2.66Ghz dual core Xeons with 667 Mhz memory bus) with a few COMPILER TWEAKS??? (which tweaks, BTW, Apple's dev tools pretty much apply automatically when you select PPC as a compile target) Compare the performance of iDVD encoding on the two platforms, unless, of course, you consider Apple's programmers to be lazy and/or incompetent boobs who wouldn't or couldn't rewrite the program from the ground up in such a way as to fully exploit the Altivec processor. Considering they wrote iDVD for the PPC IN THE FIRST PLACE! -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Daniel Stewart wrote: But truth be told they have found they are much more impressed with the old G4s because unlike the new faster Intel macs the G4s are actually consistently reliable. Their Intel Macs are consistently crashing or malfunctioning in some other way. This is directly contrary to my experience managing a college with about 100-120 Macs in use, all but a handful of which are Intel macs of one form or another; none 'consistently crash'. Of course there are occasional issues, but most of those have been fixed by either starting in safe mode (to clear the caches) using Applejack (once per machine so far, not as a routine maintenance) or most often, just getting enough RAM in the systems. (people trying to run a bunch of Mac apps plus Windows in a VM need more than 2GB ram, or the system slows to a crawl on a regular basis.) It's been about two months since I switched from my trusty ol' Gigabit G4 to a late '09 Mac Mini. The previous owner had wiped the HD and reinstalled the original system s/w which was an early version of Snow Leopard and then upgraded it to the current 10.6.6. For about the first month, I did experience strange things like application crashes, sleep issues etc but now it seems as if the machine has learned my habits. It is now rock steady, runs 24/7 (much of it in sleep mode) without any problems. Safari which always gave me fits on the G4 is now amazing. Other apps as well and I am running Rosetta (sp?) for an older game, Mah Jong and it works just fine. Moving across a ten year technology bridge has been quite an impressive journey! Wow! JT -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Well I am glad others have had a better experience. My point was Simply that on any computer platform good benchmarks does not always mean an improvement of real world performance. Sent on the TELUS Mobility network with BlackBerry -Original Message- From: James E. Therrault mjrtas...@gmail.com Sender: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:00:39 To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Reply-To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: OT OT OT need a reason ? On Mar 22, 2011, at 10:25 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:32 PM, Daniel Stewart wrote: But truth be told they have found they are much more impressed with the old G4s because unlike the new faster Intel macs the G4s are actually consistently reliable. Their Intel Macs are consistently crashing or malfunctioning in some other way. This is directly contrary to my experience managing a college with about 100-120 Macs in use, all but a handful of which are Intel macs of one form or another; none 'consistently crash'. Of course there are occasional issues, but most of those have been fixed by either starting in safe mode (to clear the caches) using Applejack (once per machine so far, not as a routine maintenance) or most often, just getting enough RAM in the systems. (people trying to run a bunch of Mac apps plus Windows in a VM need more than 2GB ram, or the system slows to a crawl on a regular basis.) It's been about two months since I switched from my trusty ol' Gigabit G4 to a late '09 Mac Mini. The previous owner had wiped the HD and reinstalled the original system s/w which was an early version of Snow Leopard and then upgraded it to the current 10.6.6. For about the first month, I did experience strange things like application crashes, sleep issues etc but now it seems as if the machine has learned my habits. It is now rock steady, runs 24/7 (much of it in sleep mode) without any problems. Safari which always gave me fits on the G4 is now amazing. Other apps as well and I am running Rosetta (sp?) for an older game, Mah Jong and it works just fine. Moving across a ten year technology bridge has been quite an impressive journey! Wow! JT -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Actually you can roll your own apps for PPC. That's what Linux for PPC or if you want serious geek cred NetBSD PPC is for. lol On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:31 PM, Tina K. penguir...@gmail.com wrote: On 2011/03/22 08:42, ah...clem so eloquently wrote: On Mar 22, 7:10 am, JoeTaxpayerjoetaxpaye...