Re: Sawtooth with ubuntu?
On 1/23/11 10:36 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Jan 22, 2011, at 11:25 PM, Dale Hoffman wrote: Here is a screen image of the installation panel where Flash is mentioned. It appears 2-3 panels into the install process: http://www.margnat.com/tech/Ubuntu/UbuntuInstallFlash.jpg Quote: Ubuntu uses third-party software to display Flash, MP3 and other media, and to work with some wireless hardware. Some of this software is closed-source. That only applies to Intel-based systems; the 'third party' software in this case is supplied by Adobe. It is X86-only. There is the GNASH project and another one that provides flash support without Adobe. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PowerPCFAQ#Flash,%20Flash%20video%20and% 20Gnash -- 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: Sawtooth with ubuntu?
On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:45 AM, Clark Martin wrote: There is the GNASH project and another one that provides flash support without Adobe. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PowerPCFAQ#Flash,%20Flash%20video%20and%20Gnash Here's a follow-up to my Ubunutu experience. Flash is not automatically included in the install with version 10.10. I haven't followed through with GNASH. Display resolution does not match up with the default in preferences (800x600) and there are no options in preferences to select your monitor. I posted this on ubunutuforums.org support and have gotten response from someone who is cobbling code for me that I will have to applie through terminal which I am less than thrilled about. Ubuntu is definitely not as seamless as I had hoped. Dale -- 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 23, 2011, at 7:51 AM, iJohn wrote: On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 3:36 PM, John Carmonne carmo...@aol.com wrote: If I use an external 3.5 7200 RPM via Firewire 400 will I gain speed over the internal HDD 4200 RPM in my Mac Mini? That's a hard one to guess at. But my guess would be no, I don't think you'd see a gain. Or if there was one, it would not be as large as you hoped. When you connect via Firewire 400 you will never be able to move data faster than Firewire 400's 400Mbps bus speed. I suppose it's possible that a 7200 RPM drive would still appear to perform faster than an internal 4200 RPM, but I wouldn't count on it. OK then let me ask is the internal drive Bus 167 speed going to be faster than the same drive connected to the FireWire 400? And does that relate to overall performance of my G4 PPC Mac Mini 1.25? 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 22, 3:36 pm, John Carmonne carmo...@aol.com wrote: If I use an external 3.5 7200 RPM via Firewire 400 will I gain speed over the internal HDD 4200 RPM in my Mac Mini? In my personal experience, my friend, the speed and size of the external drive more than make up for the slower bus (FW vs. ATA). I have used an eMac with an external FW drive for centuries now, and it beats the internal 80GB HDD every time. An internal 7200RP or SSD HDD would definitely speed things up, but they are not cost effective. I would go FW. Just my 2 cents. Best, Felix -- 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: Sawtooth to Sabretooth: The CPU upgrade question
i inherited a sawtooth a few weeks ago, and decided to keep it and upgrade it so i could run leopard and lightroom 2. i bought a 1.6 ghz processor upgrade (Sonnet) from OWC (the link is on one of the low end mac Powermac upgrade pages). it took about 5 minutes to install--run the firmware mod utility that came with the new processor, remove the old processor, drop in the new one, and off to the races. (in order to run the firmware updater to prepare for the new processor, the mac firmware needs to be at 4.2.8. if you need to upgrade the firmware, it's still available on apple's download site. however, the updater app only runs in OS9. took me a couple of days to locate OS9 install disk and get it booted, and then to get the firmware updated.) then i erased the HD and did a clean install of leopard. it runs great. if you can spring for the processor i'd highly recommend it. ken On Jan 23, 9:00 am, dc dbc...@verizon.net wrote: On Jan 23, 3:57 am, Sean Carroll cedarwaxw...@att.net wrote: Current system: Power Mac G4 AGP 450 MHz, 1.25 GB RAM, 160 GB 40 GB hard drives (PATA), Gigabit Ethernet PCI Card, Mac OS X Tiger 10.4.11 and Mac OS 9.2.2 I've found a great deal of useful information about Power Mac G4 AGP CPU upgrades through Low End Mac and scouring the archives here. Personally I wouldn't think a processor upgrade, even a used one, would be worth it if you are getting a new Mac soon. Max out the RAM to 1.5 GB, that should only cost $20 or so. You can also run a freeware utility called Monolingual which will strip out the Intel and G5 architectures from your OS, along with the languages you don't need. It will save around a gig of disk space and let Tiger run much more efficiently. -- 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: Sawtooth with ubuntu?
2011/1/19 skinnie andre.fa...@ua.pt Hi guys,anyone here tried having ubuntu on a G4 450MHz sawtooth? Does it run flash well? Did an Ubuntu 10.10 Install on a ibook G3 500, but had trouble with the screen. The problem is the configuration of the grafic driver. Will try it on a PowerMac G3 450 Greetings Aehne -- 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
GIFs Preview
I downloaded some GIFs that contain motion but Preview never shows that. Is there some setting I am missing or do I need another image viewer? -- Steve Conrad Henrietta, MO 64036 The time has come for mankind to grow up and leave its cradle behind; to go forth and claim our place in outer space. - Capt. Henry Gloval (\__/) (='.'=) ()_() Help Bunny Take Over The World! -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Sawtooth to Sabretooth: The CPU upgrade question
Monolingual is awesome -- Ovi Mail: Making email access easy http://mail.ovi.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: GIFs Preview
Stephen Conrad wrote: I downloaded some GIFs that contain motion but Preview never shows that. Is there some setting I am missing or do I need another image viewer? Control/right click the GIF and choose 'Open with Safari Andy -- 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: GIFs Preview
IIRC you need to open the .gif with a browser or a program specifically written to view animated gif files. Amanda On Jan 23, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Stephen Conrad wrote: I downloaded some GIFs that contain motion but Preview never shows that. Is there some setting I am missing or do I need another image viewer? -- Steve Conrad Henrietta, MO 64036 The time has come for mankind to grow up and leave its cradle behind; to go forth and claim our place in outer space. - Capt. Henry Gloval (\__/) (='.'=) ()_() Help Bunny Take Over The World! -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list -- 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: Can a G5 iMac power supply replace MDD power supply?
