Re: Power mac G5 2.5ghz
Howdy, I would not want it. But, it is a pretty nice machine in some ways. You say it has no leak issue, but these machines seem to develop that over time. If you want to use it for several more years, you should monitor that cooler. I know I am on the lookout for an inexpensive G5 tower that works well. But, I want an air-cooled one for longer term reliability. That does restrict me to 1.8 GHz speed, as I understand. Good luck, Ralph On Sun, 2009-09-06 at 16:50 +, musaund...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, Is this a good machine? I like the PPC mac's. Will this machine be a good addition to my collection? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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
On Fri, 2009-09-04 at 17:14 -0400, John Martz wrote: On Fri, Sep 4, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Tomtba...@nmia.com wrote: ... OWC has always been a reliable company, so I just up and ordered up two of these 1-TB ones from them: http://tinyurl.com/dec2kl. There is a cheaper version of the same drive offered there ($87 vs. $139, see http://tinyurl.com/ mjm49f), but ç and this model has a 5 year warranty and they brag about a million hours and more before it croaks. The Hitachi Deskstar E7K1000 looks like it is an enterprise version of their mainstream 7K1000.B. I'm not well informed on all the potential differences so perhaps others will jump in here. But the main differences I could see were: Howdy, There is a discussion thread in another list I follow that talks about these drives. I would suggest you look at: http://www.c0t0d0s0.org/archives/5899-Some-perspective-to-this-DIY-storage-server-mentioned-at-Storagemojo.html A Sun storage expert was commenting on an article about building your a cheap storage array. He talks about the the enterprise drive you refer to and compares it to a desktop drive. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Smurf
On Sep 7, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Ernest L. Gunerius wrote: At 7:43 PM -0400 9/7/2009, Len Gerstel wrote: On Sep 7, 2009, at 7:09 PM, dorayme wrote: How do you find out on Google, if you don't have inside knowledge, why some models were called smurfs? This is a good example of what we need to make sure we are teaching the next generation of students, how to search, combine ideas and what to look for. OTOH it's maybe it should be hard to find, and left as an exercise for the searcher. After all, a girl has to keep some mystery about her. - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. A search with Clusty using Mac model smurf has the first three hits the Mac G3. Point the search to Mac first then model then smurf. At least it seems to work this way. I would imagine the same results would be returned but farther down the return list with a different order of the search terms. I don't use Google anymore or I would check using it. Please correct me as my assumptions are usually in error. :-[ Enjoy, ErnieG Only one of those links even comes close to the explanation of Smurf, and that is the lowendmac that includes a picture of smurfs with no label saying that this is a smurf on the page. Others just say something to the effect of Nickname: Smurf with no explanation if you did not know what a smurf is. While smurfs were pretty ingrained in the US (and I believe European) culture of the 1970's and 80's there are many cultures that have never heard of them. Len --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Upgrading a used G5
I got a GeForce 7800 GS for $50 (from the popular auction site) and flashed it for my G5, it is one of the best AGP cards available. Before that I had a Geforce 6200/256MB AGP card which was also very good, they are pretty easy to find in the $50 range. On Sep 7, 2:01 pm, Ron Romine ronrom...@mac.com wrote: I just got a 1.8Ghz, G5 for $45.00, from a government auction. It's one of the original G5's with a 900Mhz bus, but it has only 512M of memory and it's missing its hard drive and graphics card. Getting the memory (8 gigs) will be easy, so will the hard drive. I found the mounting screws for the spare HD hidden inside the case. Currently, I got the G5 running using an external firewire HD, and a Radeon 9200 PCI in one of the 100Mhz PCI-X slots. Is there anyone selling AGP x8 Pro cards for the G5? OWC appears sold out. Also, would the Radeon PCI card run better in the 133mhz slot? Is the Radeon currently running at 33Mhz or 66Mhz in its current slot? Any suggestions for upgrades? - Ron. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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
