Re: Fastmail.fm answer
how the hell do i unsubscribe from this group, i have been getting E-mails for the past few months of posts just flooding this account On Tue, Sep 8, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Stephen Conrad khel...@gmail.com wrote: 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Shared Scanner over Wireless Networks
I moved an HP-PSC-1210 AIO Printer/Scanner/Copier to a network connection attached via USB to a 1TB Time Capsule. I was bummed to see that Apple doesn't support network scanning, it's printing only over Apple wireless networks. Now I see that this is a function of the router firmware, and that those routers with hacked linux DD-WRT firmware DO support shared network scanning under OS X. It works through the SANE for OS X software, which has somewhat spotty hardware support, and I assume doesn't support my AIO, but the idea that I could possibly scan over a network device is attractive. Here's the article I found on this subject: http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2009/03/10/how-to-make-your-own-2.html --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: Shared Scanner over Wireless Networks
On 9/9/09 3:52 AM, Kris Tilford wrote: but the idea that I could possibly scan over a network device is attractive. Here's the article I found on this subject: http://gadgets.boingboing.net/2009/03/10/how-to-make-your-own-2.html Thanks a lot for sharing , Kris. It's indeed a fascinating idea. And I will give it a shot. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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?
She lives in the same town. She doesn't use photoshop but does do video renering/conversion. But she has one of those Miglia USB video H264 dongles that is suppossed to take most of the pressure off the CPU's for that job. Other than that it's just internet. email and youtube. So I'm not sure she is getting any benefit from the dual processor setup she has. Thoughts? On Sep 8, 5:32 pm, Len Gerstel lgers...@gmail.com wrote: 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- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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.
Addressing the original question, you could use the older (at least a g3) Macs to build a Mac Cluster. There have been universities and government agencies that have built, relatively inexpensive, supercomputers using this method which is explained at this link; http://www.daugerresearch.com/pooch/recipe.shtml But then, this does not address the power consumption issues or how your energy bill would be effected. On Sep 8, 9:07 pm, John Niven sense...@yahoo.com wrote: --- 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
More on Upgrading my G5
I've been searching the net, and I've found all I needed. Now I just need to decide which graphics card to get. Geforce vs Radeon. OEM vs Retail. I found some G5 only cards which look like they were designed for the extra long AGP PRO slot, then I found some G4/G5 Pro cards which claim to be AGPx4/AGPx8 but look like standard AGPx2/AGPx4 cards. I assume they are designed to be backwards compatible, but I don't see how the cards could take advantage of the AGP PRO features while using the AGP connector. Does the AGP Pro only versions of the cards offer anything over the AGPx8 cards? I read one review (Radeon 9800 I believe), which claimed the card needed extra power from the power supply, requiring him to hack power from the DVD drive's power connector as the G5 lacked the extra power connectors found in most computers. Is it true that the ATI Display software does not work with OEM Mac cards, but works with retail versions of the same ATI Radeon cards? I'm now looking for at least a 128M card, APGx8. I looking toward the ATI Radeon cards, as I like the option of a software control panel. Dana mentioned getting a PCI-X compatible USB or USB/FW card. Is the USB only 1.1? I thought it had 2.0. The sound features on the G5 look pretty good, but... do I need a special card for surround sound? What type of sound does the G5 offer. - 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: Distributed processing.
On Sep 8, 2009, at 6:07 PM, John Niven wrote: --- 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? Firefox. but setting up X11 to run remote apps can be a pain. here's how to do it the easy way: Preparation: you'll want to give all the macs in your 'cluster' static IP addresses on your network. just use MacPorts http://www.macports.org/ to install firefox-x11 (or any other X11 app that's been ported) on the remote Mac. Turn on remote access on the remote Mac. Make sure you have X11 installed on your Mac, it's an optional install. Start Terminal on your Mac. Connect to the remote Mac as such: ssh -X remoteusern...@remotemac.ip.address Log in when it asks, and in that terminal type: /opt/local/bin/firefox-x11 (the /opt/local/bin part may vary depending on how MacPorts is set up on your system) X11 should have started up when you successfully connected, and soon after you enter the command for firefox-x11 an XWindow containing Firefox will open up on your Mac. This can be done with any other X11 app you like. -- 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: More on Upgrading my G5
On Sep 9, 2009, at 7:51 AM, Ron Romine wrote: Dana mentioned getting a PCI-X compatible USB or USB/FW card. Is the USB only 1.1? I thought it had 2.0. No PCI-X USB card would have ever been USB1.1; USB2.0 predates the PCI- X spec. -- 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 9, 2009, at 6:59 AM, falst...@46 wrote: She lives in the same town. She doesn't use photoshop but does do video renering/conversion. But she has one of those Miglia USB video H264 dongles that is suppossed to take most of the pressure off the CPU's for that job. Other than that it's just internet. email and youtube. So I'm not sure she is getting any benefit from the dual processor setup she has. Thoughts? Len and Andreas clearly have more recent experience than I on this subject; I'd go with their recommendations and stick to the Dual 1 Gig. -- 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