@gmail.com wrote: Tina - you hit the nail on the head here. I was running Dual 1.25GHz MDD G4 which I still love, 3 of them helping to keep my house warm. The only thing they are slow at is the video encode. You Tube, no issue. But the encode? 2-4 hours per hour of video depending on the format change. I bought the same Mac Pro you have, and it flies, less than 1/10th the time to do the same encodes. Truth is, I am not a power user, but as the G4s were nearing 8 years old, it was my family that pretty much told me I need to spend some money on myself. And yes, it's cool to take a video off a camera and see it on the tivo a few minutes later. On Mar 22, 12:41 am, Tina K.penguir...@gmail.com wrote: And if you don't believe this, try running Handbrake on a VIDEO_TS folder. It should be done in a day or three, whereas a Macbook Pro will probably finish in about half the time, maybe less. I have a sentimental attachment to my PPC Macs, and was sorry to see Apple switch to Intel (AMD anyone?), Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 there you go AGAIN, confusing software performance with CPU performance. the apps you refer to were written for the Win/Tel architecture, and ported to the PPC by lazy and/or incompetent boobs who wouldn't or couldn't rewrite the program from the ground up in such a way as to fully exploit the Altivec processor. a 1 gig intel processor does a billion floating-point operations per second, while a 1 gig PPC does one billion 64-bit vector operations per second. it is theoretically 64 times faster than an intel CPU with the same clock speed, but only if you have programmers smart enough and industrious enough to exploit it's full power. why do you think the DOD still restricts the sale of G4s and G5s overseas, but you can give north korea all the intel machines they want. Theory is all well and good, but it won't trans-code my videos or do anything else. Unless you are able to roll your own apps that do use the PPCs abilities efficiently, reality is that a MacPro is faster than a Power Mac. Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForceFX5200 Ultra 64MB VRAM 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.4.11 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I remember it taking about four days to rip a DVD (REALLY high quality rip) using HandBrake on a Dual 1GHZ MDD. I then ripped the same DVD on a 2.8GHZ P4 Hackintosh in one day. I will say that I have seen A LOT more hardware problems with the newer Macs, as oposed to the rock solid G4 towers. -Jonas -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Not surprising that you have had hardware issues with the Intel Macs. I have been doing service work on PCs for years and that is pretty standard with intel based systems.I have to ask though with the X86 Mac what on earth was Apple thinking with Intel integrated graphics. Intel integrated GPUs were considered a joke on the Wintel side long before Apple made the switch so why got with a graphics platform that many consider to be an oxymoron especially given who Apples clients tend to be. On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 1:52 PM, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: I remember it taking about four days to rip a DVD (REALLY high quality rip) using HandBrake on a Dual 1GHZ MDD. I then ripped the same DVD on a 2.8GHZ P4 Hackintosh in one day. I will say that I have seen A LOT more hardware problems with the newer Macs, as oposed to the rock solid G4 towers. -Jonas -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Daniel Stewart wrote: Actually you can roll your own apps for PPC. That's what Linux for PPC or if you want serious geek cred NetBSD PPC is for. lol Or Apple's developer tools -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Very true. That comment was intended to only be half serious with a little humour. That certainly works too. On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 2:14 PM, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: On Mar 22, 2011, at 11:46 AM, Daniel Stewart wrote: Actually you can roll your own apps for PPC. That's what Linux for PPC or if you want serious geek cred NetBSD PPC is for. lol Or Apple's developer tools -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 10:42 am, ah...clem boneheads...@gmail.com wrote: there you go AGAIN, confusing software performance with CPU performance. the apps you refer to were written for the Win/Tel architecture, and ported to the PPC by lazy and/or incompetent boobs who wouldn't or couldn't rewrite the program from the ground up in such a way as to fully exploit the Altivec processor. ? No, I was just looking at it from the user perspective. At some level, the Mac is a black box performing a function. Now, if you said you had an alternative video encoder that can change formats for me, paid or free, to go from any format to either one compatible with my iTunes/iPad or TiVo, that would have been interesting. A lecture on AltiVec, not so much. a 1 gig intel processor does a billion floating-point operations per second, while a 1 gig PPC does one billion 64-bit vector operations per second. it is theoretically 64 times faster than an intel CPU with the same clock speed, but only if you have programmers smart enough and industrious enough to exploit its full power. 