PowerPC gaming on Mac OS

If you’re like me, then you prefer the games from the PowerPC era.  Not simply because they were coded for the architecture, but rather that this was the best era in Mac and PC gaming in my opinion.  The reason I feel this way is that the games from this era are more raw and simple, with a lot less fluff.  Many modern games focus mainly on graphic realism and lack the quality experience that older ones had.

Another great thing about older games is that you don’t need a video card that costs several hundred dollars to play them.  A 32MB card is often fine for most of them.  For greats like Oni from the late 90’s you can get high frame rates on 8 MB vid controllers.  The games in the later part of the PowerPC era (2003-2006) are the ones that tend to benefit from the 64MB and up cards.  These two examples cover the extreme ends of the video hardware needed for PowerPC gaming.

In my experiences, I would say that the CPU plays a more important role in Mac gaming compared to the wintel world.  I say that because in my direct experiences with many games it’s the CPU that makes the most difference. An example of this was some testing I did a couple years back.  I tested a Sawtooth with a G4 1.0 GHz 7455 and Radeon 9800 Pro 128 MB vs. another Sawtooth with a G4 1.8 GHz 7448 and a Radeon 7500 32MB.  The 1.8 GHz system beat the snot out of the 1.0 GHz in every single way.  Although the 9800 in the slower system is a far better GPU, the difference is negated by a CPU that is clocked 80% faster.  Obviously the 9800 is better suited for the 1.8 GHz, which is where it lives now, but those tests were to prove a point at the time.  This was all during a debate where others had claimed that the GPU was far more important for Mac gaming, but it's actually 2D where the GPU plays more of a role on a Mac vs. Wintel machines.  The GPU is still important in gaming, make no mistake; I'm just saying that the CPU is more of a factor in Mac gaming vs. Wintel. 

It makes sense to break up games by system requirements, so people can try the ones within the ability of the hardware they have.  Although these games are all harder to find these days, they are pretty much all still available if you look hard enough in the right places.  I will list all the options I can think of but will really only comment on the ones I have direct experience with.  I didn’t really start gaming on Macs until a good year or more into the G3 era around early 98.  Because of this, I cannot really comment on the earliest games for the 601-604 CPU’s.

Most of these games have reviews on Inside Mac Games dot com.  The ones that do will contain a link to the review in the title.  Inside Mac Games is the number one most trusted source for me and many Mac gamers.  The site is particularly good for older game info.

Group 1: Any G3 - G4 350-700MHz – Rage 128 or higher

The selection is limited on this low end of the scale, but the titles available are quality games. 

Quake I, II and III

I and II are a mixed bag of good and bad, but III is one of my favourite games ever on the Mac.  Quake I has the worst graphics, but many tend to prefer it to II.  Quake II looks much better than I, but the gaming experience is declined quite a bit.  The maps in it are quite redundant and it simply isn’t the greatest experience.

Quake III took everything up a few notches.  The graphics and game play are stellar compared to the previous two.  I started playing this in 1999 when I bought the Stormtrooper new.  The stock configuration was a G3 350 MHz with a Rage 128 16 MB, and it played III like a champ.  ID software did an amazing job optimizing it for the G3 systems and later the G4.  I play the G4 optimized OS X version on my 1.8 GHz with Radeon 9800.  I get well over 200 FPS at 1920 and over 300 FPS @ 1280.  Needless to say there is never even a hint of lag.  It also plays great on the modern revision of my Stormtrooper with a G4 500 and Radeon 7000 PCI.

The truly great thing about all 3 versions of this game is that they are all built for both classic OS and X.  III plays even better on X in my experiences.

Oni

This is one of the final pure Bungie games before Microsoft bought them.  The game play is outstanding, and can be quite challenging in later levels.  The official requirements are a G3 300 MHz and an 8 MB vid card.  I have seen it play fine on a beige minitower G3 233 MHz with Rage 128 16 MB.

When you consider that this game was released in 1999, and has such low requirements, the graphics are quite amazing.  I play it at 1920 with quality set to highest on my 1.8 GHz G4, and it looks fantastic for its age.

It’s a third person shooter much like Tomb Raider, but is a far better game IMO.  The hand-to-hand fighting is so fun in this game that I almost never use the gun.  I only shoot when facing one of the enemies which is only shooting, and not approaching to fight.  The gun selection leaves a lot to be desired, so that is certainly part of my hand-to-hand preference.  To be fair though, the gun selection is the only area the game lacks quality in my opinion.

Like Quake, there are Classic and X options for Oni.  The X option is very elegant in that all you have to do is attach the X app to the original Classic game content folder.  There is also a great editor available here, which allows you to make yourself invincible, and invisible to the enemies.  They can only see you when you punch them.  You can also give yourself virtually unlimited ammo.  The later levels are so hard to beat that you often do need these cheats; unless you're some superhuman gamer.

Abuse

This classic side scroller has been a favourite since 99.  I bought it along with the B&W Stormtrooper in Aug. 99, via the Bungie Classic pack which included 6 games.  I only remember that one of the others was Marathon because I only ever played Abuse on a regular basis.  I tried Marathon a couple times and gave it away along with all the others besides Abuse.

As far as I know, there was never an X version made, so this is Classic only.  I played it on 8.6 and all the 9 versions without issue.  There is a version for PowerPC Linux, which I installed a while ago, and will play more when I have a chance.

Shogo

Shogo is another first person shooter like Quake.  The maps and weapon selection are superior in Shogo IMO.  Some of the maps are so big that it’s hard to imagine until you see it yourself.  I have not played this since about 2004 because my disc became damaged, and I never attempted getting another.

Just thinking of this game as I write this makes me want to get it again.  From 2003-2004 a few friends and I played this over LAN together at least once a week.  It’s a perfect game for LAN and online play, because the more that play on a level the more fun it is.

I have never heard of a OS X version, so if you can find a copy it would be for OS 8.5-9.  

Spider-Man 2

Although this game is clearly designed for a younger teen, it is still quite fun to play at times.  The graphics look decent if you have a good enough card.  It does list needing a 32MB vid card, but I have played it on a 16 MB Rage 128 with everything turned down.  The CPU requirement is a G3 700 MHz.  I have never played it on a G3, but have on G4’s as slow as 400 MHz with decent results. 

If you have an older child or teen, or just really like Spider-Man, then this game is worth looking into.

Other options for this hardware group:

Marathon (all versions)

Carmageddon

Deer Hunter

Sim City (I & II)

Tomb Raider (I, II and III)

Myth (I & II)

Star Wars - Jedi Academy

Return to Castle Wolfenstein

Tony Hawk Pro Skater 2 

Ghost Recon
Rainbow Six
Deus Ex

Group 2: G4 800MHz-1.0GHz – Dual G4 450-533MHz – Radeon 7500/Geforce 2 or higher

This is the smallest of the groups in terms of selection, because only Halo really fits into this.  Most other Mac games are either a good deal below or above Halo in system requirements.  Games like Battlefield 1942 and Command and Conquer generals technically fit within this hardware requirement, but they play like crap.

The good news is that all the games from group 1 will play even better on this hardware.

Halo: Combat Evolved (1.5)

If you like first person shooters, and have never played this game, then you’re really missing out.  The requirements are a G4 800 MHz and a 32MB vid card.  It’s OS X only, and although it will play on Radeon 7500 and lower, I recommend an 8500 or higher.

Quality game and quality graphics, so you really can’t go wrong.  The game play can get rather intense at times, and the maps are quite good.  I tend to prefer the mostly outdoor maps, as the building based ones are a bit redundant. 


Other options for this hardware:

Monopoly

Lord of the Rings

Group 3: G4 1.2GHz+ - Dual G4 800MHz+ - G5 - Radeon 8500/Geforce 5200 or higher

It’s easy to understand why this group is where Mac PowerPC gaming is the best, because of both selection and graphics.

One thing I need to mention about GPU’s is that the numbering systems that ATI and Nvidia used with some cards make no sense.  A layperson would assume a Radeon 9000 or 9200 was better than an 8500, but that is not the case at all.  Both the 9000 and 9200 are based on an underpowered 8500 chip.  The 9000 is also slightly above the 9200 in performance.  Also, the original Radeon (no number) is slightly more capable than the Radeon 7000. The rest of the Radeon are numbered in a way that represent the power delivered.

With the Nvidia cards found in Macs, there is some confusion with the Geforce 3 and 4.  A Geforce 3 will trump a standard 4 (aka MX), but a 4 Ti will beat a 3.  The Geforce 4 MX is only very slightly above the 2 in performance.

