• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Why i prefer the old Apple product?

with a solid customised distro every hw is usable and better than w10. But if we can chose, and we can, there are some not little differences
 
I have a G4 iBook and two G4 iMacs. They're basically unusable in 2016 with OS X (slow). They were also essentially unusable in Linux too (compatibility) when I looked into it years ago but I don't know the current status of Linux on PPC.
 
Eug said:
I have a G4 iBook and two G4 iMacs. They're basically unusable in 2016 with OS X (slow). They were also essentially unusable in Linux too (compatibility) when I looked into it years ago but I don't know the current status of Linux on PPC.
Click to expand...

i don t like osx after Tiger
panther probably it s better on g4
 
Best version on G4 is OS X 10.5.8 Leopard if you have 2 GB RAM.
10.4.11 Tiger is OK and may be preferred if you are limited to 1.25 GB RAM.

However, I retired my G4s many years ago. BTW, in addition to the iBook and two G4 iMacs I have, I have two Cubes, one with a 1.7 GHz CPU, and both Cubes have upgraded GPUs for Quartz Extreme. All are in complete working order, but IMO, none are of any use in 2016.
 
There are 6 Macs in this picture, the most recent being 10 years old:

IMG_7478_zpskex2txsx.jpg


The only one that is usable is the one on the bottom right, which is a Core Duo iMac. All the rest are G4s, and I just keep them because they look nice. BTW, the guy standing on the iBook is FireDino, and he's a Firewire hub. His eyes glow red when Firewire is plugged in.

115629-2206P164_3B.jpg
 
Eug said:
There are 6 Macs in this picture, the most recent being 10 years old:

IMG_7478_zpskex2txsx.jpg


The only one that is usable is the one on the bottom right, which is a Core Duo iMac. All the rest are G4s, and I just keep them because they look nice. BTW, the guy standing on the iBook is FireDino, and he's a Firewire hub. His eyes glow red when Firewire is plugged in.
Click to expand...

really like em, really really really.

Why you say they re unusable?
what s the limit of osx tiger on a imac G4 in 2016?

i really want to buy one on ebay and use it as everyday' s computer.

do you think i can?
 
Nhirlathothep said:
really like em, really really really.

Why you say they re unusable?
what s the limit of osx tiger on a imac G4 in 2016?

i really want to buy one on ebay and use it as everyday' s computer.

do you think i can?
Click to expand...
No.

Most machines have insufficient memory. 1.25 GB RAM (maximum on many) is just not enough, even for just basic surfing these days. If you have 2 GB RAM then it's OK, but to get 2 GB in an iMac means disassembling the thing, which is a real pain. The G4 iMacs use one DIMM and one SODIMM, but the DIMM is internal and very hard to get at. In fact, Apple considers the DIMM non-upgradable. Not recommended for the average user. On the iBooks, 1.25 GB to 1.5 GB RAM is the absolute max, since 256/512 MB is soldered to the motherboard and there is only one SODIMM slot.

Can't put SSD in these. They use IDE drives, and the drives are very slow. This makes the lack of memory even more problematic, since the machine pages to disk fairly frequently. SATA -> IDE adapters for SATA SSDs generally will not work properly.

The browsers are no longer updated for them. Only the really old versions work on them, so there are many compatibility issues. Don't expect to do your banking reliably on one of these. Also, HTML5 is a problem, and these Macs have no hardware h.264 decode support either, and the CPU is way too slow to decode it in software.

Watching a video is a major problem. The standard these days is h.264, and as mentioned above, that's a big problem for these machines. Playing even a standard definition h.264 just gives you a slideshow.

Hardware h.264 decode support didn't really appear in the lower end laptop models until about 2009, utilizing the GPU, in machines with Core 2 Duo, but not all Core 2 Duos have it. Luckily, most Core 2 Duos are fast enough to decode HD h.264 in software. However, personally, I would not buy any used Mac unless it had hardware h.264 decode support. Watching a 1080p h.264 video on a Core 2 Duo without hardware h.264 support is sometimes a problem, and puts the fan into high speed mode - loud. 720p usually plays fine, but with that loud high speed mode fan.

---

So, if you don't like anything from the last 8 years, then probably the best you can do is get a Core 2 Duo iMac from 2007 or 2008. This would be a shiny aluminum one. Or maybe a 2008 15" MacBook Pro or something.
 
Last edited:
Eug said:
There are 6 Macs in this picture, the most recent being 10 years old:

IMG_7478_zpskex2txsx.jpg


The only one that is usable is the one on the bottom right, which is a Core Duo iMac. All the rest are G4s, and I just keep them because they look nice. BTW, the guy standing on the iBook is FireDino, and he's a Firewire hub. His eyes glow red when Firewire is plugged in.

115629-2206P164_3B.jpg
Click to expand...

I recently parted with my Cube. Not gonna lie, I teared up 🙁
 
Eug said:
No.

