No More Power PC Support

[Anonymous]

I suppose this is common knowledge, but according to a GS press release Power PC will no longer be supported beyond 2009 (or I believe version 12).

While this makes sense the way hardware is moving, it does makes life a little harder for us PPC users. As it is, AC 11 runs very slowly on my dual G4 and dual G5. Disabling auto rebuild etc, helps, but for the moment I have gone back to AC 10.

Had I know 11 would be so slow I would have waited to upgrade.

Don Lee

[__archiben]

TomWaltz wrote:

Dwight wrote:

Mishi wrote:
So I can just say everyone that if you consider buying a new Mac i would just invest upgrading memory, fast harddrive and videocard in the old G5 systems. AC runs much better on them. I can prooove it.

Would others please comment on this while my horror subsides?

I've found the Intel machines to cut about 10% off almost every process compared to the G5's running Archicad.

me too.

mishi - please do proooove it to us. i find that this ( http://www.graphisoft.com/support/IntelMac/performance/ ) is a pretty accurate performance analysis . . .

~/archiben

[TomWaltz]

Stress wrote:

Mishi wrote:
So I can just say everyone that if you consider buying a new Mac i would just invest upgrading memory, fast harddrive and videocard in the old G5 systems. AC runs much better on them. ...

Oh.. i know this will sound like a no brainer but,.... How/where will I notice the benefit of more SDRAM vs. a faster Video card?

The faster video card would only affect the 3D window in OpenGL mode. The additional RAM would improve performance across the board.

[Stress Co_]

TomWaltz wrote:
The faster video card would only affect the 3D window in OpenGL mode. The additional RAM would improve performance across the board.

Thanks Tom.
Just to clarify.... the additional memory will help in 3D OpenGL when converting to 3D and rebuilding? ....and the video card will improve (in 3D OpenGL) .... when I rotate and move thru the model??

[TomWaltz]

Stress wrote:

TomWaltz wrote:
The faster video card would only affect the 3D window in OpenGL mode. The additional RAM would improve performance across the board.

Thanks Tom.
Just to clarify.... the additional memory will help in 3D OpenGL when converting to 3D and rebuilding? ....and the video card will improve (in 3D OpenGL) .... when I rotate and move thru the model??

Correct.

The video card would have more effect on 3D than the RAM would, but would have no effect at all on anything else in Archicad.
The additional RAM would improve performance in 3D (but not to as much an extent as the video card), in addition to elevation/section rebuilds, schedule calculation, and layout updates, not to mention other programs running at the same time as Archicad.

[Stress Co_]

Thanks Tom ..... I'll see what an extra 4 GB will do.

[Anonymous]

TomWaltz wrote:

Stress wrote:

Mishi wrote:
So I can just say everyone that if you consider buying a new Mac i would just invest upgrading memory, fast harddrive and videocard in the old G5 systems. AC runs much better on them. ...

Oh.. i know this will sound like a no brainer but,.... How/where will I notice the benefit of more SDRAM vs. a faster Video card?

The faster video card would only affect the 3D window in OpenGL mode. The additional RAM would improve performance across the board.

This has long been the rule on a Mac. I wish this were still true. 10.4 and QT 7 "finalized" the integration of NextStep and has changed this (Next Computers was a medical imaging computer company created by Steve Jobs. John Lasseter created the presentations but because the medical profession didn't see any use for it Pixar was "born"). Now the Mac uses Open GL all over the place.

Quartz Extreme uses OpenGL for the entire Mac OS X desktop. Graphics calls now render in supported video hardware, freeing up the CPU for other tasks. (Apple)

Unfortunately even the majority of Apple' s tech support isn't aware of this.

This is a major issue I am having with my machines as I am primarily using 2D software that is presented on the display in "real time" through OpenGL and only uses the processor to save or render the images to a file. This is a function of the OS/QT and not the apps. RAM would improve performance across the board for power users but would not be touched by most others as the Mac's dynamic memory when working properly is quite amazing. I used to be able to bring any machine to a screeching halt using ArchiCAD but am hard pressed to do so these days as the RAM seems to be able to keep up with my macro entries. Everyone would experience an increase in performance if they would fix a time formatting error that is in the OS and is effecting software and hardware.

