The NVIDIA GeForce 9400 in my early 2009 mini is still golden! I'm getting a lot of mileage out of this thing, when you consider that Macs were supposed to have an Apple tax...
Case in point: If you were running Lion, it would have automatically spellchecked your text, correcting the word to "relevant".
Sorry to be a smart arse, but when I wrote that post, I was at work, on a Windows 7 box, running Firefox. I checked just now on my G5, Safari will underline my spelling mistakes.
Also, I'd like to offer my 2 cents regarding updating OS's:
I work in IT, generally, for businesses (running Windows), we don't often upgrade the OS of a PC once it's been sold. They generally run the same OS for the 3 - 5 year life of the PC. sometimes we might upgrade a single unit (say, the CEO's laptop), but not often a whole fleet will get the upgrade, too expensive for licensing. As for the Mac side, again, we generally don't update, unless the OS offers new features that the business needs.
For Apple, the OS cost is lower than Microsoft, but labour is still "expensive". We did some customers from 10.5 to 10.6 (performance boost, also the Magic Trackpad requires 10.6), but most only upgrade when we do rebuilds, or when they get a new machine.
For my personal customers (mostly home users, or 1 - 5 seat businesses), some expressly ask me to upgrade their OS (especially since it's been $60 NZD), but most stay on the OS their mac ships with.
Personally, my work computer always has the latest OS (Work gets MS Licensing), and later this year, I'll get a Mac Mini running ML, and I'll probably keep it updated.
Great post. I love the look of those old iBooks! My Pismo has got 768mb RAM, 120gb hdd and I replaced the old DVD-ROM with a Pioneer slot DVD-R/RW/RAMetc burner.
Whilst running an older computer that doesn't have access to some new features does feel like you are "missing out", it doesn't mean the older computer suddenly can't do what it's always done.
I've been collecting old Macs for a while, I've got all 13 of the iMac G3's, all 5 of the iBook G3 Clamshells, a G4 Cube, All 3 iMac G4's (my favorite looking Apple computers) Various PowerMacs. I love seeing how the designs have changed over the years as technology has changed and allowed smaller and more powerful computer to be developed.
The NVIDIA GeForce 9400 in my early 2009 mini is still golden! I'm getting a lot of mileage out of this thing, when you consider that Macs were supposed to have an Apple tax...
It's all about 'compute' ability of the GPU - pretty much everything from the 9400m onwards has GPGPU - or GPU compute ability. The nearest thing in your Mac to an A4 or A5 is the GPU - in fact at the lowest level, the stream processors (or CUDA cores in nVidia speak) are in many ways closer to the ARM spec than the Intel CPUs. OpenCL, and definitely any iOS style graphics or share APIs would benefit from this; in fact require it.
Intel chips before the HD3000 simply didn't have the concept of GPGPU compute ability.
Correct, and combined with the fact the Desktop environment is now OpenGL 3.x certified throughout the only cards that support that are dedicated GPGPUs with the 3.3 full stack support and the OpenCL 1.2 support.
With the release of the AMD Radeon 7000 series latest 7700 the pricing/performance for OpenGL 4.2 and OpenCL 2.0 compliant video cards gives Apple a lot of options at just over $100.
The fact Apple can now put an AMD Mobile 7600/7500/7400/7300 in the Mini, Macbook series never mind the iMac and Mac Pro with bigger options, combined with AMD all in with OpenCL gives Apple a very nice pool of GPGPUs to draw from:
They have been remarkably upgradable up to this point. Macs normally can run approximately 3-4 major revisions, which is way better than almost any Windows based computer.
the hardest thing with a windows environment is buying something new that will still run windows XP, when the old hardware finally dies. or without the "upgradeable hardware" totally replacing everything in the old box except the case
I've been collecting old Macs for a while, I've got all 13 of the iMac G3's, all 5 of the iBook G3 Clamshells, a G4 Cube, All 3 iMac G4's (my favorite looking Apple computers) Various PowerMacs. I love seeing how the designs have changed over the years as technology has changed and allowed smaller and more powerful computer to be developed.
at last count I had 237 old macs rangeing from mac plusses iicx's powercomputing towers, g3 laptops, ibooks etc. I have many times pondered clustering them together to be able to cook my morning toast on.
Looks like you are completely correct. Just checked my 1,1, and while most processes are running 64 bit, kernel_task is not. I tried to force a 64-bit boot, but it made no difference. I guess the EFI is the determining factor.