Most machines have insufficient memory. 1.25 GB RAM (maximum on many) is just not enough, even for just basic surfing these days. If you have 2 GB RAM then it's OK, but to get 2 GB in an iMac means disassembling the thing, which is a real pain. The G4 iMacs use one DIMM and one SODIMM, but the DIMM is internal and very hard to get at. In fact, Apple considers the DIMM non-upgradable. Not recommended for the average user. On the iBooks, 1.25 GB to 1.5 GB RAM is the absolute max, since 256/512 MB is soldered to the motherboard and there is only one SODIMM slot.

Can't put SSD in these. They use IDE drives, and the drives are very slow. This makes the lack of memory even more problematic, since the machine pages to disk fairly frequently. SATA -> IDE adapters for SATA SSDs generally will not work properly.

The browsers are no longer updated for them. Only the really old versions work on them, so there are many compatibility issues. Don't expect to do your banking reliably on one of these. Also, HTML5 is a problem, and these Macs have no hardware h.264 decode support either, and the CPU is way too slow to decode it in software.

Watching a video is a major problem. The standard these days is h.264, and as mentioned above, that's a big problem for these machines. Playing even a standard definition h.264 just gives you a slideshow.

Hardware h.264 decode support didn't really appear in the lower end laptop models until about 2009, utilizing the GPU, in machines with Core 2 Duo, but not all Core 2 Duos have it. Luckily, most Core 2 Duos are fast enough to decode HD h.264 in software. However, personally, I would not buy any used Mac unless it had hardware h.264 decode support. Watching a 1080p h.264 video on a Core 2 Duo without hardware h.264 support is sometimes a problem, and puts the fan into high speed mode - loud. 720p usually plays fine, but with that loud high speed mode fan.

---

So, if you don't like anything from the last 8 years, then probably the best you can do is get a Core 2 Duo iMac from 2007 or 2008. This would be a shiny aluminum one. Or maybe a 2008 15" MacBook Pro or something.
Click to expand...

tnx, this explanation is plain and precise.

But i have 3 questions:

1) 1.25 gb ram seems a lot to me, in Tiger i always had 0.5 gb and it was really fast.
2) h264 is a problem, ok, but you said i can watch 720 without problems, and for me it s more than perfect! (btw they don t have 1080p screen, so it s not a problem!)
3)The main problem is web browsing, sites now are different and the old safari can t display em properly (i assume). i can t figure out the browsing experience and capabilities.


--- i m using a Macbook Air from 2008 (nvidia 9400m - 2gb ram - 120gb ssd ) with El Capitan. It s perfect for my use, but i m scared about g4 imac and the problems with older os. i don t use Tiger from a lot of time and the main problem is the os itself!


--- I m not interested in buying other old macs than Imac G4, i already have 3X imac 5k, but i prefer the look of the old one. I don t care about all the other macs after g4.
 
Last edited:
720p h.264 works on the old Intel Macs. If they don't have hardware h.264 support, they can play it in software.

It does not work on the G4 Macs. In fact, even 480p h.264 is a problem on G4 iMacs.
 
Eug said:
720p h.264 works on the old Intel Macs. If they don't have hardware h.264 support, they can play it in software.

It does not work on the G4 Macs. In fact, even 480p h.264 is a problem on G4 iMacs.
Click to expand...

youtube 480p? is it possible?

and browsing?
it s the only use i have with computers Web browsing ( youtube is the hardest part)
 
KMFJD said:
S4iCkhB.jpg


pffft
Click to expand...

still have c64 ( cassette) and amiga 500 (Wb 1.3) expanded to 1mb.


when i downgraded from motorola 6800 (@8Mhz) to a ugly 486dx2 (66Mhz) i felt joked.

Can you compare your workbench 1.3 to the ugly Windows 3.1 ? no, i only used dos 5.0-6.0-6.2-6.22, than i had enough from pcs. Never used windows.

hate at 1st sight with windows.
 
All my macs are from 2012. 2012 Mac Pro, 2012 Mac Mini, 2012 Macbook Pro (non retina). Coincidentally, thats the last year that Macs were truly user upgradeable. If a part fails I'll just replace it. I'll keep using them until they are no longer supported by Mac OS, but not sure what I'll do after that. Probably hackintosh.
 
Nhirlathothep said:
still have c64 ( cassette) and amiga 500 (Wb 1.3) expanded to 1mb.


when i downgraded from motorola 6800 (@8Mhz) to a ugly 486dx2 (66Mhz) i felt joked.

Can you compare your workbench 1.3 to the ugly Windows 3.1 ? no, i only used dos 5.0-6.0-6.2-6.22, than i had enough from pcs. Never used windows.

hate at 1st sight with windows.
Click to expand...

no, i foolishly upgraded to an amiga 1200 instead of going the 486dx2 (66mhz) route

/from a gaming viewpoint anyways....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top