On 2011/01/24 06:32, johnwd5 so eloquently wrote: I have been offered a MDD tower with a bad psu. Can I use an iMac psu in place and do I need to make any adjustments? *Anything* is possible, but given the completely different form factors of the two it isn't going to be easy. Doing the ATX PSU mod would probably be easier. Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.5.8 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 8 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1 GB 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: Is LogMeIn the answer?
At 3:29 PM -0700 1/23/2011, Tina K. wrote: To connect from outside your home network, you'll need to forward port 5900 to your husband's Mac in the router configuration. I think that's all it takes, someone please correct me if I've overlooked something. That's fine. A minor, but perhaps important point... First, make sure you use a strong password. This vnc login is giving someone on the outside FULL access to your computer, and thru it FULL access to everything on your home LAN! Next, DO NOT use the default inbound port 5900. That's a well-known port number, that virus/worms/malware often check in their attempts break in. Keep that port CLOSED. Instead, use a port with an obscure number, eg: 65500. Then forward that obscure port to the standard port 5900 on the target Mac. WAN port 65500 - LAN port 5900 on husband's Mac. In the VNC Client, that you're using to connect to your home, simply tell it to use port 65500 instead of the default of 5900. Yea, it's an extra step. But in today's climate it's just NOT a good idea to leave your front door open! FWIW, - 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 23, 2011, at 9:34 AM, Ashgrove wrote: On Jan 22, 3:36 pm, John Carmonne carmo...@aol.com wrote: If I use an external 3.5 7200 RPM via Firewire 400 will I gain speed over the internal HDD 4200 RPM in my Mac Mini? In my personal experience, my friend, the speed and size of the external drive more than make up for the slower bus (FW vs. ATA). I have used an eMac with an external FW drive for centuries now, and it beats the internal 80GB HDD every time. An internal 7200RP or SSD HDD would definitely speed things up, but they are not cost effective. I would go FW. Just my 2 cents. Best, Felix\ After a bunch of testing speeds not only is the external 7200 IDE FW 400 HDD making the 1.25 Mini run faster than the ATA 4200 but Tiger is about 25% faster than Leopard. JOHN CARMONNE Yorba Linda USA From TiBook 867 -- 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
PATA to SATA External HD Enclosures
I have a couple of Oxford 911 Chipset external FW/USB enclosures, normally used with my G4s, but with PATA drives or ATA type Disk Burners. I've run out of PATA drives and ATA/IDE DVD Burners ... Can I use one of those small PATA to SATA adapters to successfully convert them to SATA external drives? and use them with my DA or QS 2002 as FW/USB external drives? One's a Mercury Elite from Other World Computing. The other's fro pyranhatech (sp?) folks ... Any suggestions which ones might be most reliable? Dealers? 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: Screen Redraw Errors / Artifacts in Safari
At 12:52 PM -0500 1/23/2011, Bill Connelly wrote: I'm using the latest Safari under 10.5.8. A Geforce 4MX video card in my Digital Audio Dual 533. I've begun getting errors in the background of Top Sites. Screen isn't fully black, containing streaks and such. Is it my video card / old Sony G420 CRT monitor / Safari? Haven't seen it anywhere else that I can remember. Could be that the top sites cache is corrupted. Try resetting the caches - select Reset Safari from the Safari menu and check the items to clear the top sites, the previews, and the cache. If that doesn't fix... When the artifacts appear, take a screen snapshot (cmd-shift-3) then view that picture. If the artifacts are in the picture then there's something foo on your Mac. If the artifacts aren't there, then they're being produced in the video card. Then perhaps try reseating the card? Clean the cable connectors? - 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: PATA to SATA External HD Enclosures
This will do the trick nicely... http://eshop.macsales.com/item/Addonics/ADSAIDE/ On Jan 24, 2011, at 8:03 AM, Bill Connelly wrote: I have a couple of Oxford 911 Chipset external FW/USB enclosures, normally used with my G4s, but with PATA drives or ATA type Disk Burners. I've run out of PATA drives and ATA/IDE DVD Burners ... Can I use one of those small PATA to SATA adapters to successfully convert them to SATA external drives? and use them with my DA or QS 2002 as FW/USB external drives? One's a Mercury Elite from Other World Computing. The other's fro pyranhatech (sp?) folks ... Any suggestions which ones might be most reliable? Dealers? 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: Can a G5 iMac power supply replace MDD power supply?
On Jan 24, 2011, at 6:32 AM, johnwd5 wrote: I have been offered a MDD tower with a bad psu. Can I use an iMac psu in place and do I need to make any adjustments? No. MDD's take a special PSU, there are ways of modding standard ATX PSU's to fit. -- 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: Is LogMeIn the answer?