Absolutely right and I tried to tell AppleInsider that but they don't listen as much as they used to. The Mac requirements have almost nothing to do with the GPU. ML does not require a heftier GPU. It is purely about the 64-bit kernel. The 64-bit kernel only runs on Macs with EFI64. To find out if you have EFI64 you need to run:
ioreg -p IODeviceTree -w0 -l | grep firmware-abi
If you don't get EFI64 in the output then you ain't running ML. So yes the MacPro1,1 is EFI32 and cannot run 64-bit kernel. This is why the same model also can't run Windows Server 2008 R2 or Server 2008 64-bit.
i think its a good idea, i think in the long run the people who are mad about not getting the upgrade will be less than if if people start seeing macs running slow and laggy like a windows computer. macs have a standard to uphold, macs should always be fast and flawless in there customers eyes
Why would it run slowly? Do you see anything in that list of new features that mean it should need extra power? We're there even any features in Lion that needed extra power? Answer no.
Macs are premium machines and OS X only has to be designed to run on a very minimal number of configurations. Yet somehow Microsoft who have a reputation for writing an OS that isn't as good are able to match the speed, while also supporting older machine and a huge number of configurations.
Personally I just don't see the point in replacing perfectly good machines to have the latest OS. I still wan't the latest OS though, so I'd rather pay Windows prices for OS X rather than buying a whole new machine.
Enough with this 'forced upgrade' garbage. I personally don't know a single real-world mac owner who would feel 'forced' to upgrade based on a new OS. It's mostly a message board myth.
Probably, but it is also a little bit more subtle than this. For most people, computing is centered around internet and without up to date web browsers you are out in the cold, partly at least. Having the latest OS version will guarantee that you will have the most recent software updates also. So, OK, Apple is not forcing you to update but you will end up doing it anyway because ... this is how it is. It is called evolution.
Apple so far allowed Macs of up to 4-5 years old to run its latest OS. Limited updates for the previous version are still offered some time after a major release, and with those one is good for another 1-2 years. This takes us to 6-7 years of good use of the computer. I think it is not realistic to expect anything more from such an old machine with the current rates of advancement in software and internet services.
Bummer for the Core 2 Duo machine owners, those are still pretty capable. Dropping Core Duo was understandable in Lion since Core 2 Duo has newer instruction sets that are used in Lion, but in this case it just seems lack of 64 bit driver support for the Intel graphics chips are the only thing holding it back. Hopefully the modder community cobbles something together, I think they even got Lion working on Core Duo so this should be workable. If those graphics chips can push Lions animations I don't see anything in Mountain Lion that should push them more, so its just drivers.
It's all about 'compute' ability of the GPU - pretty much everything from the 9400m onwards has GPGPU - or GPU compute ability. The nearest thing in your Mac to an A4 or A5 is the GPU - in fact at the lowest level, the stream processors (or CUDA cores in nVidia speak) are in many ways closer to the ARM spec than the Intel CPUs. OpenCL, and definitely any iOS style graphics or share APIs would benefit from this; in fact require it.
Intel chips before the HD3000 simply didn't have the concept of GPGPU compute ability.
The HD3000 doesn't have OpenCL, it is still supported. . I think the cuttoff is just for 64 bit driver support.
Same old story with Apple. If its over 3 years old they don't care, its time you spent some money with them again.
Macs are very well supported. And given the push towards the cloud and iOS devices, the desktop computer is becoming less relevant. My wife was using a 2004 iBook G4 up until last week. She uses her iPad for everything, but kept the iBook for music storage. She recently decided to use some of the Cloud features. So I gave her my 2007 MacBook with Lion, and bought a 2009 white unibody MacBook on eBay, installed Lion. We are fully connected and everything works well. But if it wasn't for the cloud, she would have been perfectly happy with her iBook and Leopard.
Comparing the 2 MacBooks, both running Lion, the difference is noticeable. The 07 mb had 3gb ram and no 3rd party background apps. My 2009 mb has 4gb ram, but I have 6 or 7 background apps running at all times. The 09 is noticeably faster. It isn't just the graphics. The memory is slower, the system bus is slower, it limited to 3gb ram.
Also bear in mind that Apple makes hardware and is concerned with user experience. Running is not the same as running WELL. Microsoft is a software company, and could care less what computer you run it on. This past year they've made strides to innovate and remove legacy bloat, ending support for IE6. But that's why PCs seem better supported. But that doesn't mean it runs well.
Comments
Dropping support for a 4 year old machine seems a little much to me.
You can still use Lion but you can't install ML.
No big deal to me, I am still using SL. And it serve my purpose.
Btw if you work out the cost per day you had sent $2 on your Mac (basing on the high valuation of $3000)
Case in point: If you were running Lion, it would have automatically spellchecked your text, correcting the word to "relevant".
Sorry to be a smart arse, but when I wrote that post, I was at work, on a Windows 7 box, running Firefox.
