Re: emac hard drive

[iJohn]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 7:01 PM, Jonas Ulrich wrote:
> USB sucks on mac. Firewire is definately the way to go.

While I wouldn't completely agree that USB 2.0 sucks compared to
Firewire, I have no problem asserting that USB 2.0 is definitely a lot
less special than Firewire is when it comes to throughput for an
external drive.

I have found this to be true regardless of the platform. Firewire is
(slightly but definitely) better than USB 2.0 on both a Mac and a PC.
(At least in my experience).

That said, I saw my first USB 3.0 article today. Dang! And I was just
beginning to reconcile myself to a world dominated by USB 2.0 and
eSATA ...

-irrationa john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: USB Need

[iJohn]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Isaac Smith wrote:
>> I have a camera that takes a USB connector to connect it to my Mac.
>> The problem is I need a Male to Male connector.

One of the reasons I have always disliked the USB protocol is that the
designers seemed to have a connector fetish. Why else would they have
included so many different types of connectors.

Anyway, at times like this I don't really know how else to figure out
what the other person thinks they need than to reference some sort of
USB connector chart. For convenience I just went to the dreaded
wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB#Types_of_USB_connector

Do any of those connector types look familar?

Could you say which of them your camera need to connect to a PC?
Type-A or Type B or the mini or micro flavors? And are you sure both
ends need to be the same type of connector? (That's less common in my
experience with USB ... but maybe I'm just showing my lack of
experience?)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Safari 4.0

[iJohn]

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 11:41 PM, insightinmind wrote:
> On Jun 18, 2009, at 11:35 PM, irrational john wrote:
>> A Safari Version 4.0.1 update is now available.
>
> i don't see it with my Tiger Software update ...

My apologies ... I'm not sure if it IS available for Tiger yet. It
definitely is up on the apple downloads site for Leopard though.

If you download Safari directly for Leopard you get a file named:
Safari4.0.1Leo.dmg, but for Tiger you (still) get the file
Safari4.0Tiger.dmg.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Safari 4.0

[iJohn]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 2:05 PM, Dan wrote:
> At 8:35 PM -0700 6/18/2009, irrational john wrote:
> Elaborate please - exactly what isn't working?  I've played with just
> about everything in the GMail web interface and it seems to work
> quite well with Safari 4.0.

When I use gmail on my MacBook in OSX ... which is usually Safari ...
selecting items via the checkbox and then clicking the top delete
button does nothing. The mail is not deleted. I think this also
happens in Firefox, but I tend not to use Firefox as much on the
MacBook so my memory isn't clear.

If I scroll down and, without changing anything else, I instead click
on the delete button at the bottom of the mail list, then the selected
items are deleted.

Makes absolutely no sense to me and part of me assumes it's a gmail
bug. However I never have this problem when I'm working with gmail on
my Windows desktop so if it's a gmail web bug, it's surprisingly
platform specific. I don't recall trying this in a browser in Windows
running in a Parallels VM. (Of all the reasons I can think of to have
access to Windows VM on a Mac, the ability to run a browser under
Windows is definitely *NOT* one of them.)

Still, maybe I'll give that a try just to see if I notice a difference.

I was hoping that this Safari update might have changed something
relating to this problem, but it didn't. I'm still seeing the problem.
It's just intermittent. No rational reason to expect it would fix this
problem since I'm not even sure it's a Safari problem. I was just a
wishin' and a hopin' ...

> What inputmanagers, plug-ins, etc have you installed?
> Does the problem still occur when you eliminate them?

What's an input manager? Or, to put it another way, I have no input
managers or plug-ins that I know of. I pretty much use Safari exactly
as it was installed without extending it with anything much other than
adding bookmarks.

I suppose I could try removing/uninstalling Safari in some way and
then reinstalling it. Maybe there's some weird interaction between the
former beta install and the non-beta code release code I'm using now?

But I doubt that this would really do anything. Mac apps seem to be a
lot less prone to problems generated by "partial updates".

Actually this could also have started around the time I installed the
OS X 10.5.7 update so I suppose I could as easily blame that.

FWIW I also have problems with the cursor disappearing on me. I think
that's somehow related to how full screen web video is processed. That
one's been with me for at least two months or longer.

It's all annoying and I'd like to get it fixed, but I'm not
exasperated or desperate yet. It's just very annoying.

If nothing else I'm hoping that moving to Snow Leopard will fix it.
Yeah! That's the ticket! Snow Leopard will fix *everything*! Sure it
will ... ;-)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Orig. Airport card vs. PCI wireless card

[iJohn]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 5:03 PM, Arnel Tuazon wrote:
> On 19/06/09 10:01 AM, "Jason"  wrote:
>>
>> Hello there. I just put an aftermarket pci wireless card into my sons dual G4
>> 450 powermac. It is very stable, no drivers were needed and he gets fast
>> internet upstairs in his room. Hope this helps
>>
>
> Make? Model?

To which I'd also ask, what does it protocols support?

And ball-park what did it cost you? I'm just curious what wireless
equipment is going for. I'm anticipating a 802.11g firesale ... but
then again it may have already happened and I just missed seeing it.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Orig. Airport card vs. PCI wireless card

[iJohn]

On Fri, Jun 19, 2009 at 10:11 PM, ah...clem wrote:
>
> new to this topic.  perhaps i missed it in the deluge of replies, but
> it seems no one addressed the point of cost vs protocol (b or n).
> 
> if all you are doing
> is connecting the base station to a DSL modem or a shared printer, and
> to other computers which are basically independent clients of the DSL
> and/or printer, then the older, cheaper, 802.11b card is already
> faster than the DSL, and probably faster than the printer, so you
> won't "see" any discernible difference in performance.

I think I understand the point you're trying to make, but I also think
I disagree with it.

While on paper an 802.11b connection may be more than enough to handle
the throughput of a DSL connection, it also doesn't leave a lot of
buffer space.

If the computer is always going to be 10 feet from the router with no
signal barriers and the max throughput will always be limited to that
of a DSL connection, then wireless b may be fine.

But what if he decides to move the router or computer so they are now
separated by a room or two or three. Suddenly what was borderline
adequate becomes noticeably inadequate.

Another reason IMO to avoid these ancient 802.11b devices is because
the only security they may support is WEP. WEP has become such a joke
that I believe no one bothers to talk about how to hack it. Instead
they focus on finding the *fastest* way to hack it. There are "how to"
articles out there you can easily find with Google.

> NEVER buy more horsepower than you are actually using right now.
> if you ever need more in the future, it will be cheaper (and probably
> better) then.

Trying to go for the tightest fit to your current needs can also be a
false economy. I think a better metric is the cost at the margin. If
it costs you 5-10% more beyond your base cost to increase your
performance by more than 100% then it may well be worth it to do that.
 Penny wise versus pound foolish and all that.

I really don't know if I'd recommend that the OP go with wireless n at
this point. He's never really said much about what he expects his
network to look like. But at this point in time I also couldn't
justify going with b unless the adapter is a total freebie and he has
absolutely no concerns about who hacks into his wireless. A good
enough g adapter is just not that expensive these days.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Safari 4.0

[iJohn]

On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Dan wrote:
>>  > What inputmanagers, plug-ins, etc have you installed?
>>>  Does the problem still occur when you eliminate them?

Does this help? If you see something you think is worth taking the
time to try omitting I might try it. But I'm not eager to try
eliminating anything in /Library just to "see what happens" ...

In my experience, simply "trying it" is not sufficient to test for
this problem. It's intermittent. It works fine and then it doesn't.
Whatever the pattern might be I haven't picked up on it.

bash-3.2# ls -l /Library/InputManagers
total 0
drwxr-xr-x  4 root  wheel  136 May 26  2008 LCC Scroll Enhancer Loader
bash-3.2# ls -l /Library/Internet?Plug-Ins
total 48
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Mar 22 23:14 AdobePDFViewer.plugin
drwxrwxrwx  2 GhostMonk  admin68 Feb 27 10:08 Disabled Plug-Ins
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 May 13 02:51 Flash Player.plugin
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Aug 15  2008 Flip4Mac WMV Plugin.plugin
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Aug 15  2008 Flip4Mac WMV Plugin.webplugin
lrwxr-xr-x  1 root   admin76 Jun 16 01:15
JavaPluginCocoa.bundle ->
/System/Library/Frameworks/JavaVM.framework/Resources/JavaPluginCocoa.bundle
-rwxrwxr-x@ 1 root   admin  4752 Feb  7  2006 NP-PPC-Dir-Shockwave
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Sep 24  2007 Quartz Composer.webplugin
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Jun 18 23:22 QuickTime Plugin.plugin
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Jun 14  2008 QuickTime Plugin.webplugin
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Jan 15 08:21 Silverlight.plugin
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Dec 12  2007 VerifiedDownloadPlugin.plugin
-rw-r--r--  1 root   admin   856 Feb  5 22:12 flashplayer.xpt
drwxrwxr-x  3 root   admin   102 Jul 14  2008 iPhotoPhotocast.plugin
-rw-rw-r--  1 root   admin  2394 May 27 21:43 nsIQTScriptablePlugin.xpt
bash-3.2# ls -l /Users/GhostMonk/Library/InputManagers
ls: /Users/GhostMonk/Library/InputManagers: No such file or directory
bash-3.2# ls -l /Users/GhostMonk/Library/Internet?Plug-Ins
total 0
drwxr-xr-x  3 GhostMonk  admin  102 Mar  9 13:28 Move-Media-Player.plugin
bash-3.2#

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Safari 4.0

[iJohn]

On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Dan wrote:
> Think isn't good enough.  Be specific.  Try it.  You're talking about
> a GMail function failing on two totally different platforms
> (Safari/WebKit vs Firefox/Gecko), and to be frank, that just doesn't
> make sense.
>

I'm sorry that the bugs that happen to hit me don't bother to make
sense for you. FWIW, it doesn't make any sense to me either. And I'd
just as soon *not* be experiencing this.

Oh, well.

And while this may or may not be true, from my naive way of viewing
things, it's now gone to potentially *three* totally different
platforms. I just ... as in just now a few minutes ago ... experienced
the same problem with Firefox 3.0.11 running in 64-bit Windows 7 on my
desktop machine, a Core 2 Duo E4300 in a Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 with 4GB
of RAM.

At least we know it's not anything specific to a Mac or a MacBook now
... I still have no idea what the problem is, but I'm guessing it
lives somewhere in the upper bowels of Google's gmail implementation.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Fwd: monitor

[iJohn]

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 8:22 AM, Lawrence David Eden wrote:
>
> Can anyone give me an idea of what to look for in a new monitor?  Specs?

I don't consider myself very knowledgeable about monitors ... I'm
partially color blind for one thing ... so I wasn't going to say
anything.

In hindsight I suppose I could off up my pet peeve with my current
monitor, a 19" Samsung 941BW. When watching some video, it's clear in
dimly lit scenes that the contrast is not as good as what I took for
granted on my previous CRT monitor.

That said it doesn't bug me enough to change. But one thing you might
consider in a new monitor is how good a contrast ratio (?) it has.
FWIW, I think most of the latest crop of monitors is much better than
than the one I have.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Help! HD filling up issue

[iJohn]

On Sun, Jul 5, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Po-en Tsai wrote:
> Download the utility called 'Disk Inventory X' and run it on your OSX HDD.
> It will tell you what is taking up space on your computer, and where it is.
> Then you can delete whatever you dont need.
>
> Disk Inventory X: http://www.derlien.com/

Yes, but ..
"Disk Inventory X is a disk usage utility for Mac OS X 10.3 (and later)."

And if I recall correctly, he's running OS X 10.2

-irrationally literal john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Return to PowerPC?

[iJohn]

On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 12:49 AM, Mullin9 wrote:
> Will Apple return to PPC processors?
> I experienced smoother Game Graphics on a 2 GHz G5 Mac with 256 MB of
> VRAM,
> than I had on a 2 GHz Intel Mac,  with 256 MB of VRAM,
> both my Macs have 2 GB of RAM.

