PDA

View Full Version : Leopard Cut off point



hawker
22nd December 2006, 04:38 PM
I don't know if anyone has brought this up before, but what do people think will be Leopard's Cut off point in terms of hardware?

Most people I talked to seem to think no G4's will run good with it, others think 1ghz + G4's will run fine and I even heard one person say that any macs with anything less than a dual processor G5 will have a hard time running it!

Thoughts? Will video cards and memory also be a bottleneck of the new OS?

My thoughts are the min requirements would be something like:

- 1Ghz + G4 (1.5Ghz recommended)
- 512MB of ram (1GB recommended)
- 64MB Video card (128MB recommended)

morgs
22nd December 2006, 04:51 PM
My feeling is that the only thing that will be left behind are the G3's. That is the only thing that would seem fair.

sendai
22nd December 2006, 05:10 PM
I'd say G3s and Yikes G4s are definitely out.

mechcon
22nd December 2006, 05:12 PM
g4's out? your nuts!

hawker
22nd December 2006, 05:16 PM
mechcon, Yikes G4's are basically G3's pretending to be G4's!

marc
22nd December 2006, 05:17 PM
My feeling is that the only thing that will be left behind are the G3's. That is the only thing that would seem fair.
If anything OS X is getting more efficient, so I'd say I agree with that. I haven't seen any reason for Apple to ditch low spec G4s.

mechcon
22nd December 2006, 05:17 PM
new term for me, never heard of these Yikes g4's :\

hawker
22nd December 2006, 05:19 PM
new term for me, never heard of these Yikes g4's :\

They were just before Sawtooth G4's!

Byrd
22nd December 2006, 05:30 PM
It appears people with G3 CPUs have had no issues running early versions of 10.5 - although Apple could increase system requirements with all the new features they're soon to preview.

G3 CPUs aren't that dated - if I'd bought a G3 900Mhz iBook in 2003 and couldn't run the latest OS when it's only 3 - 4 years old, I'd be pissed :)

The requirements of 10.4 are a G3 CPU and native firewire support (although XPostFacto gets around this with little hassles on "unsupported" machines), I can't see this sigificantly changing except perhaps a "recommended" 800+Mhz CPU.

At the same time, I've successfully run 10.4.8 on a PowerMac 9600 upgraded to a G3 520Mhz/896MB RAM/Radeon 7000 - for a machine that's nearly ten years old, it has no hassles and runs the OS perfectly. The simple thing to note is that old Apple hardware lasts a lot longer than a comparative PC (a 1997 PC would be under the scrap heap now). If Apple pulled OS support on machines that are only a few years old, there would be many disgruntled users - it wouldn't make sense for Apple to cease this rule.

JB

thebag
22nd December 2006, 05:55 PM
Well said Byrd,

As far as I can remember the only reason older Macs would'nt run OSX 10.1 was to do with the ID of the model.

If your Machine was genuine G3+ it would run okay, but if you had an upgraded machine ie: a 7600 with a G3 upgrade you needed Xpostfacto.

OSX would have run on older macs, but you get into that whole how much hardware are you going to support issue.

Mark

cgollner
22nd December 2006, 06:03 PM
Although I am not that familiar with Mac hardware prior to the Powerbook G4 that I bought last December, it seems reasonable that Apple may drop off the oldest generations and keep the recent 2 generations or so. That being the Macbook/Pro/MacPro and the G4/G5s.

marc
22nd December 2006, 06:13 PM
I agree Byrd. The only thing that might kill older machines is if Leopard has a new UI that needs more grunt. That should all be handled by the GPU though...

Who knows.

maclover
22nd December 2006, 07:26 PM
I think a lot will run, however I think Leopard will depend a lot more on your video card, therefore people with older machines may not get all the 'iCandy' that will no doubt be included with Leopard.

Aa
22nd December 2006, 07:38 PM
If anything kills it it'll be something like spaces, time machine or some graphics intensive core app.

the GUI really isn't looking much different so far, just more of an emphasis on some styles that are already present in 10.4.

The Fluffy Duck
22nd December 2006, 08:47 PM
g4 will run.