You can get by on most of the games below with a Radeon 7500 or 9000/9200, or a Geforce 2 or 4 MX, but would need to turn all the quality down and play at 800x600 if you want any semblance of performance. I have added a real world performance ranked list of both Nvidia and ATI cards to the bottom of this post.

Command & Conquer Generals and Zero Hour

These last few years I have played this game more than any other by far.  Before it I was never into RTS games, but this one made me addicted.  It was released in 2004, followed by the Zero Hour expansion pack in 2005.

Once you get bored of playing the built in levels, you can enjoy endless possibilities by playing skirmishes.  The online play is very good, but it has to be PowerPC vs. PowerPC or Intel vs. Intel.  Aspyr and EA wrote a 1.04 patch that added universal architectures, because before that it was PowerPC only.  Even with the universal patch you can’t play Intel users with your PowerPC.  On Gameranger people generally title the games by architecture for this reason.

The requirements say a G4 1.0 GHz, but it isn’t smooth until you get up to 1.2 GHz in my experience.  Even with a Radeon 9800.  I have had good results with it on the dual 867 MHz MDD I used to own with a Radeon 9600.  It played well enough on the dual 867, that it would also be fine on a dual 800.

I play it these days on the 1.8 GHz with 9800 @ 1024 on medium quality.  The reason it’s set a bit low is that it makes the larger maps much smoother and I prefer those.  Map speed is crucial on an RTS game.

I should also note that the Radeon 9000 has a known conflict with this games rendering; you can still play it, but everything turns either blue or black in terms of ground and sky.  Very hard on the eyes.  There has never been a Mac fix for this that I'm aware of, so 9000 owners (if thats all you have GPU-wise), stay away from this one.  Some of the MDD towers came with the 9000 stock, but it was never a big GPU on the Mac; more the similar 8500 and 9200.

Battlefield 1942

This is easily my 2nd favourite game.  It offers about the best selection of expansion packs and mods of any game from this era.  The deluxe edition was released for Mac in 2004, after about two years as Windows only.

The requirements are listed as a G4 867 and 32 MB vid card, but this is unrealistic in my experiences.  You can get by fine with a Radeon 7500 but for true performance, without everything set the lowest, a 1.2GHz or higher will be better. 

I have the Road to Rome expansion, and the Desert Combat mod.  It's easy to waste hours in this game driving around the desert in an Abrams tank looking for things to kill.  The standard WWII levels are great, but the desert mod gives it much more modern and powerful weapons. 

The game has something to suit everyone.  You can drive a tank, APC, fly a plane/jet/helicopter, fire a missile truck, steer and shoot a battleship, use anti-aircraft guns, or just run around with a gun shooting people.  Whatever you prefer.

I am also an author on Rated Win, and wrote this post there about the Desert Combat mod, and the Spectre gunship specifically.

Quake 4

I need to note off the top that this needs a G4 1.6 GHz+, so it's above the 1.2GHz low end of the group.  My experience with it is minimal, but it did play well enough on my 1.8 with 9800.  I had all the quality turned down though, and ran it at 1024.  A dual or quad G5 would be better for this game.

True Crime: The Streets of LA

This is kind of like Grand Theft Auto for good guys, because you play a cop rather than a thug.  I was given the store copy by a friend in 2006, and have only played it a few times.  It could certainly be a good one for those that like to drive and race cars in their games. 

Call of Duty I and II

I have the first one and hardly ever play it, but not because of a lack of interest.  Once I have more time for gaming I will play it more.  The first version requires an 867 MHz, but like others above it realistically needs more.  The 2nd needs a G5 1.8GHz or higher.  The first version at least has some expansions packs etc.

Stubbs the Zombie

If you like games that will make you laugh and let you do silly crap, then this is the one for you. I have played it a few times and found it reasonably enjoyable. This one would appeal more to the 8-15 age bracket.


Others:

Let me know and I will list them.

Closing comments

As with everything I write, I tend to only base it on things I have experience with.  If you feel other games are worthy of mention then leave a comment and I will add it to the post to help spread the word.  Explain what you like about it and what specs/settings it plays well with.  My life is so insanley busy that my mind is always jumbling many things, so I am sure I have left out obvious ones like Unreal Tournament.  I have no experience with it, or what hardware it plays best on so if someone wants to chime in on that it would be great.  I'm looking for games I have not mentioned or added insight to those that I have.



Real world GPU ranking (least to most powerful) 

 ATI:

Rage 128 (mobility)
Rage 128 
Rage 128 Pro
Radeon 7000
Radeon (original Radeon with no number)
Radeon 7500
Radeon 9200
Radeon 9000
Radeon 8500
Radeon 9550 (mobility)
Radeon 9500
Radeon 9600's
Radeon 9700's
Radeon 9800's
Radeon x800

Nvidia:

Geforce 2's
Geforce 4 MX
Geforce 3's
Geforce 5200
Geforce 6200
Geforce 6600 LE
Geforce 4 Ti
Geforce 6600
Geforce 6800
Geforce 7300
Geforce 7800

Linux traffic

The Linux based traffic here has increased a large amount. It has finally took the place of Windows as the 2nd most used OS by the visitors here, with OS X being 1st of course.

Back in August and September, the Linux traffic here was maybe 15-18% of the total, and it is now 30%+ every single day. I average about 250-300 unique visits per day, with page loads hitting 400-500, so it's good to see that many people are using Linux generally, and interested in reading about PowerPC Linux specifically. This is very encouraging indeed, especially when you consider many are using Macs, and they have decided to take the plunge.

People are obviously realizing that to embrace Linux, you don't have to abandon Mac OS 10.5 or older, but rather give each OS its own role, or at least discover what they could be while they learn. That is how anything moves forward. When people adopt something into their tech life, they often like a comfort level right from the start, which scares most away from Linux, because it lacks familiarity for most.

Another encouraging thing is that about 70% of the google search bot hits here are PowerPC Linux related, by people often using either Mac OS or Windows. This tells me that even those that have not took the plunge yet are interested. Very encouraging.

I will continue to write helpful content to help smooth the transition. As always, I encourage reader ideas for content so that I can share my insight, while also writing some specific content that people request.

OS X PowerPC browser assessment

I meant to write this well over a month ago, but it never happened somehow. Thanks to a regular commenter here named 'dr.dave', I was reminded of this when I asked for OS X content ideas a few days ago. My interest is not only to write what I have to say, but also to write about subjects that the readers are interested in. Browsers are easily the most utilized internet tool in the world, so this is a worthy topic.

Since most browsers are based on core technologies like Mozilla or Webkit and such, it would be best to categorize them like this. My logic behind this is that even a layperson on the internet often has a preference. I myself tend to always gravitate to Mozilla based browsers like Camino and TenFour/Aurora/FireFox.

To truly evaluate a group of anything you need to be objective so my Mozilla preference is out the window for this post. I will look at each in an overall type manner by combining an evaluation of the features and technologies at hand. Although the browser selection on PowerPC is more limited in 2012, there is still a small but loyal developer base working hard. People like Cameron Kaiser, RPMozley and a few others are working hard and have been for a long time. Dr. Kaiser alone is directly responsible for TenFourFox and Classilla.

On to the browsers... If you know of a good one that I don’t mention, or has just started development, please let me know and I will add it. The point is to cover all options whether we consider them all good or not. I would only leave out the ones that have possible security concerns. Other than Safari, I will only be covering browsers that are still developed. Safari is the exception because it's built in. There are a few like Sunrise, Stainless and Shiira that some may feel are worthy of mention, but they are all no longer developed. An undeveloped browser is a security risk, because there is no one battling to keep the code healthy and safe.



Mozilla options


TenFourFox (10.4/10.5):

This is Cameron Kaiser’s main project and the one everyone knows best usually. It supports both 10.4 and 10.5 which makes it more portable. I would call it the most capable and bug free Mozilla option for OS X PowerPC.

It’s not quite so efficient on 10.5, but AuroraFox addresses most of those issues. The bug free aspect of it is particularly beneficial with extensions. I have yet to find one that doesn’t work perfectly. The same cannot be said for Aurora or SeaMonkey. This is the best modern Mozilla option by far for Tiger users

Download


AuroraFox (10.5):

This is the Aurora based sibling of TenFourFox. It borrows from both the TenFourFox code and the official FireFox’s Leopard optimizations to create a better experience for 10.5 users. As I mention above TFF is a little more compatible with all the add-ons I have used but Aurora performs a good deal better on 10.5.

Download


SeaMonkey (10.5):

SM is a decent contender.  Other than adblock, none of my extensions from Aurora work.