Could you provide a little more detail? Which Intel Mac were you
using? What did it use for video?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Was;Return to PowerPC?Now HackinSonyMac

[iJohn]

On Wed, Jul 8, 2009 at 11:34 AM, Wallace Adrian
D'Alessio wrote:
> But Nanny, how is running OS X on a Playstation 3 any less of a violation
> of the Apple EULA than running it on an Intel or AMD machine i.e. a (
> non- Apple ) PC? Even that running under emulation?

Or, I don't know, maybe because running OS X on a PS3 is just so
freakin' unlikely to happen in any useful/meaningful/product
threatening way that it qualifies for the "Who really frickin' cares?"
exception?

I think I remember seeing an article a long while ago about an
"exposure" in one of the HD disc formats. Supposedly at that time you
could grab screen shots and thus get a digital HD copy of a movie.
Frame. By. Frickin'. Frame.

The things some people will actually bother to worry about sometimes
astounds me.

-irrational ... even *I* think this is a stretch and I'm not really
sane! ... john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: VideoLan has finally reached version 1.0.0

[iJohn]

On Thu, Jul 9, 2009 at 11:17 PM, tortoise wrote:
> In this case I am not sure what the strategy means. It could mean the
> end of ppc support, it could mean that the project as a whole is
> considered complete and the team is breaking up, in which case someone
> may do minor updates or take it over and/or big changes in the program
> will ensue shortly.

Well, the following is a brief excerpt from the web site:

"The VideoLAN project is pleased to announce the release of the first
version of the Goldeneye branch of VLC: 1.0.0.
This major release introduces many new features, new formats and new
codecs to the VLC multimedia framework and fixes a very high number of
bugs that were present in the 0.9.x or 0.8.6 versions."

I haven't noticed yet what the differences are from the 0.9 releases,
but I trust that they are there.

As for what platform it runs on ... my primary use of VLC has been on
Windows. I only started using it on OS X a few months ago when I got a
MacBook.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Airport "N" + dialup?

[iJohn]

On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 10:46 AM, Dan wrote:
> Don't NAT your NAT.
> Use the AEg as your WAN connection.
> Plug the ARn into your LAN, as you would any wired computer.
> Disable NAT and DHCP in it.
> Then you can connect to the ARn's wi-fi, and it will route you out
> thru the AEg, with the AEg providing NAT and DHCP services to your
> LAN.

Yeah, what Dan said.

Other more or less stock wireless suggestions would be:

1) If you're not using the 802.11g in your AEg then turn off that
radio so it can't interfere with the AEn.

2) If you ARE using both the 802.11g and 802.11n, then try to locate
the routers at least 5-10 feet apart and at least 1 foot from a wall.
If they are both using the 2.4 GHz band, then make sure the channels
they are using are as far apart as possible.

3) Postition the AirPort(s) as high and as centrally located as
possible to get the best coverage & signal strength. (Just read a
thread from someone complaining about how bad his wireless n was.
Turns out he had his router on the floor of a closet. Moving it to the
top apparently made a very noticeable difference to his throughput.)

Other suggestions in the link below might also be of interest to you.
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30182/228/

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Ethernet headaches

[iJohn]

On Sat, Jul 18, 2009 at 3:54 AM, Chris Ferne wrote:
> The two computers are also individually connected by wifi to a
> separate router/modem at the other end of the house.

Not sure I understood that correctly. Are you saying you have two
systems which are connected to two LANs at the same time? (Something
along the lines of a diagram might help ...)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Best way to clone a hard drive to use as a start-up drive?

[iJohn]

On Mon, Jul 27, 2009 at 8:09 PM, George R. Hozendorf wrote:
> CCC is much more reliable.

I can't refute or confirm that because I only have experience using
the Leopard Disk Utility on an Intel MacBook. In my case, I connected
the drives, did the copy, then booted from the destination drive. It
seems reliable ... and painless ... enough to me.

In what way is the Leopard Disk Utility less reliable? Are there are
issues using Leopard's Disk Utility on the older PPC Macs that I'm not
aware of ... ???

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: will a PPC cloned boot drive work as the boot drive for an Intel?

[iJohn]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 3:12 PM,  wrote:
> Does anyone know if an Intel
> Mac can be booted from a PPC boot drive?

While I can't answer the question, I would certainly hope that this
would *NOT* work.

If if did, then that would imply that the program binaries used by
both the PPC & Intel Macs was being stored on your PPC hard drive. IMO
that would be a lot of wasted space! (Lord knows I don't want any OS X
PPC binaries on my Intel MacBook's hard drive.)

> I wouldn't bother; however, the mail, calendar, and address book files don't
> seem to be readily accessible.

No doubt someone else will point you towards a way to migrate the data
for these apps to your mini. But a possible (alternative) brute force
approach that might work for you would be to
(1) clone your existing PPC clone to another disk, partition, or image
to make sure it is saved.
(2) attach the cloned PPC clone to the mini as an external drive
(3) use the install disks that came with mini to do an "Archive and
Install" to the external drive (PPC partition) the tech saved for you.
Choose the install option which will preserve the existing user
settings of the OS X on the external drive.

Hopefully this will result in a migrating the PPC version of OS X to
an Intel flavor which will boot on the mini and with the old settings
and data for you mail, calendar, and address book preserved.
(REMEMBER: Just make sure you don't destroy the original data just in
case something goes wrong).

What flavor of Mac Mini do you have? And what version of OS X is it using?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: will a PPC cloned boot drive work as the boot drive for an Intel?

[iJohn]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:23 PM, McGrude wrote:
> They're all universal binaries...

Well, if that's the case then you've just explained how Apple was able
to actually "shrink" the size of OS X in Snow Leopard. Getting rid of
the PPC binaries would certainly accomplish that. (Funny I've never
seen this pointed out before.)

Yet another reason to move to Snow Leopard this fall ...

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: will a PPC cloned boot drive work as the boot drive for an Intel?

[iJohn]

On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 4:38 PM, McGrude wrote:
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:32 PM, iJohn wrote:
>> Yet another reason to move to Snow Leopard this fall ...
>
> No need to wait.   Download monolingual...

Thanks for the suggestion, but I'll wait. I'm still too new to the Mac
& to OS X and thus (obviously) too naive about the basics. I'm not
particularly squeezed for space at the moment so I'll stay with what
Apple has blessed rather than go out on a limb.

I'm just surprised that the universal binaries were used for OS X. It
appears that during the migration to the Intel Macs back circa 2006
that Apple essentially "bloated up" OS X by including binaries for
both CPUs. Now with the advent of Snow Leopard only the Intel binaries
will be installed and ... surprise!! ... the size of OS X suddenly
shrinks. Such technical genius!

The situation reminds me of those wonderful department store jewelry
sales offering you 30% off! What is not mentioned is that they
increased the list price by 80% before putting it on sale. Such a
deal! ;-)

Anyway  to return to the original poster's question, why wouldn't
his PPC partition boot on his mini? The first question which comes to
my mind is if the OS used on his PPC also used the universal binaries.
I assume that if it's anything earlier than the 10.4.4 (Intel) update
to Tiger that there's no way that it could work on an Intel Mac Mini.

-irrational john


-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Window position assignment drives us nuts

[iJohn]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 5:42 PM, Richard
Gerome wrote:
> Also with FireFox it doesn't open another window it uses tabs in the same 
> window
> and you can click from tab to tab to tab without trouble of any kind!!!\

Actually, you can use tabs with Safari as well ... which is what I
usually do so I'm not sure what window placement concerns the OP is
referring to.

I usually have only one (maximized) window of safari open at a time as
I use spaces to keep my single Safari window separate from other apps
I happen to have open. And when I do happen to open more than one
window, I will often use the menu option to consolidate all the
windows into a single tabbed window. (The one feature exclusive to
Safari that I wish would show up in other tabbed browsers such as
Firefox ...)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Window position assignment drives us nuts

[iJohn]

On Fri, Jul 31, 2009 at 10:52 PM, Jonas Lopez wrote:
> ... so you tug the window off to the side and open a new window, search 
> Google,
> get the info you wanted and now move the email window back to the main 
> position
> and paste it into the email.

Slightly off topic (again) and mentioned (again) just FWIW ... have
you tried expose and/or spaces? It took me a bit to get used to using
expose mouse shortcuts (?) to bring one window or another to the
foreground without changing their relative position. But after using
it a bit and then a bit more it is starting to grow on me.

http://www.apple.com/macosx/what-is-macosx/expose.html

But to each their own ...

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are subscribed Low End Mac's G3-5 List, 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
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list-unsubscr...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list?hl=en
Low End Mac RSS feed at feed://lowendmac.com/feed.xml
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: Next for PPC?

[iJohn]

On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 1:10 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote:
> I guess Apple is going the Intel-only path because for Apple this means that
> people will _have to_ buy a new Mac.

Of course, I don't actually know anything about why Apple went with
Intel CPUs. But IMO it had little to do with "forcing" people to buy
new Mac hardware.

Apple appears to be very pragmatic when it comes to their hardware
these days. They probably have two things in mind: (1) driving towards
reducing their production costs and (2) getting hardware that meets
their requirements (whatever those happen to be).

I expect they went with Intel CPUs because they decided they were
never going to get the same combination of availability, cost, &
performance from PPC processors that they could get from Intel. But
they are also clearly not locked into Intel products per se. Just look
at how "quickly" Apple abandoned the Intel internal graphics chipsets
for NVIDIA's, ostensibly because NVIDIA's solutions provide much
better performance.

>From a corporate/business point of view, switching CPUs is one big
drawn out furshluggin' pain in the posterior. I think Apple would only
have done it after debating the pros & cons and deciding going with
Intel would definitely result in the most benefit for the company's
products in the longer term.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Question about how Time Machine works

[iJohn]

On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 9:56 PM, Tom wrote:
> How 'bout this plan, then: I put the first of the new drives in the G5
> alongside the old drive that's still working, and clone the old to the
> Then I toss the old drive and put in the second new one, install
> OS 10.5 on it, and let Time Machine restore the dead drive's data to
> that one.

It sounds as though you intend to install OS X 10.5 on both of your
drives so that both of them are bootable. Any particular reason why?
Is this a common way to go in the Mac world?

> I suppose I could stick the old working drive into an external
> enclosure and keep on using it, if such can be had cheaply somewhere.

Depends on what you mean by "cheaply". I think they run between $20 to
$30, although you can of course always pay more. Here's a link to
(some of) what's over at newegg just FYIW: http://tinyurl.com/mkulqg

If it were me, one of the things I'd consider is how big the old drive
is. And as I said I'd run the manufacturer's diagnostics on it ... and
possible also the exerciser in the Hitachi Drive Fitness Test software
... to try to get an idea how reliable it still was. But you'd need an
Intel system to run those tools. I don't think the drive manufacturers
offer diagnostic software that runs on a Power PC platform.

How big is your "not dead yet" 5 year old drive?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Question about how Time Machine works

[iJohn]

On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Tom wrote:
> So, with two drives backed up in Time Machine, I should be able to
> boot from the OS installer disk twice, and each time restore the
> contents of an old drive to its new replacement drive.

Yes, you should not need to install OS X to a drive just to be able to
restore the data on it from Time Machine.

Also, while I haven't done it so I can't say for sure, I don't think
you'd have to boot from the install disc twice. You should only need
to boot from the install DVD once and then just use the “Restore
System From Backup…” utility to restore first one disk and then the
other.

Of course, before you began this entire process you'd want to make
sure you have a current back up of your "not dead yet" drive you're
going to replace. Just to make sure your backup contains a complete
copy of that drive.

I see there are also notes about immediately/temporarily turning off
Time Machine backup after the restore to postpone Time Machine doing a
complete (re)backup of both your drives. Not sure what the best way to
approach that aspect of the process is. I guess at a minimum you'd
want to make sure your system is working the way you expect/want
before you let Time Machine overwrite your existing backup by backing
up the drives you just restored.