Shatter
22nd December 2006, 08:59 PM
I know it's confirmed that it will and everything, but it would not be good if Apple pulled the plug on Leopard's PPC counterpart. That would force any upgraders to buy a new computer.

hawker
22nd December 2006, 09:09 PM
I know it's confirmed that it will and everything, but it would not be good if Apple pulled the plug on Leopard's PPC counterpart. That would force any upgraders to buy a new computer.

ha ha ha do you know how many people would walk away from mac if that happened? I'd be first! That's just called being stupid!

melted.marsbar
22nd December 2006, 09:17 PM
I know it's confirmed that it will and everything, but it would not be good if Apple pulled the plug on Leopard's PPC counterpart. That would force any upgraders to buy a new computer.

When Steve J. announced the PPC --> Intel switch, didn't he also announce that they'd continue to support PPC for the next 5-or-so years? (don't quote me, I can't remember exact figures...)

rtc
22nd December 2006, 09:18 PM
Being the proud owner of what was once an AGP Sawtooth G4, and now has a 1.4ghz sonnet in it, I find that tiger is forkin' hurngry for RAM at the most (due to osx's non customisable greedy ram virtual hogging dirth).

Winxp (and to a greater extent vista) is good at hogging useful resources to use them fore useless shite like UI prettiness and translescent blue rubbish.

Now osx (startin' with jaguar, through panther now tiger) is following suit. leopard is a BIT better but could improve still.

lean coding is where it's at!

Unfortunately my g4 (even in its upgraded state) has a low-end video card and so can't run some of the cool features of tiger let alone leopard.

Lets just say 1.8DP or 2.0SP g5 is the min to get the MOST out of leopard. and 1gb ram at the min.

Sure it will run on less, but to apple's credit when it does and some of the vsual effects are disabled it is still pretty seamless.

MrJesseRoss
23rd December 2006, 11:28 AM
When Steve J. announced the PPC --> Intel switch, didn't he also announce that they'd continue to support PPC for the next 5-or-so years? (don't quote me, I can't remember exact figures...)

In that case, 10.6 (if it ever exists) would be the one to dump PPC support. Which would make sense.

thorevenge
23rd December 2006, 11:36 AM
If they go the video card route, I'd say that the min spec would be any Mac stock configuration with an ATI Radeon or nVidia GeForce card.

Apple tends to limit release based on shipped hardware configs, for instance I think 10.4 would run on any Mac stock configuration with Firewire ports - this meant that the early G4's and some late G3's would run it from standard stock configs - of course how well was determined by the machine.

I think the Radeon/GeForce concept would be a nice way to differentiate - as USB2.0 and Firewire configs haven't changed much on Macs - and I've yet to see a processor spec apart from the difference between system 8, which required PPC instead of 68k, for a Mac OS. In my young lifetime at least :)

Shatter
23rd December 2006, 11:40 AM
In that case, 10.6 (if it ever exists) would be the one to dump PPC support. Which would make sense.

woah. 10.6. Seems almost futuristic. When Apple run out of Cat types they will probably use bird types as release names.

Ha. 10.6 Eagle

Gerbils
23rd December 2006, 12:43 PM
I think fruit and vegatables.

I give you: Mac OS 10.9 Avocado.

Brains
23rd December 2006, 01:42 PM
Leopard is going to rely very heavily upon a decent GPU -- if your card won't support Core Video, then you're going to be lucky to get Leopard to behave even close to reasnably well.

The current requirements for 10.5, the developer release at least, do not specify a minimum speed, just the usual minimums of RAM, DVD, built-in FireWire, and "a built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card supported by your computer".

Whether they bump these for the release version remains to be seen.


B.

thorevenge
23rd December 2006, 02:05 PM
Leopard is going to rely very heavily upon a decent GPU -- if your card won't support Core Video, then you're going to be lucky to get Leopard to behave even close to reasnably well.

The current requirements for 10.5, the developer release at least, do not specify a minimum speed, just the usual minimums of RAM, DVD, built-in FireWire, and "a built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied video card supported by your computer".

Whether they bump these for the release version remains to be seen.


B.

Hence my idea - ATI Radeon or nVidia GeForce stock video card as the min spec - which will probably encompass things like DVD drive, min RAM specs and min processor specs :)

darksplat
23rd December 2006, 02:27 PM
My friend is a devopler nad he borrowed my imac 800mhz G4 17inch to test 10.5 and it worked fine