Author Topic: Mac News and geek talk. (Read 12564 times)

RRobar · « **on:** August 22, 2003, 07:38:53 AM »

Just figured I'd start a thread here for those who run macs. Maybe we will all learn somthing and maybe even win a few converts

So is Pather worth the upgrade from Jaguar? ANd can one go straight from OS X 1.0 to Panther.

John Kelly · « **Reply #1 on:** August 22, 2003, 08:17:38 AM »

I've been running the betas on a spare drive, and so far I'm impressed enough to pay the upgrade fee. I was running the very first beta full time at one point, but the next one broke core audio so I had to go back to 10.2 so I could keep taping.

The only thing I don't like about it is the brushed metal finder. Apple's breaking their own design guidelines, and they're making it ugly when they do it.

I'm getting sick of brushed metal going into every application, they may as well make the entire OS metal (blech!).

But since Panther is so amazingly fast, I think I can deal with the nasty metal.

Edit - And yes, you can upgrade from any X install to 10.3. I'd recommend a format and a fresh install, though. Usually tends to work out better.

RRobar · « **Reply #2 on:** August 22, 2003, 08:44:05 AM »

Quote from: John Kelly on August 22, 2003, 08:17:38 AM

I've been running the betas on a spare drive, and so far I'm impressed enough to pay the upgrade fee. I was running the very first beta full time at one point, but the next one broke core audio so I had to go back to 10.2 so I could keep taping.

The only thing I don't like about it is the brushed metal finder. Apple's breaking their own design guidelines, and they're making it ugly when they do it. I'm getting sick of brushed metal going into every application, they may as well make the entire OS metal (blech!).

But since Panther is so amazingly fast, I think I can deal with the nasty metal.

Edit - And yes, you can upgrade from any X install to 10.3. I'd recommend a format and a fresh install, though. Usually tends to work out better.

Cool, Thanks. I asked the last part as the old G4 I have at work is 10.1 and it could use a format and new install anyway. It was a hand me down and unless my coworker leaves and I get the dual process G4 she has I need to make do with this one. But I am still pushing for a G5. I guess I could do without the monster dual 2ghz one but If they are spending the cash might as well go for the gusto.

DO any of you in the graphic design field know what the bugs are in Quark 6. We are at the crossroads with a decisin to buy Quark 6.0 (so we can stop running OS9) We have in design but our output houses seem to all have issues. Not sure if InDesign actually is crashing rips or if it's lack of knowledge of the software. But they all seem ok with quark. WHich i have no real love for but am forced to use. Just wondering.

John Kelly · « **Reply #3 on:** August 22, 2003, 09:01:17 AM »

Actually, from everything I've read a single G5 will be better for most people that the Dual. But if you are thinking about it, definitely go for the 1.8. The 1.6 has a crippled mobo (edit - reduced memory bandwidth and older pci slots)...

RRobar · « **Reply #4 on:** August 22, 2003, 09:04:51 AM »

Quote from: John Kelly on August 22, 2003, 09:01:17 AM

Actually, from everything I've read a single G5 will be better for most people that the Dual. But if you are thinking about it, definitely go for the 1.8. The 1.6 has a crippled mobo (only an 800MHz bus)...

Yeah That was the one I thought I had the most chances of getting. The super drive is also imprtant to me for obvous reasons

John Kelly · « **Reply #5 on:** August 22, 2003, 09:19:59 AM »

Cuz it's super?

scb · « **Reply #6 on:** August 22, 2003, 10:05:10 AM »

>> The 1.6 has a crippled mobo (only an 800MHz bus)...<<

i'd hardly call the 1.6ghz crippled...

John Kelly · « **Reply #7 on:** August 22, 2003, 10:27:48 AM »

Well the fact that they deliberately underclocked the board, I'd say it's crippled. It's like what they did to the Yikes board, there's no reason for the downclocking except to distinguish the models a little more.

Still probably 50x faster than my iBook, though.

RRobar · « **Reply #8 on:** August 22, 2003, 10:27:51 AM »

I think since the other has 1ghz fsb is why he was considering it crippled. But your right still 2 times as fast as any PC FSB and given the fact the PC's don't even use half of the 400mb fsb they have now.

I'm begining to develop my master plan

John Kelly · « **Reply #9 on:** August 22, 2003, 10:32:09 AM »

I thought there was an Intel chip that had an 800Mhz bus now? Yes/no? Don't they call it "Hyperthreading" or something like that?

I dunno, I've been out of the PC loop for a while now (and don't miss it at all).

Nick in Edinboro · « **Reply #10 on:** August 22, 2003, 10:47:56 AM »

Ya John, Intel's Pentium 4's have an 800mhz FSB.

However Hyperthreading is something completely different and is merely an extension of old technologies (called pipelining and SIMD) . If anyone else here has taken a language like Assembly it's easier to comprehend what exactly it's doing.