On Jan 23, 2011, at 3:29 PM, Tina K. wrote: To connect from outside your home network, you'll need to forward port 5900 to your husband's Mac in the router configuration. I think that's all it takes, someone please correct me if I've overlooked something. And know your external IP address, which can change at times, although cable and dsl leases tend to be very long, and are mostly static, especially if you never reboot your cable/dsl modem. If you can walk your husband through finding your external IP address if it changes, this will work, otherwise a service like dyndns will let you have a fixed ip name that's mapped to your real address at all times. -- 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
Fwd: GIFs Preview
I see, I remember JPegView could view animated GIFs I guess I was hoping we had not taken a step backward to where you had to use your browser to view them -- Steve Conrad Henrietta, MO 64036 The time has come for mankind to grow up and leave its cradle behind; to go forth and claim our place in outer space. - Capt. Henry Gloval (\__/) (='.'=) ()_() Help Bunny Take Over The World! -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Sawtooth with ubuntu?
On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:23 AM, Dale Hoffman wrote: On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:45 AM, Clark Martin wrote: There is the GNASH project and another one that provides flash support without Adobe. https://wiki.ubuntu.com/PowerPCFAQ#Flash,%20Flash%20video%20and% 20Gnash Here's a follow-up to my Ubunutu experience. Flash is not automatically included in the install with version 10.10. I haven't followed through with GNASH. Display resolution does not match up with the default in preferences (800x600) and there are no options in preferences to select your monitor. I posted this on ubunutuforums.org support and have gotten response from someone who is cobbling code for me that I will have to applie through terminal which I am less than thrilled about. Ubuntu is definitely not as seamless as I had hoped. In over a dozen installs of Linux (that's a dozen different distros) I think that only once or twice has the XWindows worked out of the box. Most times it requires adding monitor resolution settings. In some cases it works but at a small resolution. Other times it just can't start X and leaves you in the shell. It's not hard to change but you do need to know what to do. I was able to fix it the first few times by checking on the web. After that I knew what to look for (and had another machine available to use as a template). -- 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 23, 2011, at 9:51 AM, iJohn wrote: That's a hard one to guess at. But my guess would be no, I don't think you'd see a gain. Or if there was one, it would not be as large as you hoped. What? Why are you guessing? These are measurable facts. Guessing about things isn't acceptable. Either you know some factual information or factual reasoning about a topic, or you don't. In this case, YOU DON'T, so you shouldn't have posted. I suppose it's possible that a 7200 RPM drive would still appear to perform faster than an internal 4200 RPM, but I wouldn't count on it. A 7,200 RPM HD is DEFINITELY faster in a FW400 enclosure than either a 5,400 RPM or 4,200 RPM. Have you ever even booted from Firewire on a daily basis? Have you made measurements? Have you streamed video off a Firewire enclosure? Obviously your experience is limited. More to the point, I feel fairly confident that you would not really be able to tell the difference between a (recent) SATA 5400 versus 7200 when connected via Firewire 400. BASED UPON WHAT FACTS? In my experience MEASURING the difference in speed, the difference is LARGE and EASY to tell the difference between. In other words, if you're going to go with a Firewire 400 external drive I'd suggest going with a 5400 drive and save a few bucks. With the recent improvements in platter bit densities over the last year or two, the throughput of 5400 drives has increased noticeably. The difference between 5400 and 7200 is not as noticeable especially when you put that 400 Mbps cap on the drive throughput. It's the HD ITSELF that's the limiting factor here, NOT the Firewire connection. Any gain you make to the HD will transfer directly, arithmetically to the Mini's HD performance. === On Jan 23, 2011, at 10:22 AM, John Carmonne wrote: OK then let me ask is the internal drive Bus 167 speed going to be faster than the same drive connected to the FireWire 400? A 2.5 HD connected to the internal ATA bus is going to be slightly faster than any HD connected via Firewire 400, but if the internal 2.5 HD is the standard OEM 5,400 RPM and the external FW400 is a 3.5 7,200 RPM the difference will be minimalized substantially. The fastest you can achieve will be a SSD connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 2.5 or 5,400RPM 2.5 connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 3.5 connected via Firewire 400, and then any slower HDs connected via FW400. And does that relate to overall performance of my G4 PPC Mac Mini 1.25? The best thing you can do to your 1.25GHz Mini for performance is to overclock it to 1.42GHz. It's a simple overclock IF you can see well, the resistors are TINY. I never soldered mine, they were too small for my soldering ability. Instead, to remove one I cut the solder with an exacto knife (any tiny sharp knife or razor blade might work?), and to add one I used conductive circuit paint using a toothpick. It's a free 15% speed gain with no downside unless you screw-up and botch the job. As Newertech and several other companies noticed, there isn't much downside to booting a PPC Mini from a 3.5 7,200RPM HD instead of the 2.5 5,400 RPM OEM drive, and the proliferation of MiniStack enclosures is a testament to that concept. I've been using my Mini as a media-center computer and I'm trying to squeeze every last bit of performance from it, so I boot from a small internal 2.5 7,200 RPM drive and use a 1 TB Apple Time Capsule for media storage, but this isn't much better than booting from a MiniStack or any good Firewire enclosure with a modern 3.5 HD. Note, there is NO difference in speed between a 3.5 ATA133/150 HD and a 3.5 SATA HD inside a FW400 enclosure. If an SATA HD enclosure are