Thanks Ralph. That article is heavy going for a non-techie like me, but what I seem to get out of it is that these enterprise drives such as the two I bought are built to a higher standard than regular drives, able to run reliably non-stop 24/7 even while enduring higher operating temperatures. If so, the extra cash I spent for them I consider well spent. I was mainly just looking at the extra two years of warranty protection Hitachi provides for them. Tom --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Fastmail.fm question
On Sep 7, 2009, at 9:26 AM, Stephen Conrad wrote: From my email I am using Mac OS X 10.4.11 and Fiefox 3.5.2 In Safari it let me set my Display Style (I chose the pic of the Crab Nebula) Sorry, missed that. If you're using a supported browser, then bug them about it, they're the ones who would know. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: iTunes shuffle question
On Sep 7, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote: It may have an intuitive way - like Mac OS X has - but what it does in the background (in the directories where all the music files are) is not very transparent. This is one commonly made argument that baffles me. What it does in the background is put the files in a very clear and easy to follow order: Artist Album 1 Name Track 01 Name Track 02 Name Track 03 Name ...etc. Seems pretty damn intuitive to me :-) The only place it breaks down is when it doesn't have the info it needs to put these things together. I don't believe you can get a whole lot more transparent than that. Here's a sample from my own iTunes library, filenames and such have never been messed with by me: http://dbdev2.pharmacy.arizona.edu/miscjunk/itunes_dirlist.html Some are from the iTunes music store, some are ripped from CD's, but I never have to bother with messing with that dumb low level stuff like making sure files are in the right order...that's why I have a computer! The only time I've had to mess with song metadata is when CDDB didn't know about the CD (a couple local artists) and when the metadata was messed up (some Dead shows from Nugs.net that came down in the wrong order for some reason.). But I have better things to do with my time than manually organize the music. Again, this is a matter of personal taste: You enjoy messing about with having to manually mange your files. I don't. Some people love gardening, I consider yardwork a chore. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: iTunes shuffle question
On Sep 7, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote: A web shop (with out proprietary Flash) would be a wiser way to reach the masses. No it wouldn't. There aren't many 'masses' that the ITMS is missing , and it's the largest music retailer on the web and one of the largest in the world, period. The 'masses' have pretty clearly chosen, I would say... -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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
On Sep 7, 2009, at 7:14 PM, Stephen Conrad wrote: Now, it will take a 5V DC power cord and then I can switch it from bus-powered to self-powered. However, the folks at Rat Shack (Radio Shack) said it can run off the USB bus and I can use it with 4 thumb drives. Well, this is what you get for listening to ratshack clerks. shrug Those older 250 and 512 mb drives will take more power than modern ones, and the hub itself siphons off some power. Plug in the power brick for the hub. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: OT iTunes - Sort by Burn info
On Sep 7, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Mark wrote: Can I sort my iTunes library by times burnt ? Everything you can sort by is in the View Options menu, and no 'times burned' is not one of them. That wouldn't be in song metadata anyway, since it's playlists that get burned not the songs. You can only burn one playlist with DRM'ed files a certain number of times, but you can burn it in different playlists infinitely. (Well there is a finite number of different playlists you could generate out of a finite library, but the number if very very large.) 'Tis better to back up your itunes library via the OS anyway, there's no limits on that. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Upgrading a used G5
