# Mac OS X 10.3 "Panther" Won't Support G3



## fryke (Dec 3, 2002)

http://mosr.com/ claims to have sources for this. They also state that the information may not be accurate.

If it *IS* accurate, the iBook will have to get a G4 processor before long, but I doubt that. The G3 is the right processor for the iBooks, both because it's fast enough (along with the right graphics card) and cool enough for notebooks.


----------



## Jason (Dec 3, 2002)

that would suck, i just got my ibook 

hears hoping this doesnt happen


----------



## fryke (Dec 3, 2002)

It wouldn't make much sense, anyway... Well, of course they would sell some more of the newer hardware, but it's not like the G3 and G4 are _so_ different. If there's any truth to the rumour, maybe OS X will have even more AltiVec enhanced code, so the G3 will further lag behind. But that'd be acceptable, I guess...


----------



## Langley (Dec 3, 2002)

Yeah great 

My DPG4 bearly run 10.2.2 to a standard as it is.  I have an iBook so I guess the chase to keep up with the Jones's has ended for that poor fella.


----------



## fryke (Dec 3, 2002)

I think *IF* Apple is going to abandon older machines, the first ones would be the beige G3s. It's been done before with old hardware. I just don't see the iBooks already losing access to new system software. If Apple were to totally switch to a different processor (incompatible) this would be more understandable, but I really guess there'll be software updates for iceBooks for quite some time yet. Remember: The new iBooks were only just introduced. And Apple is selling them like hot cakes to large edu customers who would certainly stop buying Apple if their hardware is obsolete half a year later. (Well, it'd still work, but without system software updates? No go.)


----------



## vanguard (Dec 3, 2002)

Interesting idea.  I *think* that iMovie already fails to support the G3.  Maybe there are more apps that will fall into that catagory?

I would also be surprised to see apple do this without putting the iBook on a G4 waaay in advance.  However, I'm wrong about something everyday.  Why should be any different?

Vanguard


----------



## AlanCE (Dec 3, 2002)

vanguard: iMovie works fine on G3s, but it is altivec enhanced so the G4 is the better cpu on which to run it.

and Langley, what on earth do you mean your dual proc 867MHz can "barely run 10.2.2 to a standard as it is"?


----------



## kendall (Dec 3, 2002)

To do this before my iBook's first birthday would be suicide.  I'd send it back to Apple and demand my money back.


----------



## hellatoms (Dec 3, 2002)

> From MOSR: "but we can all rest assured that the fact that Apple will be shipping G3-based iBooks for many months to come means that it will be years before [these] Macs will have to worry about becoming unsupported by new versions of OS X"



Actually, doesn't MOSR say that newer versions of OSX support the G3, but don't have new special optimizations for the processor? Apparently, it will be like Quartz Extreme in that the G3 will be useable, but won't offer enhancements that the G4 and above will offer.


----------



## ccuilla (Dec 3, 2002)

HOLD THE PHONE folks. Read the WHOLE thing:



> An apparent rumor running through more than one sector, notably Higher Education, is that versions of Mac OS X post-10.2.x will no longer support the G3 processor. We have investigated extensively this story which has made its way to at least three well-known Ivy League universities as well as no less than five major corporations which we have heard from in the past two weeks, and from everything we have been able to find out, it is at most a severe distortion of confidential statements by Apple that it plans to no longer ship even iBooks based on the G3 after mid-to-late 2003, and will no longer be including the G3 specifically in any future optimizations of the OS. This is akin to 10.2's Quartz Extreme -- it does not make older graphics accelerators any slower or make them unsupported, it just does not offer its full benefits to accelerators that don't meet its requirements.


----------



## toast (Dec 3, 2002)

If Apple stops supporting G3 I'll use my guarantee to get my money back and I'll buy a PC instead.

There is NO way Apple stops supporting G3's while those were still on sale last year. I bought my G3/500 last XMas, I am looking forward to buy some RAM for it (some 512RAM, which is designed for... G4, at the basis, BTW), I don't want to get stucked with an old OS because Apple is being discriminative with its customers.

If this rumor finds any official backup, and I don't think it'll happen (hopefully  ), this G3 will be my last Macintosh.