cheaper, that's the best deal, but if you have an older ATA 7,200 RPM HD enclosure it should be identical in performance. There are some Firewire 400 enclosures with poor performance chipsets, but these are rare in more modern enclosures. Definitely avoid anything by GeneSys Logic which will NOT work. Oxford is best, and anything by a HD manufacturer is good. The 1.25 Mini is going to be a little bit too slow to play modern HD video smoothly, the bottleneck isn't the HD, it's the Radeon 9200 video which unfortunately can't be upgraded at all, and severely limits these older PPC Minis. I suspect slower G4 PowerMacs with better video cards can outperform these G4 Minis. About the only thing you can do to get better video card performance is limit the resolution to something smaller. Unfortunately on my HDTV the only proportional resolution available is the highest resolution 1,920x1080 which kills the video performance and renders HD quality video to a stuttering mess. Any lower resolution would increase performance, but in my case, such isn't possible. Tiger 10.4 is about 15-20% faster on the G4 Mini than
Re: Mac Mini HDD speed
A 7,200 RPM HD is DEFINITELY faster in a FW400 enclosure than either a 5,400 RPM or 4,200 RPM. Have you ever even booted from Firewire on a daily basis? Have you made measurements? Have you streamed video off a Firewire enclosure? Obviously your experience is limited. The rotational speed of a drive (3,600 rpm, 4,200 rpm, 5,400 rpm, 7,200 rpm or, indeed, infinite rpm) directly impacts the latency of a drive's performance, generally taken to be one-half of the reciprocal of the effective rpm of the drive. Indeed, using this measure alone, a 7,200 rpm drive is twice as fast as a 3,600 rpm drive. Yeah, right! (3,600 rpm WAS the classic speed of a mainframe drive, but as the demand for higher-capacity drives became evident, the only way to achieve the required higher capacity, within the same hard drive FORM FACTOR, was to REDUCE the rpm, thereby giving a 9 GB capacity from an otherwise 3 GB capacity drive, or an 18 GB capacity from an oherwise 6 GB capacity drive, etcetera). Yet, the average throughput capacity of most drive electronics and host bus adapter electronics remained essentially the same, at about 40 megabytes/second, MAXIMUM. And, the average latency is still one-half of the reciprocal of the rotational speed. Can't change physics. It is immutable. -- 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: Sawtooth with ubuntu?
On Jan 23, 2011, at 6:28 AM, Dale Hoffman wrote: On Jan 23, 2011, at 6:33 AM, skinnie wrote: Wow,I didn't think so much people would answer me :) I've read somethings and it appears that although there is no adobe flahsplayer for ppc linux,there are free alternative flash like gnash. That screen telling about flash in the installation is just generic I think. How do you do have dual boot between mac and ubuntu? When I asked about flash,it is because it is the only thing that I can think that osx may be worse in the powermac. Dual boot between OSX and Ubuntu by installing Ubuntu on a separate volume (either partition your single drive or add a second drive). Then when you start the mac, hold the Option key down and you will get a window showing icons for all viable system equipped volumes. Choose Mac or Ubuntu and you're set. Or you can install Ubuntu on an HD along with OS X. The bootloader gives you a prompt to choose between Ubuntu or OS X (or any other installed OS I think). Clark Martin Redwood City, CA, USA Macintosh / Internet Consulting I'm a designated driver on the Information Super Highway -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Mac Mini HDD speed
Kris, why so hostile? Since FW400 is limited to 400Mbs, and a 5400RPM drive will run 3Gbs, how will a 7200RMP offer more performance when the bottleneck is in the FW400 itself? In any system, one needs to look at where the bottleneck is, and iJohn's guess passed the common sense test with me. An SSD addressed through FW400 will perform no better. Definitely faster? You sure? On Jan 24, 2:51 pm, Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net wrote: On Jan 23, 2011, at 9:51 AM, iJohn wrote: That's a hard one to guess at. But my guess would be no, I don't think you'd see a gain. Or if there was one, it would not be as large as you hoped. What? Why are you guessing? These are measurable facts. Guessing about things isn't acceptable. Either you know some factual information or factual reasoning about a topic, or you don't. In this case, YOU DON'T, so you shouldn't have posted. I suppose it's possible that a 7200 RPM drive would still appear to perform faster than an internal 4200 RPM, but I wouldn't count on it. A 7,200 RPM HD is DEFINITELY faster in a FW400 enclosure than either a 5,400 RPM or 4,200 RPM. Have you ever even booted from Firewire on a daily basis? Have you made measurements? Have you streamed video off a Firewire enclosure? Obviously your experience is limited. More to the point, I feel fairly confident that you would not really be able to tell the difference between a (recent) SATA 5400 versus 7200 when connected via Firewire 400. BASED UPON WHAT FACTS? In my experience MEASURING the difference in speed, the difference is LARGE and EASY to tell the difference between. In other words, if you're going to go with a Firewire 400 external drive I'd suggest going with a 5400 drive and save a few bucks. With the recent improvements in platter bit densities over the last year or two, the throughput of 5400 drives has increased noticeably. The difference between 5400 and 7200 is not as noticeable especially when you put that 400 Mbps cap on the drive throughput. It's the HD ITSELF that's the limiting factor here, NOT the Firewire connection. Any gain you make to the HD will transfer directly, arithmetically to the Mini's HD performance. === On Jan 23, 2011, at 10:22 AM, John Carmonne wrote: OK then let me ask is the internal drive Bus 167 speed going to be faster than the same drive connected to the FireWire 400? A 2.5 HD connected to the internal ATA bus is going to be slightly faster than any HD connected via Firewire 400, but if the internal 2.5 HD is the standard OEM 5,400 RPM and the external FW400 is a 3.5 7,200 RPM the difference will be minimalized substantially. The fastest you can