My insurance company hasn't discovered https I guess, so they require info FAXed to them. After creating some kind of pre-paper-like document on my Mac, can I FAX it over the internet using some hidden capability of OS X? or maybe NeoOffice? some other app for OS X on a G4? Maybe my VueScan links me to such an ability? This is on a Digital Audio G4 Dual 533, FWIW. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 9, 2009, at 7:48 AM, falst...@46 wrote: Addressing the original question, you could use the older (at least a g3) Macs to build a Mac Cluster. There have been universities and government agencies that have built, relatively inexpensive, supercomputers using this method which is explained at this link; http://www.daugerresearch.com/pooch/recipe.shtml But then, this does not address the power consumption issues or how your energy bill would be effected. Nor the fact that to utilize a cluster, you need a cluster-aware app, which 99.999% of the software out there is not... -- 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:15 AM, Bill Connelly wrote: My insurance company hasn't discovered https I guess, so they require info FAXed to them. After creating some kind of pre-paper-like document on my Mac, can I FAX it over the internet using some hidden capability of OS X? or maybe NeoOffice? some other app for OS X on a G4? If you have a modem on your Mac connected to a phone line, you can send a fax as easy as printing, since 10.3 or so it's been in the same section of the Print dialog as print to a PDF has been. In 10.5 it's called PDF to Fax, under the PDF button. This is about all that Apple's USB to Phone connector is good for these days. (OT:Oh HO! something is up! The Apple Store says 'Busy updating! Be Back Later!', so I can't give you the url. I forgot the special 'It's only rock-n-roll, but we like it!' invite that went out for today...new iPods?? ) Otherwise there are commercial email-to-fax gateways, such as efax.com -- 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
On Sep 9, 2009, at 12:22 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:15 AM, Bill Connelly wrote: My insurance company hasn't discovered https I guess, so they require info FAXed to them. After creating some kind of pre-paper-like document on my Mac, can I FAX it over the internet using some hidden capability of OS X? or maybe NeoOffice? some other app for OS X on a G4? If you have a modem on your Mac connected to a phone line, you can send a fax as easy as printing, since 10.3 or so it's been in the same section of the Print dialog as print to a PDF has been. In 10.5 it's called PDF to Fax, under the PDF button. This is about all that Apple's USB to Phone connector is good for these days. (OT:Oh HO! something is up! The Apple Store says 'Busy updating! Be Back Later!', so I can't give you the url. I forgot the special 'It's only rock-n-roll, but we like it!' invite that went out for today...new iPods?? ) Otherwise there are commercial email-to-fax gateways, such as efax.com Thanks. My DA had its modem removed when the eBay Seller upgraded it to a Dual 533, but my Yikes! (10.4.11) and QS 2002 Dual 1GHz (10.5.7) both have their modems. Guess I need to temporarily bypass the DSL connection, hook up the modem, and FAX away using OS Xs pdf to fax capability before/after creating a pdf ... thanks. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
There are a couple listed in this article: http://www.pcworld.com/article/171435/19_free_web_services_that_keep_saving_you_money.html?tk=nl_dnx_t_crawl I dropped my land line so I need to take note of this as well. Previously I would fax from the computer. I have only tried efax as an incoming service. Diane --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Bill Connelly wrote: Guess I need to temporarily bypass the DSL connection, hook up the modem, and FAX away using OS Xs pdf to fax capability before/after creating a pdf ... thanks. No you shouldn't need to bypass the DSL connection to do this...the modem is acting as a regular phone in this instance, not a network adapter. -- 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?
Bruce Johnson wrote: Len and Andreas clearly have more recent experience than I on this subject; I'd go with their recommendations and stick to the Dual 1 Gig. i can only add my personal experience. i do not use the apps you mention. i do use apps (gaussian and spartan) that do very CPU intensive tasks, that can take hours, days, weeks, or months to execute a single instruction. there is no limit, really, other than the size of the task given them, and my willingness to wait for the answer. the computers that perform these computations are dedicated machines. i never have other apps open when the computations are in progress. i compared a QS/933 to a QS/1GDP and found that on computations that required several hours to complete, the 933MHz was (within 0.5%) exactly 93.3% as fast as the dual 1 gig. the dual processors feature made absolutely no difference. the dual one gig processor was no faster than a single 1 gig processor would have been when executing a single job. where the dual processors ARE of value is that it allows me to submit two jobs simultaneously on the 1 gig DP, with only a slight loss of computing efficiency. in essence, the DP QS is like having two independent 1 gig QS computers in one box. of course, this only applies to my situation, but it may shed some light on the question. many (if not most) apps make no use of the dual CPU architecture, and most of the apps you mention are nowhere near as CPU intensive as the ones i use. OSX itself makes only limited use of DP architecture, so the benefits when multitasking will be minimal, unless you are running two apps simultaneously which are both very CPU intensive, like photo editing with one app while another app is ripping video in the background. so long story short, i think bruce's original assessment was correct. theoretically, the 1.4 gig single processor should be nearly 40% faster for most applications. however, i would also add that i have had unsatisfactory experiences with several Sonnet products, and would never consider getting another processor upgrade made by them. 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: Which is a faster option?
On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:20 PM, ah...clem wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: Len and Andreas clearly have more recent experience than I on this subject; I'd go with their recommendations and stick to the Dual 1 Gig. i can only add my personal experience. i do not use the apps you mention. i do use apps (gaussian and spartan) that do very CPU intensive tasks, that can take hours, days, weeks, or months to execute a single instruction. there is no limit, really, other than the size of the task given them, and my willingness to wait for the answer. the computers that perform these computations are dedicated machines. i never have other apps open when the computations are in progress. i compared a QS/933 to a QS/1GDP and found that on computations that required several hours to complete, the 933MHz was (within 0.5%) exactly 93.3% as fast as the dual 1 gig. snip You hit the secret here, You have a dedicated machine for one app, but most people use their Mac for everything. Sounds like 2 things are going on with your machines: 1) The apps are not dual processor aware. Most apps are. Even VLC player is and will split the load across the 2 processors of a dual. 2) You are not doing anything with these systems while the apps are running. Since they do not appear to be dual processor aware, they are running at about 100% utilization on one processor, and the other is sitting near 0% I bet. To really see the difference, try viewing a video while they are crunching away on the other app. My guess is that the single 933 will be choking on trying to do that, while the dual will have very little problem. My DA with a single 933 had trouble playing back even the smallest H. 264 encoded video. With a dual 1.2 I can play them at full screen with no problems. 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?