64 times? Well, actually, I am unfamiliar enough with Intel to not speak to it. AltiVec is a 128bit SIMD, so 4 simultaneous 32 bit operands, but this is a tangent. I guess going from 2 x 1.25GHz to 4 x 2.8GHz gave me the 10X improvement, but for the wrong reason? I'm ok with that. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 2:52 pm, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: I remember it taking about four days to rip a DVD (REALLY high quality rip) using HandBrake on a Dual 1GHZ MDD. I then ripped the same DVD on a 2.8GHZ P4 Hackintosh in one day. Jonas, when you say rip do you mean encode? My G4s rip (copy the DVD) in under 30 minutes. Ripping isn't their issue. It's encoding to burn, or to view on iPad/TiVo. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 2011, at 12:09 PM, Daniel Stewart wrote: I have to ask though with the X86 Mac what on earth was Apple thinking with Intel integrated graphics. Intel integrated GPUs were considered a joke on the Wintel side long before Apple made the switch so why got with a graphics platform that many consider to be an oxymoron especially given who Apples clients tend to be. Only one Mac uses Intel graphics and in that one it's the secondary graphics card... Mac Mini: NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory4 iMac: ATI Radeon HD 4670 graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR3 memory, ATI Radeon HD 5670 graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory or ATI Radeon HD 5750 graphics processor with 1GB of GDDR5 memory depending on the model Mac Pro: ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB of GDDR5 memory or ATI Radeon HD 5870 with 1GB of GDDR5 memory depending on the BTO options. MacBook: NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory Macbook Air: NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory MacBook Pro: AMD Radeon HD 6490M graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR5 memory on 2.0GHz configuration; or AMD Radeon HD 6750M graphics processor with 1GB of GDDR5 memory on 2.2GHz configuration AND Intel HD Graphics 3000 with 384MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory (so you can switch between them for better performance or better power savings.) Finally, I can speak from a position of some experience on hardware issues, as we support hundreds of systems, both Mac and PC. If you buy a quality system to begin with, your hardware issues pretty much vanish. If you buy consumer-grade crap, you get consumer-grade crap. Go for the 'business' grade systems from reputable vendors (HP is our current favorite, Dell is a very distant second) and you'll have decent reliability. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I have to ask though with the
X86 Mac what on earth was Apple thinking with Intel integrated
graphics. Intel integrated GPUs were considered a joke on the Wintel
side long before Apple made the switch so why got with a graphics
platform that many consider to be an oxymoron especially given who
Apples clients tend to be.
Only one Mac uses Intel graphics and in that one it's the secondary
graphics card...
Mac Mini: NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM
shared with main memory4
iMac: ATI Radeon HD 4670 graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR3 memory,
ATI Radeon HD 5670 graphics processor with 512MB of GDDR3 memory or ATI
Radeon HD 5750 graphics processor with 1GB of GDDR5 memory depending on
the model
Mac Pro: ATI Radeon HD 5770 with 1GB of GDDR5 memory or ATI Radeon HD
5870 with 1GB of GDDR5 memory depending on the BTO options.
MacBook: NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3 SDRAM
shared with main memory
Macbook Air: NVIDIA GeForce 320M graphics processor with 256MB of DDR3
SDRAM shared with main memory
Perhaps true, but a great many so-calledHacks, as distinct from so-called
Macks, find the GMA950 to be perfectly satisfactory PROVIDED the proper
support is provided in the DSDT.
Now, if an inexperienced hacker should try and use the on-mobo GMA950,
while attempting to provide all resolutions and CI/QE, using a variety of
hacked kexts, then he gets what he deserves: poor performance.
The NECESSARY and SUFFICIENT GFX0 device, for all resolutions and CI/QE is:
Device (PEGP)
{
Name (_ADR, 0x0002)
Device (GFX0)
{
Name (_ADR, Zero)
Method (_DSM, 4, NotSerialized)
{
Store (Package (0x06)
{
device_type,
Buffer (0x08)
{
display
},
model,
Buffer (0x07)
{
GMA950
},
built-in,
Buffer (One)
{
0x01
}
}, Local0)
DTGP (Arg0, Arg1, Arg2, Arg3, RefOf (Local0))
Return (Local0)
}
}
}
Read it and weep!