--- On Mon, 9/7/09, Dana Collins dlcatft...@verizon.net wrote: The second would be to add an audio interface card, a little harder with PCI-X, but can be found (regular PCI there are many options, like an M-Audio 2496 PCI audio card)-anticipate a bit more $$ for PCI-X since everyone has moved on from that design. Hey Dana, I just tried an M-Audio Audiophile 192 PCI card in a G5 dual 2.3GHz Xserve, and it sounds horrible. I thought PCI-X was backwards compatible with PCI. The same card works fine in a G4 Xserve (64bit PCI slots). Do I have to get a PCI-X specific card? Any recommendations? 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
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. Now, it will take a 5V DC power cord and then I can switch it from bus-powered to self-powered. However, the folks at Rat Shack (Radio Shack) said it can run off the USB bus and I can use it with 4 thumb drives. Rule one (in any list of rules, anywhere): DON'T listen to anyone at Radio Shack. You CAN use four flash drives off of a hub IF all four flash drives use a maximum of 100mA. That is they report a maximum current draw of 100mA. Background: USB devices when connected automatically get 100mA allocated to them. Upon communicating with the computer a device may request more current, in 100mA steps, up to 500mA max. This is subject to available current. When in self powered mode there is a total of 500mA for the hub and any devices plugged in to it. The hub itself takes 100mA leaving 400mA for the rest. So if each of four devices plugged in to a self powered hub only requests 100mA then they can all be used. But if one or more requests more current then it won't allow more devices to operate. When using external power (a wall wart) the hub can typically power all devices at the full 500mA capacity. Now here is the rub... some USB devices request 500mA regardless of how much power they actually need. I suspect this is because the programmers of the code in the USB device left the current setting at a default value, never setting it to what is actually needed for their product. You can find out how much each device is requesting by looking under the USB section in Apple System Profiler. PS.I emailed Fastmail.fm about my issue and will let you know what they say. And Fastmail is??? -- Clark Martin Redwood City, CA, USA Macintosh / Internet Consulting I'm a designated driver on the Information Super Highway --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: OT iTunes - Sort by Burn info
Bruce Johnson wrote: On Sep 7, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Mark wrote: Can I sort my iTunes library by times burnt ? Everything you can sort by is in the View Options menu, and no 'times burned' is not one of them. That wouldn't be in song metadata anyway, since it's playlists that get burned not the songs. You can only burn one playlist with DRM'ed files a certain number of times, but you can burn it in different playlists infinitely. (Well there is a finite number of different playlists you could generate out of a finite library, but the number if very very large.) What I am trying to do is NOT burn infinitely. :-) Burning an album is ok, but I collect a bunch of individual tunes wait til I have enough to fill out a CD. But then I get all kinds of music on one disk, so I wait a little longer then I forget what I have and haven't burned. Yes, I am disorganized. The pop down View menu is one thing (the metadata) but I am assuming the playlist info would also have the songs in it so the info about the number of times the song has been burned should be rattling around in the application somewhere. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: iTunes shuffle question
-- Original message --
Subject: Re: iTunes shuffle question
Date:Dienstag, 8. September 2009N
From:Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu
To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com
On Sep 7, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote:
A web shop (with out proprietary Flash) would be a wiser way to reach
the masses.
No it wouldn't. There aren't many 'masses' that the ITMS is missing ,
and it's the largest music retailer on the web and one of the largest
in the world, period.
The 'masses' have pretty clearly chosen, I would say...
Right you are. The popularity is on the side of iTunes. All you need is a PC
with Windows or a Mac with Mac OS.
Sorry for my English, it seems to be horrible ('masses').
Cheers,
Andreas.
--~--~-~--~~~---~--~~
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
-~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Distributed processing.