The thing some may really like is that it’s a very complete internet usage tool with a built in mail client, composer and address book. I have never attempted using the mail client so I cannot speak for how good it is. If you don’t use a lot of extensions anyway, and just want a lightweight but modern Mozilla then this is the perfect browser for you.

Download


Camino (10.4/10.5):

I have used Camino as my main browser since about 2001. It has great built in features like adblocking, flash blocking, limiting animated images to only play once (big help with CPU use), and is the all round most efficient browser on the Mac. Period.

The downside to Camino is that it uses older Mozilla tech to keep it’s efficiency. It’s based on FireFox 3.6 and there are some sites it won’t work too well with. Media Fire and Mac Update are the two main ones I can think of that it doesn’t play nice with. Another knock against it is that with the pre 4.0 version it’s based on there is no HTML5 support.

Although Camino’s technology is a bit dated, it’s still a perfect browser for standard sites that are not full of a bunch of fluff code. I use Camino, SeaMonkey and Aurora in combination for all my Mozilla needs. Each has it’s own strengths so they compliment each other well. I highly recommend the CPU optimized versions which include G3, G4, G4+ and G5.

Download


Classilla (8.6/9) (up to 10.4 via Classic):

I have no direct experience with this at all but my faith in Dr. Kaiser is strong enough to still recommend it. I also know a few people who praise it and I trust their opinion.

This project is proof that with the right developer and motivation, anything is possible. Not only does it bring modern secure browsing to the pre-X users but it also helps performance by using mostly mobile versions of sites. This is also great if you like that retro Netscape look from the 90’s.

Download



Webkit options


Safari 4 (10.4) 5 (10.5):

When you consider that Safari 4 supports HTML5 and is 4+ years old it’s quite impressive. Version 5 added extension capability in a somewhat similar fashion to FireFox. In terms of Apple Safari it is stuck at 5.06 forever on PowerPC now since development stopped leading up to 5.1.


Leopard Webkit:

This is my personal choice when it comes to Webkit on OS X.  It’s built on the open source of slightly more modern Webkit tech but based around Safari 5.06. In my experiences it’s about 20% faster than the Apple version and uses a good deal less CPU during idle moments.

The development team has been experimenting with options like replacing the standard Safari with this with an install option. I have not tried this myself because I prefer to keep both around for comparison testing.

Download



TenFourKit (10.4):

Other than running this once on my Stormtrooper I have no experience with it but have heard good things from people I trust. It's based on Webkit and apparently also includes some TenFourFox code from what I understand. It's creation fills the Safari 5 gap on 10.4.

The real advantage to open source code like Webkit or Mozilla is that anyone with the will and ability can get the code and make their own version to suit whatever computing environment they choose. Webkit has even made it’s way into the Linux and BSD world now.

Download


Roccat (10.5):

This is another option I have little experience with but it is very fast and I have heard good things about it. From what I understand it’s geared to using social networking sites but it works fine all round. I am very very impressed with the sheer speed of it and how lightweight it is. I am running it with 5 tabs open as I write this and it’s only using 53 MB RAM.

It's really f@#$ing fast. You have to try it and see for yourself.

Download



Others


Omniweb (10.4/10.5):

Omni is a very unique and customizable browser. The biggest standout feature is page specific preferences. I have been using it on and off for a good 3-4 years and love it. It has OS X optimizations like OpenGL and Quartz built in, along with some of the Safari engine.

If you want to browse the web in a more customized to your every whim type of way, then this is the one for you. Keep in mind that this requires a lot of effort in setup to tune it so that every site performs the way you prefer.

Download



Closing comments

This will be a growing dynamic post, which I will add to as things come up or people point out currently developed projects not covered here. Please feel free to also let me know of important details I may not have mentioned about some of the options covered.

Considering it’s now about 6.5 years since Apple made a PowerPC system the selection is pretty damn good. Variety is the spice of technology. We don’t have a Chrome option but I could care less to be honest. I use Chrome now and then on my girlfriend’s MacBook if she already has it open but I often choose to open FireFox instead. We really are not missing out on much and it’s all thanks to these great developers that still care enough about this amazing architecture.

OS X content and your ideas

I have been very heavy on the Linux content the last while.  For those that prefer OS X related content, I just want to say that I am working on a couple things which will be posted in the next couple days.  I still love X very much, and use it about 60-70% of the time I compute these days with the rest divided between OpenBSD and Lubuntu.  

My intention is to give equal coverage to both OS, but the last couple weeks I have been concentrating on the Linux to help the early adopters.

If anyone has any ideas about content they would like to see me write about, please leave a comment about what it is and why you feel it's important to cover.

Midori: Webkit for Linux

I had heard about this for a while, but didn't try it until 3 days ago because I'm not a big Webkit fan, until now.  On Mac OS I almost never use Safari or Webkit and it took a Linux adoption of the tech to get my attention.

Over the last 3 days I have run this on Lubuntu 12.04.1 and 12.10 with great results.  It launches in less than half the time of Firefox 16, uses about 40% less RAM, and is noticeably snappier at page loading.  It doesn't have all the brute capability of Firefox, but for regular  browsing it's all you will need.  I now keep both browsers installed with Midori set as the default.

One of the real positives about it is that it has a very capable built in collection of extensions, like ad blocking, cookie management etc.  So far the built in ad blocking is just as good as ABP/ABE.  Very capable bookmark management also.

Those that have installed Linux should give it a try.

Linux: The Code

I wanted to share a great Linux documentary from 2001 about the fundamentals of the Linux culture.  It also talks about the birth and history of Linux.

After decades of using strictly Mac OS and BSD, I am happy to finally embrace Linux.  The last two years I have slowly increased my Linux use, but it's these last 3 months or so that I have really dove into it.  As a BSD user since the 80's, I was sort of caught up in that BSD elitism some have.  By that I mean that many BSD heads scoff at Linux for not being 'true' Unix.  The reality is that it may not be as close to true Unix as BSD, but all the same advantages are there along with a Linux developer and user base that dwarfs BSD. 

The greatest thing about Linux in 2012 is that the pre-existing kernel and package collection that makes up the whole is so big that virtually everything is limitless.  After two decades of heavy growing development there are solutions to suit literally everyone, from the most green newbie, to a command line wizard.  It's because of all these things that I now heavily promote Linux especially for PowerPC Macs now years after being abandoned by their maker.  I still use BSD every single day, but Linux is just as much if not more a part of my life now.  Linux reaches much further into virtually every computing avenue. 

About 10-15% of the video is in the Finnish language without english subs, but most parts are spoken in english.  All the core people are interviewed.  I first saw this in 2003 right around the time that I was starting to sway from BSD, and it reminded me why I shouldn't.  If you have never seen this, or have not in a long time; here it is.

Video
140.9 MB - 58 min 49 sec
320x240 - h.264/AAC - 25 fps

Here is the standard web URL for HTML5.  I have a personal policy here to never embed images or video in my posts.  The reason for this is that it keeps the load time and CPU use much lower.  I also prefer to concentrate on the words and keep a simple elegant look.  This is also why I don't use the blogger navbar at the top.

Puppy love?

I am a big fan of Puppy Linux, and I am really feeling the void of there being no PowerPC port.  There was an attempt at a beta back in 2009 with PowerPup, but the developer seems to have abandoned it with no updates for 3+ years.

There are others out there in the PowerPC community that like Puppy Linux, and a proper version for our favourite architecture is exactly what it needs.  The greatest thing about Puppy is that it runs entirely in RAM which means it's lightweight and extremely fast.

We need developers and testers to step forward and make this happen.  I do OpenBSD development for both PowerPC and x86 myself, so I will bring all I can to the plate, but I can't do it alone.

Who's in?  We need some great people with amazing skills to step up and push PowerPC forward by helping port what could possibly be the perfect distro for our hardware; especially G3's and slower G4's.


Puppy links:

Official Page - Community Page - Wiki Page

Claim your computing freedom

Computing in 2012 is full of more fluff and BS than at any point in the past.  It’s all so pathetic that it sometimes makes me physically cringe.  Not only is most of it silly, but it’s also very constricting and limiting.  Too many technologies today force you to be locked into certain OS or hardware.  The only reason the industry gets away with all this is because regardless of people’s displeasure with things, they still continue using them.  This is a habit that too many practice, and the only way any of us can change this is to change our habits, and the devices and/or software we grow attached to.


