Will Tiger kill G3?
Will Mac-OS-X tiger kill the G3 for good? panther has done a really good job but will the G3's be able to upgrade to tiger or this is the end 
Why would apple do that?
Apple wants you to buy G4s and G5s
Another reason is that pearpc is based on a 0 mhz g3
so they might wanna cut it ...
Anybody got an idea on whats comming?
Why would apple do that?
Apple wants you to buy G4s and G5s
Another reason is that pearpc is based on a 0 mhz g3
so they might wanna cut it ...
Anybody got an idea on whats comming?
Comments
Anyway Apple doesn't want to sell G4's. There are only there for legacy OS9 stuff.
Dobby.
Fix me if i'm right but wouldent it be good if apple kill some G3'S?
I mean Come on people are Downloading mac osx like shit ( nop not microsoft hehe ) beacuse of pearpc powerpc Emulator...
Anybody in the forum going to the WWDC?
I doubt even 10.5 will cut G3 support.
of course, you can bet your bottom dollar that there will be some "g5-only" features, or stuff that "requires minimum dual processors" to run (i'm thinking in the quartz extreme area here).
Originally posted by Nano
Lets think about the main core of os x. Will it be so different that it cannot run on some older machines. And if there are new features that won't work on older machines they just wont work. Like Quartz to quartz extreme.
But if these features are a requirement, then wave goodbye to the G3. Maybe QE will become a requirement? Who knows...
Originally posted by Gavriel
Mac users have been complaining since day one about the performance (or lack thereof) of their machines in handling of day-to-day tasks with Mac OS X. Things like window-resizing, document scrolling and whatnot. I can only begin to imagine how painfully slow these rather mundane tasks must be for all those poor souls (read cheapskates) running Panther on BeigeBox-emulated G3 hardware.
On my 233 iMac, everything runs "almost" as good as on my G4 400, with a 32 Mb AGP Radeon. It must be something that either cant be more optimized, or they are using some rutines that just wont get any better!
Originally posted by dobby
I severely doubt it. There is no reason to. My 450Mhz B&W G3 runs better than a 400 mhz G4. Also think of the amount of laptops with G3's in them. The were only phased our a few months back.
Anyway Apple doesn't want to sell G4's. There are only there for legacy OS9 stuff.
Funny, my G4 400, 32 Mb AGP radeon runs OSX way better than my brothers 500 Mhz iMac, 8 mb Vram.
On-topic: I'm actually not that sure if they'll continue support for G3 machines in Tiger. I sure hope so, it would be stupid if they didn't (at least for us consumers). There are tons of tons of tons of people sitting on non-G4-and-above hardware that'd purchase Tiger if their machine will run it.
But since so little is known about Tiger, it's kinda hard to say if there's technologies in it that'll obsolete the G3 processor.
Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch
On my 233 iMac, everything runs "almost" as good as on my G4 400, with a 32 Mb AGP Radeon. It must be something that either cant be more optimized, or they are using some rutines that just wont get any better!
Re-reading my post I realize that it was somewhat unclear. So to clarify, in the last sentence I was talking about the people emulating a PowerPC G3 processor to run Panther on PC-hardware. The one's hack4ev3r mentioned in his original post.
233 MHz rev A Bondi iMacs
233 MHz rev A Toilet Seat iBooks
300 MHz Blueberry "Smurf" G3 PowerMacs
400 MHz Wallstreet G3 Powerbooks?
While I wouldn't want to use X on these, there's no novel technology that would prevent it. All new world machines are similar and I doubt support would be dropped since it would do nothing but piss people off.
Originally posted by hypoluxa
well I hope 'tiger' will run just as well as pather on my G3 300 b&w pmac. apple would be stupid not to suppot them. not all of us have 2grand to shell out for a new mac every few yrs...
First off, I am pretty sure that G3s are going to be supported in Tiger because systems that would still be under warranty were released with G3 processors. With that said, Apple wouldn't be stupid for "not" supporting G3s with future releases. Apple would be stupid for not "enticing" people to upgrade their computers. Mac OS X sells Apple hardware, period. They make no money on OS upgrades. If they could introduce cool new features that require you to have a newer processor, then they should do it. It is the large range of system requirements that makes an OS ugly, clunky, and un-innovative like Windows.
If you want a new-er Mac, you don't have to shell out $2,000. You can buy a G4 eMac for $800 or look on eBay for a used system.
Originally posted by Xool
The current oldest/slowest supported machines are:
233 MHz rev A Bondi iMacs
While I wouldn't want to use X on these, there's no novel technology that would prevent it..
Hehehe I just installed a 233 rev b (6mb vram) bondi to 10.3.4, she only has 128mb of ram but she still goes ok as a potential p2p machine