Apple's Leopard Will Exclude 800MHz G4 Processors

goombah99 writes "According to AppleInsider, Apple is about to announce that Leopard will not support 800 MHz G4 PowerPC processors. Previously developers had been told that it would require at least an 800 MHz G4. But AppleInsider alleges only 867 MHz G4s and higher will now be supported because of speed issues, and testers have been told that the new OS 'cannot be installed' on lesser machines. This cutoff in minimum requirements means that all those original iMac flat screens and Titanium PowerBooks are now forked to the Tiger (10.4) Update Path."

Comments

Spelling Nazi time!

[thatskinnyguy]

two-flavors of the apple OS in widespread use, it's... There! I can sleep better tonight knowing some wrong in the word has been righted!

Re:and we get slower still

[Anonymous Coward]

Up until Panther, each version of OSX ran faster than the previous one. But Tiger is definitely slower than Panther. Looks like Leopard will continue the trend. If they keep up this trend they will have to call the next release "Garfield"...

Re:Whoopee doo

[nine-times]

I'll probably get modded to hell and back, but Leopard is rapidly becoming Apple's version of Vista.

I haven't used Leopard enough to know whether it's a step backwards for OSX and has no useful new features. However, even if that's the case, at least they only wasted 2 years making it.

best. OS. feature. ever.

[damn_registrars]

Leopards advances came in the form of either under-the-hood changes (e.g. 64 bits) or added capabilities (e.g. time machine)

And my OS still hasn't even perfected its flux capacitor relay yet. Egads, skunked by apple yet again.

It's a rumor site, for Christs' sake

[noewun]

It's not real until Apple says it.

Re:Death knell for PPC Mac Mini

[markbt73]

Oh, no! I have a four-year-old iPod and a two-year-old Mac Mini! I no longer fit the stereotype! I'd better go throw some money away right away, so people know how to pigeonhole me.

Odd.

[mattgreen]

I thought every new release of OS X runs faster than the previous one?

Re:Death knell for PPC Mac Mini

[AragornSonOfArathorn]

Well, you don't need to worry. You're obviously not hip enough to enter an Apple store anyway. ;-)

Re:Don't believe it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Such as snubbing users with iPhones purchased as recently as August 2007. Perhaps it's not Apple's "historical pattern", but evidently they're now willing to think differently.

for sale

[pak9rabid]

Sweet, so I guess there'll be a lot more G4's for sale on craigslist that I can experiment w/Linux on =D.

Re:Incorrect Summary

[uglyduckling]

The box for NT4 Workstation said 33MHz CPU and 12MB RAM.

Yup, but you did end up with the most stable platform ever for running Notepad.

Re:You know, Leopords are cool and all

[Anonymous Coward]

Homophobes are usually closet bisexuals.

Re:How about a proper useable shell.

[Just Some Guy]

No not the bs they include (I'm sorry when I can type faster than the fucking shell that's a problem, and one problem I haven't had since like 91-92 on dialup :P

On a 1.2GHz G4 eMac:

$ find / > /tmp/foo
$ wc /tmp/foo
636858 1061869 59578401 /tmp/foo
$ time cat /tmp/foo
cat /tmp/foo 0.00s user 1.45s system 2% cpu 49.424 total

I cannot quite type 1.2MB per second for more than a short burst, so I'll defer to your presumably superior typing skills and admit that I may not be as finicky as you deservedly are. Still, I would suppose that even one such as yourself would find Terminal.app to be at least, say, decent?