How does your G5 access your Time Machine backup? (Just curious.)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for 
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette 
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: USB 4-Port Hub

[iJohn]

On Mon, Sep 7, 2009 at 10:14 PM, Stephen Conrad wrote:
> So, I plugged in (via USB) my USB Hub and I plugged in 2 USB Thumb
> Drives (a 2 GB and a 247 MB one (according to the Get Info command)
> but when I tried to plug in a 3rd (512 MB drive) it gave me a Low
> Power Warning.

If the question is how many devices can your hub support when it
powered only by its connection to your computer, the answer would be
"it depends" on what devices you plug into the hub.

By spec, a single USB port (whether v1.1 or v2.0) can only be expected
to provide a max of a 0.5 amp. So there is at most 0.5 amp of current
available to run the hub and any other devices that you plug into the
hub.

Now if the devices you attach via the hub are all very low power, then
this won't be a problem. But it appears that it takes more than a 1/2
amp of current to power the hub plus the 3 USB flash drives you tried.

> the folks at Rat Shack (Radio Shack) said it can run off the USB bus
> and I can use it with 4 thumb drives.

Unless I'm missing something here, I think they are just plain wrong about that.

The most common place people run into problems with the 1/2 amp
restriction for a USB port is when they attempt to power a 2.5" drive
from a single USB port. For some drives this is just not enough
current to let the drive spin up. This is why they came up with the
(slightly wacky) cables which let you plug the drive into two USB
ports. One of the ports is used for both data and power while the 2'nd
is used just for power. Supposedly you can get 1 amp of current if you
combine two USB ports which should be enough for any 2.5" drive.

If you want to ensure that you can use all four ports on your hub
you'll either have to power the hub another way or use devices that
require less current.

No?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Question about how Time Machine works

[iJohn]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Tom  wrote:
> Thanks John, but in this case it's pretty easy to tell when these
> drives were made; they both have July 2009 printed right on them, in
> big red letters! (Must be something new?).

Yes, that works too. :-)

The point I had in the back of my mind was more along the lines of if
you ever did need to do a warranty RMA then Hitachi would start with
your drive's serial number. Being the cynical, less trusting sort, I
like to verify that the date derived from the serial number matches
what's printed on the drive.

No reason at all to think they would not match. I just like to make
sure they do. That's one of the (many) reasons I'm known as ...

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: My G4 seems to be running slow

[iJohn]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 2:27 AM, lyne  wrote:
> NVIDIA GeForce4 MX:
> ... (snip) ...
> It isn't more than a year old. Could it be outdated already?

Less than a year old???

OK, now I'm confused. The NVIDIA GeForce4 series is around 7 years
old. According to the wikipedia article I glanced at briefly NVIDIA
first introduced the series circa 2002. The article also had
particularly harsh things to say ... for wikipedia ... about the
GeForce4 MX.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GeForce_4_Series#GeForce4_MX

Just posting FWIW ...

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Shared Scanner over Wireless Networks

[iJohn]

On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 4:04 AM, Charles Lenington
 wrote:
>
> Oh
> I didn't catch the "wireless" part of wireless router. That's (wireless)
> over my head although there are a dozen or so laying around here. I have
> wireless disabled on the actiontec and the speedstream doesn't have
> wireless.

Actually, the "wireless" part of the discussion is not especially
pertinent. The important difference, as I see it, is that you are
using an AIO that has a network port and is thus designed to be used
over a network.

The OP has a scanner which connects via a USB port only. That device
is NOT network "aware". The OP was hoping that the firmware in his
Apple router would allow him to access the usb attached scanner over
the network, but no joy.

"wireless" is essentially just the same as ethernet (... except where
it's different, of course).

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Wireless 350 MHZ Yikes!

[iJohn]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 6:32 PM, Jasiu  wrote:
> How far can I expect wireless coverage without the use of a repeater?
> My father has a cabin approximately 80 yards from his house.  He would
> like to have internet reception there as well.  Anyone know what range
> I can expect from an 802.11n card?  Which one will work in
> aforementioned machine?

The only way to know for sure is to try it. But I'd be surprised if
you could get a usable signal at 240 feet. Maybe you could and maybe
the throughput would be good enough for web browsing but you probably
wouldn't want to be transferring large files. I think my MacBook was
able to reach my DLink DIR-655 at somewhere between 100-150 feet. But
not really much beyond that so I'm not optimistic.

What would you be using as a router or wireless access point (WAP) in
the house? What type of computer do you intend to use as the wireless
client in the cabin?

Are there any other considerations such as obstacles? Will the WAP be
positioned by a window facing the cabin or will the signal have to go
through walls? If so, how many and what construction? How high up will
the WAP be positioned? Higher is always better. (If it's in a basement
I think you can definitely forget about ever connecting to it from the
cabin.)

How about any sources of potential interference? Most cordless phones,
except for the newer DECT 6.0 models, will blow your typical 2.4GHz
wireless connection away. If you pay more you can get 802.11n
routers/clients that use the 5.0 GHz band, but the usable range in the
5.0 GHz band is usually noticeably less than with the 2.4GHz band.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Wireless 350 MHZ Yikes!

[iJohn]

On Fri, Sep 11, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Clark Martin  wrote:
> And they won't blow away your WiFi, necessarily.  A 2.4 GHz phone will
> interfere with your WiFi if it's on the same frequencies.  How much is
> problematic.  The biggest problem is that the phone will change
> frequencies as needed to avoid interference so it might not cause a
> problem today but may tomorrow and then not again the next day (or hour).

Everything is always relative.

All I know is that in my experience all it takes to kill my 802.11n is
to get a dial tone on my 2.4GHz cordless phone. Also, over at
http://forums.smallnetbuilder.com it is among the first things asked
about when someone complains about intermittent wireless problems.
Cordless phones are much more likely to be a source of interference
than the other usual suspects such as microwaves or baby monitors.

While the 2.4GHz phones are always a possible suspect, apparently some
5GHz phones will also use the 2.4GHz band so a phone claiming to be
5GHz does not necessarily mean you are "safe".

What they like and recommend for use around a wireless network are the
DECT 6.0 phones.

Turning on my cordless phone will stomp on my wireless when I'm just
on the other side of a small room from my WAP. I can only imagine what
would happen with any 2.4GHz phone at the very weak signal strength
out around 240 feet from the WAP ...

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for 
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette 
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: USB PCI card

[iJohn]

On Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 8:32 PM, Lawrence David Eden  wrote:
> I was given an old USB 1 card.  UH-275    Part # BG-3800-00  made by OPTI.
> Is this card Mac compatible?

Out of curiosity, what do you intend to use the USB 1.1 ports for?
(I'm assuming you meant USB v1.1 since AFAIK v1.0 was not widely
adopted.)

I've got a PC laptop (or maybe two) around here which only has USB 1.1
ports. The only thing USB 1.1 is good for (IMO) is attaching low data
rate peripherals such as a mouse or keyboard or printer or maybe
moving non-big files to/from USB attached storage. I suppose it would
be OK for copying pictures from a camera if they weren't too big and
you had patience.

OTOH, I have also tried to use USB v1.1 to attach an external drive.
My experience was that it really won't work for most of the things
people might want to use an external drive for these days.

FWIW,

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: [Bulk] Re: Elgato EyeTV on a G4?

[iJohn]

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:44 PM, dorayme  wrote:
> Maybe you don't have them in US? In Australia, TV is moving away from
> analog and the free to air stations are broadcasting in Digital and
> HD Digital.

The TV conversion to broadcasting in digital happened in the United
States on June 12 of this year. So, yes, we are familiar ... and
depending on where you live also frustrated ... with the "converter
boxes".

The problem with connecting the converter boxes I've seen here to a
monitor is matching the boxes outputs to the monitors inputs. Many of
the most inexpensive converter boxes don't support any type of video
out other than RF, usually on US VHF channels 3 or 4. Those converter
boxes which do provide video and audio lines out, do so in ways that
can't necessarily be be used with a monitor. Composite video with
stereo audio is typical. Some (fewer) also provide S-video out.

While many of the recent analog TVs here will have inputs for those
formats, it's not a given that you'd find them on your LCD monitor.
While there are monitors that provide those inputs, there are also
more than a few that don't.

Interesting idea though. The converter boxes certainly are cheap
enough if they can work for you.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: My G4 seems to be running slow

[iJohn]

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 2:25 AM, lyne  wrote:
> ...  what is VLC?

>From the  website for "VideoLAN - VLC media player"

"VideoLAN is a project, run by volunteers, backed-up by a non-profit
organisation, which produces free and open source software for
multimedia, released under the GNU General Public License."

If you want more info, visit the website: http://www.videolan.org

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: HD Issues

[iJohn]

On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 9:07 PM, Stephen Conrad  wrote:
> OK, according to Apple techs I should be able to put an HD on the same
> cable as my Super Drive.
> I  the HD and it never shows up. I was told to set it Cable Select and
> I did this. No Luck.

I'm not clear on all of the possible context so ...

Does it "show up" in either the Disk Utility or in the hardware
section of the System Profiler?

If you don't see it in either of those places then the next thing I'd
try is attaching it as an external drive vie either USB or firewire
just to verify that the drive works correctly.

Is the drive formatted?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: PowerPC speeds and the switch to Intel...

[iJohn]

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 3:38 PM, Bruce Johnson
 wrote:
> Still doesn't change the fundamental issues: IBM does not desire
> Apple's business sufficiently to provide chips Apple needs; they
> cannot or will not produce a version suitable for laptop use.

There's that ... but no one has mentioned the fact that IBM is not
just a supplier of PowerPC chips, but also a consumer. Unless things
have changed drastically since I left, the PowerPC is the CPU in a
number of IBM products.

I'm sure part of the reason Apple switched to Intel is because Intel
is only interested in selling chips and will work to ensure Apple gets
a certain amount of preference. IBM is happy to have someone to sell
"extra" capacity chips to, but if there's ever a crunch in
availability guess who's going to get priority in delivery?

There's also the fact that by switching to Intel CPU's Apple enabled
folks who need to run a Windows app for one reason or another to do so
on a Mac. This is yet another way to nibble away at MS dominance of
the market.

If you look for the one single reason why Apple switched I think
you'll always come up empty. This is particularly true if you adopt
the POV of a customer rather than a maker of computers. While the
Intel mobile chips for laptops was probably a major reason, I think it
was probably also a host of other little reasons. None of them would
be compelling enough on their own to motivate a switch. But when they
were all added up, it was apparently compelling enough to convince
Steve J.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: PowerPC speeds and the switch to Intel...

[iJohn]

On Fri, Oct 9, 2009 at 7:53 PM, Richard Gerome
 wrote:
>  And when he contracted them they had to agree not to make PC's
> with the ability to run OS 10 Tiger and Lep only Apple...

Not sure I understand what you're saying here. I've heard that there
are folks who *do* run Leopard & Snow Leopard on non-Apple systems
which use Intel CPUs and chipsets. Not that I'd ever try anything like
that no matter how frustrated/annoyed/irritated/POed I got with
Windows since that would be wrong. Yeah, a real stickler for all the
many details of the EULA, that's me. ;-)

Was this agreement that was supposedly reached time limited?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
You received this message because you are a member of G-Group, a group for 
those using G3, G4, and G5 desktop Macs - with a particular focus on Power Macs.
The list FAQ is at http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-list.shtml and our netiquette 
guide is at http://www.lowendmac.com/lists/netiquette.shtml
To post to this group, send email to g3-5-list@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/g3-5-list
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---

Re: USB Hub

[iJohn]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 6:37 PM, Stephen Conrad  wrote:
> The USB connector is rather small (looks like 5 pins in it)
> And what will such a card cost me?

Don't you already have a mini-USB B cable sitting around for use with
a cell phone, camera, MP3 player, or whatever?