----------



## ElDiabloConCaca (Dec 3, 2002)

People, the article clearly states that dropping G3 support is "at most a severe distortion of confidential statements by Apple" and that the G3 will most likely go the way of Quartz Extreme -- G3s will still be supported, they just won't be as fast as the newer hardware which will probably have many optimizations for it.

Nowhere does that article say that Apple is dropping G3 support under OS X.  READ!


----------



## fryke (Dec 3, 2002)

Hmm... Guess that's another one of those wishy-washy MOSR articles then.


----------



## kommakazi (Dec 3, 2002)

OS X is already very much like that...many optimizations for the G4 but has anyone heard of something in OS X optimized for a G3? Nope. Apple is probably just adding in various enhancements to the next version of Jaguar to really make it fly (I'm actually thinking they might use AltiVec more for the system...makes sense because the G4 is quite dead and they are desperate to get OS X running blazing fast from all the complaining I hear from people about it's 'unresponsiveness'. So if they gave 10.3 AltiVex enhancements, it sure would breathe some life into the G4 unil we can get a new high end processor. A G3 obviously wouldn't be able to take advantage of this but new G4 systems would fly like no others running OS X...think about it...they could even enhance AltiVec itself at the same time) So basically its like Quartz Extreme: a feature that you need new hardware to use. It's perfectly reasonable...if they made all new OS versions continue to support old hardware, nobody would ever buy new hardware; at least it would be less frequently for sure. It seems more vicious of Apple since they happen to make both hardware and software...but really I see everyone doing it. Why do you think each new version of Windows will run like crap out of the box on a slightly older machine...sure you can make it go a bit faster with some optimization...but never as good as a newer machine. Game makers do it, new games require new hardware to run optimally. It's kinda a win-win situation...they make money on each others' products' dependence on the others' products. Congratulations, you all now know how the computer industry goes round. The G3 has been around for nearly 6 years...get over it.


----------



## georgelien (Dec 4, 2002)

The G3 processors inside current iBooks will be replaced by G4s.  The question should not be--will it--but when.

It is bound to happen, guys.

Just like I anticipated faster graphic processing power in later versions of PowerBook G4s when I bought its first generation.

It's stupid for me to ask for my money back just because new PowerBook G4s come with faster graphic processing power.

You dig?


----------



## kommakazi (Dec 5, 2002)

WWWWWWWhat?
I'm sure everyone realizes it's bound to happen _sometime_ *eventually*...But the point here was that it's not going to happen at MWSF, it's not a near future transition.


----------



## cellfish (Dec 5, 2002)

I just bought an iBook 600 and frankly, this news disappoints me. Realistically though, I see Apple simply not optimizing for the G3 anymore instead of killing G3 support entirely. It wouldn't be in their best interests to remove the G3.

The reason I say this is cause, well, there's barely any difference between the G3 and the G4 and on top of that, they aren't producing new G4's very quickly anyway. What would be the point of dropping the G3 when you still don't have a good G4 to replace it with? I mean if the G3 was capped at 800 mhz (which it is not) and Apple was producing a G5 that had a radically different architecture from the G3 I would understand, but otherwise there would be no point.

I WANTED a G3 because it ran cool and I chose a G3 over a G4 because I find that the G4 is an overrated and overpriced processor that offers ME very few benefits. I also knew, beforehand, of the differences between the G3 and the G4 and still know that there is no way for Apple to really discriminate one over the other as being exceptionally better.

Besides, Intel is trying to convince us that the P4 is better than the P3, like AMD showed us the K7 was better than the K6. However, Microsoft still makes its operating systems compatible with the K7, K6, P4 and P3 without discrimination. If Apple is unable to do the same thing, then that says a lot about how they feel about customer relations.


----------



## toast (Dec 5, 2002)

Very well stated, cellfish.


----------



## georgelien (Dec 5, 2002)

G5 will replace G4, and the G3 in the iBook will be replaced by the G4.

Computer evolution, my friend.

You've still got a sweet machine.  And you've been using it while others await for the G4 version--just like I waited to get my PowerBook G4--which replaced the PowerBook G3s.

Enjoy your machine and stop sound like one of the WinDoz users.

What am I talking about--I'm also a WinDoz user?

^_^ Please love your Macs no matter they're G4s or G3s, okay?


