One of the photos shows the logic board that indeed has the pins for the CF card reader but of course no port for it. I looked through my iPhoto library and found the photos. I had the exact same model iMac G5, a 2005 iMac G5 (20-inch iSight), that I took apart and cleaned in May 2017. It did show that Mr Jade’s source was good at the time though. This of course never happened as the final production models did not have the card reader. He found this article from September 2005 that speculated new iMacs may sport an iSight and maybe even a card reader. Some further exploration showed a beta firmware version.Īt this point Greg Hrutkay got off work and joined the conversation between Michael, Rocky and myself on faceTime. Guess the seller was not blowing smoke up his ass, this really did come from Apple! It doesn’t look dremel’d in by someone modding it, there’s even an icon above it.
#New os for imac g5 mac
Michael buys it, takes it home and thinks nothing of it.Ī look around the Mac brought him to the back of it and something seemed odd… He meets the seller which tells him he got this from a woman that used to work at Apple. He’s wanted one for a while just to add to his collection and finally found one locally. It’s really sad to see someone get so upset about someone happily using their computer in whatever way works best for them (whether or not we ‘know’ better or not.The date is December 22nd, 2018 and my friend Michael goes out to pick up an iMac G5. >is getting a little sad – get with the program.Īnd if someone had said these self same words to you while you were still using BeOS ‘until it became a corpse’ how would you have reacted? YOU need to get with the program, not everyone will want to use their computers the same way that you and I do–and there’s nothing *wrong* with that! we just happen to do things differently. >After using BeOS until it became a corpse, I switched Perhaps the nice people at the (IMHO) defunct SEAL 2.x project this bit of information or maybe the Qube people? They’ve been working hard on making GUIs for DOS and they might like to know its time to throw in the towel since DOS is dead… /sarcasm anyone?Īs for MacOS 9.x you might want to keep in mind that there are people with a sizable amount of money invested in some older MacOS programs that either don’t function in MacOS X.x or they have found a way to make MacOS 9.x behave to their likeing and would rather not have to start over with the new UI of MacOS X.x…hard to imagine, but I’m sure there are some people who prefer the ‘classic’ way of doing things and see no real reason to move on–except wanting abit more speed in their hardware. You might want to tell the good people working on FreeDos that, or perhaps you’d like to tell this bit of news to the various companies that are _still_ releasing new implementations of DOS. >now, it is just as dead as DOS is in home desktop computing.
>oh my god, you get it….they are phasing it out and However WindowsIntel users do have the ability to run older versions of the Operating system on brand spanking new hardware for the most part, thus their (our?) casual ignorance.ĭebman (IP: -.) said–
#New os for imac g5 windows
OTOH, when using products like 98lite to configure the system with the older Windows 95 version of Explorer, this actually does provide the speed boost of a new(er) kernel running with an olderlighter interface on top… But in answer to your REAL question, I honestly doubt anyone with a brand new G5 that _comes with_ a newer version of the MacOS written especially for it would want to do this, as the above described issues do not aparently exist for many Macintosh users. >understand WHY you’d want to downgrade a brand new computer.īecause most people have more experience with the WindowsIntel world, its not uncommon to slap on an older OS in these machines for an instant (if not illusionary) speed boost. >of the OS not working with newer hardware. >I never understood the surprise about older versions Wow, an opinion piece whose argument is based on two incorrect assumptions. The surrounding architecture, however, is not. The processor itself is cheaper than the G4, due to the smaller wafer size. The second assumption is that IBM’s 970, when it arrives, will perform at least acceptably, but that it will be much more expensive. First, that Motorola has given up on further development of high-speed PPCs, which is almost certain. That’s not at all implausible, based on two assumptions. Not doomed in the short run, not doomed to imminent collapse, but doomed to long term decline through gradually increasing uncompetitiveness. Suppose that he is pretty certain that Apple’s computer business is doomed.
They certainly live up to their name! Their argument is based upon two assumptions: I see you’ve linked to the “USS Clueless”.
0 kommentar(er)