If you want to buy  mini-USB B cable the price will depend on how
quickly you want/need to have it in your hands. For example,
meritline.com is offering a Belkin 5-PIN Mini-B Cable F3U138ODM06 for
$7. (It was $2 cheaper 2 weeks or so ago.)
http://www.meritline.com/belkin-6-ft-pro-series-usb-5-pin-mini-b-cable-f3u138odm06---p-38430.aspx

But it'll (probably) take 1 to 2 weeks to arrive after you order it.
(Longer if the place you order from is closed tomorrow for Columbus
Day.)

A generic cable will cost less of course and probably work just as well.

Not sure what you'd pay in a shop these days ... I haven't done that
in a long, long time. I usually either already have the cable sitting
in a pile someplace (I have a LOT of spare USB cables) or I'm just not
in enough of a hurry to get the cable to not order it through the
mail.

But seriously, before you buy one I strongly suggest you first make
sure you know *which* flavor of USB cable you need to make it work and
also check to be sure you don't already have one sitting around for
use with another gadget.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: NTFS formatted carry to Sawtooth

[iJohn]

In Leopard I can access an NTFS formatted drive in read-only mode. The
only reason to bother with NTFS-3G is if this feature is not available
in the version of OS X you are using or if you want to be able to
write to the NTFS formated drive from your Mac. No?

In other words, I'd check to see if you can simply attach the drive
via USB and read it before bothering with using another program you
may not need to accomplish what what you want to do.

And if the Mac asks if you want to reformat your NTFS drive ... don't do it. No?

FWIW,

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Insecure MacIntosh Powerline Networks: AT&T Liable?

[iJohn]

On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 3:23 AM, Dwight Hines  wrote:
> Researching the use of Powerline adapters for in-home, or even within
> business sites, you notice immediately that if you are using a pc instead of
> a Macintosh computer, there is a specific software package you can download
> to secure your Powerline adapters.

As Dan asked earlier, which powerline network adapter are you talking
about? It's hard to tell what is "required" or not without knowing
which device your are referring to.

Assuming that you are talking about a device which can only be set up
by running software which will only work under Windows, that strikes
me as a tedious and annoying problem, but it could be worked around in
a number of ways. Probably the easiest would be to have someone you
know who uses a Windows laptop stop by and run the utility to set up
the security for the powerline adapters. Generally this is not
something that needs to be worked with repeatedly.

(Something to consider though is whether or not the device reverts to
a default "insecure" state if it loses power. I would not want to
purchase a device that was THAT brain dead.)

The first thought that ran through my mind when I read your post was
how many home wireless access points "out there" use no security what
so ever? Or that are still using WEP instead of WPA2? My understanding
is that no one bothers with info on just how to hack into WEP any
longer. Instead it's sort of a competition. The novelty is to see who
can break into it fastest ...

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: NTFS formatted carry to Sawtooth

[iJohn]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 12:03 AM, Nestamicky  wrote:
> I need to be able to mount ntfs hds on
> the mac from other machines and write to them.

Are the different machines on the same local network (LAN)? If so,
then couldn't you also just R/W share the drive via the network?

But if the NTFS drive has to be connected directly to your Mac and you
need to be able to write to it then I suppose something like NTFS-3G
or a commercial software equivalent like Paragon's NTFS for Mac is
what you'd be looking at.
http://www.paragon-software.com/home/ntfs-mac/

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: NTFS formatted carry to Sawtooth

[iJohn]

On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 11:46 AM, Bruce Johnson
 wrote:
> Installing NTFS-3G will give you read/write access; I'm pretty sure
> that 10.6 alos does read/write out of the box.

Nope. NTFS partitions still show up in Snow Leopard with permissions
of "You can only read". I think what you may be thinking of is that in
SL Bootcamp has, IIRC, been enhanced to allow read (and write?) to
your Mac partition when you've booted Windows.

If you think about it this is the most likely path Apple would take.
They can relatively easily add support HFS+ to Windows, but AFAIK NTFS
is still technically a proprietary file system. It has been reverse
engineered to implement, for example, NTFS-3G but Microsoft apparently
still holds on to the delusion that a "proprietary" NTFS gives them  a
significant competitive advantage.

(Or it could just be "why bother?" laziness on the part of MS that
they don't open up NTFS. Who knows?)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Creeping failure to send emails

[iJohn]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:47 PM, Dan  wrote:
> IN the mean time You might want to switch to a more reliable
> provider.  My fav these days is Gmail...

I actually have my gmail account read (via POP) my mail from my Yahoo
account. That way I didn't have to immediately track down each source
of email and change the email address on the sender's site. I *am*
doing that, but very gradually on a "when I can get to it" basis.

FWIW, aside from the occasional accessibility glitch that all cloud
based services are subject to, I've been very happy with gmail ever
since I switched to it.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Creeping failure to send emails

[iJohn]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Bruce Johnson
 wrote:
> Well, let's hope they have backups. T-Mobile customers just learned
> THAT lesson the hard way.
>
> http://tinyurl.com/yzfnwtz

I worry a lot less about backing up with google than I would if the
data were on one of my machines.

Since moving to gmail my email is actually a lot more available to me
since it's not on a single machine that I'd have to use to access it.
I guess Google's servers are occasionally unavailable or, more likely,
slow. But that doesn't happen often enough for me to think about
managing my own email storage again.

But, yes, that mess with Sidekick is the worst nightmare of anyone who
uses a cloud based service. OTOH, it sounds like the Sidekick customer
data loss was the proverbial "perfect storm" of incompetence and
neglect. (Or worse).

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: No Script

[iJohn]

On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 9:25 AM, Ted Treen  wrote:
> Use any old PC USB mouse & you can assign the right-hand button to "Right
> click".

I never had to "assign" anything when using a mouse. The right-hand
button automagically brings up the same context menu that
control-click does. (Putting two fingers on my MacBook's trackpad and
clicking also brings up the menu.)

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 "stuck" after it was working

[iJohn]

If I recall correctly, you are working with the PPC/G4 flavor of the
Mac Mini, correct?

Whether or not you buy from OWC their site usually does have
reasonably good videos of the steps you'd have to go through to
upgrade things like memory or hard drive. I suggest you take a look at
the process before you buy anything so you can see if you would feel
comfortable doing it.
http://eshop.macsales.com/installvideos/mac_mini_g4_mem_hd_opt_h/

The hardest step appears to be opening the case since Apple never
intended for a customer to do this with any of the systems in their
Mac Mini line

If you do not routinely fiddle with computers you may not have all the
tools (thin enough putty knife and small enough screw drivers ...
watch the video) to do it. Once you figure out what you need, a local
Home Depot (or equivalent) is one possible place you can pick that
stuff up.

Below is a link to the OWC Mac Mini upgrade page. It looks like the
PPC mini uses DDR RAM and they sell it for ~$39 (shipped USPS). You
might get it cheaper elsewhere but probably not all that much cheaper.
If you prefer paying a bit more just to simplify your life then OWC is
probably the best way to go for you ... especially in this case.
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/mac-mini

FWIW,

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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 "stuck" after it was working

[iJohn]

I just finished watching the OWC video I pointed towards in my last link.

It looks like if all you want to do is replace the RAM then you can
skip almost everything in that video. I'm just guessing, but it looks
like all you'd need to do is get the cover off to swap the DDR DIMM.
The video goes through the entire process of disassembling the chassis
and removing the fan and the optical and hard drives. But I got the
impression you may not need to do any of that to simply change the RAM
module.

A suggestion. Once you've swapped in the new DDR DIMM, CAREFULLY
connect the system and power it up before you replace the cover.
Sometimes RAM doesn't get seated correctly in the slot. You're rather
find out you've got to reseat the RAM BEFORE you put the cover on than
after. Just my personal opinion ...

FWIW,

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: hard drive speed in an iBook G4 12"

[iJohn]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 5:14 PM, Ralph Green  wrote:
>  The higher RPM drives are definitely faster.  It does not always make
> sense to use them.

Another aspect of upgrading a hard drive that is usually overlooked is
the bit density of the platters. Roughly speaking the newest drives
with the highest densities will usually net you better performance
even at "only" 5400 RPM. The reason being that the drive platter
doesn't have to be moving as fast in order to read/write a large
quantity of data when the bit density of the platter is higher.

Within reason, I would always recommend going with the latest drive
technology with the highest platter bit density that you can get and
worry about 7200 vs 5400 as a lower priority. You'll get more
performance bang for the buck with a higher density platter. And if
you get a large drive that only uses a single platter it is also
likely to use less energy.

Just some thoughts for whatever their worth. I realize that since
you're (I assume) looking a for a PATA 2.5" drive your options are
more limited.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: IDE/ATA Hard drives

[iJohn]

On Fri, Oct 23, 2009 at 7:54 PM, yawg  wrote:
> I use these adapters:
>
> http://www.nowthatsit.nl/?itemtype_id=4233&categorie_id=61
>
> Regards, Jörg.

I think Jörg meant to include a link pointing towards something like this:
http://www.nowthatsit.nl/categorie.asp?categorie_id=629

The advantage of SATA <-> PATA converters ... when they work ... is
that it works at level so low in the hardware that the operating
system isn't really aware that it is there. So you shouldn't ... in
theory ... have to worry about whether firmware is compatible with
your MAC or not.

I've had good luck using converters to continue using PATA drives with
a SATA motherboard. Whether or not the ones to convert a PATA socket
for use with SATA drives would work for you I can not promise. But you
might want to consider trying it. (Or not).

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Western Digital

[iJohn]

On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Norm Rowe  wrote:
> External Hard drive has the ability to use Firewire  or USB 2. I was using
> the firewire connection to use as a start up disk if needed. I was told by
> this group that this would not work on my PPC G4 mac so I changed to the USB
> 2 cable and the disk shows only 32 gig of storage where the firewire shows
> 232 gigs. I have tried Disk Utilities on it to no avail. What is going on
> and how do I fix it.

Never ran into something like that so all I have are questions. I
can't come up with a scenario for how this could happen, so I'll be as
interested as you to see what the others might suggest.

Have you tried using both interfaces of this external drive on another
system just to be sure that the problem is in fact in the external
hard drive and not your G4 Mac? (Doesn't have to be a system you own,
just one you could "borrow" to run a quicko sanity check test on.)

Is it a Western Digital external drive or a Western Digital drive in a
3'rd party external enclosure? Just trying to understand the context.

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Scanner gives funny colors with one G4 but not another

[iJohn]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2009 at 12:18 PM, Bruce Johnson
 wrote:
> Glad it worked. I've had similar issues with other HP scanners, but
> they were older than yours predating OS X, I hoped HP's scattering of
> files all over were limited to their very earliest OS X scanner drivers.
>
> Clearly not the case.

My experience was that the rule among software developers is that once
you find something which you *think* works, you tend to stick with it.
This is especially true for corporate coders.

Since most corporate programmers are insulated from any true customer
feedback or interaction by layers of bureaucracy, they tend to base
their assumptions about what works or does not work pretty much by
what they find in the corporation's code library. The typical rational
goes something like: "Hey, they did it this way the last few times and
it worked then. Let's not rock the boat by changing anything and risk
introducing bugs. Besides, no one will support paying us for a more
extensive change."

Usually it takes a Vista sized seismic event to rattle things enough
to prod them to take another look at "what worked before". That or a
design change required for another reason.  And even then there's no
reason to believe they'll come up with anything better. There is a lot
of pressure from the corporate culture to produce mediocre but
ostensibly functional code that no one can blame you for.

It's an insidious evolutionary process. That's why I fear ... long
term ... for Apple after Steve Jobs passes away. One month after Jobs
is gone Apple will be not that much changed. After one year? Probably
still doing things much the same way. Five years after? Who knows?

-irrationally (??) pessimistic john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: Backups? !!!

