Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

driven · Feb 5, 2008, 01:17 AM

I've been using my MBP almost exclusively for the past 2 weeks. Tonight I had to turn on and use my Dual 2.0 G5 because for some weird reason the scanner drivers wouldn't install on the MBP.

What I found was impressive. The G5 still feels snappy even when compared with the 2.4 Ghz MBP. It also seems *faster* in some tasks, such as loading Microsoft Office 2004 (Rosetta app). Obviously it can't run Windows at all (at least not reasonably), but for Mac only tasks this is still an impressive box.

In some ways it's a shame that IBM didn't take this processor further. With a little less incompetence they might have given Intel a run ...

peeb · Feb 5, 2008, 03:06 AM

The G5 rocks - as far as I'm concerned, not running windows is a feature, not a bug.

Big Mac · Feb 5, 2008, 05:30 AM

This may be the first subject we agree on, peeb.

Unfortunately, IBM apparently did not have sufficient market incentive to maintain desktop PPC development. I have come to terms with the fact that with no good mobile solution as well as the need to resort to liquid cooling in the last G5s Apple had its back up against the wall. If the AIM alliance had remained intact and a viable common hardware platform had taken off, the PPC could have easily been sustained. But with Apple as the only desktop customer it was but a matter of time before competitive pressures from the much larger Intel ecosystem got too great.

driven · Feb 5, 2008, 06:17 AM

Originally Posted by peeb

The G5 rocks - as far as I'm concerned, not running windows is a feature, not a bug.

I would (and do) agree with you. Unfortunately software development on Windows is what pays my salary and pays for my nice Macs ... so it's one of those evils that I must deal with.

Simon · Feb 5, 2008, 06:25 AM

In terms of raw CPU power a 2.4 GHz C2D will beat a dual 2.0 GHz G5, but the difference won't be large. The fact that you noticed apps open faster on the G5 has mainly to do with the fact that the G5 has a fast 3.5" HDD while the MBP is stuck with a 2.5" notebook drive which is comparably slow. So I would say what you experienced is nothing unusual.

As nice as your Power Mac was (and apparently still is), but leaving the G5 behind didn't mean giving anything up. The Penryn in a new MP is much faster than any G5 ever produced and thanks to the Core CPU family we also have very powerful mobile processors - something the G5 never gave us.

bearcatrp · Feb 5, 2008, 09:11 AM

I miss the PPC. My G4 powerbook (12 inch) was the sweetest laptop ever. I loaded yellowdog linux and flew even faster than OS X. I thought about buying a dual G5 and loading linux but didn't have the funds at that time. Anyone running linux on there G5's? Curious on how fast it runs.
Randy

Theodour · Feb 5, 2008, 11:04 AM

I've been trying to run Linux Live CDs on my dual 2 G5, but I can't get them to boot. They work with my 12" 867 G4 powerbook, but have some issue with the 64-bit processors, apparently ...
I've tried Fedora (the latest ... 9?) and Ubuntu (longer in tooth).

Anyone know any Live CDs that boot a G5 for testing out?

But I agree. I love my G5. Too bad PCI-X stuff will be rare, and mac AGP video cards are nonexistent.

Big Mac · Feb 5, 2008, 11:09 AM

PCI-X is at least backward compatible with PCI, and video card upgrades compatible with OS X for Mac Pros are almost as non-existent as AGP upgrades.

driven · Feb 5, 2008, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by Simon

In terms of raw CPU power a 2.4 GHz C2D will beat a dual 2.0 GHz G5, but the difference won't be large. The fact that you noticed apps open faster on the G5 has mainly to do with the fact that the G5 has a fast 3.5" HDD while the MBP is stuck with a 2.5" notebook drive which is comparably slow. So I would say what you experienced is nothing unusual.

As nice as your Power Mac was (and apparently still is), but leaving the G5 behind didn't mean giving anything up. The Penryn in a new MP is much faster than any G5 ever produced and thanks to the Core CPU family we also have very powerful mobile processors - something the G5 never gave us.

No doubt. Sorry if I was trying to imply that we were giving something up.