--
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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 2011, at 2:26 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: Only one Mac uses Intel graphics A few more than one. I'm counting at least 12 models with three different families of Intel graphics. Without these many hackintosh would be SOL. Intel GMA 800: developer Mac Pro Intel GMA 950: MacBook 2006+2 updates, iMac mid-2006/late-2006, Mini late-2006/mid-2007 Intel x3100 : MacBook Air, Late 2007 MacBook+2 updates. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Only one Mac uses Intel graphics A few more than one. I'm counting at least 12 models with three different families of Intel graphics. Without these many [ a ] hackintosh would be SOL. And, the Macks would be SOL, too. Although all standard distributions have GMA950 and GMAX3100 support (but NOT GMA3100 support), these are still in 10.6.6. I am presently working on a Hackintosh which uses the remnants of the original Intel Mac support: a 915GAG, which Apple released to its developers as 10.4.8. And a 915GAG WILL STILL run MacOS X, too, and possibly even 10.6 (using the Voodoo 10.6 kernel), but it certainly will run 10.4.8 or beyond without a Voodoo kernel. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I use GMA900 graphics on four different Hackintosh machines and it works great with full ability to change resolutions, as well QE CI. From my experience, HP is terrible. There have been a couple machines that are descent, but I go with Dell. -Jonas -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I've never used integrated graphics on any of my hackintoshes, mainly because I play some games and run a multiple monitor setup, but when I did use a Mac Mini with GMA 950 it wasn't that bad. As far as system brands go, most of my hacks are custom built boxes, it's just easier in my opinion to build a machine where you buy components knowing they'll work, rather than trying in vain to get your name-brand system completely working. Just my .02, Chance On Mar 22, 2011, at 6:03 PM, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: I use GMA900 graphics on four different Hackintosh machines and it works great with full ability to change resolutions, as well QE CI. From my experience, HP is terrible. There have been a couple machines that are descent, but I go with Dell. -Jonas -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
At 12:24 PM -0700 3/22/2011, JoeTaxpayer wrote: On Mar 22, 2:52 pm, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: I remember it taking about four days to rip a DVD (REALLY high quality rip) using HandBrake on a Dual 1GHZ MDD. I then ripped the same DVD on a 2.8GHZ P4 Hackintosh in one day. Jonas, when you say rip do you mean encode? My G4s rip (copy the DVD) in under 30 minutes. Ripping isn't their issue. It's encoding to burn, or to view on iPad/TiVo. Um, no, not encoding. Transcoding. Rip == a raw read off the DVD. You end up with a video-ts folder containing the original MPEG-2 video and MPEG-1 Layer 2 (not mp3!) audio tracks. Depending on the speed of said DVD drive, this should take 15 mins to an hour, maybe. Transcode == Decode both streams of ripped data then re-encode them into some other form. And it should be noted that if it took a full day to transcode 4 GB of MPEG-2 data into *anything* on a 2.8 GHz PowerPC G4 machine then you were hitting ffmpeg with some really screwed up options. - 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 7:42 pm, Dan dantear...@gmail.com wrote: At 12:24 PM -0700 3/22/2011, JoeTaxpayer wrote: On Mar 22, 2:52 pm, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: I remember it taking about four days to rip a DVD (REALLY high quality rip) using HandBrake on a Dual 1GHZ MDD. I then ripped the same DVD on a 2.8GHZ P4 Hackintosh in one day. Jonas, when you say rip do you mean encode? My G4s rip (copy the DVD) in under 30 minutes. Ripping isn't their issue. It's encoding to burn, or to view on iPad/TiVo. Um, no, not encoding. Transcoding. Got it - I imagine Jonas' issue was the transcoding, then. Thanks. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 3/22/2011 1:52 PM, Jonas Ulrich wrote: I remember it taking about four days to rip a DVD (REALLY high quality rip) using HandBrake on a Dual 1GHZ MDD. I then ripped the same DVD on a 2.8GHZ P4 Hackintosh in one day. I will say that I have seen A LOT more hardware problems with the newer Macs, as oposed to the rock solid G4 towers. -Jonas Let me echo this. All of the PPC Macs I've had/used have been rock solid (except for the one UPS dropped), though I've not had a PPC laptop. My experience with Intel Macs has been decidedly mixed. My first Intel Mac was a 1st (or maybe 2nd) generation 15 Macbook Pro. No less than four trips to the Apple Store later (thankfully I bought Applecare) they finally got the overheating and GPU artifacts under control. My Aluminum iMac has been somewhat better, but still overheats unless I crank the fans to nearly full blast. The only trouble free Intel Mac I've had has been a Mac mini that was rock solid for the two and a half years I owned it. Lately I've been hearing rumors that recent Macbook Pros overheat, perhaps caused by overzealous use of thermal paste. Anyone heard similar? If true, it seems that Apple is slow on the uptake when it comes to cooling. Eric -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