[iJohn]

>On Tue, Nov 10, 2009 at 12:23 PM, Bruce Johnson  
>wrote:
>
> Carbon Copy Cloner (and the very similar Super Duper) makes it very
> easy to recover form a failed HDD: just boot from your backup.
>

To create a bootable clone copy of an OS X partition I've always just
used the confusingly named (to me) "restore" function in the OS X
included Disk Utility app. Always seems to work fine for me in 10.5
and later. (I believe it is supposed to work from 10.3 on, but I've
only had direct experience with 10.5 & 10.6)

If you want some compression I guess you could also create a image
file of your partition, though I would not expect you to be able to
boot from that. But, FWIW, I think I read that you can boot from
install media and then restore from a .dmg file.

What advantage is there to using these other apps beyond what Apple's
Disk Utility would provide?

-irrational john

--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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: New Disks in G5

[iJohn]

On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 11:34 PM, Kasey Smith  wrote:
> I would go with the 7200RPM, going from a 5400 to a 7200 even with an
> IDE drive is a big difference.

It used to make a bigger difference than it does now with the newer,
higher bit density platters.

This article might be of interest: "Should You Be Looking For A Hard
Drive Upgrade?" Tom's Hardware - 2009-08-19
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/hard-drive-upgrade,2377.html

The article compares the performance of an older and a newer Samsung
drive. The new one is a 1TB Samsung F2 which I expect is equivalent to
the 5400RPM F2 you're looking at. Here's an excerpt:

"The F2 EcoGreen drives comes with 32 MB cache memory, which is four
times more than the SP2004C. But it  spins at only 5,400 RPM.
This isn’t a reason to be scared in the performance area, though, as
this drive still delivers 107 MB/s and hence provides almost twice the
throughput of the 3-4 year old P120 drive."

Clearly ~100 MB/s ain't too shabby. It still won't be limited by your
1.5Gbps theoretical max SATA bandwidth (~185 MB/s??). Other aspects of
your system ... like your CPU performance and max memory transfer rate
... will probably hold it back more.

While you might possibly get a bit better performance by going with a
7200 RPM drive, I don't think with your system you'd really see a
noticeable performance improvement from the extra rotational speed.

You might also take a look at the site http://diskcompare.com. The
site appears to be pretty an indirect way for newegg.com to try to
sell more hard drives. But if you keep that bias in mind, it can still
be a useful way to locate recent hard drive reviews from the various
hardware sites on the Internet.

-irrational john

-- 
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: SSD

[iJohn]

On Sat, Jan 30, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Bruce Johnson
 wrote:
> Sadly more likely is that they'll just dry up and disappear, because they'll
> stop making them. The IDE-> SATA transition hit just as these were coming to
> market, so only the very early iterations had IDE electronics.

And my understanding is that the "very early iterations" of the SSDs
were much less special. What has made SSDs more attractive recently
has been not only the cost coming (somewhat) down, but improvements in
the tech and firmware to improve the performance and make it more
consistent as the disk filled up over time.

I would suggest that instead of looking for a PATA SSD you consider
using a PATA to SATA adapter with a newer SATA SSD.

> it seems like SSD's will become modestly
> priced after SATA has replaced IDE

FWIW, SATA has already replaced PATA. Doing a quick count over on
newegg they offer around 108 SATA drives versus about 10 PATA. Of
those 10 PATA drives, the largest capacity offered was 500GB. And it
is much more likely that a new iCore motherboard will drop that legacy
PATA connector completely.

(FWIW, both PATA and SATA are "IDE". A technical distinction that
means less and less as common usage of "IDE" has twisted it into a
synonym for PATA. Oh, well.)

-irrational john

-- 
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: SSD

[iJohn]

On Sun, Jan 31, 2010 at 1:41 AM, Ed Grey  wrote:
> Are there any SSD's that plug into a PCI slot? That would be very
> handy for a desktop machine, and would avoid taking a hard drive
> connector. I've seen PCIe, but I don't remember whether or not I've
> seen any PCI.

I think what you're asking is more about what SATA PCI
controllers/adapters are available which will work in your (PowerPC?)
Mac, no?

I'm pretty sure this topic has been discussed previously on this list
but I don't remember the gist of the responses. If you want a quick
answer that doesn't consider the cost of the PCI card you could just
look and see what OWC offers.
www.macsales.com or, more specifically, http://tinyurl.com/yftzte7

I expect that support for PCI will outlast PATA support, at least in
the more generic PC hardware world. (Apple seems to have already
dropped PCI slots from their desktops some time ago.) So there is
still more of an active retail market for SATA PCI controllers.

But whether or not a PCI SATA controller designed with a non-Mac
motherboard market in mind would also work in a Mac with PCI slots I
have no idea.

-irrational john

-- 
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: Some smarter people than I comment about Flash...

[iJohn]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 11:02 AM, Bruce Johnson
 wrote:
> OMG WTF??!! YGAC, ROFL

Alrighty then, YGAC ???

Some of the possibilities Google came back with ...

Young German American Club
You Girls Are Crazy
Yale Genome Analysis Center
Yamba Golf and Country
Youth Guidance and Counseling

None of them seem to be a good fit ... Oh, wait, maybe "You *Guys* Are
Crazy"?? If so does that mean I could also go with YHAC for "You
Humanoids Are Crazy"?? (Seems like more of a reach ...)

-irrational john

-- 
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: Some smarter people than I comment about Flash...

[iJohn]

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 12:50 PM, J.M.P.Hissel  wrote:
> Did you try already "the best of all" ?? No, then go to:
> 

Don't know if I tried it or not, but the two suggestions at your link
were in the list I posted. And I'm guessing neither of them is what
Bruce was thinking of ...

-irrational john

-- 
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: ClickToFlash .pkg

[iJohn]

Did you actually unpack the package file from the zip it is downloaded
in? When I tried running the package file from within "BetterZip", it
would not install. After dragging and dropping (i.e. extracting) the
.pkg file to my desktop, it installed fine.

You probably also need to ensure that Safari is closed when you
install. (Don't know this for a fact, but that's often the way it
works.)

-irrational john

-- 
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: wireless connection issues

[iJohn]

On Fri, Feb 5, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Da'Birdman  wrote:
>    I just spent 40 minutes on the phone with Uverse tech support, and
> as it turns out, the problem is apparently our use of two 2.4 ghz
> cordless phones.

Yes. Either never use the phone while also using wireless or replace
them with a DECT 6.0 phone.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Enhanced_Cordless_Telecommunications#DECT_6.0

Another good way for me to blow away a wireless connection is to use
my microwave. If you're curious, you could also look at this article:
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-basics/30182-how-to-fix-your-wireless-network-part-1?showall=&start=2

(Note that the link above takes you to the middle of the first article
of a series of three articles. The linked section talks about
potential sources of wireless interference).

Another common mistake with wireless is to place the Wireless Access
Point (WAP) aka router in a less special location. I remember one
person complaining about the poor range of his wireless network and he
had the frickin' router on the floor of a closet. Just raising it up
to the shelf level improved his connection strength.

-irrational john

-- 
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: Flash in the pan (redux) ... aka dealing with Adobe Flash

[iJohn]

And then there's this ...
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100208/adobe-flash-for-mac-is-getting-better-really/

I didn't know what to make of the supposed quote/claim

"In Flash Player 10.1 we are moving to CoreAnimation, which will
further reduce CPU usage and we believe will get us to the point where
Mac will be faster than Windows for graphics rendering….With Flash
Player 10.1, we are optimizing video rendering further on the Mac and
expect to reduce CPU usage by half, bringing Mac and Windows closer to
parity for video.”

That would be nice. But it doesn't appear to me to have happened yet
... Maybe in the next version of the 10.1 beta? ;-)

-irrational john

-- 
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 G4 with double hard drive a possible solution?

[iJohn]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 6:44 AM, Kris Tilford  wrote:
> Sometimes adapters have firmware updates that correct issues, so
> you might check for that, but I saw no support pages on the MCE website, so
> it appears unlikely.

SATA<->PATA adapters don't (in my experience) have firmware updates. I
believe this is the case because these devices are just "simple"
interface bridges. I believe that all a SATA<->PATA adapter does is
convert the commands/data transmitted between the serial bus and the
parallel one.

My understanding is that both SATA & PATA hard drives are still both
ATA drives. That is, the commands sent to the hard drive are the same
whether it is a SATA or a PATA drive.

(OK, a little inaccurate because I'm sure the ATA commands used with
PATA are now just a subset of those supported for SATA drives. My
point is just that a SATA drive should recognize all the ATA commands
a PATA drive would. That's why this little gizmo's work.)

I tried to come up with an analogy but unfortunately I do not have a
good one. All that came to mind was the difference between wired and
wireless ethernet. Two different mediums for moving data and commands,
but the underlying commands and (especially) data are the same.
(They're both just ethernet when viewed from the top of the protocol
stack "down", no?)

BTW, FWIW I found this ancient PDF circa 2005 on the Addonics web
site. I don't know if there's anything of interest in it, but it
seemed of possible interest.
Easily Convert SATA Hard Drives to IDE
http://www.addonics.com/news/media/2005/SATA-IDE.pdf

Apparently some folks even went so far as to take a G4 Mini and mount
it inside a larger (Centris ??) case just so they could use a 3.5"
drive and/or a full sized 5.25" optical drive. Needless to say some
folks out there were shocked, outraged, and appalled by this
sacrilegious act. (What's the emoticon for shrugging one's shoulders
in apathy?)

> Perhaps the 500 GB SATA HD is bad?

Yes. If possible I would try the drive in another system. This may not
be easy to do though given that a 2.5" IDE connector is required to
connect your 2.5" SATA drive bay, correct? You might want to start by
just connecting the drive to a SATA system if you have one. Another
alternative would be to try it in an external USB attached SATA drive
enclosure. (SATA connectors are the same for both 2.5" and 3.5" drives
so if you have a external drive enclosure for 3.5" drives you should
be able to test the 2.5" drive in it).

Frankly at this point I'm having a hard time keeping track of which
drives you have and whether or not they worked and what the context
was. This is was I think you have said. Please correct if I've got it
wrong.

500 GB 2.5" SATA WD Scorpio via SATA-PATA optical drive replacement
bay. Not recognized by Mac Mini.

80 GB (2.5" ???) Hitachi. I think you said this drive was both
recognized and can be used to boot Mac Mini, yes? (Was it used in the
SATA-PATA optical bay when this was done?)

250 GB (2.5" ???) PATA WD Scorpio Blue. Was also able to boot Mac Mini
from this drive, correct?

-irrational john

-- 
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 G4 with double hard drive a possible solution?

[iJohn]

Another question for the OP. I also found this thread on another
board? It sounds like you may have started it.
http://www.123macmini.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=183287

The reason I ask is because that thread contains the following in one
of the posts:

> This is the item that I've bought.
> http://tinyurl.com/y9gas3m

I was wondering whether or not this was the device you are are talking
about here.

-irrational john

-- 
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 G4 with double hard drive a possible solution?

[iJohn]

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 2:14 PM,   wrote:
>
> Wow now I'm more confused than I started out. It looks like the adapter is a
> WinBloze item.

At the electronics interface level of PATA & SATA, there really aren't
"Windows" versus "Mac" items. (Well, the further back you go in time,
the less sure I would be about that. But I certainly think it's true
for drives or systems made within the last few years.)

But I also would be surprised if the form factor for this item would
allow it to physically fit into a G4 Mac Mini. Then again, WTHDIK? But
that's why I decided to ask.

I'm not even sure that post I'm referencing came from the OP. It is in
a different thread on another board. Figured it couldn't hurt to ask
though. I'm still not really sure what's what so far.

-irrational john

-- 
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 G4 with double hard drive a possible solution?

[iJohn]

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 4:09 AM, Nicholas Fantuzzi  wrote:
>
> The chinese seller guaranteed me that this item perfectly works with a C2D
> Mac Mini 1.83GHz..so I think that the problem is of the G4 system.