--- On Wed, 9/9/09, ah...clem boneheads...@gmail.com wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: Len and Andreas clearly have more recent experience than I on this subject; I'd go with their recommendations and stick to the Dual 1 Gig. i can only add my personal experience. i do not use the apps you mention. i do use apps (gaussian and spartan) that do very CPU intensive tasks, that can take hours, days, weeks, or months to execute a single instruction. I find this thread rather surprising. If you research the web, this used to be a popular Mac question: should I buy the dual or the single? The answer used to be that you would see no difference unless you were using one of the few multiple processor aware apps (i.e. Photoshop). Indeed I understand that DP macs were Apples desperate answer to the lack of faster processors from their suppliers. The thing is these are all referring to the days of Classic Mac OS which did not support multiple processors at all. Only when OSX came along did you start to see any widespread benefit. Nowadays everybody has multi-core processors. This is because the designers have given up trying to make them faster. So the future is multiple processing. If you open Activity Monitor and select the cpu history window it shows you the level of activity for each cpu. I was just watching a video on-line: http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2009/sep/09/cycling-tour-of-britain-devon and it maxed out BOTH cpu bars. So I rather fancy that I'd prefer a slower dual than a faster single. Or is Activity Monitor lying to me? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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
enough already!! On Sep 8, 2009, at 7:03 PM, g...@gmx.net wrote: smurf,chief of the group! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 9, 2009, at 10:20 AM, ah...clem wrote: i never have other apps open when the computations are in progress. i compared a QS/933 to a QS/1GDP and found that on computations that required several hours to complete, the 933MHz was (within 0.5%) exactly 93.3% as fast as the dual 1 gig. the dual processors feature made absolutely no difference. That's because the applications in question do not use multiple CPU's. INstall Menu Meters on oyur mac and monitor CPU use, you will notice that one CPU maxes out while the other does virtually nothing. gaussian does not support multiple CPUs on OS X, only Unix/Linux (which is dumb because OS X IS Unix, but this isn't the first time I've run into these chem software vendors who thing Mac == OS 9) :http://www.gaussian.com/g_prod/g09.htm spartan Wavefront's web site makes no mention whether or not they use multiple CPU's, but it's pretty clear from your discussion, that it doesn't. Compare encoding a DVD in iDVD on one and then the other, or ripping a CD in iTunes on one then the other. You will find that those operations run nearly twice as fast on the dual 1G than they do on the 933. -- 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?
for the price of a faster dual processor upgrade card, you could buy a way way way faster dual g5. -Jonas On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:20 AM, ah...clem wrote: i never have other apps open when the computations are in progress. i compared a QS/933 to a QS/1GDP and found that on computations that required several hours to complete, the 933MHz was (within 0.5%) exactly 93.3% as fast as the dual 1 gig. the dual processors feature made absolutely no difference. That's because the applications in question do not use multiple CPU's. INstall Menu Meters on oyur mac and monitor CPU use, you will notice that one CPU maxes out while the other does virtually nothing. gaussian does not support multiple CPUs on OS X, only Unix/Linux (which is dumb because OS X IS Unix, but this isn't the first time I've run into these chem software vendors who thing Mac == OS 9) : http://www.gaussian.com/g_prod/g09.htm spartan Wavefront's web site makes no mention whether or not they use multiple CPU's, but it's pretty clear from your discussion, that it doesn't. Compare encoding a DVD in iDVD on one and then the other, or ripping a CD in iTunes on one then the other. You will find that those operations run nearly twice as fast on the dual 1G than they do on the 933. -- 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
I don't buy downloads.I think it's a waste of money.I go to blogs,and get what I find interesting for free.I did get a free download when I bought that limited version on the last Green Day.the three record version with the book of art prints that sold for $90.00,but I don't count that. Roger --- On Tue, 9/8/09, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: From: Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu Subject: Re: iTunes shuffle question To: g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Date: Tuesday, September 8, 2009, 11:00 AM 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: Which is a faster option?
I already have the card. So it's not a cost issue at this time. As mentioned above, this question has been raised and discussed on the net before. Most discussions tend to spiral into personal preference discussions. I was looking for a more definative answer in actual benefits or lack thereof to keeping the dual processor as oppossed to the slightly faster single processor. Looks like this one might be heading in that direction as well. Thank you all for your input. I especially appreciated the actual user experiences. I will probably recommend that she stay with what she has or purchase a newer system. I might just sell the Sonnet card as it was originally purchased for a cube I wanted to soup up. But it turned out to be the incorrect model. On Sep 9, 2:44 pm, Jonas Ulrich jonasulrich3...@gmail.com wrote: for the price of a faster dual processor upgrade card, you could buy a way way way faster dual g5. -Jonas On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:42 AM, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:20 AM, ah...clem wrote: i never have other apps open when the computations are in progress. i compared a QS/933 to a QS/1GDP and found that on computations that required several hours to complete, the 933MHz was (within 0.5%) exactly 93.3% as fast as the dual 1 gig. the dual processors feature made absolutely no difference. That's because the applications in question do not use multiple CPU's. INstall Menu Meters on oyur mac and monitor CPU use, you will notice that one CPU maxes out while the other does virtually nothing. gaussian does not support multiple CPUs on OS X, only Unix/Linux (which is dumb because OS X IS Unix, but this isn't the first time I've run into these chem software vendors who thing Mac == OS 9) : http://www.gaussian.com/g_prod/g09.htm spartan Wavefront's web site makes no mention whether or not they use multiple CPU's, but it's pretty clear from your discussion, that it doesn't. Compare encoding a DVD in iDVD on one and then the other, or ripping a CD in iTunes on one then the other. You will find that those operations run nearly twice as fast on the dual 1G than they do on the 933. -- Bruce Johnson University of Arizona College of Pharmacy Information Technology Group Institutions do not have opinions, merely customs- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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.