My experience has been the inverse of yours. My iBook G3's graphics chip went out (yes, it's a know flaw, but regardless, the system failed) and the L3 cache on my 1.42GHz MDD G4 failed, causing instability and requiring a replacement CPU card. The iMac G4 I gave to my sister died too, it gets partway through the boot process and freezes with an awful sound coming from the speakers until I pull the power cord. On the other hand, I have never had a single problem with my MacBook Pro, which is almost 4 and half years old now. I also used an early Intel Mini as my main system for 2 years without issue, and it continues to serve me as a (no pun intended) server. I do admit that I have owned PPC machines that never gave me issues, namely G4 'Books (an iBook that I sold a year ago and a 12 AlBook,) but most of my PPC machines have given me issues. As with every post I make, just my .02. Chance On 3/22/11 9:31 PM, Eric Volker wrote: Let me echo this. All of the PPC Macs I've had/used have been rock solid (except for the one UPS dropped), though I've not had a PPC laptop. My experience with Intel Macs has been decidedly mixed. My first Intel Mac was a 1st (or maybe 2nd) generation 15 Macbook Pro. No less than four trips to the Apple Store later (thankfully I bought Applecare) they finally got the overheating and GPU artifacts under control. My Aluminum iMac has been somewhat better, but still overheats unless I crank the fans to nearly full blast. The only trouble free Intel Mac I've had has been a Mac mini that was rock solid for the two and a half years I owned it. Lately I've been hearing rumors that recent Macbook Pros overheat, perhaps caused by overzealous use of thermal paste. Anyone heard similar? If true, it seems that Apple is slow on the uptake when it comes to cooling. Eric -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 22, 11:57 am, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: Oh puleeeze. You're claiming a dual 1.25 Ghz G4 on a 333 mHz bus can compare to a Mac Pro (which at a MINIMUM has 2 2.66Ghz dual core Xeons with 667 Mhz memory bus) with a few COMPILER TWEAKS??? (which tweaks, BTW, Apple's dev tools pretty much apply automatically when you select PPC as a compile target) i never claimed any such thing! re-read the post, bruce. if you want to win the discussion so desperately that you will resort to putting words in my mouth, then you only underscore the weakness of your own position. what i said was that PPC versus intel of comparable clock speeds was no contest. given software well written for each, the PPC was damned near twice as fast as the intel on real world computationally intensive tasks. it used to give me great pleasure to point to execution times on my 2 GHz G5 versus their 2.7 GHz pentium win/tel boxes, and shut the mouths of the apples are for kids pc diehards. and the reason is that the PPC architecture is inherently superior to the intel architecture. period. the preposterous statement above came from your fevered imagination. the same imagination that dreamed up a dual 1.25 G4 with a 333 MHz bus. the only dual 1.25 i know of was the MDD/FW800 with a 166 MHz bus. nowadays, my 3.33 GHz intel iMac running snow leopard is barely as fast as their 3.33 GHz i7 running winbloze 7. given the difference in cost, it no longer makes much sense to throw money in steve jobs coffers just so i can hang on to the familiar OSX interface. since the computer works for weeks without any need for user interface, the OS is pretty irrelevant. so i stand by my premise, PPC with Altivec was/is vastly superior to intel crap. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 16, 4:17 pm, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: Apple has no reason to support all the different hardware out there. However, if you buy the right hardware, it's pretty simple to install Leopard or Snow Leopard on a PC. I currently run two Hackintosh's, one a desktop and one a laptop. They run great and are totally worth the time it takes to set them up. gosh, and you haven't been thrown into a window-less (pun intended) dungeon below SJ's house for EULA violations, yet? hmmm . . . .sounds like apple IS supporting OSX on PC hardware, albeit in a backhanded manner, by allowing those with sufficient smarts to do it on their own, and with no burden on apple support. none of which would have been so easy or even possible had they not pretended that they were forced to switch to the grossly inferior intel CPUs. i guess it's all in how you look at it. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