OK, saying the item works perfectly with a "C2D Mac Mini" strikes me
as not very pertinent at this point. It's not where I would start
trying to figure this out.

It may well be that the design works but you have a bay and/or hard
drive that is defective.

Maybe you've already answered this and I just missed it, but I think
the first question to answer is does this bay and/or drive work in ANY
context. You can worry about whether or not the bay/drive combo works
in your G4 Mini after you have verified the parts themselves are not
just broken.

That's why I suggested trying them in another system or with an
external drive enclosure. First rule of problem isolation is to make
sure the source of the failure is not the component itself.

Once you know that the drive bay and your drive both work, then you
can go back and work on narrowing down in what context it does not
appear to work.

> Now I'm waiting for other adapter that he's going to ship to me.

Huh? What "other adapter"?

-irrational john

-- 
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 G4 with double hard drive a possible solution?

[iJohn]

On Sat, Feb 13, 2010 at 6:56 PM, Kris Tilford  wrote:
> I don't know about Macs, but I tried using a PATA HD on an optical PATA bus
> in a PC and was unpleasantly surprised to find no LBA48 support so it was
> limited to 128 GB HDs. This was on a relatively new motherboard made in
> 2008. I don't think anyone expects an optical PATA bus to be used as a HD
> bus so it's likely it may be limited to 128GB max.

I cannot think of any reason any motherboard manufacturer would do
that. LBA48 support is just part of any reasonably priced chipset they
would buy to implement the PATA support.

For example, the Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 I got in 2007 uses a JMicron
chipset to support 2 sata ports and a PATA connector which supports 2
PATA devices. The same chipset controls both. If they stripped out
LBA48 for the PATA they'd also be doing it for the SATA. It would not
save them any money. It would actually cost them money to do this
because essentially be "special ordering" a setup like that.

Could you provide details on this PC such as manufacturer and model number?

-irrational john

-- 
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: New keyboard verses Old Tiger

[iJohn]

On Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Kris Tilford  wrote:
>
> Shouldn't we suspect the NSA has something to do with this?
>

If you want to fear that the government might invade your privacy, I'm
right there with you ... except I think you've got the wrong
government.

Remember that when gmail was hacked a bit ago it seemed most likely
that China was behind it. Supposedly some of the best hacker teams ...
yes, teams, not single individuals, but a coordinated 24/7 group
effort ... are located in China and Russia. Or so I have been hearing.

I try my best not to make my computers or my cloud access accounts an
easy target. But if there ever was some bizarro-world reason for them
to target me, I'm sure they could find a way in. :-(

You ever been inside the NSA?? I was, 3 decades ago for a job
interview. It reminded me of how much of a hassle it is to do
renovations in a highly classified space. Makes it inconvenient as all
get out to upgrade their infrastructure. I trust they have done
updates since I saw the building, but I also suspect of lot of it
still looks much the same as when it was built.

The NSA ... like most organizations ... is a lot more "only human"
than I think most folks realize.

-irrational john

-- 
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 thermal calibration "necessary?"

[iJohn]

Since so many seem to have missed it and just to set the record
straight, the OP apparently was "just joking" about the hearing loss.
Note that the second paragraph of that post starts with ...

> well, that's not the case, but since so many 'contributors' to this
> thread seem more interested in telling me what i should or shouldn't
> find bothersome, rather than answering my question, i will explain.

He then goes on to explain that the system is located in an isolated
room that is rarely visited.

I personally have objections to using that subject as the basis for a
"joke", but maybe that's just me.

I just wanted to clarify because, well, I suppose because I'm somewhat
OCD. I'm not trying to drag this out any further.

-irrational john

-- 
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: Daisy Chaining FireWire 400 Devices?

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 1, 2010 at 11:17 AM, Dan  wrote:
> FW can throw about 390 Mbps. That's usually faster
> than most single devices can sustain.

That's just under 49 MB/s, isn't it? That strikes me as a tad
optimistic given my experience with firewire. Usually it was somewhere
in the 30 to 36 MB/s range (on a good transfer).

But even assuming that you'd get 49 MB/s I expect that recent hard
drives would have no problem sustaining that rate. I'd think a bigger
problem might be the internal bandwidth limitations of older CPUs and
associated motherboard chipsets. (And of course, any of the "older"
drives probably would not be able to keep up).

-irrational john

-- 
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: G4 MacBook

[iJohn]

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 9:59 AM, John Carmonne  wrote:
>
> I got a MacBook Intel 13" for a friends daughter on Christmas
> for $600.00 and an extra $60.00 on eBay. I put in 2GB Ram and a
> 120GB HDD. And Snow Leopard, now to me that's a deal.
>

Out of curiosity, which flavor of MacBook? (What model year is it? Is
it Core 2 Duo?)

What condition was the battery in? (How "usable" was it?)

Did it come with the original install media?

(Just the some of the things I automatically wonder about when I see
the phrase "on eBay".  Oh, and what was the "extra" $60 for? I
hope it wasn't what they charged you for shipping!)

-irrational john

-- 
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: [Manager Comment] Re: G4 MacBook

[iJohn]

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 10:53 AM, Fabian Fang  wrote:
> This OT thread seems to be getting weirder and weirder.  First of all, there
> are no G4 MacBooks.  Secondly, all MacBooks have SATA drives.  Please move
> further suggestions about acquisition and enhancement of MacBooks to our
> MacBook Group

The OP also stated it was "5 years old" which if true seems to rule
out a MacBook, no? I believe the MacBook was introduced in November,
2006 which is less than 4 1/2 years ago.

Then again, perhaps the OP was just rounding up?

I would paraphrase what I think is your intent as "If this is about a
G4 laptop, then clarify this by providing more info about which model
it is. But if it *is* about a MacBook, then move the discussion to the
MacBook list." Am I close?

-irrational john

-- 
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: Airport extreme - How to extend my network?

[iJohn]

On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 8:26 PM, Jeffrey Engle  wrote:
> So, here's the deal.. I'd like very much to "extend" my network. Is there a
> way to do this? I use a current Airport Extreme Base Station mounted high on
> my wall inside my 14x55 mobile home and I'd like to share my internet with
> my niece who lives in another mobile home 75 yards give or take away...

75 yards!?!?!?!  with 802.11g !?!?!?!  :-) ~~! ROTHF LMAO !~~ :-)

BTW, are you sure your niece is connecting to *your* network. You ARE
using the highest level of wireless security you can, aren't you?
(Hopefully WPA2). And non-trivial shared keys? (You can generate a
random enough key by using tools on the Internet. For example,
https://www.grc.com/passwords.htm

> currently she gets about 2 bars on her macbook. Is there a way of getting
> her 4 bars? by mounting some kind of antenna on the outside of the house? if
> so, where would I plug it into?

It's amazing (to me) that she manages to get a signal as strong as
that given the distance and the obstructions between your niece and
your router. Probably a result of having mounting it "high up" on your
wall. Again, I hope you are doing the most you can to secure this
network because if the signal is that strong at that distance it's
also a potential temptation to anyone else in a 75 yard radius (as in
circle) of your home.

You didn't say which flavor/version/vintage of the Airport Extreme you
are using. But IIRC all of them are sealed models with the antennas
inside the case. You'd have to open the case (voiding any warranty)
and then fiddle around with the internal antenna connectors to mount
an external. Is that really a route you want to try to take?

As for the previous suggestion to try using Wireless Distribution
System (WDS) you should first understand that, depending on how it is
set up, WDS would probably cut your throughput by half.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_Distribution_System

But even skipping the potential throughput hit, I wasn't at all clear
how WDS could be useful in your situation. Certainly you wouldn't want
to try to mount an intermediate "repeater" unit outside of your
respective homes, would you??? How would you be able to secure it?

Don't know if they will help but here are some links to some generic
wireless usage tutorials.

How To Fix Your Wireless Network - Part 1
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30182/98/

How To Fix Your Wireless Network - Part 2: Site Surveying
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/content/view/30198/98/

How To Fix Your Wireless Network - Part 3: Increasing Coverage
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-basics/30225-how-to-fix-your-wireless-network-part-3-increasing-coverage

How To Fix Your Wireless Network - Part 4: Antennas
http://www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-basics/30546-how-to-fix-your-wireless-network-part-4-antennas

-irrational john

-- 
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: WPA

[iJohn]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 12:00 PM, JOHN CARMONNE  wrote:
> What is a good reason to have a WPA password for my NETGEAR when all my
> machines require an administrator password to connect to them.

The Wireless Access Point (WAP) password on your Netgear router has
nothing (directly) to do with access to the systems on your network.
It is used to restrict/control access to the network itself.

The primary reason I can think of to use the strongest wireless
connection security you can is to prevent others from accessing the
Internet via your router. Most people don't like to receive cease and
desist letters from their ISP because they've been (surprise!)
downloading movies illegally. Sure you would never do that, but how
about someone who happens to be pirating your Internet to pirate
movies?

A secondary concern is they might be able to access/hack into your
systems even though the systems are password protected. You can argue
the probabilities of that happening all your want, but frankly I'd
prefer to just not give anyone the possibility of being on the network
rather than trusting that the machines on the network will be "secure
enough".

A final consideration which doesn't sound like it applies in your case
pertains to using 802.11n. Connecting a client with 802.11n using
either WEP or WPA (vs WPA2) limits the throughput. The reason for this
is that the 802.11n spec restricts any client to at *most* 802.11g
throughput unless it is either not using any type of encryption (which
is absurd) or is using WPA2 (and I think also AES ???).

-irrational john

-- 
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: [Bulk] Re: Who's using my network?

[iJohn]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 11:28 AM, Bill Connelly  wrote:
>
> On Mar 5, 2010, at 11:12 PM, Bill Connelly wrote:
>>
>> My internet provider verizon dsl, has a browser page that gives who's
>> connected. Input address is http://192.168.1.1 ... maybe yours has one?
>>
>
> I think it would be more accurate to say that my wireless capable Westell
> Versalink 327W dsl modem, allows verizon dsl to have a network monitoring
> page, and Preference setting tabs, for the various home LAN settings.
>

FWIW, all of the support for this is inside your combo router/DSL
modem. Verison and/or Verizon DSL is not involved in this at all.

The 192.168.1.1 address is the address of the router on your internal
network. Listing the systems is a standard feature on every router I
can remember working with. Certainly so on any made/sold within the
the last 5 years or so I'd guess. (Don't know if this feature still
works if DHCP is not enabled on the router. I've never been in a
situation where I had any need/reason to turn off a router's DHCP
support).

-irrational john

-- 
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: Airport extreme - How to extend my network?

[iJohn]

On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Dan  wrote:
> Companies such as SMC make higher powered WAPs that could be used to bridge
> such distances with no problemo.
>

Perhaps, but what do they cost? My perhaps incorrect assumption is
that once you leave the realm of basic home networking routers/WAPs
the prices jump to another range rather quickly. (Though perhaps you
could get something for 802.11g which was "previously owned" for less
money now that the move to 802.11n is (possibly) happening).

Folks keep saying there are "higher power" WAPs "out there". I'd
appreciate it if they would also include a few model numbers so we
could get an idea what price points and hardware specs they are
thinking of.

> A buried cat5 would be faster/cheaper tho.

Amen to that! Wired still always beats wireless in lots of ways. Not
as convenient though. Especially if you're trying to route the cable
through a trailer park. Besides being a PIA lot of work to do even
only somewhat properly the owner of the trailer park might not be as
supportive of this project as one might hope for. (Well, then again
maybe the OP is the owner? ;-)

-irrational john

-- 
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: Right group for questions about exporting from G4 QS to a Macbook SL

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 5:08 AM, dorayme  wrote:
> 3. Shall I partition the 320GB HD for a planned purchase and installation of
> Fusion or Parallels *at this stage* or not worry about it?

I believe that both Fusion and Parallels for the Mac support a
"virtual disk" mechanism. Certainly you can also carve out a separate
partition on your hard drive for the OS which you wish wish to run in
parallel to OS X. But you don't need to.