Also, I'd like to offer my 2 cents regarding updating OS's:
I work in IT, generally, for businesses (running Windows), we don't often upgrade the OS of a PC once it's been sold. They generally run the same OS for the 3 - 5 year life of the PC. sometimes we might upgrade a single unit (say, the CEO's laptop), but not often a whole fleet will get the upgrade, too expensive for licensing. As for the Mac side, again, we generally don't update, unless the OS offers new features that the business needs.
For Apple, the OS cost is lower than Microsoft, but labour is still "expensive". We did some customers from 10.5 to 10.6 (performance boost, also the Magic Trackpad requires 10.6), but most only upgrade when we do rebuilds, or when they get a new machine.
For my personal customers (mostly home users, or 1 - 5 seat businesses), some expressly ask me to upgrade their OS (especially since it's been $60 NZD), but most stay on the OS their mac ships with.
Personally, my work computer always has the latest OS (Work gets MS Licensing), and later this year, I'll get a Mac Mini running ML, and I'll probably keep it updated.
Great post. I love the look of those old iBooks! My Pismo has got 768mb RAM, 120gb hdd and I replaced the old DVD-ROM with a Pioneer slot DVD-R/RW/RAMetc burner.
Whilst running an older computer that doesn't have access to some new features does feel like you are "missing out", it doesn't mean the older computer suddenly can't do what it's always done.
I've been collecting old Macs for a while, I've got all 13 of the iMac G3's, all 5 of the iBook G3 Clamshells, a G4 Cube, All 3 iMac G4's (my favorite looking Apple computers) Various PowerMacs. I love seeing how the designs have changed over the years as technology has changed and allowed smaller and more powerful computer to be developed.
The NVIDIA GeForce 9400 in my early 2009 mini is still golden! I'm getting a lot of mileage out of this thing, when you consider that Macs were supposed to have an Apple tax...
The NVIDIA GeForce 9400 has OpenGL 3.3 support.
It's all about 'compute' ability of the GPU - pretty much everything from the 9400m onwards has GPGPU - or GPU compute ability. The nearest thing in your Mac to an A4 or A5 is the GPU - in fact at the lowest level, the stream processors (or CUDA cores in nVidia speak) are in many ways closer to the ARM spec than the Intel CPUs. OpenCL, and definitely any iOS style graphics or share APIs would benefit from this; in fact require it.
Intel chips before the HD3000 simply didn't have the concept of GPGPU compute ability.
Correct, and combined with the fact the Desktop environment is now OpenGL 3.x certified throughout the only cards that support that are dedicated GPGPUs with the 3.3 full stack support and the OpenCL 1.2 support.
With the release of the AMD Radeon 7000 series latest 7700 the pricing/performance for OpenGL 4.2 and OpenCL 2.0 compliant video cards gives Apple a lot of options at just over $100.
The fact Apple can now put an AMD Mobile 7600/7500/7400/7300 in the Mini, Macbook series never mind the iMac and Mac Pro with bigger options, combined with AMD all in with OpenCL gives Apple a very nice pool of GPGPUs to draw from:
http://www.amd.com/US/PRODUCTS/NOTEB...eon-7000m.aspx
These are nice specs for the 7500/7600 Mobile:
http://www.amd.com/us/products/noteb...m-7600m.aspx#2
Same old story with Apple. If its over 3 years old they don't care, its time you spent some money with them again.
You could always buy a Dell or Asus or something. I'm sure you'd be happy with it.
Mountain Lion signals end of OS X support for older Macs read more m a k e ca s h 4 . [c o m]
I have Apple's customer support number for you. 1-800-NO-TROLL.
They have been remarkably upgradable up to this point. Macs normally can run approximately 3-4 major revisions, which is way better than almost any Windows based computer.
the hardest thing with a windows environment is buying something new that will still run windows XP, when the old hardware finally dies. or without the "upgradeable hardware" totally replacing everything in the old box except the case
I've been collecting old Macs for a while, I've got all 13 of the iMac G3's, all 5 of the iBook G3 Clamshells, a G4 Cube, All 3 iMac G4's (my favorite looking Apple computers) Various PowerMacs. I love seeing how the designs have changed over the years as technology has changed and allowed smaller and more powerful computer to be developed.
at last count I had 237 old macs rangeing from mac plusses iicx's powercomputing towers, g3 laptops, ibooks etc. I have many times pondered clustering them together to be able to cook my morning toast on.
Looks like you are completely correct. Just checked my 1,1, and while most processes are running 64 bit, kernel_task is not. I tried to force a 64-bit boot, but it made no difference. I guess the EFI is the determining factor.