gosh, and you haven't been thrown into a window-less (pun intended) dungeon below SJ's house for EULA violations, yet? Apple's Draconian EULA is essentially unenforceable against individual end-users. Sure, there is, indeed, case law against blatantly commercial violations of its EULA (Psystar, et. al.), but there is no known ... at least not known to me ... case law against an INDIVIDUAL who was NOT violating (emphasis intended) the EULA with NO expectation of financial gain. The legal concepts are not too dissimilar vis a vis the infamous Comstock Laws (which see). Do I own true Macintoshes? Yes. Do I use said Macintoses? No, their performance is too low to meet my needed and expected performance requirements. Do I own and use Hackintoshes? Yes, their performance meets, or exceeds, my needed and expected performance requirements. Do I make said Hackintoshes for others, on a not-for-profit basis? Sure. So, sue me! -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:54 AM, ah...clem wrote: none of which would have been so easy or even possible had they not pretended that they were forced to switch to the grossly inferior intel CPUs. There was no pretense involved here at all. IBM had no interest in making low-power, high-performance PPC processors for Apple, Motorola, errr, 'Freescale' couldn't and the primary driver of computer sales (laptops) was rapidly leaving Apple behind. Other companies were introducing Pentium mobile, pentium dual., and even Core systems when Apple was stuck with an architecture last updated when the Pentium 3 was king, and desktop systems that substituted for industrial space heaters. It was a dead end. Meanwhile Intel had made big strides from the days when 'power management' equalled 'slow the CPU to a crawl' days of the Centrino. I have the latest and greatest ever PPC laptop, an AlBook 1.67 ghz system. compared to even the worst performing Macbook, it scks. It's perfectly usable (it's in daily use) but I don't make any pretense about it being a modern, 'capable of anything' laptop. Anyone still clinging to the concept that the PPC is somehow better than the Intel chips for general purpose computing are delusional regardless of what IBM has brought out for game consoles and servers. Had IBM actually cared about retaining Apple as a major chip business client, things may have turned out differently, but I doubt it...Intel's great strength is their economy of scale...if everyone is using their CPU's and chipsets to make computers, they're cheaper, and cheaper to make faster. This economy of scale is what drives Moore's Law, after all. Smartest thing Apple ever did was to move to Intel; you'll note that their 'meteoric' ascendance coincides twith the intrduction of the Intel Macs. They did well before, but their growth curve has been exponential since then. And all the lessons they learned managing OS X for two different architectures for so long paid off in spades when it came time to add a third and fourth (ARM and Apple's new CPU's in the iPhone and iPad)...Apple now has an OS scalable like MS only dreams it could ever have done and they've been doing it for longer. (Don't forget, there WAS a version of NT that ran on the Dec Alpha and the Motorola ChRP chipset...which was yet ANOTHER time Moto screwed over Apple by overpromising and underdelivering) -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
IBM had no interest in making low-power, high-performance PPC processors for Apple, Motorola, errr, 'Freescale' couldn't and the primary driver of computer sales (laptops) was rapidly leaving Apple behind. IBM did, indeed, make such processors. They are now at G7-level, which is at least THREE generations BEYOND that which Apple signed-up for. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
At 1:44 PM -0700 3/21/2011, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: IBM had no interest in making low-power, high-performance PPC processors for Apple, Motorola, errr, 'Freescale' couldn't and the primary driver of computer sales (laptops) was rapidly leaving Apple behind. IBM did, indeed, make such processors. They are now at G7-level, which is at least THREE generations BEYOND that which Apple signed-up for. Are you comparing the latest POWER processors to the PowerPC line? Big diff. - 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 21, 2011, at 1:59 PM, Dan wrote: At 1:44 PM -0700 3/21/2011, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: IBM had no interest in making low-power, high-performance PPC processors for Apple, Motorola, errr, 'Freescale' couldn't and the primary driver of computer sales (laptops) was rapidly leaving Apple behind. IBM did, indeed, make such processors. They are now at G7-level, which is at least THREE generations BEYOND that which Apple signed-up for. Are