I'm looking forward to the AlthlonXP 64's but it seems like it'll be a while before they're widely available

RRobar · « **Reply #11 on:** August 22, 2003, 10:56:06 AM »

Quote from: John Kelly on August 22, 2003, 10:32:09 AM

I thought there was an Intel chip that had an 800Mhz bus now? Yes/no? Don't they call it "Hyperthreading" or something like that?

I dunno, I've been out of the PC loop for a while now (and don't miss it at all).

I guess so, My laptop is a 2.4 ghz P4 and I don' think it runs that. My home desktop is a AthalonXP 1700+ series and it's about 400mhz.

Now that I think about it, the P4's do have 800 mHz FSB, however I think without Rambus Ram it does not even come close to using what is available. Maybe more so now with the faster DDR that is out. I went with the athalonXP rather than the P4 when I bought that as it was cheaper but a few hundred.

Nick in Edinboro · « **Reply #12 on:** August 22, 2003, 11:18:55 AM »

RRobar, your Athlon has a 266mhz FSB, not 400, in fact, only Pentium uses such "even" numbers.

Your motherboards FSB is actually 133mhz (it just has two channels), the AMD's have a doubled pumped CPU bus which terminates into the two FSB channels thus creating a "266mhz" FSB number.

The newer Athlons are 333mhz FSB which relates into a motherboard FSB of 166mhz "double pumped". Intel conversly "quad pumps" theirs. So 200 x 4 = 800mhz FSB.

When you say that without Rambus Ram it doesn't use what's available it's only a half truth. With the faster FSB it also provides faster speed to the PCI and AGP buses. I think a PCI bus is usually about 1/5th the speed of the FSB and the AGP slot runs at twice the speed of the PCI. So the FSB speed does affect the whole package from your potential HD speed to how fast of video card you can run.

You said you wanted geek talk right? :afro:

My post is heavily quoted from this article, and it's good for further reading:
http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Front_side_bus
http://www.4reference.net/encyclopedias/wikipedia/Front_side_bus.html

RRobar · « **Reply #13 on:** August 22, 2003, 11:39:20 AM »

I stand corrected Thanks.

Nick in Edinboro · « **Reply #14 on:** August 22, 2003, 11:42:12 AM »

Only stood out because I have the same processor

Although I think my mobo is fried as when it boots it says it's a 733mhz or 1100mhz processor depending on how it feels.

scb · « **Reply #15 on:** August 22, 2003, 02:07:43 PM »

>> I think since the other has 1ghz fsb is why he was considering it crippled.<<

the 970's bus runs at HALF the speed of the processor. the 2ghz g5 has a 1ghz bus, the 1.8 ghz is 900 mhz bus, and the 1.6ghz had an 800mhz bus. it's not crippled, that's how it was designed

John Kelly · « **Reply #16 on:** August 22, 2003, 03:01:58 PM »

Sorry, I meant that they crippled the PCI bus and the memory bandwidth. If you check the tech specs, the memory for the 1.6 is only at 333 Mhz, while the other two both operate at 400 Mhz. Also the PCI slots in the 1.6 are the usual PCI, operating at 33 Mhz. While the slots in the 1.8 and dual 2 are PCI-X, operating at 133 Mhz 64bit (for one slot) and 100 Mhz 64bit for the other two slots.

There was no real reason to do this to the 1.6...

zhianosatch · « **Reply #17 on:** August 22, 2003, 04:35:05 PM »

npinsboro, chances are it's a ram issue... or the board isn't grounded

RRobar · « **Reply #18 on:** September 16, 2003, 02:26:42 PM »

So what is the new Powerbook news? I see the rumbling at laptop taper's but missed the thread. The g5 powerbooks?

scb · « **Reply #19 on:** September 16, 2003, 02:31:06 PM »

updated line

12 inch is now 1ghz g4, has DVI port

15 inch is now aluminum, has fw 800, bluetooth, 1.25ghz g4, usb2

17 is 1.33ghz, usb2 added. superdrive is rated 2x instead of 1x dvd-r

real question is are these chips 7747 or 7757?

RRobar · « **Reply #20 on:** September 16, 2003, 04:20:04 PM »

Thanks I knew one of you guys would chime in. I had checked the mac site and saw most of that

John Kelly · « **Reply #21 on:** September 16, 2003, 06:58:42 PM »

I'm currently working out a way to get one of the 12"... Now what the hell can I sell?

RRobar · « **Reply #22 on:** September 16, 2003, 09:49:10 PM »

how much for I book?

John Kelly · « **Reply #23 on:** September 17, 2003, 08:03:31 AM »

Well I still haven't completely decided to sell it yet, but probably around $900.

RRobar · « **Reply #24 on:** September 17, 2003, 08:31:19 AM »

Quote from: John Kelly on September 17, 2003, 08:03:31 AM

Well I still haven't completely decided to sell it yet, but probably around $900.

If you do keep me in mind.

Chris K · « **Reply #25 on:** September 18, 2003, 09:46:51 PM »

has anyone noticed that the new Power Mac G5's are built with optical in/out

always ethat macs are at the forefront on everything

way to go apple...now if you can just survive being sued by the beatles...again

RRobar · « **Reply #26 on:** September 18, 2003, 10:56:25 PM »

Yes, but it raises the whole "Bit Perfect" Debate. Unless someone has heard what chip it uses. It is cool though.

