If you’re not going to be using the battery for a long while (days, not hours), just remove it and leave the ‘book plugged into the wall.
Got it. No problems leaving it always on?
No, if you consider sleep mode also as being turned on, I reboot my 12” PB and my G3 clamshell iBook mostly only for OS upgrades. And I never do this “remove battery when attached to power long enough” game and I have not spoiled my batteries so far.
Jebedee - 29 July 2005 05:49 PM
mcdermd - 29 July 2005 11:34 AM
10.4.2 Tiger on the 400mhz G3/768mb RAM/64mb Radeon 7000 machine and 10.3.9 Panther on the 400mhz G3/640mb/32mb Rage128 (weird, huh? I thought they were all 16mb’s) machine.
Didn’t know G3s ran Tiger. So Tiger must sense the CPU and shift to 32-bit mode. Could you have bought the Tiger Family Pack and used the same OS on all machines? Is it possible to upgrade the hard drive on a G3? If so, what’s the size limit?
... JJ
64 bit support in Tiger is still limited (works only with command line applications so the whole GUI runs 32bit) so it is at best a hybrid 32/64 bit OS. But yes, Tiger runs under 32 bit as well.
There is no limit to the HD, it just has to be a 2.5” laptop HD. My old clamshell has a 60GB HD for instance. I could put in a 100 GB HD if I wanted as well (now that I think about I want, but I don’t have the money).
I think generally, you my be interested in http://www.lowendmac.com . They have detailed specs of all machines and lots of material around the topic “pimp your mac”.
I think generally, you my be interested in http://www.lowendmac.com . They have detailed specs of all machines and lots of material around the topic “pimp your mac”.
Terrific! It’s bookmarked and I’m wandering. Thanks for the heads-up!
I was just in PDX in April. Loved the free hotspot, hated the freaking traffic. I’m looking forward to TPA being totally wireless at the end of 2005. :D
The stretch beyond is Google. What does Google have to do with squat, other than the obvious; eating Microsoft Search for lunch.
A Google OS? I’ll bet Tera it never happens. If that happens, I’ll diet.
I agree - if Google ever makes any inroads into the “OS” area, it will be about the same time that OS’s become irrelevant. Maybe by that time the OS will have morphed into just part of the home-business-public experience. Accessible from anywhere, and we all have implanted “Google” chips, just like the family dog.
64 bit support in Tiger is still limited (works only with command line applications so the whole GUI runs 32bit) so it is at best a hybrid 32/64 bit OS. But yes, Tiger runs under 32 bit as well.
I’ve never heard of a 64-bit operating system that doesn’t do 64-bit operations. (Who’s going to use CLI with a Mac?) I’m sure there must be a good reason for it, but I can’t think of a single one off the top of my head and right now it strikes me as very, very odd.
Of course, apart from raw processing, Tiger still provides the benefit of addressing more than the 4 gigabyte memory ceiling of 32-bit systems.
That can be important in some applications with a machine that can do it. The PowerMac holds up to 8 Gb of RAM. If I had one of those, I’d make sure that I had the memory slots loaded with max RAM, even though it’s certainly not necessary. Why? For the same reason a dog licks his… Well, never mind. Hey, I’m a guy. That’s what I do.
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 10:20 AM
At the end of the day, do you really require 64-bit processing? Are you mapping the human genome or building the successor to superstring theory in quantum physics? Even ordinary consumer video doesn’t need 64-bit, so unless you have some extraordinary requirements of your computer for an end user or consumer, I suspect you will never miss it.
Many years ago I saw shelves with 80386SX machines. There were DX machines around, but the cost of 32-bit processing (including 32-bit data paths) was horrendous. “When Costco gets a DX on its shelves, I’m getting it!” I vowed. Sure enough, they did. And, equally sure, I did. My new Packard Bell had a huge 15” monitor, an Intel MilSpec motherboard, a 25 Mhz 80386DX CPU, 1 Mb RAM that, soon after I kicked up to its max of 2 MB, and an unbelievably massive 125 Mb Seagate hard drive and an internal 2400-baud modem. It came with MS DOS 4.2, I think. (These were the days before WinDoze.) That sucker set me back a flat $3 grand. Cheap! At a BBS (that’s Bulletin Board System, for the young sprouts) barbecue a few weeks later, I had the system with me, just to satisfy the requests of folks (including the SysOp) who wanted to see it. Ooh… Ahhh… “What are you going to do, Jack?” asked the SysOp. “Manage the economies of the free world? There’s no way you can come close to needing 125 Mb storage!” No, I didn’t manage the economies of the free world. Nor am I going to map the human genome or any of the rest of it. Funny, though. After another year or three, that 125 Mb hard drive didn’t seem so huge. Eventually the Seagate saw a bright light and headed toward it. I replaced the hard drive with a 420 Mb model because they didn’t make 125 Mb hard drives any more. The Packard Bell was the only system that I ever bought off the shelf. Everything I’ve used since then has been a system I assembled myself from individual components. The Mac, in this respect, is a completely different animal. You don’t build one from components. You can add RAM, upgrade the hard drive and maybe even update the video card… if it has a card. Otherwise, it’s “Hands Off.”