achieve will be a SSD connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 2.5 or 5,400RPM 2.5 connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 3.5 connected via Firewire 400, and then any slower HDs connected via FW400. And does that relate to overall performance of my G4 PPC Mac Mini 1.25? The best thing you can do to your 1.25GHz Mini for performance is to overclock it to 1.42GHz. It's a simple overclock IF you can see well, the resistors are TINY. I never soldered mine, they were too small for my soldering ability. Instead, to remove one I cut the solder with an exacto knife (any tiny sharp knife or razor blade might work?), and to add one I used conductive circuit paint using a toothpick. It's a free 15% speed gain with no downside unless you screw-up and botch the job. As Newertech and several other companies noticed, there isn't much downside to booting a PPC Mini from a 3.5 7,200RPM HD instead of the 2.5 5,400 RPM OEM drive, and the proliferation of MiniStack enclosures is a testament to that concept. I've been using my Mini as a media-center computer and I'm trying to squeeze every last bit of performance from it, so I boot from a small internal 2.5 7,200 RPM drive and use a 1 TB Apple Time Capsule for media storage, but this isn't much better than booting from a MiniStack or any good Firewire enclosure with a modern 3.5 HD. Note, there is NO difference in speed between a 3.5 ATA133/150 HD and a 3.5 SATA HD inside a FW400 enclosure. If an SATA HD enclosure are cheaper, that's the best deal, but if you have an older ATA 7,200 RPM HD enclosure it should be identical in performance. There are some Firewire 400 enclosures with poor performance chipsets, but these are rare in more modern enclosures. Definitely avoid anything by GeneSys Logic which will NOT work. Oxford is best, and anything by a HD manufacturer is good. The 1.25 Mini is going to be a little bit too slow to play modern HD video smoothly, the bottleneck isn't the HD, it's the Radeon 9200 video which unfortunately can't be upgraded at all, and severely limits these older PPC Minis. I suspect slower G4 PowerMacs with
Re: Mac Mini HDD speed
Ok now I'm lost. I thought Kris was referring to IDE not SATA. SATA II and SATA III in a Firewire enclosure will of course run slower than plugged directly into a SATA II or SATA III Controller. From: JoeTaxpayer joetaxpaye...@gmail.com To: G-Group g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Cc: Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 4:46 PM Subject: Re: Mac Mini HDD speed Kris, why so hostile? Since FW400 is limited to 400Mbs, and a 5400RPM drive will run 3Gbs, how will a 7200RMP offer more performance when the bottleneck is in the FW400 itself? In any system, one needs to look at where the bottleneck is, and iJohn's guess passed the common sense test with me. An SSD addressed through FW400 will perform no better. Definitely faster? You sure? On Jan 24, 2:51 pm, Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net wrote: On Jan 23, 2011, at 9:51 AM, iJohn wrote: That's a hard one to guess at. But my guess would be no, I don't think you'd see a gain. Or if there was one, it would not be as large as you hoped. What? Why are you guessing? These are measurable facts. Guessing about things isn't acceptable. Either you know some factual information or factual reasoning about a topic, or you don't. In this case, YOU DON'T, so you shouldn't have posted. I suppose it's possible that a 7200 RPM drive would still appear to perform faster than an internal 4200 RPM, but I wouldn't count on it. A 7,200 RPM HD is DEFINITELY faster in a FW400 enclosure than either a 5,400 RPM or 4,200 RPM. Have you ever even booted from Firewire on a daily basis? Have you made measurements? Have you streamed video off a Firewire enclosure? Obviously your experience is limited. More to the point, I feel fairly confident that you would not really be able to tell the difference between a (recent) SATA 5400 versus 7200 when connected via Firewire 400. BASED UPON WHAT FACTS? In my experience MEASURING the difference in speed, the difference is LARGE and EASY to tell the difference between. In other words, if you're going to go with a Firewire 400 external drive I'd suggest going with a 5400 drive and save a few bucks. With the recent improvements in platter bit densities over the last year or two, the throughput of 5400 drives has increased noticeably. The difference between 5400 and 7200 is not as noticeable especially when you put that 400 Mbps cap on the drive throughput. It's the HD ITSELF that's the limiting factor here, NOT the Firewire connection. Any gain you make to the HD will transfer directly, arithmetically to the Mini's HD performance. === On Jan 23, 2011, at 10:22 AM, John Carmonne wrote: OK then let me ask is the internal drive Bus 167 speed going to be faster than the same drive connected to the FireWire 400? A 2.5 HD connected to the internal ATA bus is going to be slightly faster than any HD connected via Firewire 400, but if the internal 2.5 HD is the standard OEM 5,400 RPM and the external FW400 is a 3.5 7,200 RPM the difference will be minimalized substantially. The fastest you can achieve will be a SSD connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 2.5 or 5,400RPM 2.5 connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 3.5 connected via Firewire 400, and then any slower HDs connected via FW400. And does that relate to overall performance of my G4 PPC Mac Mini 1.25? The best thing you can do to your 1.25GHz Mini for performance is to overclock it to 1.42GHz. It's a simple overclock IF you can see well, the resistors are TINY. I never soldered mine, they were too small for my soldering ability. Instead, to remove one I cut the solder with an exacto knife (any tiny sharp knife or razor blade might work?), and to add one I used conductive circuit paint using a toothpick. It's a free 15% speed gain with no downside unless you screw-up and botch the job. As Newertech and several other companies noticed, there isn't much downside to booting a PPC Mini from a 3.5 7,200RPM HD instead of the 2.5 5,400 RPM OEM drive, and the proliferation of MiniStack enclosures is a testament to that concept. I've been using my Mini as a media-center computer and I'm trying to squeeze every last bit of performance from it, so I boot from a small internal 2.5 7,200 RPM drive and use a 1 TB Apple Time Capsule for media storage, but this isn't much better than booting from a MiniStack or any good Firewire enclosure with a modern 3.5 HD. Note, there is NO difference in speed between a 3.5 ATA133/150 HD and a 3.5 SATA HD inside a FW400 enclosure. If an SATA HD enclosure are cheaper, that's the best deal, but if you have an older ATA 7,200 RPM HD enclosure it should be identical in performance. There are some Firewire 400 enclosures with poor performance chipsets, but these are rare in more modern enclosures. Definitely avoid anything by GeneSys Logic