True enough. On Sep 9, 12:17 pm, Bruce Johnson john...@pharmacy.arizona.edu wrote: On Sep 9, 2009, at 7:48 AM, falst...@46 wrote: Addressing the original question, you could use the older (at least a g3) Macs to build a Mac Cluster. There have been universities and government agencies that have built, relatively inexpensive, supercomputers using this method which is explained at this link; http://www.daugerresearch.com/pooch/recipe.shtml But then, this does not address the power consumption issues or how your energy bill would be effected. Nor the fact that to utilize a cluster, you need a cluster-aware app, which 99.999% of the software out there is not... -- 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?
John Niven wrote: I find this thread rather surprising. If you research the web, this used to be a popular Mac question: should I buy the dual or the single? The answer used to be that you would see no difference unless you were using one of the few multiple processor aware apps (i.e. Photoshop). Indeed I understand that DP macs were Apples desperate answer to the lack of faster processors from their suppliers. The thing is these are all referring to the days of Classic Mac OS which did not support multiple processors at all. Only when OSX came along did you start to see any widespread benefit. Nowadays everybody has multi-core processors. This is because the designers have given up trying to make them faster. So the future is multiple processing. If you open Activity Monitor and select the cpu history window it shows you the level of activity for each cpu. I was just watching a video on-line: http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2009/sep/09/cycling-tour-of-britain-devon and it maxed out BOTH cpu bars. So I rather fancy that I'd prefer a slower dual than a faster single. Or is Activity Monitor lying to me? No. A dual in particular is advantageous as the OS itself tends to load a processor up a fair bit just sitting there. And even if an application isn't multithreaded (written to use multiple processors) many of the OS calls the app makes are multithreaded so such a program can still take advantage of multiple processors. Quad and eight (or more) core machines may end up not using much of their horsepower unless you are using multithreaded apps or have several apps running simultaneously, and I mean actually doing something not just sitting open in the background. And, hopefully, now that multiprocessing is here to stay it will become more common for programs to be written to take advantage of multithreading. -- 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
installing Classic over Tiger
Is it possible to install Classic onto a Mac that is already running Tiger? I need this old iMac (front loading CD) to run a few older applications. When I try to use the OS 9.2.2 installation disk, I hit a dead end. The Mac wants an OS 9 System Folder to launch the installer Do I have to re-partition my hard drive in order to get Classic installed? (Forgive me if I have asked this question before, but I still don't know how to solve the problem...) Larry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: installing Classic over Tiger
On Sep 9, 2009, at 2:27 PM, Lawrence David Eden wrote: When I try to use the OS 9.2.2 installation disk, I hit a dead end. The Mac wants an OS 9 System Folder to launch the installer Assuming the OS 9 drivers were installed when the HD was initially partitioned, you should be able to install OS 9. There weren't any 9.2.2 installation discs, so I assume you mean 9.2.1 or 9.1? You need to boot from the disc by holding the C key, and then you may be able to install if the OS 9 drivers were installed when the HD was formatted. Other options would include installing OS 9 onto a USB flash drive, although that would be a little slower since you're limited to USB 1.1 on these old iMacs. You could also install OS 9 onto any external Firewire HD for higher speed and complete boot support. A power USB external will also boot, but like the flash drive option, very slowly. You'd need to use the Option key at startup to select a USB drive. If the HD doesn't have the OS 9 drivers, I don't think there is an easy way to add them without reformatting the HD. There is a slim chance you could add OS 9 drivers to an existing HD by booting an OS 9 install CD and going to Utilities FolderDrive Setup and highlighting the HD and using the option Upgrade HDD drivers, which IF AVAILABLE, will give a warning the existing HDD driver is newer than the one you are installing, are you sure you want to proceed, in which case you'll want to say yes, but, you'd better have a good backup because I've never done this and I'm not certain it works without ruining the OS X System? Also, sometimes when OS 9 is installed 2nd onto the same partition as OS X you end up with a non-bootable OS 9 System which only functions as a Classic emulation under OS X. This is a good reason to keep OS 9 and OS X on separate partitions or separate drives if possible. If you can get along with Classic emulation, I've even read that some people have been able to successfully run Classic from a CD. It's not the install CD, but rather a special CD that has a clone of an installed System on it. That's handy because then to run Classic you simply place the CD into the drive, go to OS X's System PreferencesClassic and point it at the CD. You'd need to Google some for better instructions on using a CD as Classic. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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?