Hardware, Software and other things

The only thing that I have attached myself to is the PowerPC architecture, and this is for no reason other than reliability and longevity.  When you have used something for 18 years, and it has never failed you, there is no reason to stop using it as long as it can still achieve all you need it to.  In terms of OS X, everything after Snow Leopard is covered in horrible.  Since 10.5 is so similar to 10.6, I find it a capable OS option for PowerPC while still not needing Intel hardware.  As a Mac tech I have no faith in 95% of the Intel hardware Apple has produced.  The early stuff in 2006-07 is still to this day the most reliable.  I am seeing a lot of 2009-10 model MacBook and iMac the last few months.  I have seen SATA controllers on unibody MBP just up and die about 4 times so far.  One failed intermittently and the others worked one moment then died the next.  The Mac Pro and Mini are the only current Macs I can recommend to people in good conscience, and those are easily the two least purchased.

Not only is much of the newer Intel hardware lacking in quality, but Apple has turned MacBook screens into glossy overdone iPad look-alikes.  It’s as if the cast of Jersey Shore helps design things at Apple now.  Everything is covered in a horrible, tacky, dithered mess.  Anyone with any computing needs beyond basic consumer stuff should be repelled by a dithered glossy screen.  I find them unusable personally, and the style is now well saturated in the desktop LCD market also. 

This deals with some of the things I mentioned in my “Why the Sawtooth is the greatest Mac ever” post.  I am referring to choosing a device based on its usability rather than its aesthetics.  No matter how pretty you find something like a computer or tablet; it needs to be a tool before anything else if you ever hope to get any practical use out of it.  If you’re really that obsessed over the look of something, then it would be far more practical to have a high res photo printed for your wall above your computer, and buy a device that will give you all the computing ability you actually need. 

People need OS and software selection whether they realize it or not.  You never know what needs will come along over the years, so having hardware that lasts and offers software flexibility is ideal looking forward. 

All the people still running PowerPC hardware would all be very wise to start adopting Linux into their computing world.  This is the best thing for all of us looking forward, because the more of us that use Linux, the more the OS will grow on the platform.  Apple dumped the architecture 7 years ago now so it's time for those of us still using it to pave our own computing path, at least in regard to achieving new abilities we don't get from old Mac software.  There is no reason to abandon the Mac OS versions our systems can run, but in terms of modern secure software Linux is the most logical choice.  BSD is an option also, but it is in no way user friendly, so anyone cutting their teeth on *nix for the first time is better off on Linux. 

Clinging onto Mac OS and its associated devices at this point is a bit of a fools game for PowerPC users.  You're just inevitably going to sink further into the New World Order Apple trash can.  More on this in a moment. 


iOS/Android

I can understand the need some have for an iPhone, but an iPad is really obnoxiously bad and limited in so many ways.  It may be more capable than an iPhone, but as a portable computing option an iPad is one of the most limited and incapable devices that exist in the portable market.  Exactly how much capability are people willing to give up to own a certain device?  Apparently quite a lot. 

A 10 year old PowerBook is actually far more capable than any tablet, other than web or h.264 video.  If all someone wants to do on a tablet is video and web then go for it.  You will still be limited to what browsers and technology is available to you.  For those that want to do more than waste time on YouTube, and actually need some real computing ability, a PowerBook (or any portable that allows multiple computer OS) is a better option.  iOS is not a legitimate OS, and I will argue that to the grave.  It’s really Apple's attempt at stroking the lowest common denominator that is the general market trend now, and they started it. 

Apple has turned people into apes that are so caught up in dragging their fingers around, and using the motion sensor, that they don’t realize how much they're getting screwed.  When I say screwed, I mean by the price they pay; combined with the limitations that come with it.  Is embracing a gimmick or social status symbol worth all you give up?  Is a true computing device like a PowerBook really so much bigger, and is flipping a screen up (that you cannot drag your fingers across) really so bad for all the extra ability it gives you?  You could buy 2-3 quality used laptops for the price of an iPad.  This allows you to shape what OS and software you want working together, which puts you in the drivers seat of your computing journey; where you belong.  Even the best tablet OS cannot touch a full computer OS in any regard, other than touch access.  The truth is that the whole touch technology craze is as much a gimmick as anything else.  Small things amusing small minds.

I compute so much at home, that when I go out I use that as a break from technology.  This is why I don't need portability at all.  For those that truly do need portability, you're far better off with a full blown computer like a laptop.  A netbook is also far more capable than a tablet.  


The problem with some PowerPC resources online

It's obvious that anyone who writes PowerPC related content in 2012 does indeed care about the architecture, but most of them deal with things in a way which is influencing the reader to stick to this dead end Apple path.  The MacRumors PowerPC board, Low End Mac, and My Mac Collection are good examples of this.  All are done with good intent, but they are really just pushing people further down the dead end one way street.  I say that because all they do is point their readers to solutions for making their way in a dwindling market; rather than point them to liberating and forward thinking options such as Linux. 

The other aspect of this is that many of these sites and blogs only point people to things, and offer little practical knowledge or thinking outside the box in how to get things done, other than limited on their way out for PowerPC technologies.  In 2012 you need to offer people practical know how, and different ways of thinking and using things, because that is what is required these days. 

With rapidly dwindling PowerPC support on OS X, people can no longer just get by playing follow the leader any longer, by using whatever the industry spits out for them.  If you intend on continuing to use your old Macs, you need to think outside the box, and learn how to adapt without giving up capability.    We all need to stop adapting methods to keep being a slave to something no longer supported, and focus that energy on true alternatives which often use different technologies, but produce the same end result. 

I have even seen some of them point people to the modified flash pluggin, which made me cringe.  This is still the very insecure Flash 10, but with a modification to the version it reports so that sites that need 11 or higher will work.  It is still Flash 10 in every way, and to recommend this to people is just ignorant and shameful.  The key is to look for flash alternatives, and if some day there are none, then we should all just stop trying to watch flash online on PowerPC.

Apple started leaving us in the dust in 2005, and these days even an iPod shuffle needs an Intel Mac for goodness sake.  Apple left us for dead, so I really don't get the PowerPC users who are Apple fanboys to this day.  Stop loving your PowerPC because it's made by Apple, and love it instead because it has the best computer architecture ever inside, and Apple had very little to do with its creation compared to the actual hardware manufacturers (Motorola/Freescale and IBM).


Closing thoughts

All of us in the PowerPC community need to focus on what can move our hardware forward, and Open Source OS is the best way to do that while still keeping Mac OS around for other needs where security isn’t a concern.  Linux and BSD are the only OS still developed for our platform, and the more of us that embrace it the more it will grow.  Simple cause and effect. 

There is a learning curve involved, but once you learn Linux or BSD then you have truly empowering computer skills that will give you a clear road directly around any limitations the industry throws at you.  The expression “knowledge is power” is particularly apt for computers.  Gain the knowledge, and you have the power to compute the way you want, rather than how the industry tells you. 

I’ve got a fever and the only cure is Linux growth on PowerPC.  I think Dan at PPC Luddite is going about things perfectly with his Linux content, and we should all look to his amazing example. 

The Linux content here will only grow over time, as I am totally dedicated to getting all I can out of it, and helping others do so. 

Kupfer

I recently discovered a great Quicksilver alternative for Linux thanks to this post by Dan at PPC Luddite.

Kupfer is very similar to Quicksilver on Mac OS X, in both look and behaviour.  For the readers that have installed Linux, I highly recommend giving it a try.  My experience with it so far is limited, as I just started using it, but as a long time Quicksilver user I find it an almost seamless transition.

For me this makes the Openbox window manager so much more usable, because I am not a fan of the menu dominant access.  Kupfer allows me to keep my hands on the keyboard, which I prefer in that environment. 


Install in Debian or MintPPC as root (root terminal) with:

apt-get install kupfer

Or use Synaptic, or whatever GUI package manager you prefer, and search for 'kupfer'.


Kupfer site: http://engla.github.com/kupfer/

Kupfer manual: http://engla.github.io/kupfer/help/

Combine the power of multiple Macs

If you’re like me, then you have several systems because of how affordable PowerPC Macs are these days.  The issue many PowerPC users have in 2012 is not having enough power to do something with heavy CPU use, and still be able to multitask effectively.  These CPU hungry tasks could be anything from a script heavy site to playing video, and it's nice to be able to do other things without holding back something that needs to use a good chunk of the resources.

It’s nice to be able to browse the web or do whatever while you wait for some heavy lifting to finish up.  Whether you have a G3 or a Quad G5; having spare CPU cycles at your disposal is what will really make any computing experience all it can be.  If you have another system you can use it to take excess load and tasks off your main system. 

The easiest way to do this is with two screens, but one is enough thanks to VNC/Remote Desktop technology.  I use a combination of two screens and the built in “ScreenSharing” app in Leopard, and I do this on a daily basis with my two main Sawtooth systems.  This allows me to offload anything I want onto my 1.0 GHz system, which keeps my 1.8 GHz open for business. 