In essence, I am wondering how you can use multiple older ppc computers to make things happen faster? I have occasion to run unix based programs via X11 at work. I am not a knowledgeable unix person but actually OSX is educating me in that direction. It's possible for me to use ssh to connect to a remote computer (CentOS) and run an application which opens a window on my screen. As I understand it, that means that that application is actually running on the remote cpu, not my local mac. My mac is only working as a X-Window server. So I was wondering if it was possible to run the applications that we normally run on a mac, in X11? In other words can I run Safari on one mac, Excel on another, while watching a DVD on another, by connecting to these cpu remotely using x windows? Or does this only work with special x windows programs? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Interesting short-term file sharing service - s4ve.as
Title: Interesting short-term file sharing service - s4ve.as hum. Seems interesting. Works well for 24-hr file shares. http://s4ve.as/ It purports to be owned by some of the Napster boiz. A 5 MB example, good for 24 hrs: http://bit.ly/15wAY1 - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: iTunes shuffle question
-- Original message -- Subject: Re: iTunes shuffle question Date:Dienstag, 8. September 2009N From:Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com On Sep 7, 2009, at 12:45 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote: It may have an intuitive way - like Mac OS X has - but what it does in the background (in the directories where all the music files are) is not very transparent. This is one commonly made argument that baffles me. What it does in the background is put the files in a very clear and easy to follow order: Artist Album 1 Name Track 01 Name Track 02 Name Track 03 Name ...etc. Seems pretty damn intuitive to me :-) I don't want my directories to be messed with. Some ancient mp3 files have horribly wrong metadata, and I don't want them to be all over the place. The only place it breaks down is when it doesn't have the info it needs to put these things together. Right. I don't believe you can get a whole lot more transparent than that. You could be asked which way you want it. There is no easy way to customize the style. BTW, for albums I prefer the directory and file naming that you described to be iTunes' default. For singles and songs, that I have without the album, I prefer a different naming. But I have better things to do with my time than manually organize the music. Like writing on the LEM G-List? Again, this is a matter of personal taste: You enjoy messing about with having to manually mange your files. I don't. Some people love gardening, I consider yardwork a chore. It is more a matter of how big your library already is and how the files taged (metadata). It is a matter of which programs you used before and if you are used and learned to love a different philosophy. For me, a music player is just a music player. I use Amarok. It doesn't mess with tags at all. If I have the time to correct some tags of older mp3s I use Easytag, which is very powerful yet easy to use. For buying new music I go to a music store, which happens to be in big shopping malls nowerdays. If it's not available, I don't buy it at all. Sometimes I record songs from the radio. Of cource I have to cut and fade-in/-out them manually with Audacity, and tag them with Easytag. Lot of work... But, as you say, a matter of personal taste. I never ever bought a DRM'ed song, in a lossy compressed audio file for the price I could get it on CD (with all the songs from an album or compilation, of course). If there ever were a music shop that would sell FLAC compressed audio files, I'd be even willing to use Windows or Mac OS X just to get it. But since this is only available in a very few online music stores, this isn't the case. There is only the Deutsche Grammophon that comes to mind, its portal is working on any OS with a recent browser. Sadly there are only selected albums available as FLAC downloads (just for you to see, not meant to be a commercial): http://www2.deutschegrammophon.com/cat/ FLAC - lossless audio downloads for a special selection of albums You're just right - my taste is different. Cheers, Andreas. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Distributed processing.
Good call! There's that x-grid thing built into (and addable seperately) later versions of OS X, but the main machine needs to be running the server version of the os, and it only works with certain apps (like final cut) from what I understand. Would be nice though to hook my old iMacs up through FireWire for a bit of an overall speedboost. Think I'm dreaming there though On 8 Sep 2009, at 19:14, John Niven sense...@yahoo.com wrote: In essence, I am wondering how you can use multiple older ppc computers to make things happen faster? I have occasion to run unix based programs via X11 at work. I am not a knowledgeable unix person but actually OSX is educating me in that direction. It's possible for me to use ssh to connect to a remote computer (CentOS) and run an application which opens a window on my screen. As I understand it, that means that that application is actually running on the remote cpu, not my local mac. My mac is only working as a X-Window server. So I was wondering if it was possible to run the applications that we normally run on a mac, in X11? In other words can I run Safari on one mac, Excel on another, while watching a DVD on another, by connecting to these cpu remotely using x windows? Or does this only work with special x windows programs? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Distributed processing.
-- Original message -- Subject: Distributed processing. Date:Dienstag, 8. September 2009N From:John Niven sense...@yahoo.com To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com In essence, I am wondering how you can use multiple older ppc computers to make things happen faster? I have occasion to run unix based programs via X11 at work. I am not a knowledgeable unix person but actually OSX is educating me in that direction. It's possible for me to use ssh to connect to a remote computer (CentOS) and run an application which opens a window on my screen. As I understand it, that means that that application is actually running on the remote cpu, not my local mac. My mac is only working as a X-Window server. So I was wondering if it was possible to run the applications that we normally run on a mac, in X11? In other words can I run Safari on one mac, Excel on another, while watching a DVD on another, by connecting to these cpu remotely using x windows? Or does this only work with special x windows programs? As far as I know this works because of the server-client structure of X11. Mac OS X on the other hand uses a different design: Aqua. Aqua applications are not running on the X11 server, so they cannot be displayed on a X11 client. What you could use is a Mac verions of a good VNC client, which basically takes the picture and displays it on another machine. I have no idea though if this will also work for watching DVD or even HD material, since there's almost certainly hardware acceleration from the graphics card involved, and this essential acceleration cannot be transmitted to a different client machine. Another problem might be the sound comming out of the server (the computer where the CPU does all the work) and not out of the client (the one, where you want the picture+sound to be shown+heard). I hope this wasn't too weird... I'm sorry, but I'm not a native speaker. If something's not quite clear, just ask again. Cheers, Andreas --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Distributed processing.