The virtual disk boils down to the app creating a file which resides
in your Mac's Extended (aka HFS+) File System. This file would be at
least a few GB in size and contains the complete installation of the
OS which you are running under Fusion or Parallels. The advantage is
that the size of this virtual disk/partition can be (relatively)
easily dynamically expanded so you don't have to "waste" space on a
fixed partition. You can also back it up as part of backing up the
other files on your Mac should you choose to.

I suppose the disadvantage is that you are more locked into depending
on the virtualization app to run the OS in the virtual drive. You
couldn't (for example) easily clone/copy the install partition to
another (non-Mac) system and run it there. This has never been a
concern for me.

-irrational john

-- 
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: E-IDE/ATAPI GH22 on QS 733

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:41 AM,   wrote:
> It was the "E" in front of IDE that made me wonder, just like the "E" after
> PCI which is probably intel specific? I've been off line for 5 years and
> much has changed.

Generally speaking, EIDE = IDE = PATA.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_ATA

Strictly speaking both EIDE or IDE should refer to either PATA or SATA
since all these acronyms mean are "Integrated Drive Electronics" (IDE)
and "Enhanced Integrated Drive Electronics" (EIDE). All modern hard
drives (that I know of) integrate the drive controller into the drive
electronics and have done so for (nearly?) two decades now.

But as always happens the actual history behind a term has nothing to
do with its usage. So the acronym (E)IDE has become synonymous with
PATA no matter how much it might happen to irritate the OCD among you.
Oh, well.

-irrational john

-- 
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: Airport extreme - How to extend my network?

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 11:21 AM, John Musbach  wrote:
>
> Not only that, but IIRC higher power means a thinner broadcast radius
> as well--eventually becoming strictly line of sight.
>

I'm afraid I wasn't able to parse "thinner broadcast radius". What
shape (??) results from a thinner (??) radius?

Also, FWIW, I always understood that "line of sight" was more related
to the frequency of the transmission rather than the power of the
transmission. So I guess I'm doubly confused.

-irrational john

-- 
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: Safari 4.0.5 memory leak?

[iJohn]

>From an Intel MacBook for comparison if anyone is curious:

Safari Version 4.0.5 (6531.22.7)
Process Kind: Intel (64 bit)
%CPU: 8.9
Real Mem: 273.2 MB
Virtual Mem: 321.3 MB
Private Mem: 184.4 MB
Shared Mem: 33.0 MB

I'm guessing that a MB is 10**9 bytes, not 1024**3. Not sure when
Apple decided to go this route, but that's how it works for file sizes
in Snow Leopard. They'd be consistent and use the same units for other
size, wouldn't they?

FWIW,

-irrational john

-- 
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: [Bulk] Re: Safari 4.0.5 memory leak?

[iJohn]

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 11:56 AM, Dan  wrote:
>
> I'm seeing it in Tiger, Leopard, and Snow Leopard.
> The bug is in Safari 4 or the underlying WebKit.
>

Part of the reason for my previous post was to implicitly point out
that I do NOT think I am seeing this memory leak in Safari 4.0.5 in
Snow Leopard.

Perhaps I'm just not pressing it hard enough? However, I have had
Safari open with "a few" tabs for a few days now and haven't seen run
away memory usage. Up until your last post I had assumed this was
probably just a PPC related bug. (Couldn't think of any reason it
would be CPU specific, it just seemed that way from the anecdotes I'd
read).

Have you got a series of steps that one can follow to try to reproduce
this memory leak in Safari 4? If so I might be able to give it a try
in Snow Leopard to see what happens on my MacBook.

-irrational john

-- 
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: [Bulk] Re: OT 1966 iMac

[iJohn]

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 7:23 PM, Dennis Myhand  wrote:
> That is an AT&T Video-Phone.  We all knew we would all have one of those in
> ten years.

It was no lie, at least IMO. I'm sure the telco engineers sincerely
believed they would make it happen. And I'm also sure it all seemed so
very "next logical step" to them. An engineer is an engineer is an
engineer.

It's amazing to me that the VideoPhone actually did come to be. No
hover cars, but we did get the video phone. Of course, the telcos had
absolutely nothing to do with giving us video with a telephone call,
but that's no surprise, is it?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: Safari 4.0.5 memory leak?

[iJohn]

On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 2:09 PM, Dan  wrote:
> Have Activity Monitor running.
> Launch Safari.
> Note the VM size.
> Open a bunch of pages in tabs or windows.
> Note the VM size.
> Close the windows.
> The VM size should drop to nearly what it was the first time you looked.
> Continue...
> Notice that the VM size makes big increases and only tiny decreases...

I'll give it a try. I am also not quite clear on how one enables
"world leak checking". The only debug I see is in the Safari "Develop"
menu. It's an entry to toggle to "Debugging Javascript" on/off.

Also, I'm not sure how many open sites/tabs are considered to be "a
bunch". Is 10 enough?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: Hard drive failing

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 1:02 PM, John Carmonne  wrote:
> I removed the drive and put it in an external enclosure an connected it
> to my PM G5 Dual 2.7 and it functioned properly except I can't verify
> S.M.A.R.T. because its IDE and the G5 is SATA.

Most likely the reason you can not access the S.M.A.R.T. data has
nothing to do with IDE versus SATA but is a consequence of using an
external enclosure.

(FWIW, I'm not sure what you meant by the above. Are you implying that
the hard drive you are having problems with is a PATA drive? If that's
true and your G5 is SATA, then how were you using the drive in your
G5?)

Unless you are using eSATA, you won't be able to access the S.M.A.R.T.
data. My understanding is that there is no support in (the current)
protocol used to attach an external drive via USB to retrieve
S.M.A.R.T. data. I'm guessing (but don't know for certain) that this
is also the case with firewire attached external drives.

This is extremely annoying (to me) but I don't know of any way around
it if you use USB to access the external drive.

I remember reading a vague comment once that some extension to the
mass storage attachment protocol (?) was planned which would allow
accessing S.M.A.R.T. data from USB attached drives. I'm not holding my
breath waiting for it to show up. (Maybe it'll work with USB 3.0? One
can dream, no? :)

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] PATA to SATA conversion

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 2:40 PM, John Carmonne  wrote:
> I have a G4 Dual 1.25 MDD with a sick HDD and I think I should
> convert from PATA drives to SATA as suggested by a lister but I
> don't know about the SATA cards like which one is good also the
> MDD has four HDD bays.

Another possible way to go that might work for you is to use a simple
SATA to PATA adapter "dongle" card instead of a SATA PCI card.

I'm thinking of one of the small converters which has the SATA
connectors on it. For example/pictures only, something like this:
http://www.amazon.com/SATA-PATA-Drive-Interface-Adapter/dp/B002Y2NI4M

(For some reason these are harder to find than the ones designed to
allow connecting a PATA drive to a SATA port.)

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: Hard drive failing

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 5:31 PM, John Carmonne  wrote:
> I ran the verify and also the repair with Drive Genius 2. Now I'll run
> the integrity Sustained Write test and see what that produces.

It is usally pointed out in situations such as this one that only YOU
know how valuable your data is to you.

If it were me and I had seen a drive failure indication I thought
potentially credible then I wouldn't even look at the icon of a test
program until I had backed up/saved any data I truly valued from that
drive. I certainly wouldn't run any type of sustained test which might
elicit a drive failure until I'd backed up all that I could.

Once the data is "safe", then I'd happily true to beat the crap out of
it with hopes of returning it under warranty. But I'd only do that
after I saved as much of my data as could.

But maybe that's just me.

> I think the drive is about a year and a half old so I wonder about
> Seatate giving me a new one also I don't have the receipt.

The drive manufacturers don't care when you bought the drive.  The
serial number of your drive is used to determine when the warranty on
it expires.

The warranty period is determined based on when the drive was
manufactured. If you go to the support section of the Seagate web site
you'll find a web page there which will let you check the warranty on
your drive. You'll be asked to enter the serial number of your drive
(... and possibly the model number?).

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: Hard drive failing

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:26 PM, John Carmonne  wrote:
>
> I made a request for warranty service from Seagate's
> site so maybe I'll get lucky on this one.
>

Hm, this didn't occur to me before but whenever I've looked at
going down the RMA under warranty path before I've always been in a
Windows PC frame of mind. I'm not sure how they work things when
you're using a Mac, especially a PPC Mac.

I am used to a manufacturer asking to first have the drive checked by
running their own diagnostic program. Of course, I wouldn't be at all
surprised if whatever diagnostic program they want used only runs on a
windows (or at least x86) PC.

Not saying they won't replace the drive if it's defective. Just saying
I'm not quite sure how Seagate will ask you to handle this.

Maybe someone else on the list has already done a drive RMA for a PPC
Mac and can flesh out how that worked for them?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: [Bulk] Re: Hard drive failing

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 12:02 AM, John Carmonne  wrote:
>
> The seagate site includes Apple and all the OS's as tabbed choices while 
> filling
> out the online form, so the Apple PC issue are no problem

That sounds good, but I'd still appreciate it if you could update this
thread with your experiences going through their RMA process. I've
never had to do it myself and I'm curious how it will turn out for
you. Especially since you won't (right?) be able to give them any
feedback from their SeaTools diagnostic tool.

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re:Hard drive failing

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 2:20 PM,   wrote:
> Also can the SMART be verified via a eSATA external enclosure?

Yes. eSATA is effectively a SATA connection to your computer using
hopefully a better shielded eSATA cable. If you can get your computer
to recognize the eSATA drive then you should be able to perform any
function you could with any of your other SATA (or PATA) drives.

> One good thing about Seagate is the 5 year warranty, no receipt necessary.

Yes, no receipt is necessary, only the serial number. But, as has
already been pointed out, the warranty period depends on where Seagate
considered the drive to be in their product line and thus on Seagate's
view of the market segment the drive is targeting.

For a while Seagate was offering a 5 year warranty on all of their
regular consumer drives. I have one or two of these and they are
nearing the end of their warranty period.

However, a year or three ago (not sure of the date), Seagate reworked
their warranty periods. Now their regular drives have only a three
year warranty just like the other drive manufacturers. I believe the
common practice now is to reserve a five year warranty for the more
expensive, supposed commercial/enterprise drives in a manufacturer's
line. It's now one of the reasons to supposedly persuade you to pay
more for those drives.

I have no idea what sort of nonsense the drive manufacturers have come
up with for the warranty on their external enclosures. Part of the
reason I've never bought one of those is because I saw the warranty
period listed as just one year on some of them.

One year?!?! Are they kidding me?

I figure it makes more sense to purchase an OEM drive with a three
year warranty and mount it in an external enclosure I purchased
separately.

My take on the post about the used drives purchased from the swap
board having "zero years warranty" is that if you separate the drive
from its enclosure ... or possibly just open the enclosure in a way
that can be detected by the manufacturer ... then In the
manufacturer's opinion you have voided the warranty. Not an unheard of
practice. But IMO it's yet another reason to avoid these pre-packaged
external enclosures from the drive manufacturers.

But maybe that's just me.

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] To Journal or not

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 10:02 PM, JOHN CARMONNE  wrote:
> I read some where that a journaled
> drive can be slower than one that's just Mac OS extended.

Sure, technically the extra time to journal would slow it down. But I
doubt you could tell the performance difference without some sort of
measurement software.

If you really want to know why not just test it? Install whatever is a
good hard drive performance analyzer for a Mac and then format and
test the drive both ways.

> I ask because my
> son has two of these large drives and his boot time can be really long and
> we were told it's because the journaled drives are a drag on the system.

This doesn't sound like a very plausible explanation to me. It sounds
more like someone grasping at straws rather than admit they don't know
what's happening. Unfortunately without more details about your son's
system and what happens on it when it boots, I doubt anyone do more
than guess as to why it is booting slowly.

Out of curiosity, what type of drive does your son's computer boot from?