Chris K · « **Reply #27 on:** September 18, 2003, 11:37:04 PM »

i would suspect that emagic probably had a hand in it, and if so, it should be good...

the specs sheet at apple.com says the optical i/o are "state of the art"

RRobar · « **Reply #28 on:** September 19, 2003, 07:46:42 AM »

I'm sure. SOme magazines consider the creative SB line "STate of the Art" But I trust it's good stuff.

RRobar · « **Reply #29 on:** October 01, 2003, 09:05:10 PM »

Quote from: John Kelly on September 16, 2003, 06:58:42 PM

I'm currently working out a way to get one of the 12"... Now what the hell can I sell?

Ok, Looks like I have work kicking in on a brand new PowerBook for me!!!

I'm trading in my PC laptop and getting a PowerBook. I'll know early next week if I can make my order. I'm pretty geeked, My boss is saying for me to get the 17inch and while I know it's a bit big for taping for doing Graphic design work it is really nice. ANy ideas on the normal battery life of the 17inch G4. I'll look it up but I was just wondering.

nic · « **Reply #30 on:** October 02, 2003, 09:36:24 AM »

the real question regarding Panther is if Core Audio is finally in a useable form to record with reliably...it hasnt been as of 10.2.7
until Core Audio has matured, I'll keep my OS9.2 partition for Digital Performer

Chris K · « **Reply #31 on:** October 02, 2003, 10:41:48 PM »

hi....i saw this while scoping for some gear for my home studio...

g4 1.o ghz powebook for $600 at sweetwater sound's trading post

http://www.sweetwater.com/tradingpost/details.tpl?cart=10651487372310002&sku=20031002121739

i will post this in the yard sale also

chris k

Chris K · « **Reply #32 on:** October 02, 2003, 10:53:17 PM »

whoops ... sorry didnt rad to far into it that the screen was no good

well...i'll keep lookin

RRobar · « **Reply #33 on:** October 03, 2003, 08:37:52 AM »

I was going to say that was to good to be true. I'm 99% sure I'll be getting a new PowerBook from work soon. I should be able to place my order on Monday. All I need know is a line on some "DEMO" software fo recording

Chris K · « **Reply #34 on:** October 03, 2003, 09:14:09 PM »

i have been using bias peak le 3.2.1....and they just sent me a copy of peak le 4, but i haven't loaded it yet because you need 10.2.3, and i have 10.2.2...and i'm not ready for another phase up os upgrades right now

peak is nice, but i have been playing with spark xl...there is a good demo, and you can also get the free spark me. the program format is a little different than i am used to , but i think i prefer spark.
http://www.tcelectronic.com/SparkXL

RRobar · « **Reply #35 on:** October 04, 2003, 12:36:02 AM »

Is the Spark ME fully functional and what will it do. I'm kind of confused by the specs. I'm looking to do 24/48 from the MiniMe. Then 24/96 at some point later on.

scb · « **Reply #36 on:** October 04, 2003, 02:19:05 AM »

17 inch can get 3 hours pretty easily i think, though not sure when taping

it's HUGE to use for taping

wbrisette · « **Reply #37 on:** October 04, 2003, 05:51:38 AM »

Quote from: scott brown on October 04, 2003, 02:19:05 AM

it's HUGE to use for taping

In my opinion it is too big! An iBook or 12" PB would be a better option for taping since this is one area where smaller is usually better. I know that in most of the venues around here I don't have enough space to keep a 17" PowerBook from being stepped on, dropped, etc. Usually I have just a small amount of space to work with.

RRobar · « **Reply #38 on:** October 04, 2003, 02:12:07 PM »

Quote from: scott brown on October 04, 2003, 02:19:05 AM

17 inch can get 3 hours pretty easily i think, though not sure when taping

it's HUGE to use for taping

I really want the 17 inch for full spreads in stuff like quark. I'll probably end up with a 15 inch just beacause of the price difference. ALso I run a 15 inch PC laptop now for taping. Also I don't run FOB so a little more size is OK by me. The 12 inch is just to small for Design work. If I had a big ass desktop monitor I would be ok with it. Plus if work is paying for it (or half of it) I need to keep the design aspect of my needs in mind in the decision.

MattD · « **Reply #39 on:** October 06, 2003, 01:29:15 PM »

There's a program called soundhack that'll do this for you. Only thing is, I think it needs core audio which, if I remember, isn't implemented until 10.2.

-Matt

scb · « **Reply #40 on:** October 06, 2003, 01:39:32 PM »

>>he real question regarding Panther is if Core Audio is finally in a useable form to record with reliably...it hasnt been as of 10.2.7
until Core Audio has matured, I'll keep my OS9.2 partition for Digital Performer<<

what's not reliable? i think core audio is pretty damn good, and has been perfectly fine since 10.2....