I guess my point was this: A 4 (nearly 5) year old computer is holding it's own against the latest and greatest. That to me is amazing. Normally a computer that old would be nearly useless. My other point was *if* the development were to continue on those older processors in earnest ... how fast would they be today?

I'm not complaining at all. The Intel procs are amazing in their own right. Just different.

Big Mac · Feb 5, 2008, 03:29 PM

Nearly useless? Not unless or until Apple and third parties abandon PPC software development.

It used to be that computers were so underpowered that every four years you'd see your investment be largely obsoleted by the march of technological progress. My LC lasted 4 years as my main Mac before I was desperate to upgrade; my Quadra 650 lasted 4 years as my main Mac before I was desperate to upgrade. But my 8600/300 lasted as my main Mac for 7 years before I was desperate to upgrade. I expect my G5 to last a lot longer than my 8600, until I willingly upgrade; the only variable thrown into the mix is the point at which PPC development is abandoned.

driven · Feb 5, 2008, 03:56 PM

I should have specified ... in the PC world 4 years is nearly obsolete.

We *finally* just retired our iMac SE DV (from 1999!)

angelmb · Feb 5, 2008, 04:36 PM

I have a B&W 350 MHz G3 Power Mac that hasn't been as fast as today it is, 1 GB RAM and a 80 GB 7200 rpm hard disk made it possible, it is amazing how good it performs under Tiger.

Needless to say my single 1,25 GHz MDD runs 10.5 way better than I would expect ever.

So yes, one can only wonder 'what if…' and while I know to compare apple and oranges is silly, aren't all current generation game consoles PowerPC based?.

Last but not least and as driven said, I have no issues with the intel CPUs inside Macs nowadays… (who knows what comes next), I am apolitical, you know !! XD

peeb · Feb 5, 2008, 05:14 PM

Originally Posted by angelmb

I have no issues with the intel CPUs inside Macs nowadays… (who knows what comes next), I am apolitical, you know !! XD

You know what, with my PPC Mac, I know it will never run windows. That's a great comfort to me. With an Intel machine, I would always worry, you know? You just can't rule it out.

Lateralus · Feb 5, 2008, 05:46 PM

Originally Posted by driven

In some ways it's a shame that IBM didn't take this processor further. With a little less incompetence they might have given Intel a run ...

I'm not sure I'd tag the word incompetent to IBM's microprocessor division, which is truly something to be behold and is second to none.

The fact of that matter is that the death of the PowerPC as a viable desktop alternative is Apple's fault entirely. They provided IBM and Motorola with zero incentive to keep PowerPC competitive. They were demanding state of the art desktop and notebook processors from two companies who really couldn't care less about the desktop segment given the size of the other microprocessor markets they were in.

Apple's demand wouldn't have been so infuriating if they had been willing to foot any of the development costs or at least offer engineering resources. Which would not have been a lot for Motorola and IBM to expect, given the fact that Apple was a founding member of the AIM Alliance and the first major proponent of PowerPC.

But Apple wanted all of the rewards with none of the effort. And if I were IBM I'd have told Apple to dick off too.

angelmb · Feb 5, 2008, 05:51 PM

You know what, with my PPC Mac, I know it will never run windows. That's a great comfort to me. With an Intel machine, I would always worry, you know? You just can't rule it out.

Oh sure, don't get me wrong, last weekend I was at my neighbors' home cause they get a PC with Vista and have had issue after issue since the day they got it, last time was a movie that some app dubbed Power DVD would play it with video but not sound, so I bring there VLC cause VLC plays them all, funny enough VLC did just the opposite thing than Power DVD, sound OK, no image -video-, how came that?, no idea, if that is a codecs thing why one can reproduce video and no sound and the other player just the opposite? rhetoric question of course… that was the last issue with it, but before they had issues with Vista activation -cause they lack an internet connection right now-, with the speakers, with the monitor, with a tv-tuner… and while this is my particular opinion, Vista UI is horrid, I still think they haven't improved the classic win 98 UI, what a mess…

After all, all my Macs but one are PPC, and I am waiting to receive the fastest PPC PowerBook ever !!

peeb · Feb 5, 2008, 06:07 PM

That's the PB I have - you'll love it!