Re: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 22, 3:58 pm, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: Cyberguys also has 2.5 drives, but all of the drives in this size, IDE/ATA and SATA, are 5400 RPM. The 2.5IDE/ATA drives are Western Digital and come in 80GB ($57), 160GB ($72) and 250GB ($88) capacities. Micro Center stocks WD ATAs in up to and including 320 GB. Micro Center's price on 320s is about $100 ... their price on 160s is about $65. Amazon offers the 5400RPM WD 320GB 2.5 drive for $90 with free shipping. http://www.amazon.com/Western-Digital-2-5-Inch-Notebook-WD3200BEVE/dp/ B001SQH1DY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8s=miscellaneousqid=1295905894sr=8-1 I think I found it one or two other places for about $10 less, but the other places seemed to be offering OEM drives which did not include Western Digital's 3 year warranty. The item description for this drive on Amazon's site claims it has the WD warranty, so even if WD doesn't honor it, one could complain to Amazon. I'm pretty sure there was a 500GB 2.5 PATA drive from WD for a little while, but no one seems to have stock any more. Unless WD announced it and never shipped it? I bought one (the 320GB) for my G4 Mini, but I have not installed it yet. It's going to cause a cascade of upgrades which I'm not quite ready for yet. Jeff Walther -- You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs. The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
Re: Mac Mini HDD speed
If putting it into the mini, it needed to be PATA, but why bother buying a drive that's probably twice the price in an old format to put into a FW enclosure? On Jan 24, 4:51 pm, Albert Carter slvrmoonti...@yahoo.com wrote: Ok now I'm lost. I thought Kris was referring to IDE not SATA. SATA II and SATA III in a Firewire enclosure will of course run slower than plugged directly into a SATA II or SATA III Controller. From: JoeTaxpayer joetaxpaye...@gmail.com To: G-Group g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Cc: Sent: Monday, January 24, 2011 4:46 PM Subject: Re: Mac Mini HDD speed Kris, why so hostile? Since FW400 is limited to 400Mbs, and a 5400RPM drive will run 3Gbs, how will a 7200RMP offer more performance when the bottleneck is in the FW400 itself? In any system, one needs to look at where the bottleneck is, and iJohn's guess passed the common sense test with me. An SSD addressed through FW400 will perform no better. Definitely faster? You sure? On Jan 24, 2:51 pm, Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net wrote: On Jan 23, 2011, at 9:51 AM, iJohn wrote: That's a hard one to guess at. But my guess would be no, I don't think you'd see a gain. Or if there was one, it would not be as large as you hoped. What? Why are you guessing? These are measurable facts. Guessing about things isn't acceptable. Either you know some factual information or factual reasoning about a topic, or you don't. In this case, YOU DON'T, so you shouldn't have posted. I suppose it's possible that a 7200 RPM drive would still appear to perform faster than an internal 4200 RPM, but I wouldn't count on it. A 7,200 RPM HD is DEFINITELY faster in a FW400 enclosure than either a 5,400 RPM or 4,200 RPM. Have you ever even booted from Firewire on a daily basis? Have you made measurements? Have you streamed video off a Firewire enclosure? Obviously your experience is limited. More to the point, I feel fairly confident that you would not really be able to tell the difference between a (recent) SATA 5400 versus 7200 when connected via Firewire 400. BASED UPON WHAT FACTS? In my experience MEASURING the difference in speed, the difference is LARGE and EASY to tell the difference between. In other words, if you're going to go with a Firewire 400 external drive I'd suggest going with a 5400 drive and save a few bucks. With the recent improvements in platter bit densities over the last year or two, the throughput of 5400 drives has increased noticeably. The difference between 5400 and 7200 is not as noticeable especially when you put that 400 Mbps cap on the drive throughput. It's the HD ITSELF that's the limiting factor here, NOT the Firewire connection. Any gain you make to the HD will transfer directly, arithmetically to the Mini's HD performance. === On Jan 23, 2011, at 10:22 AM, John Carmonne wrote: OK then let me ask is the internal drive Bus 167 speed going to be faster than the same drive connected to the FireWire 400? A 2.5 HD connected to the internal ATA bus is going to be slightly faster than any HD connected via Firewire 400, but if the internal 2.5 HD is the standard OEM 5,400 RPM and the external FW400 is a 3.5 7,200 RPM the difference will be minimalized substantially. The fastest you can achieve will be a SSD connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 2.5 or 5,400RPM 2.5 connected to the internal ATA; followed by a 7,200RPM 3.5 connected via Firewire 400, and then any slower HDs connected via FW400. And does that relate to overall performance of my G4 PPC Mac Mini 1.25? The best thing you can do to your 1.25GHz Mini for performance is to overclock it to 1.42GHz. It's a simple overclock IF you can see well, the resistors are TINY. I never soldered mine, they were too small for my soldering ability. Instead, to remove one I cut the solder with an exacto knife (any tiny sharp knife or razor blade might work?), and to add one I used conductive circuit paint using a toothpick. It's a free 15% speed gain with no downside unless you screw-up and botch the job. As Newertech and several other companies noticed, there isn't much downside to booting a PPC Mini from a 3.5 7,200RPM HD instead of the 2.5 5,400 RPM OEM drive, and the proliferation of MiniStack enclosures is a testament to that concept. I've been using my Mini as a media-center computer and I'm trying to squeeze every last bit of performance from it, so I boot from a small internal 2.5 7,200 RPM drive and use a 1 TB Apple Time Capsule for media storage, but this isn't much better than booting from a MiniStack or any good Firewire enclosure with a modern 3.5 HD. Note, there is NO difference in speed between a 3.5 ATA133/150 HD and a 3.5 SATA HD inside a FW400 enclosure. If an SATA HD enclosure
