Forums | MacLife

A $400 budget:
Gigabyte G4/400=less than $200
G4/933 from OWC=$150
Generic USB card=$20.
Reuse ram and HDDs from dead G3 if its PC100/133=0
Find a decent used vid card on ebay with the balance.

pcguy wrote:

Shadowless wrote:

Remember, you can upgrade the CPU to a Core 2 Duo down the road. I'd buy the single-core for now and up the RAM. Then later on upgrade to the sweet Core 2 processors when you have the cash.

The ability to upgrade cpu on your own with a Mac is not a given for a average person, it is not the socket but rather how Apple might lock down their logicbroad.

Right, just like Apple has precluded other socketed Macs from using CPU upgrades

dvpierce wrote:

fwiw, I have a 1.5GHz PPC mini. It's plenty of machine for 99% of the people out there, especially if you're coming from a G3. An intel mini would be an excellent investment.

If you really want expandability, might as well get the mini anyway - sell it when you've saved enough for a mac pro or a newish G5. There's no point buying used equipment past a certain age - some of those G4s are going on 6 years old, and have had plenty of time and opportunity to be abused.

qft.  Also, if you hang onto the mini for ~6 months, you'll be in prime pouncing position for a used/refurb rev. A Mac Pro.  And if you/Adobe is not quite ready for Intel, the Mac Pro's should really drive down prices on the used/refurb G5s.

Almost all the cheaper PowerMacs are gone from the refurb section! So many of the refurbs in general are totally gone, it's almost rediculous. I wonder if refurb sales can count towards +marketshare, 'cause now all Apple's old stuff and new stuff is flying off the shelves (relatively speaking).

dvpierce wrote:

Mr. T wrote:

pcguy wrote:

The ability to upgrade cpu on your own with a Mac is not a given for a average person, it is not the socket but rather how Apple might lock down their logicbroad.

Right, just like Apple has precluded other socketed Macs from using CPU upgrades

Are you rolling your eyes at pcguy or Apple?

pcguy, I'm pretty sure. Someone already successfully upgraded their mini to a Core 2 Duo.

Gatchaman wrote:

toadkiller wrote:

Are we being astroturfed?  I've never seen so many posts about "FUD we need a consumer tower".

Why does the idea of a consumer tower offend you so much?

We haven't had a consumer Tower since the 6500 was discontinued. The G3 Desktop might have counted.

Might as well bitch about there being no more Newton.

Gatchaman wrote:

toadkiller wrote:

Are we being astroturfed?  I've never seen so many posts about "FUD we need a consumer tower".

Why does the idea of a consumer tower offend you so much?

I'm not offended  - just surprised at the whine festival.  This exact sort of Mac hasn't existed for a long time.  Why all the angst now?

dvpierce wrote:

Mr. T wrote:

pcguy wrote:

The ability to upgrade cpu on your own with a Mac is not a given for a average person, it is not the socket but rather how Apple might lock down their logicbroad.

Right, just like Apple has precluded other socketed Macs from using CPU upgrades

Are you rolling your eyes at pcguy or Apple?

It will be up to apple to release updates that allow newer chips to work with older boards/computers when necessary.

Possibly, but there's a difference between Apple taking specific action to break compatibility with new chips ("locking down") versus Apple's inaction to write patches to allow new chips to work with legacy hardware.  Nevertheless, as Macskeeball pointed out, the Mac Mini has been successfully upgraded to a Core 2 Duo - a chips that "requires" a supposed BIOS update.

Mr. T wrote:

dvpierce wrote:

Mr. T wrote:

Right, just like Apple has precluded other socketed Macs from using CPU upgrades

Are you rolling your eyes at pcguy or Apple?

It will be up to apple to release updates that allow newer chips to work with older boards/computers when necessary.