I would actually like to take issue that the Mac OS did not support multi processors. I seem to remember several machines that were multi processor from the 603e era, including one with 4 processors, if memory serves, made by one of the clone manufacturers and I believe the 8600 and 9600 were available with dual processors. These systems ran from system 8.1 to 9.2.2 with multi processor support. On Sep 9, 2:30 pm, John Niven sense...@yahoo.com wrote: --- On Wed, 9/9/09, ah...clem boneheads...@gmail.com wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: Len and Andreas clearly have more recent experience than I on this subject; I'd go with their recommendations and stick to the Dual 1 Gig. i can only add my personal experience. i do not use the apps you mention. i do use apps (gaussian and spartan) that do very CPU intensive tasks, that can take hours, days, weeks, or months to execute a single instruction. I find this thread rather surprising. If you research the web, this used to be a popular Mac question: should I buy the dual or the single? The answer used to be that you would see no difference unless you were using one of the few multiple processor aware apps (i.e. Photoshop). Indeed I understand that DP macs were Apples desperate answer to the lack of faster processors from their suppliers. The thing is these are all referring to the days of Classic Mac OS which did not support multiple processors at all. Only when OSX came along did you start to see any widespread benefit. Nowadays everybody has multi-core processors. This is because the designers have given up trying to make them faster. So the future is multiple processing. If you open Activity Monitor and select the cpu history window it shows you the level of activity for each cpu. I was just watching a video on-line: http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2009/sep/09/cycling-tour-of-britain-... and it maxed out BOTH cpu bars. So I rather fancy that I'd prefer a slower dual than a faster single. Or is Activity Monitor lying to me? --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
QT 7.6.4 Update PROBLEM
I saw there was new iTunes 9 available today, and thought I'd update. I ran Software Update on my G5 and was offered QuickTime 7.6.4 instead. I ran Software Update and upon reboot things seemed normal, but upon the final Desktop screen a couple login itemsstartup applications immediately crashed. I wanted iTunes 9, and I assume QT 7.6.4 was a prerequisite, so I tried to run Software Update again, and it wouldn't launch. NO applications would launch (I only tried Mail, Safari, and QuickTime). I wrote a crash report to Apple saying no apps would launch, and attempted a Safe Boot. Safe Boot didn't go well at all. I use verbose boot all the time, so I see every boot. It abnormally stalled for a long time at the BSD root: disk 2, major 14, minor 8 line, and then when it finally proceeded after a couple minutes, the stuff looked wrong, although I can't be sure, I rarely Safe Boot. Here are some lines that looked wrong: WARNING: mkext unexpectedly out of date w/rt Extensions folder kernel[0]: can't remove kernel __LINKEDIT segment - in-kernel linker needs it Immediately after this last message the fans would start going full bore, and then it rebooted again. This happened 3 times in a row while I was attempting to complete a single Safe Boot. The third time, I stepped away from the computer during the long stall, and while I was away I heard it reboot, but I was unable to get to the keyboard in time to use the Safe Boot option. Low and behold, it booted normally, and now applications launch. I'm typing this in Mail now. I did notice something else different in the verbose boot dialog. Before this bad update experience it said Matching service count = 54 and now it says Matching service count = 13. I immediately went to Disk Utility and ran Verify Disk, and it verified OK quickly, so I started a Repair Permissions. I also started Software Update to see about iTunes 9. Software Update's progress bar stalled for at least 5 minutes with nothing going on (perhaps Apple Servers were being hammered?), but finally I as offered iTunes 9 and it installed normally. Disk UtilityRepair Permissions was another story. My permissions were correct beforehand, but now MANY were wrong, including most all of the Extensions Folder. I've had this permissions problem before, and something seems wrong with Disk Utility for me. It's repairing permissions alphabetically, going REALLY slow, one line at a time, about 1 per second, and from past experience it should require at least 2-3 hours to complete these thousands of wrong permissions. I'm waiting for Disk Utility to complete now, and then I'll attempt to complete a Safe Boot for the 4th time. This hasn't been a good experience so far. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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?
A few days ago. there was an offer of a 1.8GHz card for a G4 as I have in use at this present moment, It went up to over € 250 (300 $US) - a G5 could be purchased for that (nearly). for the price of a faster dual processor upgrade card, you could buy a way way way faster dual g5. -Jonas --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 9, 2009, at 2:04 PM, falst...@46 wrote: I would actually like to take issue that the Mac OS did not support multi processors. I seem to remember several machines that were multi processor from the 603e era, including one with 4 processors, if memory serves, made by one of the clone manufacturers and I believe the 8600 and 9600 were available with dual processors. These systems ran from system 8.1 to 9.2.2 with multi processor support. Under systems 8.1 to 9.2.2 there was support in the OS development toolboxes for multiple CPU's, but there were only ever a handful of applications that took advantage of them; the OS itself did not use multiple CPU's at all. So yes there were multiple CPU Macs, but they were very expensive space heaters...if you were lucky and one of the handful of Photoshop or Premiere functions that were supported were ones you used a lot, you could se some remarkable performance enhancements. -- 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: installing Classic over Tiger
I think many computers run 'Tiger' and a classic 9.2.2 (my G4 and a G3 do), and I recommend installing the 'X' on a different drive than the 'Classic'. If you're using an iMac (a single drive system), there'll be problems. And there has been the advice (by Apple) firstly to install 9, update anything (as QT), and then install X. So partitioning IMO is a good idea for such a machine (Talking about a CRT iMac). Lars Is it possible to install Classic onto a Mac that is already running Tiger? I need this old iMac (front loading CD) to run a few older applications. When I try to use the OS 9.2.2 installation disk, I hit a dead end. The Mac wants an OS 9 System Folder to launch the installer Do I have to re-partition my hard drive in order to get Classic installed? (Forgive me if I have asked this question before, but I still don't know how to solve the problem...) Larry --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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?
