I know what through me off was the MacPro term. When i saw that i was interested in pouncing on it, but then when i saw later that it was a G5 and not a MacPro i wasn't interested. It will be a good machine for someone, thats for sure.

Quote from: matt_wallace on January 13, 2010, 09:04:34 PM
I know what through me off was the MacPro term. When i saw that i was interested in pouncing on it, but then when i saw later that it was a G5 and not a MacPro i wasn't interested. It will be a good machine for someone, thats for sure.

Did u really think that u could get this computer with Intel CPUs for this price?
:D :D :D :D

Some people are so clueless that yes it is possible. I've seen people buy 3000 cameras for 500.00, whether they're stolen or not who knows, but the sale was made.

I would definitely buy it... If I had the money... I still think that the PowerPC processor is what made Mac's Special, with Intel boxes why not just buy an old mac case put high end PC parts and build a Hackintosh. The 2001 - 2005 Macs are by far my favourite...

Long live PPC.

But the Intel's are much faster. I guess it all depends on what you do with it. I'm a photographer and a faster machine means i can get more work in and out, so a slower machine would only mean less work and less income.

I agree with the speed, but I still think that there was more of an impact on Apples machines when the processors had a design that they helped with. Now I am typing this on a MacBook Pro 15" (Unibody) and this computer is scarily fast, but my iMac G4 can perform certain tasks almost as fast with the exception of it's age. I guess my whole issue is that apple is showing less and less support for their own community and are beginning to care more and more about the general trend.

I will never stop buying Macs, but I must say my windows 7 laptop is pretty nice.

MacBook Pro 15" Unibody 2.66 Ghz
MacBook Pro 15" Aluminum 2.0 Ghz
MacBook 13" 1.83 Ghz
iMac C2D Aluminum 2.0 Ghz
iMac G4 1.25Ghz
iBook G4 1.20 Ghz
PowerBook G4 Titanium 400 Mhz
PowerMac G4 466 Mhz
PowerMac G4 400 Mhz
(Multiple iPods and an iPhone 3GS)

I've worked with a couple G5s and they were nice machines. One of my main machines now is the 2.8 C2Duo MPB and its awesome. Its quite fast. I just sold a MacPro that was a Quad 2.6 with 12gb of ram and i'd say there's nothing that would compare to that beast. I've also just recently built a Hackintosh and its been amazing. its as fast as my MBP. It's being mostly used as a file server, but i'm also using it for as a second machine for Adobe Lightroom.

What I like about Macs (Imacs anyways) is how quiet they are. I just couldn't handle the fan noises on my old pc's. Have you managed to make a somewhat silent Hackintosh..?

No, i'm not worried about the noise. It's running 8 Drives and is running as a server so we're not concerned with the noise. It's pretty on par with the noise produced from an xServe, those are crazy noisy.

I have a last generation 2 GHz Dual Core G5 and you can barely hear it hum. I have never owned a tower as quiet as this one. It slows down a little doing video conversions, but aside from that, it is great! I intend to keep it as long as it works. I love having dual Gigabit Ethernet, and the ability to expand my RAM to 16 GB. And this type of RAM is quite inexpensive too!

It looks like the glut on used market for powermac G5s has dried up, so you will see the prices of these baby's slowly going back up. Taken in context of supply and demand, if you want a PM5 and can't find one, $650 is a very reasonable price.

The thing that does not look promising about the Apple is the way how easily the corporation is abandoning users.
It was not so long time ago when graphic designers had to shell out $5K for a beefed-up new G5 dual or quad.
It seems to be a clear message to users:
"It does not matter how much $$$$ u spent on new computer. We will leave you in 5 years with this technology anyway".
Apple is transforming from producer of solid&reliable computers into designer of fashionable toys.
R.

But, why would a company not abandon old machines/OS's that can't run the latest software or hardware? It's a business, for any computer company to stay profitable, they need us to buy new machines. It's just logical. Being in business is about making money. For us, we typically keep machines for 3 years, then sell them and get new equipment. A new computer means: its faster, which means we can make more money by getting jobs in and out of the shop easier. Personally I think it's a no brainer. If you can get a way with running an older machine, that's great, but if you're using it solely for a business like design or photography, where new software needs more power, it's likely hampering the amount of work you can get out during the day, which is bad for business.

The thing is the software engineers, and programmers need to learn what Steve Wozniak has said so often about computers, and the reason I personally find Apple to be an amazing company, pertaining to "purist programming." In essence he is describing people who can maintain such a connection with what they are writing that they try to make it run on as little memory as possible so that it can be accessible to all. I am no professional but I do believe that software such as Adobe Photoshop and even many of Apple's own applications have become bloated simply because computers are getting more powerful, but I have an LC III and it runs all the programs of it's day, equally as fast as my MacBook Pro runs Logic Express... And since when should Apple be a company that only cares about their numbers, they needed help, they got it now it's time for them to remember who they are, a company that cares more about making great hardware and software that just works and keeping the consumer happy.

Apple your switch to Intel made me think that the last PC company to think different finally joined the majority, Apple needs to learn to think different again.