you comparing the latest POWER processors to the PowerPC line? Big diff. Also, I'd like to know where I can buy a Power7 laptop system. Clearly it's small enough to fit: http://www.techspot.com/gallery/data/504/IBM_Employee_with_POWER7_Ceramic_Module_1_.jpg But when I look, none of the available systems seem really all that small: http://www.nasi.com/ibm-power7.php -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On 2011/03/21 14:02, Bruce Johnson so eloquently wrote: I have the latest and greatest ever PPC laptop, an AlBook 1.67 ghz system. compared to even the worst performing Macbook, it scks. It's perfectly usable (it's in daily use) but I don't make any pretense about it being a modern, 'capable of anything' laptop. And if you don't believe this, try running Handbrake on a VIDEO_TS folder. It should be done in a day or three, whereas a Macbook Pro will probably finish in about half the time, maybe less. Anyone still clinging to the concept that the PPC is somehow better than the Intel chips for general purpose computing are delusional regardless of what IBM has brought out for game consoles and servers. I have a sentimental attachment to my PPC Macs, and was sorry to see Apple switch to Intel (AMD anyone?), but there's no denying that we have seen performance and efficiency gains that we were never going to see with PPC. The G5 was speed limited due to power consumption (heat output), and the i/Powerbooks were stuck with the G4 for the same reason. Sticking with PPC would also have continued to limit Apple's market share, and whether you realize it or not that has a negative effect for OS X users. With a larger market share Apple has been able to R D things now that they could not have afforded to do in the PPC days, which enables us to do more with our Macs. Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForceFX5200 Ultra 64MB VRAM 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.4.11 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 6 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1GB VRAM 10.6.6 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I would like to see AMD because I'm not crazy about my 2008 Macbook with 2G processor and 2G memory running Snow Leopard... My old Titanium Powerbook A1025 runs better running Tiger!!! I guess we will see if Apple jumps ship with them??? I have a sentimental attachment to my PPC Macs, and was sorry to see Apple switch to Intel (AMD anyone?), but there's no denying that we have seen performance and efficiency gains that we were never going to see with PPC. The G5 was speed limited due to power consumption (heat output), and the i/Powerbooks were stuck with the G4 for the same reason. Tina -- Scars only tell us where we have been, they do not have to dictate where we are going... “Choose love and peace above all other options. Commit to the goal of unconditional love and compassion for all life, in all its expressions, and surrender all judgment to God. --- Dr. David R. Hawkins -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:08 PM, Richard Gerome wrote: I would like to see AMD because I'm not crazy about my 2008 Macbook with 2G processor and 2G memory running Snow Leopard... My old Titanium Powerbook A1025 runs better running Tiger!!! Then something is seriously wrong with your MacBook, and an AMD processor will not fix anything. -- Bruce Johnson Wherever you go, there you are B. Banzai, PhD -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
I think with the comparison of the laptop G4s to current intel offerings is a like comparing apples and oranges but that is a different story. The point I am looking to make here is the Intel Mac may be faster then the older PPC offerings but I would like to point out that a friend of mine works in a print shop and they use Macs exclusively in the art room. They have both brand new Intel Macs and old G4 power macs as backup machines. But truth be told they have found they are much more impressed with the old G4s because unlike the new faster Intel macs the G4s are actually consistently reliable. Their Intel Macs are consistently crashing or malfunctioning in some other way. The G4s are the only machines that consistently function. What good is a brand new Ferrari if half the time you turn the key nothing happens? What matters more. Speed or reliability. On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: On Mar 21, 2011, at 10:08 PM, Richard Gerome wrote: I would like to see AMD because I'm not crazy about my 2008 Macbook with 2G processor and 2G memory running Snow Leopard... My old Titanium Powerbook A1025 runs better running Tiger!!! Then something is seriously wrong with your MacBook, and an AMD processor will not fix anything. -- Bruce Johnson Wherever you go, there you are B. Banzai, PhD -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