That was my point. Apple DID make multiprocesser Macs BEFORE they had an OS that would use them, which is why this single/dual question was previously subjective. It depended on what apps you were going to use. OSX changed that. --- On Wed, 9/9/09, falst...@46 paulall...@cox.net wrote: From: falst...@46 paulall...@cox.net Subject: Re: Which is a faster option? To: G-Group g3-5-list@googlegroups.com Date: Wednesday, September 9, 2009, 4:04 PM I would actually like to take issue that the Mac OS did not support multi processors. I seem to remember several machines that were multi processor from the 603e era, including one with 4 processors, if memory serves, made by one of the clone manufacturers and I believe the 8600 and 9600 were available with dual processors. These systems ran from system 8.1 to 9.2.2 with multi processor support. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 9, 2009, at 2:33 PM, John Niven wrote: That was my point. Apple DID make multiprocesser Macs BEFORE they had an OS that would use them, which is why this single/dual question was previously subjective. It depended on what apps you were going to use. OSX changed that. Partially. Applications STILL need to be explicitly coded to be multiprocessor aware. Simply running a program under OS X does not let it use more than one CPU. It's a lot easier than under OS 9, so a lot more programs do it (it can be as simple as a compiler switch, but your program has to work in certain fashions to make it that easy.) One of the big changes in 10.6, in fact, is making it a lot easier for applications to take advantage of multiple cores. -- 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?
Sorry for the typo enyway' --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
DP 1GHZ vs. single 2GHZ intel
I am considering buying a Dell to run leopard on, and am wondering how a 2 or 2.8GHZ intel single processor would perform vs a mdd dp 1GHZ ppc. thanks -Jonas --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: DP 1GHZ vs. single 2GHZ intel
Well, I can tell you that my 1.42 Dual MDD (with bad L3 cache!) runs slightly faster than a Hackintoshed Dell P4 machine running at 2.6ghz, and is much more responsive overall. If you're going the Hackintosh route, go dual-core intel, I suggest a Pentium Dual Core or Core 2 Duo. Either will be 2 to 3 times faster than the P4 and MDD dual. Chance On Sep 9, 2009, at 8:56 PM, Jonas Ulrich wrote: I am considering buying a Dell to run leopard on, and am wondering how a 2 or 2.8GHZ intel single processor would perform vs a mdd dp 1GHZ ppc. thanks -Jonas --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
On Sep 9, 2009, at 1:19 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:57 AM, Bill Connelly wrote: Guess I need to temporarily bypass the DSL connection, hook up the modem, and FAX away using OS Xs pdf to fax capability before/after creating a pdf ... thanks. No you shouldn't need to bypass the DSL connection to do this...the modem is acting as a regular phone in this instance, not a network adapter. Thanks All. Worked like a charm from my Yikes! OCd 450MHz under Tiger 10.4.11. TextEdit Print Fax PDF after creating an Address Book entry. Take That The Hartford in Lexington, KY! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
At 9:42 PM -0400 9/9/09, Bill Connelly wrote: Thanks All. Worked like a charm from my Yikes! OCd 450MHz under Tiger 10.4.11. TextEdit Print Fax PDF after creating an Address Book entry. Take That The Hartford in Lexington, KY! I love how they tell you they have to take a fax as it's more secure and non-editable. And then you explain to them (since you don't have a stand alone fax machine), that you will be SCANNING the document into your computer (hence editable) so it can be faxed from said computer. And they sigh, and say I know, but Glad it worked! Diane --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: DP 1GHZ vs. single 2GHZ intel
This is completely off topic on the G List and this thread is closed. Len Gerstel List Nanny --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
iTunes 9 PPC Macs
I just updated to iTunes 9 on my dual 1.42 MDD G4, and I'm having some problems with it. I keep seeing the beach ball, but iTunes is the only app I have running besides Mail and IRC. When I try and click the Movies tab for my iPod touch, it crashes and must be force quit. Anyone else having these issues? I have yet to install it on my MacBook Pro or Hackintosh, so I don't knowhow it performs on Intel. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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
OK, I got the two new drives today, replaced my dead internal drive with one of them, and used Time Machine to restore the contents of the dead drive to the new one. I was successful, but only on the second try. I didn't do it the right way the first time around, I guess. The first time I tried to restore the contents of the drive, I did it through Time Machine's Star Wars interface. After booting up the Mac with the old internal drive that still works, and seeing that the new drive was on the desktop, I went into Time Machine, located the folder that contained the contents of the dead drive (named Internal 1000), highlighted it, and hit Restore. TM then asked where I wanted to put the data, I chose the new drive, and TM copied all the stuff onto it. Notice that it said it was copying all the items from the dead drive to the new one. In other words, it did not say it was restoring the drive, like I wanted it to, it said it was copying the data onto it. I let it go ahead and do it, though, and It took a few hours, and when it was done, I opened up the new drive's window and saw that all the data was inside a folder titled Internal 1000. I opened the folder and tried to launch a couple of the restored Final Cut Pro projects, but they would not open. They got stuck on a dialogue box that said something about Final Cut Documents folder missing. I had sort of expected something like that. On the original drive, all the stuff was out in the open in the drive's window, it was not inside of a folder like that. And Final Cut is very fussy about folders. So, I decided to try the other method of restoring data with Time Machine. First I erased the new drive, to start over from scratch, and then I restarted the Mac with the Leopard installer disk, by holding down the C key. After the Leopard Installer disk booted up and took control, I used its Utilities menu to choose Restore with Time Machine (I think that's what it was called), and this time TM offered more choices. It showed both Internal 1000 and Internal Internal 1000 10.5.6. available to restore from. I figured the latter was just offering to restore the OS only, so I chose Internal 1000, and TM then offered me the whole list of that drive's backups from the day the it failed on back several weeks. Naturally