FWIW, I would also recommend enabling journaling unless you actually
do discover an astoundingly large performance gap by benchmarking the
drive. Better safe than sorry IMO.

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: To Journal or not

[iJohn]

On Mon, Mar 22, 2010 at 11:37 PM, JOHN CARMONNE  wrote:
>
> The problem we have is as time goes on the Mac takes a long
> long time booting, If we disconnect the externals it boots right up.

If HFS+ journaling was the problem then you'd see it all the time
since (I'm guessing) the boot drive on the iMac uses the journaled
version of OS Extended. (I would expect that is how Apple ships it).

I would think the problem is with something else. Is there an app
which starts when the system boots which might be trying to
catalog/scan the (video?) files on the externals?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: To Journal or not

[iJohn]

On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 2:17 AM, Dan  wrote:
>  It's quite possible that the problem with his son's machine Spotlight being
> foo - totally re-building the index each time the drive is mounted.

The easiest way that occurs to me ... (possibly there are easier
ways?) ... to check if Spotlight is causing this problem is to turn
off Spotlight indexing for those drives.

Open Spotlight in System Preferences and add the external drives to
the "Privacy" tab. That should turn off indexing for those drives.
(The drives will of course need to be attached to the machine so that
they can been "seen" by OS X in order to exclude from indexing).

Since your son's machine is using Snow Leopard I would hope it's not a
case of Spotlight being fooed up. But WTHDIK?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: Airport Extreme Base Station failure?

[iJohn]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 9:58 AM, John Carmonne  wrote:
> This happens to my Time Warner Cable modem about twice a month. I
> have to reset the modem and go through the reconnection process.
>

Process?? There's a process?? To reset the Motorola SURFboard(c)
SB5100 modem that Time Warner insists I "rent" from them I just unplug
it, blink a few a times, then plug it back in and wait for the
connection lights to settle down.

If you want to go the extra mile, make sure the router WAN ethernet is
NOT connected to the modem until the modem thinks it has successfully
connected to whatever it is that is upstream of a cable modem. Not
sure this actually matters, but it can't hurt and it's how the cable
company says to do it: Bring the modem up all the way first, connect
the router to the cable modem and then power the router up.

In my case Time Warner's DHCP remembers the MAC address of whatever
last device successfully connected to their network. My guess is that
this is their crude way of "preventing" more than one computer/router
from being connected to their network at the same time.

In practice it means that if you switch the device connected to the
modem you either have to wait some period of time (5, 10, 15, 20
minutes ??) before connecting another device with a different MAC
address. Either that or "clone" the MAC address of the last device.

(My understanding is that cloning is illegal so I always just wait
through the timeout period ... ;-)

My SB5100 has a "standby mode" button. If yours also has a feature
like this make sure the modem's standby indicator light is NOT on. It
should have an indicator light for "online" (or such) to indicate a
successful modem connection. (Though as I said, you also have to make
sure your cable companies DHCP will accept the MAC address of your
device and assign it an IP address).

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: OT - "to UPS or not to UPS"

[iJohn]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 11:07 AM, Jeffrey Engle  wrote:
>  now what about that AppleTV?

I've never even been (knowingly) in the same room as an Apple TV so
all I have is a question. Does an Apple TV have a "power down" cycle
which it goes through when you turn it off? Or when you flip the power
switch does it just immediately go dead?

If the former, then maybe you care. If the latter, then I don't see
what a UPS would buy you.

I guess my first question should be does it have a power switch or do
you turn it off by unplugging it?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: Older Airport with OS 8.5

[iJohn]

On Sat, Mar 27, 2010 at 5:01 PM, Robert Long  wrote:
> some one mentioned to me that I could connect to the G3 by connecting
> with an ethernet cable to the G3 and get on the internet.

How would your older Airport connect to the Internet? Not that this
matters in and of itself. I'm just trying to make sure you understand
that you would have to have that part of the puzzle working in order
to connect your G3 to the Internet via your older Airport.

How old is your older Airport? Got a model number or some other way we
could look up its specs?

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: would this router work?

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 6:12 PM,   wrote:
>
> An ad for Office Max today shows a D-Link Wireless-N 150 Home router for
> $39.99. Would this work for her? I'll be doing the set up, so what would I
> need to know? (I've only done Airports before.)
>

The frank truth as I see it is that ANY router should work with a Mac.
The main advantage you get with going with an Airport is that it
should be "easier" to set up because Apple should have set things up
that way. But a router is pretty much a router is a router. If you
understand how to set up a TCP/IP network they aren't all that hard to
work with.

Unfortunately I can't know whether or not it would be a good match for
you and your friend because I am not good at understanding what other
people will not understand. There should be no problem interoperating
with the Macs though. Because your friend is trying to enable older
Macs which use older wireless protocols there may be speed and/or
connection range concerns.

Does your friend want to connect the G4 ibook using wireless? If so,
what sort of distance from the Wireless Access Point (i.e. the router)
would the iBook be when used? How many and what sort of obstacles
(walls usually) would the single have to get through?

FWIW, positioning the WAP/router as high off the floor as you can and
as close to the center of the area you want to cover will usually give
you the best results.

Some things which may (or may not) be of interest about the D-Link
DIR-601 Wireless N 150 router.

1) It is a "single stream" wireless N router. That's what the "150" in
the title is (probably) about. One way to think of this is that it is
a crippled version of 802.11n. It costs less because it does less and
thus is cheaper to build.

The theoretical (aka unattainable) max speed of a typical 802.11n
connection is 300 Mbits/sec (or 37.5 MB/sec). (The best I've seen with
my early 2008 white MacBook is ~50 to 70 Mbits/sec).

For a single stream device you can cut that in half. The unattainable
max is 150 Mbits/sec. I'd guess the most you'd actually get would be
around 25 to 35 Mbits/sec. Plenty fast enough for web surfing I would
expect. Just be aware that this is not a "full" 802.11n wireless
you're considering getting.

2) There are two flavors of this router. The earlier version was the
D-Link DIR-600 which according to D-Link's web site was End of Life on
01 Dec, 2009. The current version they are selling is the DIR-601.
http://www.dlink.com/dir-600 (end of life)
http://www.dlink.com/dir-601 (current)

3) The wired ethernet ports on this router do NOT support gigabit
ethernet. They are 10/100 Mbit/sec only.

Don't know if it will help you or not, but here's a link to an article
on smallnetbuilder.com about deciding which wireless router to get.
www.smallnetbuilder.com/wireless/wireless-basics/30905-how-to-buy-a-wireless-router-short-version

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: would this router work?

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 9:24 PM, Bob Whiton  wrote:
> You don't need a router to share an internet connection between two Macs.
>  Just turn Airport on for both Macs, and enable internet sharing over
> Airport on the Mac that's connected to the cable modem.
>

Yes, but that implies that the iMac (?) will always be powered on
whenever the iBook needs to access the Internet. The iMac is in this
case acting as the router for the local network.

Routers usually use less power than an iMac will when left powered on
24/7. (I pay around 16 cents a KWH so how much electricity I use is a
concern for me. For others, maybe not so much.)

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: would this router work?

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 10:10 PM,   wrote:
>
> I leave my computers running 24/7 if they aren't actually being used the 
> power is minimal.
>

Not for all of us. Depends on how much you pay for your electricity (
... and I suppose on whether or not you care how much your electric
bill is. :)

Assuming my desktop system uses around 100 watts then if it is left on
24/7 I'd pay around an extra $10 a month which is $120 a year. The
cost of keeping a router on 24/7 is probably 1/10 of that.

(It's been awhile since I've plugged my D-Link DIR-655 into a
Kill-A-Watt so I'm not 100% sure of my numbers. But I don't think I'm
that far off either.)

Of course, my parents and aunts and uncles all grew up during the
Great Depression. So I grew up with the silent expectation that one
would NEVER leave a light on in an empty room. :-)

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: [Bulk] Re: would this router work?

[iJohn]

On Sun, Mar 28, 2010 at 11:05 PM, Jane, (Portland, OR)
 wrote:
> Bob, she doesn't have an Airport. She doesn't have any type of router
> at the present time. But are you saying that she can share internet
> connection WITHOUT having an Airport? In other words, her iMac,
> connected to the cable modem, can give the iBook internet without the
> iBook having any physical connection

Jane,

I believe that Bob was using the term "Airport" in the (annoying to
me) way that Apple uses it, as another term for "wireless". Apple also
refers to the wireless client support in their computers as "Airport".
It's not just used to refer to the wireless routers.

And yes, you can enable the iMac to act as a simplified router/bridge
to the Internet. I assume her cable modem is connected to the iMac via
wired ethernet. If that's the case then I think what she would do is
to share her connection from Ethernet to computers using Airport. (To
use the terms I see in System Preferences "Sharing" on my MacBook).
http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?path=Mac/10.6/en/8156.html

It might be a good place to start just as a "proof of concept". One
thing that concerned me is that it looked like the strongest wireless
encryption supported was WEP (Wired Equivalent Privacy). This is an
old protocol and frankly it doesn't provide any meaningful protection
if someone wanted to "hack into" her network. How much of a risk that
might be depends on where she lives and who and how close her
neighbors are.

Of course, if there is any risk at all that someone else might be able
to connect to her wireless network then although WEP sucks, it is
still better than nothing.

FWIW,

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
g3-5-list+unsubscribegooglegroups.com or reply to this email with the words 
"REMOVE ME" as the subject.

Re: Power Crunch ?

[iJohn]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 12:25 PM, Frank Dutra  wrote:
> Will I be OK as far as the OEM power supply goes, and if not, would removing
> the 2 ATA drives help?

How many drives do you have? I'm only counting four.
> OEM 30 GB ATA HD
> plus additional internal 40 GB IBM ATA HD
> 1 Tb Hitachi 7200 rpm  SATA drive off a 2 port internal SeriTek152 PCI card
plus the your new Western Digital 2000 GB

(I assume the 2 external drives use a separate power supply.)

Assuming/overestimating around 15 to 20 watts per drive thats 60 to 80
watts. (Though it's almost certainly less than that).

FWIW, you could get a better idea of your actual power needs by
shelling out the $20 or so for a Kill-A-Watt and then seeing how much
your G4 draws with different combos of the drives connected.

What's your power supply rated at? (What does it say on the label?)

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

Re: Power Crunch ?

[iJohn]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 1:13 PM, dc  wrote:
> If you are no longer using SCSI devices you could pull the old Adeptec
> card.

I didn't even notice the mention of the "Adaptec OEM SCSI PCI" until
your note made me look for it.

I also cannot see why he would keep that installed since it doesn't
appear the OP is using it??? Curious.

-irrational john

-- 
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: Power Crunch ?

[iJohn]

On Thu, Apr 8, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Stewie de Young  wrote:
> John, I have a Seritek 1S2 in my Digital Audio with a 36Gb Raptor and a
> 250Gb Seagate attached to it.
> I have OS10.4.11 installed on both and they are both bootable.
> And as you say not all PCI SATA cards on a Mac can boot from the attached
> hard drives.This one you can however.

That sounds like good news for the OP.

I believe the OP said he has a SeriTek 152 not a 1S2 ... though
perhaps that was a typo?? (I tried a google search of the
www.firmtek.com site for Seritek 152 but didn't get any (useful)
results).

-irrational john

-- 
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: [Bulk] Re: Safari 4.0.5 memory leak?

[iJohn]

My personal take on Dan's post is why can't the SAFARI folks at Apple
investigate the problem, verify the source, and, if appropriate, open
up a problem with WebKit. Was some law passed while I was napping
which prevents development organizations from trying to get bugs fixed
in critical external components their project depends on?

I can maybe see why they'd rather someone else did their grunt work.
But if their work depends on a component then I'd expect them to be
pushing hard(er) to see that whatever is broken gets fixed. Who in
particular is going to be doing the fixing feels more like a
sub-issue.

I'm just saying ...

Oh, well.

-irrational john

-- 
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

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.