-- Original message -- Subject: Re: Distributed processing. Date:Dienstag, 8. September 2009N From:Mike mike.dogho...@googlemail.com To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com g3-5-list@googlegroups.com ... Would be nice though to hook my old iMacs up through FireWire for a bit of an overall speedboost. Think I'm dreaming there though Just besides, that would cost more power consumption than to run all that on a newer machine that has the appropriate power anyway. In other words: it wouldn't be economic to use old computers to run processor intensive applications on them, and display all of it on even another old machine. Example (NUMBERS ARE GUESSES): Intel Mac Pro, 4 cores: 140 Wh Power Mac G3 BW: 100 Wh Run three applications: On one Mac Pro: 140 Wh On three BW: 300 Wh And the Mac Pro would be faster still. Of course it would be much fun to try it... Just for the fun of doing what no other earthling ever did before... Cheers, Andreas. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Smurf
On Sep 7, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Ernest L. Gunerius wrote: At 7:43 PM -0400 9/7/2009, Len Gerstel wrote: On Sep 7, 2009, at 7:09 PM, dorayme wrote: How do you find out on Google, if you don't have inside knowledge, why some models were called smurfs? This is a good example of what we need to make sure we are teaching the next generation of students, how to search, combine ideas and what to look for. Snip: - Dan. -- - Psychoceramic Emeritus; South Jersey, USA, Earth. A search with Clusty using Mac model smurf has the first three hits the Mac G3. Point the search to Mac first then model then smurf. At least it seems to work this way. I would imagine the same results would be returned but farther down the return list with a different order of the search terms. Snip: ErnieG Only one of those links even comes close to the explanation of Smurf, and that is the lowendmac that includes a picture of smurfs with no label saying that this is a smurf on the page. Others just say something to the effect of Nickname: Smurf with no explanation if you did not know what a smurf is. While smurfs were pretty ingrained in the US (and I believe European) culture of the 1970's and 80's there are many cultures that have never heard of them. Len Sorry: I thought the questions were: why some models were called smurfs? and then: how to search, combine ideas and whatto look for. All other reported searches seemed to say they only found the description of the little Blue and White figures with no connection to Macs. The example I gave answered two of the questions. That leaves: combine ideas and whatto look for. Which are beyond my teaching skills. :-( As i said my assumptions are usually in error. :-[ ErnieG --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Distributed processing.
Just besides, that would cost more power consumption than to run all that on a newer machine that has the appropriate power anyway. In other words: it wouldn't be economic to use old computers to run processor intensive applications on them, and display all of it on even another old machine. Example (NUMBERS ARE GUESSES): Intel Mac Pro, 4 cores: 140 Wh Power Mac G3 BW: 100 Wh Run three applications: On one Mac Pro: 140 Wh On three BW: 300 Wh And the Mac Pro would be faster still. Yep, you're right, but, macpro=// etc, compared to the hardware I have laying around already Of course it would be much fun to try it... Just for the fun of doing what no other earthling ever did before... Exactly! Cheers Mike --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Distributed processing.