I chose the most recent backup and hit Restore. This time TM did not say that it was copying items, it said it was Restoring the Disk, which is what I wanted. And sure enough, four hours later, I was able to open the new hard drive's window, and there was everything sitting out in the open just like it had been on the old drive. This time, all the Final Cut video projects opened up just fine, although in some cases they complained of missing render files, but all I had to do to fix that was tell Final Cut to render the videos over again. And all is well! Everything works, so far! So, I guess there is a wrong way and a right way to restore the contents of a drive with Time Machine, and of course I picked the wrong way first. I have now turned Time Machine off, to prevent it from backing up the contents of the new drive until I'm sure everything is fine with it, so I'll go a few days this way and keep testing everything out. So far, everything seems to be working fine. All my stuff is back, and Time Machine has proven itself to be a very valuable asset! After a few days, I'll replace the old boot drive with the other new hard drive, and use the Leopard disk to restore the contents of that drive also. Then I'll be right back where I was before the other drive failed, except I'll be running two brand new hard drives that shouldn't fail for years, I hope! But I'm going to keep those five year warranty papers handy, and I'm going to keep Time Machine on the job! --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 9 PPC Macs
On 9/9/09 10:29 PM, Chance Reecher of cnrtechh...@gmail.com sent I just updated to iTunes 9 on my dual 1.42 MDD G4, and I'm having some problems with it. I keep seeing the beach ball, but iTunes is the only app I have running besides Mail and IRC. When I try and click the Movies tab for my iPod touch, it crashes and must be force quit. Anyone else having these issues? I have yet to install it on my MacBook Pro or Hackintosh, so I don't knowhow it performs on Intel. I would be curious, too. Look for the day when iTunes ver. X is Intel-only, hopefully the distinction will be noticeable to avoid problems for users. To our mutual dismay, the Old Mac Apps site no longer posts older versions of iTunes (Apple probably threatened suit). -Dana --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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?
At 11:30 AM -0700 9/9/2009, John Niven wrote: I find this thread rather surprising. If you research the web, this used to be a popular Mac question: should I buy the dual or the single? [snip] and it maxed out BOTH cpu bars. So I rather fancy that I'd prefer a slower dual than a faster single. Or is Activity Monitor lying to me? The job scheduler is fairly smart. And few Mac users run only one app (process) at a time. Under OS X, processes are put on a processor until they hit their quanta (use up their time slice) or otherwise release it (become blocked waiting for some resource - like a page fault or other i/o). And since multiple processes can be computable at the same time, the scheduler can keep all the processors busy. Processes (and the threads they own) do not fly off to the other processors on their own unless the app permits and supports it. This is done because many developers don't take into account the problems of threads completing out of sequence (fooling with causality has consequences)... Grand Central Dispatch, the new job/process/thread scheduler in Snow Leopard, addresses this by creating managed queues... so processes (apps) can very easily control how things are done and in what order. The idea is to eliminate the hassle of being multi-processor aware, hoping that more developers will now jump on the bandwagon. Now, while all the above takes into account life from the point of view of the process and thread aspect, you also need to be aware that some frameworks (shared libraries) are multi-processor aware. So even tho the parent process doesn't realize it, they can spit thing off for the scheduler to run elsewhere, kindof like a spider on roller skates... 'Tis a tangled web. - 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: installing Classic over Tiger
On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:16 PM, Fabian Fang wrote: I have several copies of Mac OS 9 Install Disc (Apple Number 2Z691-5721-A) for the express purpose of installing 9.2.2 Classic Support onto PowerPC Macs running Panther/Tiger. These Classic install discs are missing a lot of the extensions needed for directly booting OS 9.2.2 on certain models of Mac. I've noticed that in System Profiler they often say 9.1.7 or some other strange version # specific to Classic only installations. I also had a universal-install (retail) OS 9.2.2 CD, which I foolishly gave away a few years ago to someone who claimed to need it desperately. I don't believe such a disc was ever made?(9.2.2 Universal Install). AFAIK the only 9.2.2 install CD was issued with the MDD PowerMac G4, and was specific to the MDD. All the other 9.2 install CD's I've ever seen are 9.2.1 which require updating to 9.2.2. You can also download NetBoot for Mac OS 9 from Apple and make your own CD: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=120243#English Yes, this is the cheapest and quickest way to visit the quickly receding past. --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: installing Classic over Tiger
At 11:24 PM +0200 9/9/2009, WhyOSX wrote: I think many computers run 'Tiger' and a classic 9.2.2 (my G4 and a G3 do), and I recommend installing the 'X' on a different drive than the 'Classic'. If you're using an iMac (a single drive system), there'll be problems. Mac OS X 10.0 thru 10.4 are explicitly designed to run WITH Mac OS 9 *on the same disk volume*. Yes, you can put them on separate volumes. But they run just fine on the same. And there has been the advice (by Apple) firstly to install 9, update anything (as QT), and then install X. Initialize the drive, to contain both drivers. Install OS 9 and its updates. Update the firmware. Install OS X. is the preferred method. But it really doesn't matter - you can slap OS 9 onto a disk anytime. If you want to boot from it (not just use it as Classic Mode) then you need to make sure the driver was put on the disk when it was initialized. - 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 9 PPC Macs