----------



## GroundZeroX (Dec 5, 2002)

> _Originally posted by Langley _
> *Yeah great
> 
> My DPG4 bearly run 10.2.2 to a standard as it is.  I have an iBook so I guess the chase to keep up with the Jones's has ended for that poor fella. *



I find this very hard to belive, because I'm running Jaguar on my 600MHz iBook, and its running like a champ. The only program that ever gives me the spinning wheel is Internet Explorer PERIOD. The only complaint I have is with application startup time, but, I can live with that. I just sometimes get impatient. Beyond that, Jaguar is every big as responsive as OS9 was, and is faster then OS9 when I'm multitasking.


----------



## Dak RIT (Dec 5, 2002)

I think this needs to be done... eventually.  Although, 10.3 would be too soon.  About 4 years after Apple stops selling computers with G3 processors would be more likely.  The G3 should have support until about 2006-2007.  So I wouldn't worry too much.

The Mach-O kernel should be abandoned as well imo, and on the chopping block before the G3... one of the main advantages it offered was allowing you to dual boot into OS X or Classic.  With Classic dead, the advantages of Mach are withering, and it's especially holding X back with its slower message system than todays OS's.  Of course, Avi loves it, so until he's replaces or changes his mind, I suspect we'll have it for a while.  It would be nice to see it dropped by 2004 though.

There is a G4 processor out now that would make sense for an iBook.  So to be completely honest (I don't want to start any rumors, and I have no reason to believe Apple will do this) it wouldn't surprise me one bit if the iBook and iMac got G4 processors in January.  Apple may choose to wait however until there is a new processor in its pro line... the new IBM PowerPCs are my bet.

Cheers,
Dak


----------



## WoLF (Dec 5, 2002)

I guess this means santa should bring me a g4


----------



## georgelien (Dec 6, 2002)

Why Wolf?

Nobody SHOULD do anything for us.  We should do things for ourselves.  Be someone responsible and self-reliant.

^_^


----------



## kendall (Dec 6, 2002)

This is becoming an annoying trend for Apple, at least for me.  I bought a PowerBook G4 550 only to discover that QuartzExtreme would not be fully supported by its graphics card.  Luckily the 550 came with factory defects warranting its replacement with a new 667 DVI.

Now that I buy a iBook G3 800, I find that the next version of OS X will not be optimized to run on it.  This of course is going to prompt me to sell my iBook sometime in the future because I'd like to see OS X 10.3 run faster than 10.2, not the other way around.

The G3 is capable of speeds well over 1GHz with up to a 200MHz system bus.  There is no reason it should be replaced by the G4 anytime soon.   In fact, its speed should have long surpassed that of the G4. The G3 is an awesome chip.  Runs cool, scales well, has the same performance of a G4 of same speeds on non AltiVec apps yet Apple fails to admit this.  Also, at higher speeds than the G4, it out performs it even on AltiVec apps.

Holding the G3 back is a huge blunder by Apple in my opinion.  And yes, my iBook kicks the crap out of my old PowerBook in every day use for $1200 less.


----------



## fryke (Dec 6, 2002)

to tell you the truth, i don't give much on that rumour. i'd wait for some first builds of Mac OS X 10.3. and you'll see reviews on the rumour sites about how well they perform on G3 and G4 hardware... you can then still sell the iBook well before the new ones appear and before 10.3 appears.


----------



## kommakazi (Dec 9, 2002)

Doesn't anyone get it? OS X was _never_ optimized for thr G3! Apple is probably just adding more G4-only features. Technology marches on. Live with it. Do you want OS X to support your Mac SE too right away?


----------



## fryke (Dec 9, 2002)

wouldn't it be cool to run OS X on my Colour Classic, though? System 7.1 is a bit long in the tooth.


----------



## KKBFiredancer (Dec 12, 2002)

Its about time.  G4s are getting dated, and if they are going to better integrate an OS and a processor, why not get one that works the best.  Even if it means sacrificing older machines.


If people complain, jaguar is still better then pretty much any other OS out there.


----------



## Hypernate (Dec 14, 2002)

For gawd's sake!

If the whole G3 support thing is the same as the QuartzExtreme, woul dit make you iBook and older iMac owners happier if they just didn't make the optimizations? I mean, c'mon, I'm sure Apple WOULD make the same optimizations on the G3, EXCEPT that the G3 doesn't have the AltiVec code to play with, so the optimizations actually aren't POSSIBLE on a G3!


----------