On Sep 8, 2009, at 11:14 AM, John Niven wrote: In essence, I am wondering how you can use multiple older ppc computers to make things happen faster? I have occasion to run unix based programs via X11 at work. I am not a knowledgeable unix person but actually OSX is educating me in that direction. It's possible for me to use ssh to connect to a remote computer (CentOS) and run an application which opens a window on my screen. As I understand it, that means that that application is actually running on the remote cpu, not my local mac. My mac is only working as a X-Window server. Yes and no, the 'X11-server' part does put some load on your Mac. So I was wondering if it was possible to run the applications that we normally run on a mac, in X11? No, not really. Aqua is not X11 (in fact X11 is pretty unique in it's ability to seamlessly let you run processes on other computers), so you can't run native Mac programs in that fashion. If you have X11 programs, you could do that...install the unix programs via Macports or such, and run them through X-windows on the Mac. You could run multiple Apple Remote Desktop sessions to each of the other computers, but frankly, that won't work all that well either. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Smurf
The smurfs (pitufos in Spanish) were very popular in the early 1980s Spain. When the PowerMac G3 BW appeared, it was quickly nicknamed pitufo as both were blue and white. The original iMac G3 was popularly known as cabezon (Big headed), while the fancy iMac G4 was known as Lamparita (desk lamp). Until the late 1990s Macs were a real rarity around here. The iMac G3 was the first popular model and raised brand awareness quite a bit. Gorka from Spain -- GRATIS für alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: iTunes shuffle question
On Sep 8, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote: I don't want my directories to be messed with. Some ancient mp3 files have horribly wrong metadata, and I don't want them to be all over the place. You can change the metadata formats within iTunes. You highlight the track, tracks, or even entire Library; then Ctl-click (right click) the track(s) and use the Convert ID3 tags I never ever bought a DRM'ed song, in a lossy compressed audio file for the price I could get it on CD (with all the songs from an album or compilation, of course). Then where are the ancient mp3 files with horribly wrong metadata coming from? Studies confirmed that young people today have listened to so much lossy mp3 that it has become the listening norm. When asked to choose which sounds better, they invariably say an mp3 track sounds better than a lossless flac track. This means that subjectively, your taste is different. I think the best argument in favor of mp3 is that it's not that bad considering it's such a small file in comparison to lossless formats. In my car, which has a disc player that plays mp3 format, I can squeeze 10 albums on a single 700MB CD. It's sure nice having only one or two CDs in the car rather than 20 or 30. No need to splice my iPhone into the car now, at least not for audio playback. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Which is a faster option?
My sister has a dual 1ghz Quicksilver and would like to upgrade the processor. I have a Sonnet 1.4ghz card that will fit but am wondering if it would really be any faster (if not slower) than the current dual processor she has. Any thoughts? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: iTunes shuffle question
-- Original message -- Subject: Re: iTunes shuffle question Date:Dienstag, 8. September 2009N From:Kris Tilford ktilfo...@cox.net To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com On Sep 8, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Mac User #330250 wrote: I don't want my directories to be messed with. Some ancient mp3 files have horribly wrong metadata, and I don't want them to be all over the place. You can change the metadata formats within iTunes. You highlight the track, tracks, or even entire Library; then Ctl-click (right click) the track(s) and use the Convert ID3 tags Thanks for the hint, but I don't use iTunes... Because of that I won't say any more about iTunes, I'm really not an expert, had only a glimps or two... I never ever bought a DRM'ed song, in a lossy compressed audio file for the price I could get it on CD (with all the songs from an album or compilation, of course). Then where are the ancient mp3 files with horribly wrong metadata coming from? Youthful folly? I don't know, I just started converting some CDs and stuff that I don't even have at hand anymore years ago. At first I didn't even have CDDB access, so there is the reason for this metadata mess. Maybe I should delete all of it and start over... Studies confirmed that young people today have listened to so much lossy mp3 that it has become the listening norm. When asked to choose which sounds better, they invariably say an mp3 track sounds better than a lossless flac track. This means that subjectively, your taste is different. Never heard of that. I read a study of the german c't magazine that had experts test-hearing CD tracks (lossless) and MP3 tracks with 320kbps down to 128kbps. The result: for Pop music and RockRoll and all thelike it doesn't matter really. Even people with very very good ears cannot hear any difference. Only Classic music was worse with MP3. I think the best argument in favor of mp3 is that it's not that bad considering it's such a small file in comparison to lossless formats. MP3 was the first lossy compression for music. It is old. Why not use MP3Pro? Yeah, because your disc player in the car cannot play MP3Pro, right? I use Ogg Vorbis. My disc player in the car, my iPod Nano with MusicBox and iPodLinux can play Ogg. Ogg Vorbis can be compared to MP3Pro. It has a better performance than MP3, one that is worth the switch to Ogg. One other advantage of Ogg Vorbis is that it is royalty free and free of patents and licenses. It's license is actually BSD like (use it any way you like, even in closed source programs). In my car, which has a disc player that plays mp3 format, I can squeeze 10 albums on a single 700MB CD. It's sure nice having only one or two CDs in the car rather than 20 or 30. No need to splice my iPhone into the car now, at least not for audio playback. Right, I use a USB drive for that. It has 4 GB, that is space for weeks of listening experience - all in Ogg Vorbis, of course. (Except for some older songs that are still MP3, but I hate that. The metadata is also horrible. If only I had the time and the will...) Cheers, Andreas. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Which is a faster option?