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 10:20 AM
Of course, it’s a moot point anyway; the time will soon come when no 32-bit computer is produced. So keep your pants on. Please.
Ah, but then we’ll have 128-bit computers running 64-bit applications and I’ll get back to you. With my pants on, of course.
I was waiting for the argument about how previous thresholds of system resources were once erroneously thought to be far more than any individual would ever need, and how therefore (so the reasoning goes) any claims about future such thresholds would be likewise erroneous (and even foolish looking, years from now).
I still remember the original IBM PC. “Whay would anyone need more RAM (640k max) than floppy drive storage.”
Thresholds are to be broken. And will be.
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:11 PM
Merely because people have underestimated the required capacity in the past does not mean they will forever do so. The computing needs of consumers are not infinite. Consumer apps run the gamut of e-mail, web browsing, word processing, personal finance, address books, calendars, music and video players, graphics and photo, some education software and, for some, games and entertainment.
That suggests that people ‘learn the lessons of the past.’ Human nature and human history seems also to suggest that we’ll continue to make the mistakes of the past well into the future.
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:11 PM
With a few exceptions here and there, that’s about it. And the system requirements for the optimal running of such software are not infinite. I can assure you that you won’t be clamoring for a 128-bit computer (to replace your aging 64-bit system) so you can more effectively write that letter to your aunt Martha or browse the headlines of the New York Times.
Why not? One man’s ‘infinite’ is another man’s ‘threshold.’
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:11 PM
Just because we have failed (in the infancy of the micro platform) to estimate the limits of our resource requirements doesn’t mean there ARE no limits. And I submit that the vast majority of individual computer users will never need 64-bit systems—except insofar as they may want to address more memory. The actual processing advantage will be felt by a great minority of end users—outside the realm of science and certain engineering, architectural, or health care fields.
Definition Alert!! Define ‘need?’
I went from 8 bit to 16 bit to 32 bit, not because I had a choice or my requirements had a new ‘need.’ That’s the progression of the industry. Things change. Requirements are not always (often, ‘seldom’) determined by the user and his needs. Manufacturers need to continue to sell products. New products. Users will buy what’s available and gets the job done. The number of bits won’t matter.
I’d also like to submit that we’re on the early edge of a communication, technological, ‘computer’ age where moving around huge amounts of ‘bytes’ via ‘bits’ will make today’s top end servers and PCs look Liliputian.
Why? For one, it’s a natural progression. Two, I want full screen, full motion, ‘live’ video/audio communication with the rest of the world. That requires bandwidth and processor power. Lots of it.
Once I get that, guess what? I’ll want more. I’ll want to save much of those communications for retrieval.
Didn’t know G3s ran Tiger. So Tiger must sense the CPU and shift to 32-bit mode. Could you have bought the Tiger Family Pack and used the same OS on all machines? Is it possible to upgrade the hard drive on a G3? If so, what’s the size limit?
Yes, Tiger runs fine on many G3s. I just put Tiger on an iMac DV (400mhz) for a neighbor’s kid. That’s at least a five year old machine. Tiger is Tiger and doesn’t care which Mac (so long as it’ll run on it) you’ve got. Oh, Tiger is NOT fully 64-bit, either.
Some Tiger features don’t show up on older machines or machines with older graphic cards.
Yes, upgrade the hard drive on any Mac G3. They’re ATA/IDE so shouldn’t have a problem. Some older G3s required partitioning considerations (messy). There’s also a Mac application that lets you install Tiger and Panther on unauthorized (very old) G3s.
Okay, Ms Point-Counterpoint, here you hit upon the core issue.