In certain ways, the VNC option is actually more efficient because it keeps everything on one screen while still offloading work to other systems.  The ScreenSharing window gives you a Mac within a Mac; somewhat similar to virtualization, but better.  What makes this method better is the other OS isn’t running on the same computer like it is in a virtual machine, so the two are not slowing each other down besides a tiny bit of resources to keep drawing the remote window.


Methods

Rather than tell you how you should do things, I will explain my methods; which can then inspire you to shape these concepts to your own personal needs.  The ideology is to spread load over systems that are not clustered, and therefore not limited to cluster software. 

An average computing session for me starts with checking my email, which is run on my secondary Sawtooth.  I keep it on a desk which is close to my main system.  Although it has it’s own LCD, I normally prefer to access it through ScreenSharing.  The main thinking behind this is that all the tasks I run on the 1.0 GHz are background 24/7 type things, and none of them need a lot of attention.

The things I run on it are:

• Apple Mail
• Transmission (bit torrent)
• Disk Drill (data recovery and SMART utility)
• iCal
• MS Word
• Noise (white/pink noise utility)
• iTunes (music server)
• Stickies
• Alarm Clock
• Meteorologist
• Frogblast (intranet client)
• HandBrake
• Media Converter
• Occasional web browsing

When not using the system via the attached 24” LCD (which is most of the time), I keep the second Sawtooth at 1024x768, which doesn’t take up too much room as a remote window.  None of the apps listed above really need higher than 1024x768, and that size window fits well into 1920x1200, while not hogging too much space.  I use command + tab rather than the dock to get to the app I want.  I also run Quicksilver on the remote system.

With all those things running on the 1.0 GHz, it allows my 1.8 GHz to be devoted to whatever I am actively doing.  I generally leave it for video playback, and web; along with the daily image editing I do in Pixelmator.  If I am watching 1080p in CorePlayer, it will use most of the CPU, so this is an occasion where anything else I want to do is done in the remote window.  If I am watching 720p or higher I use the remote window to browse the web, so it doesn’t hold back the 1.8 GHz.  If I am watching 600p or lower video, then my main system can play that fine while I browse without dropping frames.

Think of it as balancing load over multiple systems with your tasks and computing habits rather than within the code.  The remote window within a preexisting system can give you an immense ability beyond what just one can do.  As I mentioned already, the only resources the remote window uses are a very small bit of CPU and GPU to draw the window contents.  ScreenSharing never uses more than 3-4% CPU on my 1.8 GHz, and less than 2% most of the time.

Having gigabit ethernet really helps a lot, but I have gotten by fine on 100BT and .11b wifi in the past.  The advantage of gigabit is that the flow of the remote window will be much smoother. 


Not on Leopard?

If you're running Tiger then you don’t have the built in ScreenSharing app, and will need a third party alternative.  When I’m running Tiger I prefer an app called “Chicken” which is a side project from “Chicken of the VNC”.  Chicken is better, and was last updated in 2011, but Chicken of the VNC is the only 10.3 Panther option from these developers.  It has not been updated since 2006. 

I use Chicken myself when I have my Storm Trooper B&W G3 running (10.4.11), and I use it to control the 1.0 GHz Sawtooth running Leopard just as I normally would from my 1.8 GHz.


Closing thoughts

I have done this on and off for a long time now, but for the last three or more years I do this 100% of the time, and find it very productive.  Two single CPU systems working together is the ultimate dual CPU setup; since what you do on one doesn’t hold the other back.  No matter how powerful one computer is, you still cannot avoid slowing it down with every task you add to its resources. I normally just do this with two systems, but there is no limit to how many Macs you can use this way.  If the other system is in another room, then VNC is the perfect way to utilize it.



Software:
Chicken (10.4.11+) – Chicken of the VNC (10.3.9+)

Video on PowerPC: Part 3 - Ripping

Having things just the way you want them is a rare thing in life.  Video ripping is one of those rare have it just the way you want things.  The only limitations are in the software you rip with, and the capability of the hardware the video is intended to be played on.  The software you will use for playback should also be taken into consideration so that what you rip will play flawlessly.

In my opinion, there are two PowerPC compatible apps on OS X  worthy of keeping in your ripping toolbox; Handbrake and Media Converter.  The Handbrake team ceased PowerPC development during the 0.9.4 - 0.9.5 transition, but Media Converter continues to have G4/G5 support.  Both are very capable, and allow fine tuning of rips beyond what anyone would ever really need.  Many will find Media Converter a little more user friendly, because once you have all the presets fine tuned just the way you want it’s simply a matter of drag and drop.  Handbrake is a bit more high maintenance in terms of usability, but it’s more capable in terms of video filters like deblocking and deinterlacing. 

In regard to audio, both have different strengths.  Media Converter has a wider codec range, while Handbrake is better at properly dealing with audio channels.  You obviously need to setup how you deal with audio channels based on the audio setup your playback hardware has.  These normally range from 2:1 to 5:1, so be sure you set things according to your needs.  Once you find your preferred settings in either app, make a preset so that you only have to do that fine tune once. 

Versions to use

With Handbrake you shouldn't go past version 0.9.3 on Leopard, because 0.9.4 and up drop XviD codec and avi wrapper support so they are not nearly as flexible.  0.9.3 was the last build to still offer full FFmpeg and XviD (avi) options alongside h.264.  It also is much more MP3 and AC3 friendly.  Tiger users cannot go past 0.9.1, which is a very solid build also.

For Media Converter, just use the most recent build or any version you tend to prefer.  I use the current 1.2 version, and other than a few small tweaks I needed to make, the built in presets are quite good out of the box.  Once it’s all setup the way you want, all you have to do is open it and drag whatever you have to rip onto the window.  Easy as pie.  Not that I can bake a pie, but that’s beside the point.

A practical approach, and the hardware in question

No matter if you're ripping DVD's or re-ripping compressed video, there is a sweet spot for all G4 and G5 hardware.  Anyone on a slower G4, with the will and patience to watch something their hardware can't handle, can down-rip videos to a codec and resolution more fitting their hardware playback capability.

Before doing any large quantity of ripping, it’s best to first figure out the codec/resolution sweet spots for your playback hardware.   As noted in the playback articles, you need to work within the capability of your hardware.  It would be quite a waste to spend days, or even weeks, ripping stuff that won’t even play well on your Mac. 

In terms of what hardware is suitable for ripping, it would be wise to only use G4/G5 on OS X.  A G3 could take over a week to rip what a slower G4 could rip in a day or two.  Just as with playback, Altivec has a big part in the performance of ripping.  It’s just the kind of operation that Altivec excels at, as well as L3 cache.  I use my secondary Sawtooth to do all my ripping, and it’s equipped with a G4 1.0 GHz 7455B which has 2 MB DDR L3 and it rips video at least 10-20% faster than the G4 1.25 GHz 7447A in my old PowerPC mini did.  There are many tasks a computer does that L3 doesn’t help at all with, but anything that deals with heavy lifting a large file is where it really earns it’s keep on the CPU card.

The G4’s which will struggle most with ripping are actually more in the mid range in regard to clock speed.  The early eMacs and iMac G4 are somewhat crippled with a 7450 chip that has only 256 KB L2, and no L3.

A laptop is not the best piece of hardware to use because they are simply not built for running at 100% CPU consumption for the hours, or even days, it takes to rip a big que of video.  Towers can do this with ease for months/years if needed.  If all you have is a portable, then simply use it in moderation for ripping for it's own sake, but a nice cheap dual 450-500 MHz Gigabit G4 would do an admirable job for well under $100, and could also be used for file serving, torrents or whatever else you think of.

Ripping quality and time

Once you know the codec and resolution sweet spots for your hardware, the thing to consider with each thing you rip is what bitrate is the best all round for the video and audio.  Things like animation can get by with a low video bitrate, and video with a large amount of dialogue can get by with lower audio quality. 

If your hardware deals with h.264 playback well enough, then you can get by with lower bitrates because it’s inherently less blocky than DivX.  It also takes 2-3x longer to rip, and 60%+ more CPU to playback.  My fastest hardware is my 1.8 GHz Sawtooth, which can rip DivX (FFmpeg) faster than real time, vs. about 2x real time on h.264.

I have ripped h.264 animation as low as 300kb video and 64kb audio, which actually looked very good considering.  The key was keeping a decent resolution such as 480p or higher.  This ripped in real time or faster, and the video only used about 150 MB per hour.  Keep in mind that this low quality would look horrible with anything but animation, or if I used DivX rather than h.264.

For typical video like films or television shows, h.264 can be kept under 1000kb/sec and look amazing.  The 700-1000 kb range is perfect all round for quality and low file sizes. 