On Sep 8, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Falstaff46 wrote: My sister has a dual 1ghz Quicksilver and would like to upgrade the processor. I have a Sonnet 1.4ghz card that will fit but am wondering if it would really be any faster (if not slower) than the current dual processor she has. Any thoughts? Mostly, it will be a little faster. Applications that really push multiple-cpu architecture (video compressors, 3D rendering, heavy Photoshop, etc etc) will run (very roughly speaking) in the neighborhood of how fast a single 1.7-1.8 Ghz processor would run on the dual 1G, but that will only affect those specific functions. ANything that only taxes one CPU will run faster on the 1.4. OS X does take some advantage of multi-processor architecture, but if her main use doesn't push multiple CPU's a lot, the 1.4 will be the better choice. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Which is a faster option?
On Sep 8, 2009, at 5:05 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Sep 8, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Falstaff46 wrote: My sister has a dual 1ghz Quicksilver and would like to upgrade the processor. I have a Sonnet 1.4ghz card that will fit but am wondering if it would really be any faster (if not slower) than the current dual processor she has. Any thoughts? Mostly, it will be a little faster. Applications that really push multiple-cpu architecture (video compressors, 3D rendering, heavy Photoshop, etc etc) will run (very roughly speaking) in the neighborhood of how fast a single 1.7-1.8 Ghz processor would run on the dual 1G, but that will only affect those specific functions. ANything that only taxes one CPU will run faster on the 1.4. OS X does take some advantage of multi-processor architecture, but if her main use doesn't push multiple CPU's a lot, the 1.4 will be the better choice. I have to disagree with you, Bruce. I went from a single 933 to a dual 1.2 and it was a huge improvement. While I have a lot of apps open, normally I am only doing one or two things at a time (torrent in the background, Firefox running in the foreground and a lot of idle apps). Most of what I have open really does not take advantage of the 2 processors. Offloading the finder, screen redraws, disk indexing and other system stuff to one of the processors will leave a lot of horsepower for your working app on the other. According to the geekbench results in MacTracker, a dual 1GHz scores 833, while a single 1.25GHz MDD (faster bus and memory) scores a 705. Since the 1.25 MDD has a level 3 cache and many 1.4Ghz processors don't, my guess is that the Sonnet 1.4 will measure out around 700 w/ o a L3 and maybe 800 with it. Is she close? It is only a 5 minute swap if you really take your time. Swap it out and let her play with it. Len --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Which is a faster option?