They did do this already, didn't they, sort of, with the Mac clones? Totally did not work ... On Mar 16, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: Need a reason to think an Apple OS for PC would be a good thing? Extrapolate from this report. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-the-worlds-most-important-windows-software-developer/9786?tag=nl.e539 -- Adrian D'Alessio aka; Fluxstringer fluxstrin...@gmail.com http://www.flickr.com/photos/fluxstreamcommunication/ http://www.facebook.com/FluxStringer http://www.linkedin.com/in/fluxstreamcommunications http://flux-influx.blogspot.com/ http://fluxdreams.designbinder.com/ Akron University Winter Class of '75 That and three bucks gets me a cup of coffee most anywhere. -- 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 Anne Keller Smith Down to Earth Web Design Intel iMac 2.4gHz Core 2 Duo 1GB RAM, 250GB Hard Drive, OS 10.5.5 Intel iMac 2.66gHz Core 2 Duo 2GB RAM, 264GB Hard Drive, OS 10.5.6 G4 Quicksilver 733mHz Tower 896 MB RAM, 40 GB hard drive, OS 10.4.11 mailto:earth...@ptd.net http://www.downtoearthweb.com -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 19, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Anne Keller-Smith wrote: They did do this already, didn't they, sort of, with the Mac clones? Totally did not work ... On Mar 16, 2011, at 12:40 PM, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: Need a reason to think an Apple OS for PC would be a good thing? Extrapolate from this report. http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-the-worlds-most-important-windows-software-developer/9786?tag=nl.e539 AFAIK the Mac clones were a much wanted machine because they were more affordable with extra features. I still have a trusty Power Computing clone that runs every day, OS9 of coarse. :-) I can see Apple keeping the system close to the vest so that control quality and reliability is the finest available. Every bootleg I've seen is a hobby horse at best at the end of the day Apple walks on water in this town. John Carmonne Yorba Linda CA 92886 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
On Mar 16, 2011, at 9:40 AM, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: Need a reason to think an Apple OS for PC would be a good thing? Extrapolate from this report. Which report has *nothing* to do with OS X; its merely a statement of the overwhelming market dominance of iTunes/iTunes Store/IOS in the handheld market, and the long needed euthanization of the Zune. The Zune was a joke from the beginning, a half-hearted MS attempt at being 'Just Like Apple' complete with the requisite MS missteps in marketing, execution and completely not getting it. Let me translate: Waaah Waaah Waaah Apple won't make it easy for me to get OSX to run on cheap-a** hardware from someone else! I'm too poor/cheap/stubborn to either buy a real Mac or learn how to Hack my own! Waaah! While I'm at it I want Mercedes to sell me a 500sl for the same price as a Yugo! Waaah! The day you can present a business case for Apple to chop off a good 40-50% of their income in return for supporting 1001 different crappy PC manufacturers and facing an epidemic of pirated copies of OSX, you'll make your point. -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Well said. Apple doing QUITE well these days. On Mar 16, 2011, at 3:11 PM, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: On Mar 16, 2011, at 9:40 AM, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio wrote: Need a reason to think an Apple OS for PC would be a good thing? Extrapolate from this report. Which report has *nothing* to do with OS X; its merely a statement of the overwhelming market dominance of iTunes/iTunes Store/IOS in the handheld market, and the long needed euthanization of the Zune. The Zune was a joke from the beginning, a half-hearted MS attempt at being 'Just Like Apple' complete with the requisite MS missteps in marketing, execution and completely not getting it. Let me translate: Waaah Waaah Waaah Apple won't make it easy for me to get OSX to run on cheap-a** hardware from someone else! I'm too poor/cheap/stubborn to either buy a real Mac or learn how to Hack my own! Waaah! While I'm at it I want Mercedes to sell me a 500sl for the same price as a Yugo! Waaah! The day you can present a business case for Apple to chop off a good 40-50% of their income in return for supporting 1001 different crappy PC manufacturers and facing an epidemic of pirated copies of OSX, you'll make your point. -- 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 -- 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: OT OT OT need a reason ?
Apple has no reason to support all the different hardware out there. However, if you buy the right hardware, it's pretty simple to install Leopard or Snow Leopard on a PC. I currently run two Hackintosh's, one a desktop and one a laptop. They run great and are totally worth the time it takes to set them up. -Jonas -- 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