It’s a gift.
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:58 PM
Today the single change which would have the greatest impact on the majority of computer users would not be an increase in processor speed nor even in storage or memory capacity but rather in bandwidth. I’m not saying we can’t all use bumps in storage and memory as well, (for God knows we can); but if—with the wave of my hand—I could do ONE thing to have the greatest positive effect on computer users, it would be to greatly increase their bandwidth.
Of course, once you do that, there’s now a tremendous need for storage increases, and server I/O issues need to be solved…
Have you read George Gilder’s “Life After Television.” It’s old, but discusses the changes that would be brought about by ‘cheap, infinite bandwidth.’
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:58 PM
Moving from 32-bit to 64-bit computing would have a negligible impact on most people today (by constrast). As for tomorrow, I take your point—we shall wait and see.PS: One thing I’ve learned is never to respond to a woman who asks me to define need.
Actually, I’m sure there’s a whole hell of a lot of us. I’m comfy in a unix environment. I can use all of that in the Mac’s terminal to leverage the OS. Let’s face it, sometimes it actually is easier to do things in the CLI than the GUI. And I get better connectivity interfaces - ssh, ftp, scp, sftp, etc - built right it. I’d say that for me, the CLI is one of the big draws to the OS.
Actually, I’m sure there’s a whole hell of a lot of us. I’m comfy in a unix environment. I can use all of that in the Mac’s terminal to leverage the OS. Let’s face it, sometimes it actually is easier to do things in the CLI than the GUI. And I get better connectivity interfaces - ssh, ftp, scp, sftp, etc - built right it. I’d say that for me, the CLI is one of the big draws to the OS.
“I” use CLI all the time on Tiger. Tera taught me and it’s no big deal. Just like using a Mac isn’t a big issue once you know which buttons to click, Terminal can be used so long as you know what to type. And where.
Thanks to Missy T’s instruction (she goes back to CPM days; you know, before Noah and the flood), I can now set up Apache virtual domains, tweak httpd.conf, tweak Postfix (aliases and main.cf), and php.ini, not to mention MySQL’s my.cnf file. And more. Sorry, I use pico, not vi**.
I use vi. I started on pico, but vi is always compiled on any *nix machine you’ll ever touch, so it’s portable. It’s all in what you’re used to, I guess. But yeah, some folks get very jihadist about editors in the harder cored corners.
I was waiting for the argument about how previous thresholds of system resources were once erroneously thought to be far more than any individual would ever need…
Wild Bill Gates never said, “640K is enough for anybody.” He was interviewed a while after that quote was attributed and his response was (quoting only from memory, not script) “I’ve said stupid things and I’ve said wrong things, but that’s not one of them.”
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:11 PM
I can assure you that you won’t be clamoring for a 128-bit computer (to replace your aging 64-bit system) so you can more effectively write that letter to your aunt Martha or browse the headlines of the New York Times.
I don’t doubt the sincerity of your forecast, but I question its accuracy. You don’t now know what it will take in a few years to do either of those things. It may be that the only person you’ll be communicating with over the Internet in the not-incredibly-distant future is yourself… until you have the operational tools (those are 128-bit operational tools) required to do so.
Jeff Mincey - 31 July 2005 01:11 PM
The actual processing advantage will be felt by a great minority of end users—outside the realm of science and certain engineering, architectural, or health care fields.
What you write is the current state of affairs. Requirements change. So must we. And so must our machines.
Interesting aside in a related theme… Folks at the OSX86 web site are talking about the DVD made available to developers to write code for the MacIntel. Apparently the MacIntel system will use TC and a Xeon chip to assure that Leopard is running on a genuine Mac. Trusted Computing is the name of the system being implemented by manufacturers to verify that the system is genuine. TC is already being implemented by some cell phones to make sure the battery didn’t come from a third party. It’s also used by printers to make sure that its ink cartridges are not cloned or even refilled by a third party. In computers it will make sure that the parts are genuine and that the programs aren’t pirated. Programs can use the same technology to make sure that third party software can’t read the products made from them. For example, MS Word may write files that are encrypted using TC technology so that no other program can read them and no other program can be modified to read them. (The file structure isn’t copyrighted, but the TC dongle technology is.) Connectivity is turning into a very different ballgame. For more: http://www.osx86.classicbeta.com/wiki/index.php/Main_Page
Watch out - you’ll start a holy war if you keep typing like that.