It's likely that it's running the genius scan and the gapless scan. I have to tell iTunes to cut the crap every ten minutes. On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:48 PM, Dana Collins dlcatft...@verizon.net wrote: On 9/9/09 10:29 PM, Chance Reecher of cnrtechh...@gmail.com sent I just updated to iTunes 9 on my dual 1.42 MDD G4, and I'm having some problems with it. I keep seeing the beach ball, but iTunes is the only app I have running besides Mail and IRC. When I try and click the Movies tab for my iPod touch, it crashes and must be force quit. Anyone else having these issues? I have yet to install it on my MacBook Pro or Hackintosh, so I don't knowhow it performs on Intel. I would be curious, too. Look for the day when iTunes ver. X is Intel-only, hopefully the distinction will be noticeable to avoid problems for users. To our mutual dismay, the Old Mac Apps site no longer posts older versions of iTunes (Apple probably threatened suit). -Dana --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
RAM Question
Got myself a stick of RAM that I wonder what Macs it might work in 256 MB, DDR, 266MHz, CL2.5 PC2100U-25330-Z -- 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Question about how Time Machine works
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Tom tba...@nmia.com wrote: But I'm going to keep those five year warranty papers handy I've never replaced a drive under warranty so I may have this wrong. But the impression I got from poking around drive manufacturer web sites is that they all base the warranty period not on your purchase date, as you might expect, but rather on the drive's date of manufacturer. This is determined from the drive's serial number. If you're curious you can visit Hitachi Global Storage Technologies support at http://www.hitachigst.com/portal/site/en/support/warranty , plug in the serial numbers of your new drives, and find out when there warranty period ends for them. -irrational 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: Question about how Time Machine works
Thanks John, but in this case it's pretty easy to tell when these drives were made; they both have July 2009 printed right on them, in big red letters! (Must be something new?). 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: RAM Question
On 9/9/09 11:50 PM, Stephen Conrad of khel...@gmail.com sent Got myself a stick of RAM that I wonder what Macs it might work in 256 MB, DDR, 266MHz, CL2.5 PC2100U-25330-Z Off the top of my head, the MDD G4s, 867MHz/DP. Best regards, Dana --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: DP 1GHZ vs. single 2GHZ intel
How is that off topic? It involves a G4 PPC machine, and is simply comparing the speed of that machine to an intel mac or hack. -Jonas On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 7:09 PM, Len Gerstel lgers...@gmail.com wrote: This is completely off topic on the G List and this thread is closed. Len Gerstel List Nanny --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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: FAX from a Mac under OS X 10.5.7?
On Sep 9, 2009, at 9:47 PM, diane wrote: At 9:42 PM -0400 9/9/09, Bill Connelly wrote: Thanks All. Worked like a charm from my Yikes! OCd 450MHz under Tiger 10.4.11. TextEdit Print Fax PDF after creating an Address Book entry. Take That The Hartford in Lexington, KY! I love how they tell you they have to take a fax as it's more secure and non-editable. And then you explain to them (since you don't have a stand alone fax machine), that you will be SCANNING the document into your computer (hence editable) so it can be faxed from said computer. And they sigh, and say I know, but Glad it worked! Well ... I created it on the Mac, using TextEdit and went directly to the Fax PDF ... I hope they weren't looking for my signature. I think the difference between the Fax PDF and an e-mailed PDF is that it doesn't sit on someone's Server, where someone could possibly get a copy of it (is that even possible???). It goes directly to hard copy via their fax printer. Make sense? Of course, it if they were looking for a Signature on an Original, I could fake that by scanning in my signature and pasting it into the document ... then locking it in ... and Fax PDFing that to them ... --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 12:00 AM, Tom tba...@nmia.com wrote: Thanks John, but in this case it's pretty easy to tell when these drives were made; they both have July 2009 printed right on them, in big red letters! (Must be something new?). Yes, that works too. :-) The point I had in the back of my mind was more along the lines of if you ever did need to do a warranty RMA then Hitachi would start with your drive's serial number. Being the cynical, less trusting sort, I like to verify that the date derived from the serial number matches what's printed on the drive. No reason at all to think they would not match. I just like to make sure they do. That's one of the (many) reasons I'm known as ... -irrational 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: RAM Question
On Sep 9, 2009, at 10:50 PM, Stephen Conrad wrote: Got myself a stick of RAM that I wonder what Macs it might work in 256 MB, DDR, 266MHz, CL2.5 PC2100U-25330-Z You can download MacTracker for free, and then look in the Memory section to see which models use PC2100. Some Macs require low density RAM, and MacTracker does NOT distinguish this critical aspect. If you use high density it will either boot as half the stated size, or not boot at all. I don't know whether these models require low-density or not? The only Mac models that can use your RAM are: 867 MHz MDD 1.0 GHz FW800 MDD 1.0 GHz iMac G4 USB 1.1 --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ 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 9, 2:34 pm, Len Gerstel lgers...@gmail.com wrote: 1) The apps are not dual processor aware. Most apps are. Even VLC player is and will split the load across the 2 processors of a dual. 2) You are not doing anything with these systems while the apps are running. Since they do not appear to be dual processor aware, they are running at about 100% utilization on one processor, and the other is sitting near 0% I bet. actually, you lose. where do i go to collect? ;o) i wouldn't presume to guess whether the apps are dual processor aware or if the OS distributes the work, but if i view the activity monitor on the DP machine while a single job is running, first one processor is 75% maxed out while the other is near 25% activity, then it flip-flops and the other is 75% maxed out while the first is near 25% activity. the frequency of the flip-flops is about twice per second. if i run two jobs simultaneously, both processors stay 100% maxed out continuously. and as you might expect, on the SP machine, the activity monitor shows the one CPU 100% maxed out continuously. differences in viewing video, as you describe, is (this time i'll wager) more a function of the video card processor speed and memory, not the main CPU processor speed. it really surprises me how often folks need reminded that a chain is only as strong (fast) as it weakest (slowest) link. why are CPUs are like quarterbacks . . . ? they either get all the credit or all the blame, and usually deserve neither. 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 -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