Possibly, but there's a difference between Apple taking specific action to break compatibility with new chips ("locking down") versus Apple's inaction to write patches to allow new chips to work with legacy hardware.  Nevertheless, as Macskeeball pointed out, the Mac Mini has been successfully upgraded to a Core 2 Duo

True, but really, Apple doesn't have to lock anything down - Intel just has to modify their chip's architecture a little more than they did with the Core Duo -> Core Duo 2, then keep the same socket.

And then we watch all the motherboards catch fire.

- a chips that "requires" a supposed BIOS update.

Even if the newer chips supposedly require a BIOS update (and they don't necessarily require one - it depends on what was there to begin with), Intel macs don't have a BIOS - they have EFI. I honestly have no idea how EFI effects things, except that it's different, but I'm not an optimist. I certainly don't expect to see updates from Apple which enable new chips to function which wouldn't otherwise.

All I'm saying is: historically, dropping a new CPU in an older socket doesn't always work without some hassle. The fact that it worked this time is great, but I'm going to continue being a curmudgeon untill I see the CPU-upgrade-hardons and false hope go away. Because, well, that ain't how it usually works. For most mac users, this is their first experience with Intel - and in the last 20 years, it's never been this good. I wouldn't get used to it. Counting chickens, hatching, you know.

Apple also has a history of locking CPU upgrades out - G3 Firmware update, anyone? We'll see what the next Intel Mini EFI patch does.

Pariah wrote:

The lack of a consumer priced tower is a new thing, a deviation from Apples customary line-up. Something I have confidence they will fix in the next year.

That's what you thought last year

Shadowless wrote:

And I would've agreed, but Apple turned out to not include one in the immediate Intel transition, which is fine because they wound up releasing all their computers in an extremely timely fashion.

I'd side with him saying that next year they should release one since they'd have much more time on their hands once Leopard is finished (therefore completing any transition work that needed to be done) and released. I'm expecting Apple to either expand their Mac Pro line into the lower price ranges, or create a new line specifically for Pariah and myself.

The G4/G5 days were rough for Apple. IBM just did not offer the range and performance Apple needed to actually offer a decent selection. Now Apple has true entree' into the work station class and the Zeon/Core distinction will be there to differentiate in reality what Apple has had to fake in the past with silly and transparently arbitrary Pro/Consumer categories.

Legend has it, Steve has been wanting to go Intel since he took over as iCEO, but he just wanted to wait for the opportune time to make the jump, mainly due to the bleak and uncertain future of PowerPC.  The first opportunity arose during the G4 fiasco, but then fate intervened in the form of IBM and the G5.  The second opportunity came after IBM failed to deliver a decent-performing mobile chip.

"Decent performing is the key.  Right after the intel switch was announced, IBM announced the Dual Core G5, and a low-power G5 chip for mobile uses that was never used."

So if IBM was more timley with G5 updates and offered them sooner, Apple wouldn't have switched CPUs? Was it that or was there more to it than that.

Also, did IBM just not care enough to supply Apple with more competative chips or did they have trouble keeping up with Intel's pace?

Last edited by adamjg (2006-08-31 4:25 pm)

I can't vouch for the minis.  I DO own a dual-core 2.0 ghz iMac. (Using it now.)  I also own a g4 dual 867.

I can say without question that the speed difference between the two on 90% of applications is hardly noticeable. Since I need PCI, I'd stay with the tower over the mini but that's just me.

In fact, my g4 is the heart of my post-production business. I probably put somewhere in the range of 3000 hours of PCU-intensive Pro Tools HD work into that system last year without a single problem. Well, maybe a few problems but only Tiger-related. (Ugh.) That machine didn't even hiccup for the year plus that it ran Panther.

Over 60 hours of network television edited, mixed and delivered from that machine, last year.

Several full CD recordings and multiple other music based projects.

Over 100 30/60 radio spots for a major network.

I don't think I turned that thing off twice last year.

All on a machine that you can probably go out and buy for $400.

I love me some Macs!!!!

Last edited by popps (2007-01-06 12:59 am)