With DivX/XviD the advantages are many.  They rip faster, play back with less CPU and there are a few great tricks to make up for the slight increase in blocks and artifacts.  I encode all my DivX/XviD to be at least 400-600p, which when combined with using the deblocking filter and 1000-1500 kb makes for very nice looking video.  I use either MP3 or AAC audio at 128 kb minimum which I push to 160-256 kb for video that has a lot of music in it.  You can go as low as 64 kb for pure dialogue content, but I only do that with animation. 

People with G4’s under 1.0 GHz would be wise to stick with the FFmpeg option in Handbrake.  It rips the fastest and looks almost as good as XviD, which takes about 30% longer to rip.  FFmpeg in Handbrake is DX50 (DivX 5), and I am a big fan of it.  It’s not only the fastest codec in Hanbrake, but it also performs better than Media Converter's DivX preset, even after several attempts to make it faster.  Handbrake also allows you to put an iOS compatible mp4/m4v wrapper on FFmpeg, which brings DivX efficiency to iPod/iPad/iPhone.

The moral of the quality story is that it’s a combination of hardware playback capability and personal preference.  Find your own niche that makes both you and your hardware happy, and stick to it. 

The best setting ranges for different hardware

G4 single 350–933 MHz

DivX:  200–500p (vertical pixels) @ 800-1500 kb/sec with 64 – 256 kb audio

h.264: 180–360p @ 500-1000 kb/sec with 64 – 256 kb audio

G4 single 1.0 GHz+ - Any dual G4 - Single G5

DivX: 400–720p @ 800-1500 kb/sec with 128 – 256 kb audio

h.264: 360–600p @ 800-1200 kb/sec with 128 – 256 kb audio

Dual/Quad G5

DivX:  720-1080p @ 1200-2000 kb/sec with 128 – 256 kb audio

h.264:  600–1080p @ 1200-1500 kb/sec with 128 – 256 kb audio

As I already mentioned, you need to find your own niche in the video settings, but the above guidelines reflect good overall results.  They are all based on leaving some CPU free for other tasks when playing these rips back.  If you want to go a bit higher then feel it out and see how it goes.  Trial and error is a great way to learn. 

Software

HandBrake

Tiger (0.9.1) - Leopard (0.9.3)

Media Converter 1.2 (10.4.11 or higher)

32-bit - 64-bit - Presets

Why the Sawtooth is the greatest Mac ever made

Many people have their favorite Mac and for several different reasons.  A lot of people in the Mac world tend to put aesthetics before function and expandability, by choosing impractical but pretty computers.  The Cube, and any iMac from the G4 model on are perfect examples of this.  To be fair, I do have a natural bias against any all in one computers, but at least the iMac G3's didn't sacrifice hardware health for the sake of design.  The form before function thing is a big part of the Mac culture; one I have never been able to relate to and never will. 

When I look at what makes a perfect computer, I look at reliability and expandability before anything else.  Expandability means tower and the Power Macs Apple made in the 1997 - 2002 (8600 - Quicksilver) era are the most reliable computers Apple ever made.  Within this elite group of hardware the Sawtooth has the greatest track record of them all in both personal experience and Apple service records.  The first revision of the Sawtooth only had a 1.6 % failure rate and the Uni-N 7 revision of the tower was under 1 %.  These numbers are very impressive on their own, but they seem even better when you look at MDD's or G5's.  MDD's had a 6-11 % failure rate depending on model, and the first dual 2 GHz G5 has a shockingly high failure rate of around 30 %.  The liquid cooled models are just as bad if not worse.  People can chase after higher specs all they want, but what good is it when it stops running? 

I actually switched from computing with 2x MDD (dual 867 and 1.42) to 2x Sawtooth in 2009.  The dual 867 was decently reliable, but the dual 1.42 had some real issues with stability on every OS I ever ran on it.  Then there is the G5 systems, which I feel are about the worst thing that ever happened to the PowerPC architecture, but I will get into that more in the future.

When most hear about my switching from the MDD to the Sawtooth they ask things like "why would you do that?".  The answer is reliability combined with the G4 7448 CPU.  I need reliability first and foremost, and I also had a strong desire to acquire a 7448 chip.  The MDD's fail me on both these needs, because they are not nearly as reliable as other G4's, and they cannot take any of the 7448 upgrades since they are all only compatible from the Sawtooth through to the Quicksilver.

The Sawtooth are not only the most reliable Power Mac, but also one of the cheapest to buy of all the AGP equipped models. I see them these days for 40-80. Cheap enough that I have 5 total and plan to buy another few for a cluster I plan on building.  8+ systems is the sweet spot for G4 clusters, and I still want a few spares if the day comes that I need parts.  I have built clusters for other people for years now, but this will be the first one I have ever built for myself.  I am even at the point now of writing some of my own cluster software.   


Breaking down the other G4 towers

MDD's are by far the most unreliable of all the G4 towers.  Many people are understandably enticed by the stock specs since they are the highest of all the towers.  If someone needs to get the best bang for their buck, and good performance without CPU upgrades, a dual 1.0 GHz Quicksilver might be the best choice for the long run.

The Gigabit Ethernet model has the same 2 GB RAM capacity as the Sawtooth vs the 1.5 GB limit in the Digital Audio and Quicksilver. Over the years though I have noticed the Gigagbit PSU's are not quite as reliable as the Sawtooth are. I would prefer the onboard gigabit vs the gigabit PCI card I have to use but the PSU tradeoff made the choice for me.



The Digital Audio and Quicksilver are both very reliable towers, but in my experiences the extra 512 MB RAM the Sawtooth allows is more of an overall system benefit than the 33MHz faster bus and AGP 4x vs 2x. OS X loves RAM as we all know, so the 33 % extra memory capacity and better PSU is why I chose the Sawtooth to base all, or at least most, of the computing I do.  I have one Gigabit Ethernet system.

The Yikes (PCI Graphics) is one to avoid unless you get it for a steal.  There is nothing unreliable about it, but it shares the same logic board with the rev. 2 B&W G3, and has a very slow memory controller compared to the AGP models with the same 100 MHz bus speed.  Sawtooth's can be found for the same price or just a few bucks more and will perform noticeably better with the same CPU speed.  The memory performs up to 3x faster, with a Yikes clocking in at only 180-250 MB/sec vs 500-800 MB/sec in a Sawtooth.  Very impressive for the same bus speed which points to how important a good memory controller is. 


The final word

Everyone has their own prerequisites for what makes a perfect computer but longevity, reliability and expandability are qualities that virtually anyone can get on board with.  The Sawtooth meets all these needs and then some.  They may be 12 years old now but when used by the right people they can still be extremely capable in the modern world.

Video on PowerPC: Part 2 - Playback on G3

The recent news of the new Mars rover being powered by a 200 MHz G3 is making some reevaluate their perception of the G3's ability.  The early G4 chips are fundamentally just a G3 with an added Altivec unit.  The final Power Mac G3 and the first G4 tower even share the same logic board and CPU socket.  In terms of video playback though, the lack of Altivec is a big hit on performance, but there is still lots you can do with the right codecs and software. 

I started out watching and collecting compressed digital video on a regular basis in 2002.  This was in the late OS X 10.1 days.  Then in August that year when 10.2 was released a big swarm of BSD and Linux software started getting ported over, thanks to the BSD based kernel.  As I mention in my previous video article for G4/G5, it was this mid-late 2002 era when digital video playback really took off on the Mac.  The classic and early OS X days were limited to half a handful of very sloppy, didn't work more than they did, DivX based QT codecs. 

The hardware I had in 2002 when I really got into DivX was a B&W G3 350 MHz with 256MB memory, and running 10.2 with an early Mplayer OSX build.  It wasn't really till around 2004 that h.264 became more common, but DivX based codec are still common today even though h.264 has slightly surpassed it in terms of user numbers.  A G3 cannot really cope with h.264 until you get to at least 700 MHz, but even then it drops frames.  DivX, XviD and DVD are your best options for successful playback on more modest G3 chips. 

Your best friend with DivX/XviD and the like will be Mplayer (1.1 from 2002), because newer versions of it don’t like G3 CPU’s.  This is because they rely heavily on Altivec.  The same goes with versions of VLC past 0.5.3.  To be fair, the versions that don’t run well (if at all) on G3 are from 2004 on, which is 5+ years after the G4 was introduced.  The lack of Altivec is a hindrance on video playback, but I will now move on to the tools that will help you get all the video goodness you can out of your G3.