Absolutely right and I tried to tell AppleInsider that but they don't listen as much as they used to. The Mac requirements have almost nothing to do with the GPU. ML does not require a heftier GPU. It is purely about the 64-bit kernel. The 64-bit kernel only runs on Macs with EFI64. To find out if you have EFI64 you need to run:
ioreg -p IODeviceTree -w0 -l | grep firmware-abi
If you don't get EFI64 in the output then you ain't running ML. So yes the MacPro1,1 is EFI32 and cannot run 64-bit kernel. This is why the same model also can't run Windows Server 2008 R2 or Server 2008 64-bit.
You are beating a dead horse here. No one wants to buy a Mac with an obviously inferior screen.
Apparently some people do. Otherwise, Apple wouldn't keep making these crappy glossy screens.
And yes, even Apple knows antiglare is superior, that's why they charge a premium for it on MacBook Pros.
i think its a good idea, i think in the long run the people who are mad about not getting the upgrade will be less than if if people start seeing macs running slow and laggy like a windows computer. macs have a standard to uphold, macs should always be fast and flawless in there customers eyes
Why would it run slowly? Do you see anything in that list of new features that mean it should need extra power? We're there even any features in Lion that needed extra power? Answer no.
Macs are premium machines and OS X only has to be designed to run on a very minimal number of configurations. Yet somehow Microsoft who have a reputation for writing an OS that isn't as good are able to match the speed, while also supporting older machine and a huge number of configurations.
Personally I just don't see the point in replacing perfectly good machines to have the latest OS. I still wan't the latest OS though, so I'd rather pay Windows prices for OS X rather than buying a whole new machine.
Enough with this 'forced upgrade' garbage. I personally don't know a single real-world mac owner who would feel 'forced' to upgrade based on a new OS. It's mostly a message board myth.
Probably, but it is also a little bit more subtle than this. For most people, computing is centered around internet and without up to date web browsers you are out in the cold, partly at least. Having the latest OS version will guarantee that you will have the most recent software updates also. So, OK, Apple is not forcing you to update but you will end up doing it anyway because ... this is how it is. It is called evolution.
Apple so far allowed Macs of up to 4-5 years old to run its latest OS. Limited updates for the previous version are still offered some time after a major release, and with those one is good for another 1-2 years. This takes us to 6-7 years of good use of the computer. I think it is not realistic to expect anything more from such an old machine with the current rates of advancement in software and internet services.
It's all about 'compute' ability of the GPU - pretty much everything from the 9400m onwards has GPGPU - or GPU compute ability. The nearest thing in your Mac to an A4 or A5 is the GPU - in fact at the lowest level, the stream processors (or CUDA cores in nVidia speak) are in many ways closer to the ARM spec than the Intel CPUs. OpenCL, and definitely any iOS style graphics or share APIs would benefit from this; in fact require it.
Intel chips before the HD3000 simply didn't have the concept of GPGPU compute ability.
The HD3000 doesn't have OpenCL, it is still supported. . I think the cuttoff is just for 64 bit driver support.
The HD3000 doesn't have OpenCL, it is still supported. . I think the cuttoff is just for 64 bit driver support.
If that were the case, the 2008 MBA would be supported. It's not. There are 64-bit KEXTs for the X3100.
Also, OpenCL isn't necessarily the key given the CPU compute device supports is anyway, it's really the extent of GPGPU functionality.
Same old story with Apple. If its over 3 years old they don't care, its time you spent some money with them again.
Macs are very well supported. And given the push towards the cloud and iOS devices, the desktop computer is becoming less relevant. My wife was using a 2004 iBook G4 up until last week. She uses her iPad for everything, but kept the iBook for music storage. She recently decided to use some of the Cloud features. So I gave her my 2007 MacBook with Lion, and bought a 2009 white unibody MacBook on eBay, installed Lion. We are fully connected and everything works well. But if it wasn't for the cloud, she would have been perfectly happy with her iBook and Leopard.
Comparing the 2 MacBooks, both running Lion, the difference is noticeable. The 07 mb had 3gb ram and no 3rd party background apps. My 2009 mb has 4gb ram, but I have 6 or 7 background apps running at all times. The 09 is noticeably faster. It isn't just the graphics. The memory is slower, the system bus is slower, it limited to 3gb ram.
Also bear in mind that Apple makes hardware and is concerned with user experience. Running is not the same as running WELL. Microsoft is a software company, and could care less what computer you run it on. This past year they've made strides to innovate and remove legacy bloat, ending support for IE6. But that's why PCs seem better supported. But that doesn't mean it runs well.
3 vesions of the OS for a piece of hardware sounds great until you realize that the OS release cycle for the MAC is now like 8 months.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IndyWest
…the OS release cycle for the MAC is now like 8 months.
Good thing that's not true, isn't it?