Is it worth the upgrade?

[Audio.Trench]

Just so every one knows.. I'm the type of guy who likes the "legacy" stuff.. The old stuff no one wants, and people like me, get it for dirt cheap.

I'm a gear slut.. If that makes sense lol.. I like "reviving the dead," so to speak. As sweet as a new Mac would be.. I'd get more personal satisfaction out of upgrading my G4.

Once my new job starts in the new year, I'll be able to dump $3500 into a 17" MBP. So until then, I think this project is going to work out great!

 

[dtravis7]

Baggss is correct, his machine has a 100Mhz Bus. A few months back for the fun of it I upgraded my G4 Digital Audio 667Mhz G4 which does have the 133Mhz Bus. Went to a 1.8Ghz G4, 1.5GB PC133 RAM and Radeon 9800 Pro. It really sped it up a lot but it's still no G5. It IS still a very useable machine though since the upgrade.

I would say since you like older machines and building them up, go for it.

 

[baggss]

When did OS X become a stable, useable OS? Probably the end of 2002 with Jaguar. So assuming most people started to ditch OS 9 at the end of 2002, and Tiger arrived in 2005 which is when Classic apps pretty much vanished, I make that about 3 years of lifespan.

Classic Apps are still around. Not many new ones are being made, but OSX still supports classic simply because there is a demand for it. I was not referring to "Classic" Apps per-se, I was referring to the Pre-PPC (aka 68k) classic Apps. The PPC predated OSX by some years.

I think it's naive to think PPC programs will be around longer than 3 years. Apple will shift an enormous number of Intel Macs when CS 3 comes out and it won't be long before x86 Macs outnumber PPC ones. Few companies will find it viable to create similar Mac x86 and PC x86 programs and then relic PPC apps for a dwindling customer base.

You’re missing the point. It's not a matter of writing one or the other. Right now Apple is pushing "Universal Binaries" which are Apps that will run on both PPC AND Intel. I agree that PPC ONLY Apps will go away, but Universals will be around for some time. I don't see that going away any time soon. BTW, CS3 will be a Universal Binary, so it will support both systems.

 

[Steve Adams]

Baggss is correct, his machine has a 100Mhz Bus. A few months back for the fun of it I upgraded my G4 Digital Audio 667Mhz G4 which does have the 133Mhz Bus. Went to a 1.8Ghz G4, 1.5GB PC133 RAM and Radeon 9800 Pro. It really sped it up a lot but it's still no G5. It IS still a very useable machine though since the upgrade.

I would say since you like older machines and building them up, go for it.

exactly,

well said, its not meant to be a G5. its meant to be a fun machine that I can run appature on, slowly but surely, and have the fun of building it and modding it the way I want.

 

[Alexis]

You’re missing the point. It's not a matter of writing one or the other. Right now Apple is pushing "Universal Binaries" which are Apps that will run on both PPC AND Intel. I agree that PPC ONLY Apps will go away, but Universals will be around for some time. I don't see that going away any time soon. BTW, CS3 will be a Universal Binary, so it will support both systems.

Universal apps are a stop gap to bridge the gap between PPC and x86. Eventually programs will not support PPCs and be 'Intel/x86' only. I believe there's already a couple of apps out there which are not Universal and do not support PPCs. CS3 / Quark 7 might be the first and last Universal apps.

 

[baggss]

"EventuallY" yes, but that's not going to be next year or likely even 3 years. It's likely to be closer to 5 to 6 years at the least before they expect the PPCs to go away at the end of their useful life. Arguing that the PPC is "obsolete" at this stage is a bit silly and the machines will remain useful for years.

 

[Alexis]

I'm not saying they're obsolete at this stage, but the point is that you're mad to spend $1000 on making a slow PPC machine less slow, rather than a new Mac.

But I do think you'll see software being written for Intel only sooner than you think, purely for economic reasons.

 

[baggss]

$1000-Agreed. $500-Sure, why not.

 

[mr g5]

I would either get a G5 1.6 single or 1.8 dual powermac. You should be able to find it in your pricerange.

But I would NEVER dump $1000 in a G4 with a 100 mhz bus.

I just found some 1.8 dual g5 powermacs on ebay in the $700 USD range. they will blow away your g4 for less money.

 

[Alexis]

$500-Sure, why not

Cos it's five hundred dollars

 

[baggss]

$500 is not a lot of money to everyone. If it extends the useful life of the machine to meets his needs for 2 more years, then it's $500 well spent IMO.

 

[Steve Adams]

exactly, its going to make my mac more useable for me, instead of forking over 1500 for a G5.

 

[mr g5]

exactly, its going to make my mac more useable for me, instead of forking over 1500 for a G5.

http://cgi.ebay.com/Apple-PowerMac-...ryZ51036QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

 

[Steve Adams]

thats nice and all, the only advantage I see in getting that is the bus speed in the ram, I will have 2 times the ram in my box, almost the same processor speed, 250 gigs of storage, a light scribe dvd burner and more...for around 600 bucks, my cousin works at a computer store so I get very good deals. most of the cost is the dual 1.6 upgrade. but i Figure that 600 is better than 1000 for a computer I do not use alot. that xtra 400 bucks is my 22" widescreen I have on order....but that is a fairly good deal for a G5

 

[mr g5]

thats nice and all, the only advantage I see in getting that is the bus speed in the ram, I will have 2 times the ram in my box, almost the same processor speed, 250 gigs of storage, a light scribe dvd burner and more...for around 600 bucks, my cousin works at a computer store so I get very good deals. most of the cost is the dual 1.6 upgrade. but i Figure that 600 is better than 1000 for a computer I do not use alot. that xtra 400 bucks is my 22" widescreen I have on order....but that is a fairly good deal for a G5

the bus speed is a huge advantage , not only for the RAM it will help almost everything becuse the bus is such a bottleneck on the g4.

also g5 cpus get much more performace per mhz than g4's

 

[baggss]

the bus speed is a huge advantage , not only for the RAM it will help almost everything becuse the bus is such a bottleneck on the g4.

I have to wholeheartedly agree here. I looked at upgrading my PM G4 to a 1.6 or 1.8 or even a dual something but realized that the bus was always going to be 100Mhz and I was never going to get much better performance out of it than I was a 1.25. In the end, that was what clinched the deal for me to get the new Quad. That is also why I recommend $500 as the price point. Any more than that and you're just throwing money away.

 

[dtravis7]

That is the main reason I did not upgrade my Sawtooth and bought a cheap Digital Audio instead to upgrade. 133Mhz Bus and AGP4x at least. Am so glad I did. I have the 500Mhz Sawtooth but the DA with the same CPU is noticeably faster. The AGP 4x makes a bit of difference in Video performance with the same exact Radeon 9800 Pro.

I would upgrade the sawtooth if that was all I had though as it would for sure give it a kick in the fanny, but the DA is even nicer.

 

[Steve Adams]

well my g4 runs 133 FSB and has 4x agp like I said, im upgrading it to do what I need it to do, my main computer is a PC, always will be. this is more of a playtoy for me....but i will be doing some mild photo editing on it, however i do not need blazing speed from it as im not a pro doing this as a job...just a hobby photographer....

 

[dtravis7]

Steve, Since you have a Quicksilver you should be quite happy with your upgrade.

 

[Steve Adams]

travis,

I figure for what im using it for, it should serve me well. plus, i got the machine free, so really the upgrades are even more of a bonus....