The Software (OS X 10.2 – 10.4)


Mplayer OSX 1.1 – Download

For best results open preferences and check the drop frames option, and also turn on cache.  The drop frames option sounds bad, but it will make choppy video look quite smooth by dropping 2-5 frames a second in an orderly fashion so the end result is smooth.  This exact version may be the second most efficient playback app ever made on Mac OS after CorePlayer.


VLC 0.5.3 – Download

As I noted already, the newer versions don’t work so well on G3 in my experiences, but your mileage may vary.  You may also want to try some of the 0.6.x and 0.7.x builds, but don’t expect much better than 0.5.3.  The archive of old versions is found here.


Apple DVD Player

Mplayer and VLC can play DVD also, but not as well (or with as little CPU) as Apple DVD Player can.  DVD playback is something G3’s have done well for a long time, and will keep doing as long as they are still around to use.

It needs to be noted that early G3's like the beige desktop and tray load iMacs do not have DVD playback capability because they lack DVD decoding.  On a beige tower/desktop you can upgrade the video to a late model Rage 128, or any compatible GPU with DVD decoding.  The rev.1 B&W G3 had a special piggybacked  decoder on the graphics card, but only on the DVD model of the tower.  Later revisions of the Rage 128 had DVD decoding built in. 

Any slot load iMac or white iBook with a DVD drive can play DVD.  Any G3 tower with a DVD drive and a 100 MHz Rage 128 (vs the 75 MHz orig.) or better GPU can also play them. 


Closing Comments

When it really comes down to it, any computer is only as capable as the ability and imagination of the user.  A G3 still has many capabilities if you use it with the right software and computing habits.  I encourage everyone who owns a G3 still, and loves video to try my methods and the tools mentioned here.  Let your G3 show you what it can really do.  It may surprise you. 

'Quick' efficiency

In 2004 I discovered what could easily be considered the greatest app launcher ever created on the Mac, but it's much more than just an app launcher.  I am of course referring to Quicksilver.  This has been the very first thing I put in the apps folder after a fresh OS X install ever since.  I love how it allows me to all but ignore my dock and not only live without spotlight, but evolve past it.

Quicksilver can and will completely revolutionize the way you think of your apps, files and bookmarks and really all the contents of your drive.  Rather than wasting time looking for what I want in the dock or anywhere else, I just tap F6 (you can set it to almost any key) which brings up the bezel and I then type the first 1-2 letters of whatever I'm after.  That may sound odd to some, but once you get used to it, and learn how unlimited and customizable it is, your computer use and data access will be on a much more cerebral level.

Aside from the massive amount of efficiency this gives my daily computing, it has also given me a much better mental image of my files after using it all these 8 years now.  Having BSD roots back to 1986, I am happy to type rather than use the mouse.  I am very much the only use the mouse when really needed type.

The shocking thing is that after all these years of Quicksilver being around, there are still many people that have never used it, or even heard of it.  I think this is at least partly to blame on the bloated dock syndrome so many suffer from on Mac OS X.  This is part of that dock aesthetic Apple started in OS X.  I personally think the dock is next to useless.  It's kept hidden, and only contains apps that are running, and a rare minimized window, but I normally prefer just hiding whole apps to get them out of my way visually.

So for those of you willing to relearn how you get at your stuff within the OS, I encourage you to give it a try.  I can't tell you exactly what it will do for you, because thats actually up to you.  It learns from your personal use of it, and what things with similar names you open up more, so that after just 2 -3 uses it has already leaned many things from you.


Download:
Leopard/Tiger - Panther

Other Links:
Homepage - Plugins

Leopard performance on sub-867 MHz G4 hardware

I use one of my spare 400 MHz Sawtooth for testing things on occasion, and a few nights ago I was installing Leopard and testing performance.  I went the more direct route to shoehorning it on by putting the drive in my 1.8GHz and installing it that way.  I then put the drive in the 400 MHz again and it booted perfectly into a fully updated 10.5.8 install.  No need to mess with firmware.

The performance was quite shockingly good to my delight.  I opened Camino and Aurora with 4-5 tabs each then played 480p XviD in VLC 1.1.12, and had about 9% CPU to spare and no real system lag.  After testing VLC playback I fired up MacTubes and was able to play the SD h.264 feeds perfectly smooth at approx. 81-82% CPU consumption.  If you download the files with MacTubes, and play with VLC, or even play the feed in VLC; you can get away with even less CPU power, which makes a G4 350 MHz (AGP) a possibility to watch youtube with no frame drops.  To be fair, the test system I'm using has 2GB RAM and an extra Geforce 6200 I have which supports every GUI/GPU feature in Leopard so those alone would help on any CPU.

This is even more proof that having a GPU with Core Image and Core Animation support is really what makes good Leopard performance.  Without GPU hardware support for those built in can't turn off features in 10.5 you have to pay a CPU tax of up to 34%.  This is because without CI/CA the OS uses the CPU to emulate the GPU.  So anyone not running a Geforce 5200 or higher or a Radeon 9500 or higher under Leopard is literally slowing their CPU down as much as 34% and about 23% on average.  The only way to actually disable all the GPU/GUI features in 10.5 that I have found is to have a tower and remove the video card.  That means you can only remote into it. 

The moral of the story is you're better off running Tiger if you have an unsupported GPU since it doesn't force the GPU features on the OS and CPU unless there is proper hardware support.  If you do have GPU support then your 10.5 performance should be just as good, if not better.  My two daily use Sawtooth both perform slightly better in all aspects on 10.5 and much better in OpenGL related code.  A fully capable GPU is literally like an extra CPU in Leopard.  In Tiger it's more of a slight benefit. 

It's all about having the right hardware in the right places for the OS you run.  The performance is amazing considering it's less than half the minimum CPU spec.


Test system specs:
Sawtooth
G4 400 MHz 7400 w/1MB 2:1 L2
2 GB Memory
27 GB PATA HD
Geforce 6200 256 MB AGP
Leopard (10.5.8)

CorePlayer + Perian = Better AC3 Audio

CorePlayer struggles with AC3 audio, but I discovered that installing Perian fixed this issue about 90%.

As a big user of VLC and Mplayer for about a decade before I bought CP in January, I hardly ever use Quicktime for playback.  In turn, I never bothered installing Perian, as I didn't need extra codecs for it. It turns out that Perian makes some codecs truly system wide for any compatible app.  In this case the compatibility is accidental.

Most of the MKV wrapped h.264 I play have AC3 audio so this is a huge help!  I still have some issues with XviD that have AC3, but all the h.264 that had it play fine now.

Just something I wanted to share with the few CorePlayer users out there. I am running version 1.3.6 of CorePlayer and OS X 10.5 Leopard for the record.

Perian can be found here for those that don't have it or know of it.

Video on PowerPC: Part 1 - Playback on G4/G5

I will say it right off the top... I am a video super-nerd. I love documentaries, films, sitcoms and animation, among many other things. There is no doubt to how much I love my video collection and the fact that I can play it all beautifully on PowerPC hardware. The hardware I currently use for playback is a PowerMac G4 Sawtooth with a 1.8GHz 7448 CPU and over 10.5 TB local storage, but I have used hoards of different PowerPC Macs over the years, and with many different Mac OS, codecs and playback software. The Altivec engine found in all G4 and G5 CPU's is key to good playback on more codecs and resolutions. In the next month or so I will be doing another article based on G3 video playback, but since video really comes to life with Altivec support I wanted to lead with it.

Since at least the early 90's, Apple hardware has been a leader in the professional video production industry, with Mac OS and Avid based applications. For years consumers have been able to play DVD's, and edit their personally filmed camcorder video on their Macs. Until 2002 though, the Mac platform was very limited in terms of good software and codecs for the ripping and playback of compressed video like DivX, XviD or anything FFmpeg based. This was a shame before then, because these are by far the most efficient codecs in terms of low CPU use and file size, and in turn the best for people that want to rip or digitize their video collections.

When OS X 10.2 Jaguar came out in August 2002, it really was a great time, as that was when a lot of new developers started porting their apps to Mac OS. Because of the BSD foundation of OS X this brought many developers over from the Unix and Linux world, and along with them they brought greats like VLC, Mplayer and Handbrake, just to name a few. By summer 2003, the Mac platform had done a complete 180 from DivX inept to fully capable, and I for one was very excited by this as a lover of video. Although I am going to explain how to get good playback on other codecs, I just want to first emphasize how crucial DivX and XviD are to a good experience, because of how inherently efficient both are, especially on sub-700MHz G4 hardware. Even if you have hardware far beyond that spec, it's still nice to keep CPU cycles free for other things. On the extreme low end of the G4 scale, like a 350-600MHz, these codecs will be your saving grace.