Re: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:46 PM, JoeTaxpayer wrote: why so hostile? Tired of dealing with guessing. Definitely faster? You sure? Yes, I'm sure. To confirm that from a 2nd source, look to the original poster who says: After a bunch of testing speeds not only is the external 7200 IDE FW 400 HDD making the 1.25 Mini run faster than the ATA 4200 but Tiger is about 25% faster than Leopard. Notice the word testing. I've also done this testing myself. Yes, I am sure. -- 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
Help needed for Mac Powerbook M7572, reload
Hi experts, I did a dumb thing, I wiped the hard drive of this computer instead of writing all 0's. Now I can't reload an operating system. I have tried several ways including using an external DVD reader. I want to reload Mac OS10.3.2 Panther then OSX10.4 Tiger, both of which I have. Any help will be appreciated. Wm. in Bay Village, Ohio -- 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: Help needed for Mac Powerbook M7572, reload
On 24 Jan 2011, at 23:03, Wm. Arnold wrote: Hi experts, I did a dumb thing, I wiped the hard drive of this computer instead of writing all 0's. Now I can't reload an operating system. I have tried several ways including using an external DVD reader. I want to reload Mac OS10.3.2 Panther then OSX10.4 Tiger, both of which I have. Any help will be appreciated. Wm. in Bay Village, Ohio Not sure I qualify as an expert, but what messages is it giving you when you try and boot it from the install cd/dvd? If you have another mac available, can you boot the powerbook into target disk mode and hook them together with a firewire cable and install the OS from the other mac? Hope that makes some sort of sense Mike -- 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: Help needed for Mac Powerbook M7572, reload
On Jan 24, 2011, at 4:03 PM, Wm. Arnold wrote: Hi experts, I did a dumb thing, I wiped the hard drive of this computer instead of writing all 0's. This should be the same thing. Now I can't reload an operating system. I have tried several ways including using an external DVD reader. Does it boot from the OS X installer? If so use Disk Utility to repair the hard drive and reformat it. -- 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: Help needed for Mac Powerbook M7572, reload
On Jan 24, 2011, at 5:03 PM, Wm. Arnold wrote: I did a dumb thing, I wiped the hard drive of this computer instead of writing all 0's. This doesn't make sense because writing all 0's is wiping the hard drive. You meant you wrote all zeros and wiped the HD. Now I can't reload an operating system. I have tried several ways including using an external DVD reader. I want to reload Mac OS10.3.2 Panther then OSX10.4 Tiger, both of which I have. You don't need to reinstall Panther unless your 10.4 DVD is an upgrade DVD? Even then, you could convert the upgrade DVD into a full install DVD and skip the Panther, but that may be too much work. Boot either install DVD. Go to Disk Utility and Partition the HD into one partition with the Option of Apple Partition Format and HFS + extended (journaled) file system. Then quit Disk Utility and run the installer normally. If you can't boot the DVD from the internal optical drive, to boot from an external Firewire you can hold the Option key while the external is powered up with the DVD in the unit already. If you're trying to boot from USB this probably won't work on a PPC PowerBook, USB booting is generally Intel only and early colored iBooks and iMacs. -- 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: Help needed for Mac Powerbook M7572, reload
On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Wm. Arnold w_arn...@att.net wrote: Hi experts, I did a dumb thing, I wiped the hard drive of this computer instead of writing all 0's. Now I can't reload an operating system. I have tried several ways including using an external DVD reader. I want to reload Mac OS10.3.2 Panther then OSX10.4 Tiger, both of which I have. Any help will be appreciated. Wm. in Bay Village, Ohio ___ If you low-level formatted it it is now a paper weight. Just forget it and get another. I am speaking from experience as I have done this and had others do it to my drives as well. Best to forgive and forget. Drives are relatively cheap. The data may have been precious. But was it precious enough to back up? In my case well . .. . i was just in a hurry ! -- 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/ -- 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
At 12:06 PM -0800 1/24/2011, peterh...@cruzio.com wrote: Yet, the average throughput capacity of most drive electronics and host bus adapter electronics remained essentially the same, at about 40 megabytes/second, MAXIMUM. This is not about raw or sustained throughput. If all people did was a single latency/seek cycle then read or write whole cylinders,,, then the rotational speed of a drive would not matter so much. The bottleneck would be the interfaces and buffers. But that's just not the case. People rarely read/write whole tracks at once on a HD. They grab a few sectors then WAIT for that latency and seek cycle, grab a few other sectors then WAIT for that latency and seek cycle, grab a few other sectors then WAIT for that latency and seek cycle, etc. Those WAIT cycles are soo long, the net effect is that it doesn't matter how fast the actual read/write time is on the drive, or the interface speeds (once they're fast enough)... what matters is how long YOU are bored to death waiting for your system to gather all the data you need. A faster rotational speed = shorter latency = shorter wait times = higher performance. - 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