-- Original message -- Subject: Re: Which is a faster option? Date:Dienstag, 8. September 2009N From:Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com On Sep 8, 2009, at 1:41 PM, Falstaff46 wrote: My sister has a dual 1ghz Quicksilver and would like to upgrade the processor. I have a Sonnet 1.4ghz card that will fit but am wondering if it would really be any faster (if not slower) than the current dual processor she has. Any thoughts? Mostly, it will be a little faster. Applications that really push multiple-cpu architecture (video compressors, 3D rendering, heavy Photoshop, etc etc) will run (very roughly speaking) in the neighborhood of how fast a single 1.7-1.8 Ghz processor would run on the dual 1G, but that will only affect those specific functions. ANything that only taxes one CPU will run faster on the 1.4. OS X does take some advantage of multi-processor architecture, but if her main use doesn't push multiple CPU's a lot, the 1.4 will be the better choice. In oposition to what Bruce wrote: My computer _was_ a Quicksilver 2001, single 733 MHz. I then got a 1.4 GHz OWC Mercury Extreme, running Mac OS X 10.4.11 on it with various applications (Photoshop, just to name one). I did (as I always do) switch alot between the running processes. I then replaced it with the original Dual 800 MHz for this QS2001. The subjective feeling was that Mac OS X responded much faster to task switching and was generally more responsive. With the other programs I didn't see a big slow-down in any way, althou I didn't do extensive testing. So it may well be that a Photoshop filter was now slower because it may only use one CPU for the task. Personally, I would stay with a Dual system. And like Len wrote, replacement Dual processor cards are very expensive - you should propably go for a newer Mac in that case. Cheers, Andreas. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Which is a faster option?
On Sep 8, 2009, at 4:41 PM, Falstaff46 wrote: My sister has a dual 1ghz Quicksilver and would like to upgrade the processor. I have a Sonnet 1.4ghz card that will fit but am wondering if it would really be any faster (if not slower) than the current dual processor she has. Any thoughts? The 1.4 will definitely be slower than the dual 1GHz. A 1.8GHz single may be faster for some things, but slower at others depending upon how she uses her computer. The only real upgrades for a dual 1GHz are other dual cards. However, for the cost of one of those and what you can sell the QS for, you can get a much faster, newer system. Len --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Smurf
Date: Tues, Sep 8 2009 4:52 am From: Len Gerstel ... Only one of those links even comes close to the explanation of Smurf, and that is the lowendmac that includes a picture of smurfs with no label saying that this is a smurf on the page. Others just say something to the effect of Nickname: Smurf with no explanation if you did not know what a smurf is. While smurfs were pretty ingrained in the US (and I believe European) culture of the 1970's and 80's there are many cultures that have never heard of them. It is hard to see why finding out something is hard if you already know it. On one page that came up on a reasonable search request, there were some smurfs with red in them! I think red hats or boots, I forget! Anyway, you can see in all of this, the importance, when making informative web pages, to have informative headings and text that can be picked up in grabs by search engines. You can be very informative in a long piece on something without it being search engine friendly. I guess that writing with search engines in mind is not exactly a skill easily learned and I am sure we can all imagine hilariously clumsy attempts to learn this skill! g -- dorayme --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Smurf
On one page that came up on a reasonable search request, there were some smurfs with red in them! I think red hats or boots, I forget! That was an one off smurf,chief of the group! There were also black smurfs, born from standard stock smurfs. FWIW, Gorka Enviado desde mi BlackBerry® de Vodafone --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Distributed processing.
--- On Tue, 9/8/09, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: You could run multiple Apple Remote Desktop sessions to each of the other computers, but frankly, that won't work all that well either. Actually I already have that and it works quit well for controlling your other computers. I use it sometimes to watch my wife play games on her iMac! But not video intensive ones. I'll send her a message to put the kettle on for tea :) I guess there is a X windows web browser I could use? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Fastmail.fm answer
NOTE: They say the Old Interface is Unsupported Hi, You are using the New Interface and the old Style sheets are only available for the old interface at the moment. You can switch to the old interface by choosing old web interface from the Web interface drop down menu in the Options-Account Preferences screen. You would have to logout and login for changes to take effect. Thanks, -Yassar. -- Steve Conrad Henrietta, MO 64036 The time has come for mankind to grow up and leave its cradle behind; to go forth and claim our place in outer space. - Capt. Henry Gloval (\__/) (='.'=) ()_() Help Bunny Take Over The World! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