When it comes to h.264 video, it's less blocky, but can easily use 2-3x more CPU compared to DivX etc. The YouTube web interface for example is Flash on top of h.264, and will make many PowerPC systems come to screeching halt unless you have a faster G4 or a G5 system, but even then anything higher than 360p can be taxing on it. Flash has not been supported on PowerPC for over 2 years now, and I don't recommend anyone use it any longer.  There are far too many security holes in 10.1, and any technically sane person would never use it.  Those that love to spread the 10.1 plugins that are modified to show as newer versions should be banned from ever helping anyone with computers.  For those that are a true slave to flash, and simply have to use it, you shouldn't do it on a PowerPC.  Life can exist without it very easily.  In my opinion using it is like saying you love things that are covered in horrible.  Far too many people are slaves to this horrible technology. 

I do have a few tips on how to improve playback and lower CPU use that I will get to in this article. One app out there that several PowerPC users I know online have raved about is CorePlayer, which several have confirmed can play 720p and 1080p h.264 on higher end G4 and G5 systems. CorePlayer costs $20 and once I buy and do extensive testing on it I will write an article on it.  Since this writing, CorePlayer has closed operations and is no longer for sale.  I was one of the lucky few to get it while still available, and yes it does play 1080p perfectly on my single G4 1.8GHz.  This article, however, is focussed on freeware playback software such as VLC, Mplayer etc.

I am now going to group the hardware into two categories based on computing power, as it will help fine tune the playback options to the power you have to work with. The lowest OS I will advise on in this article is 10.4 as anything lower really limits playback options. When I do a G3 playback article I will add 10.3 and even 10.2 to the mix. Anyone running a G4 or G5 is far better off on 10.4+ for playback in terms of better software with more codec playability.



Group 1 - Single G4 350-600MHz

Your only real options are DivX (FFmpeg) based codecs at a lower resolution (240-360 high) for compressed video or standard DVD. Some low res h.264 will play also in MacTubes, once you get up to about 450MHz.

Best Software Options for 10.4:

 - VLC 0.9.10 and/or Mplayer OSX 1.0rc1 for DivX
 - Apple DVD Player for DVD
 - MacTubes (set to use Quicktime in prefs.) for YouTube

Best Software Options for 10.5:

 - VLC 1.1.12 and/or Mplayer 1.0rc1 for DivX
 - Apple DVD Player (this will only work on a sub-700 MHz if you turn off deinterlacing)
 - MacTubes (set to use Quicktime in prefs.) for YouTube

Since Leopard requires a G4 867MHz+, you should expect at least a slight decline in performance in this 350-600MHz range if you have shoehorned it on your hardware.



 Group 2 - Single G4 700MHz+ - Any Dual G4 - Any G5

This is where video playback really shines on Apple's PowerPC systems. Virtually every codec is usable, and where your hardware sits on this scale will determine the quality/resolution it is capable of playing. Having a 1.0 GHz or higher is preferable but a 700 MHz is enough beef in my experience. I suppose even the 667 MHz PowerBook and PowerMac could be included, as they are close enough to 700, but I have little direct experience with that exact MHz.

Best Software Options for 10.4:

- VLC 0.9.10 and/or Mplayer OSX 1.0rc1 for ripped video of any codec or DVD's
- MacTubes for YouTube

Best Software Options for 10.5:

- VLC 1.1.12 and/or Mplayer OSX 1.0rc1 for ripped video of any codec or DVD's
- MacTubes for YouTube



About the Software


VLC

This is easily the most capable freeware player on any OS. Although 0.9.10 (last version with Tiger support) is very good, I feel the newest build of 1.1.12, which needs Leopard, is enough of a jump forward that it's worth upgrading if video playback is one of your main roles for your Mac. This newest build is hands down the best freeware player on the platform. I use it about 95% of the time I play video. I honestly cannot think of one bad thing to say about 1.1.12. It's that good. VLC had hinted at dropping PowerPC development about a year ago, but some great coders stepped up and they obviously have a great comprehension of Altivec optimizations.

0.9.10 - http://sourceforge.net/projects/vlc/...0.dmg/download

1.1.12 - http://sourceforge.net/projects/vlc/...c.dmg/download

Web Plugin - http://sourceforge.net/projects/vlc/...c.dmg/download

Archive - http://download.videolan.org/pub/videolan/vlc/


Mplayer OSX

Mplayer is a very old and loyal friend that I have always kept around. It offers great features like frame dropping for slower machines, and I find is the best player by far at playing ripped media off optical disks, with it's well implemented disk cache feature. There are actually 2 different Mplayer projects on Macs. There is the standard Mplayer team and then there is another development team that ads the OS X name on the end. Over the years this has resulted in two different directions for the app and many different versions from each. The best one in my experiences is 1.0rc1, which is a PowerPC optimized build from 2006 that runs great on Tiger and Leopard. VLC is a more elegant and capable player in general, but Mplayer is a beast and has always been there for me when I need it. A very worthy tool to keep around indeed.

It tends to like G4 chips a lot more than G5's.

1.0rc1 - http://www1.mplayerhq.hu/MPlayer/releases/MPlayerOSX_1.0rc1.dmg


MacTubes

This is a saviour for anyone with at least a G4 450MHz (maybe a 400 if it's all you're running), and the desire to be able to watch YouTube video. It also offers a totally different method of experiencing YouTube. Set the player setting in preferences to Quicktime to make video playable. I am able to play 240/360p/480p perfectly on my G4 1.8GHz with Flash on the site, but after almost two years of using MacTubes now I honestly prefer it over the web. For one you never have to look at what are generally obnoxious comments, unless you want to see them, by clicking on info which opens the comments in a separate window. It makes YouTube a lot more like watching a video in VLC or Mplayer. A winner in my book.

MacTubes is also a very capable and robust YouTube downloader, and also gives you direct urls to each resolution offered, to stream to VLC or whatever player you choose.

Always get the newest - http://macapps.sakura.ne.jp/mactubes/index_en.html



A note about Quicktime 

While it is useful to give MacTubes its most CPU-efficient form of playback, and to do simple edits (Pro version), it is easily the least efficient playback application on the Mac.  VLC and Mplayer beat it hands down in terms of CPU consumption, and by margins of 50% and higher.  Even if you have every codec under the sun installed for Quicktime, it's simply far too much of a CPU hog to use for playback.  No matter the codec, resolution, or whatever - QT is a sloppy pig.  All I use it for is MacTubes (indirectly) and simple edits, and/or joining parts together ($30 pro version).

Quicktime has a clear role on the Mac, but its strength hasn't been playback for a long long time now.  Even with MacTubes, I often download the videos and watch them in VLC.  A clear example of the difference in CPU use...  to play a 360p video in MacTubes via Quicktime it uses about 30-35% of my 1.8GHz 7448.  To play the same video in VLC it only consumes about 18-19%, and a very low 9-12% in CorePlayer.

The moral of the story is don't use QT to play video.  Streaming a video is going to consume the same bandwidth, so why not just download it and play it with a more efficient tool.  I only ever use VLC and CorePlayer to stream, and only for video I just want to watch the first few seconds of to see if it's worth downloading.  I delete most of them after watching.

PCI Gigabit Ethernet on the cheap

I am the proud owner of several Sawtooths; these were the last PowerMac to have 10/100 ethernet.

I bought two Trendnet TEG-PCITXR PCI gigabit ethernet cards for only $12 each on ebay.  I am happy to say that it works perfectly and uses built in drivers found in 10.5.2+.

Here is a product page for it:  TEG-PCITXR

It lists nothing about mac compatibility, but I read on a couple different sites that these worked in 10.5.2+ so I gave them a try. Glad I did.  It's also a great idea for firewall systems that need 2 ethernet or even a PowerMac with dead onboard eth.

So any PowerMac with PCI and 10.5 can easily benefit from this card.  I am loving the true gigabit speed.  It makes network drives perform like local drives.


EDIT:

After further testing I have found that these cards do work under 10.4.11.  I had one working on both my G4 upgraded G3 tower, and one of my spare Sawtooth.  Both were running 10.4.11.

I have been using the two cards under 10.5 for over a year and they offer very reliable and consistent performance.  I get around 27MB/sec on average, and up to 34MB/sec when transfering between my two Sawtooth.  Far better than the 4-11MB/sec I get on the built in 10/100.

These cards also work perfectly in Debian and Lubuntu Linux.  There seems to be no OS I use that these don't work perfectly with.  OpenBSD also.

These cards are a must for G4 towers.  The built in ethernet on my Gigabit (Mystic) tower only gets around 20-21MB/sec vs these cards that are 27-34MB/sec as I mention above.