To be clear, you're talking PATA in the external FW enclosure, correct? In which case the numbers support your position. I don't know that it makes sense to go buy a PATA drive to load into an enclosure, one can buy a 1TB external for less than the 320GB PATA going into the FW box. An odd choice. On Jan 24, 5:53 pm, Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net wrote: On Jan 24, 2011, at 3:46 PM, JoeTaxpayer wrote: why so hostile? Tired of dealing with guessing. Definitely faster? You sure? Yes, I'm sure. -- 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: Mac Mini HDD speed
On Jan 24, 2011, at 7:17 PM, JoeTaxpayer wrote: To be clear, you're talking PATA in the external FW enclosure, correct? No. It doesn't make any difference. It can be SATA I, SATA II, PATA133, or PATA150 . They're all going to be roughly the same speed as single HDs. A newer 7,200 RPM PATA HD is generally going to be a faster HD than any 5,400 RPM SATA HD. We're talking about SINGLE HDs, not RAID HDs. For normal SINGLE HD setups, it's the rotational speed and the latency of the HD that are important, NOT the connection speed to the computer. The only exception would be for extremely old, slow connections like USB 1.1 or older SCSI. For modern ATA, SATA, eSATA, USB 2.0, USB 3.0, FW400, FW800, FW1600, or FW3200 with a SINGLE HD there's not going to be much noticeable difference in performance for the user. The factor with the single greatest influence will be the HD itself. Its rotational speed is directly proportional to its latency. I learned this THE HARD WAY, I actually BOUGHT FW800 enclosures expecting them to be TWICE AS FAST as my old FW400 enclosures, but when I TESTED THEM, they were the SAME SPEED, not because they're not CAPABLE of twice as fast, but because you'd need a RAID of multiple HDs to saturate the connection. This whole 1.5 Gbps or 3.0 Gbps thing for individual HDs is 100% hype. No single HD can sustain anything near that rate. Mechanical LATENCY is the reason. It doesn't matter how fast the electronics can move bits when the mechanical parts can't move equally as fast. HD RPM is one direct method to lower latency. Like Dan said, it's the WAIT cycles that are the killer here, not the speed of the connection. To quote Dan, A faster rotational speed = shorter latency = shorter wait times = higher performance. The connection speed isn't important, it's NOT THE LIMITING FACTOR for a single modern HDs. Sorry for being so hostile today. I don't like guessing about facts. I don't like using advertising hype as a substitute for reality. I'm a little frustrated and my patience is thin. Too much snow, too much cold, too much cabin fever. -- 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: Is LogMeIn the answer?
On 2011/01/24 08:33, Dan so eloquently wrote: First, make sure you use a strong password. This vnc login is giving someone on the outside FULL access to your computer, and thru it FULL access to everything on your home LAN! Next, DO NOT use the default inbound port 5900. That's a well-known port number, that virus/worms/malware often check in their attempts break in. Keep that port CLOSED. Instead, use a port with an obscure number, eg: 65500. Then forward that obscure port to the standard port 5900 on the target Mac. WAN port 65500 - LAN port 5900 on husband's Mac. In the VNC Client, that you're using to connect to your home, simply tell it to use port 65500 instead of the default of 5900. Yea, it's an extra step. But in today's climate it's just NOT a good idea to leave your front door open! Excellent suggestions, thank you. I need to do this myself. Tina -- iMac 20 USB 2 1.25GHz G4 2GB RAM GeForce FX 5200 Ultra 64MB 10.4.11 PB G4 15 HR-DLSD 1.67GHz G4 2GB RAM Radeon 9700 128MB VRAM 10.5.8 Mac Pro Mid-2010 2.8 GHz QC 8 GB RAM Radeon HD 5770 1 GB 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: Screen Redraw Errors / Artifacts in Safari
On Jan 24, 2011, at 11:21 AM, Dan wrote: At 12:52 PM -0500 1/23/2011, Bill Connelly wrote: I'm using the latest Safari under 10.5.8. A Geforce 4MX video card in my Digital Audio Dual 533. I've begun getting errors in the background of Top Sites. Screen isn't fully black, containing streaks and such. Is it my video card / old Sony G420 CRT monitor / Safari? Haven't seen it anywhere else that I can remember. Could be that the top sites cache is corrupted. Try resetting the caches - select Reset Safari from the Safari menu and check the items to clear the top sites, the previews, and the cache. If that doesn't fix... When the artifacts appear, take a screen snapshot (cmd-shift-3) then view that picture. If the artifacts are in the picture then there's something foo on your Mac. If the artifacts aren't there, then they're being produced in the video card. Then perhaps try reseating the card? Clean the cable connectors? Well ... I tried Reset Safari to no avail, then tried disassembling my Mac, reseating all PCI cards (SATA and USB2) and memory after cleaning contacts. The streaking only appears regularly in Safari's Top Sites window. iTunes in Cover Flow doesn't show any issues. Don't know. -- 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: Help needed for Mac Powerbook M7572, reload
Sounds like the DVD install can't Find The hardrive. Hum! That was bad if you are not familiar with Mac issues. Lets think about it On Jan 24, 2011, at 6:19 PM, Wallace Adrian D'Alessio fluxstrin...@gmail.com wrote: On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 6:03 PM, Wm. Arnold w_arn...@att.net wrote: Hi experts, I did a dumb thing, I wiped the hard drive of this computer instead of writing all 0's. Now I can't reload an operating system. I have tried several ways including using an external DVD reader. I want to reload Mac OS10.3.2 Panther then OSX10.4 Tiger, both of which I have. Any help will be appreciated. Wm. in Bay Village, Ohio ___ If you low-level formatted it it is now a paper weight. Just forget it and get another. I am speaking from experience as I have done this and had others do it to my drives as well. Best to forgive and forget. Drives are relatively cheap. The data may have been precious. But was it precious enough to back up? In my case well . .. . i was just in a hurry ! -- 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/ -- 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