Jeffrey

[Eduardo Rolon]

AFAIK Pixar was an Industrial Light and Magic division that Steve Jobs bought.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

The full Quartz Extreme Engine is not turned on in OS X 10.4

arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10-4.ars/14

The old Mac graphics engine is called Quickdraw which is (I think) what AC uses and the reason for the Quicktime requirement, this set of instructions have been deprecated by Apple which means that they can stop using them at anytime. Quickdraw was substituted by Quartz 2D and Quartz 2D was substituted by Quartz 2D Extreme (not enabled by default).

Quartz 2D is enabled in Os X and it is faster than Quickdraw and it is not dependent on Quicktime. As long as AC still uses the Quickdraw engine it will not take advantage of the speed improvements.

Based on Ars Technica numbers, Line drawing on 10.4 per second:

Quickdraw = 290,000
Quartz 2D = 1,500,000
Quartz 2D Extreme = 12,000,000

In conclusion Apple is making these engines available it is for the software maker take advantage of them.

PS, I am not a programmer so I might be completely wrong about this…

[Anonymous]

ejrolon wrote:
AFAIK Pixar was an Industrial Light and Magic division that Steve Jobs bought.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pixar

The full Quartz Extreme Engine is not turned on in OS X 10.4

arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10-4.ars/14

The old Mac graphics engine is called Quickdraw which is (I think) what AC uses and the reason for the Quicktime requirement, this set of instructions have been deprecated by Apple which means that they can stop using them at anytime. Quickdraw was substituted by Quartz 2D and Quartz 2D was substituted by Quartz 2D Extreme (not enabled by default).

Quartz 2D is enabled in Os X and it is faster than Quickdraw and it is not dependent on Quicktime. As long as AC still uses the Quickdraw engine it will not take advantage of the speed improvements.

Based on Ars Technica numbers, Line drawing on 10.4 per second:

Quickdraw = 290,000
Quartz 2D = 1,500,000
Quartz 2D Extreme = 12,000,000

In conclusion Apple is making these engines available it is for the software maker take advantage of them.

PS, I am not a programmer so I might be completely wrong about this…

Completely wrong no. I wasn't a developer, with the exception of GDL and AppleScripts, until OS X.4 started destroying my hardware and data and an important project I am working on since Oct 2003 has been destroyed by the OS using Apple's own apps. A Y2K thing a few years behind the times. I have since developed a motion picture program that is plagued with the same problems as many others. There are too many clocks in the frameworks and audio and video simply cannot be synced together with any remote accuracy and the durations of time dependent files are arbitrarily recalculated somewhere along the lines.

As for Pixar, Wikipedia is somewhat accurate but brief. If you follow the current legal concerns of Pixar's former and Apple's current CEO it is all an intermingled corporate paper chase.

As for QT it is the graphics side of the OS (not the QT player application). QT is even required by AC for Windows. Everything you see on the Mac is QuickTime. OS X 3.9 + QT 7 actually enabled Quartz Extreme. Quartz Extreme is the hardware accellerater which encompasses Qtz 2D, QuickDraw, QT Streaming Media & OpenGL 3D (which is what your desktop is).

Apple makes these engines available to take advantage of them as they are new technologies and an improvement over what was but when they say a technology will be or is "deprecated in" it means that if you continue to develop with those legacy API's your software will eventually no longer work with future OS releases and instead of updating bits and pieces of your SW you may have to start from scratch. I would be surprised if GS is still using QD for the Intel version as it would not work and this is most likely the reason GS decided to develop to the separate platforms. A very wise choice as all my universal apps are nothing but garbage and GS writes to the kernel and avoids many of the extensions that reveal this error and does not need to be synced with other technologies as CoreAudio and the like. The only apps that work properly for me are the PPC running in Rossetta and the Intel only apps. I still can't believe that no one on this forum is having challenges with Firewire and USB devices though the graphics card issues seem to appear here and there.

Any speed or time numbers generated on the Mac OS are not something that I believe for even one second as this is a serious issue with the OS and is evident through many other forums. Moving files from one place to another changes creation dates, time-stamps are incorrect on and on-... I can wallpaper the world with crash reports and kernel panics and all point to the same thing it does not understand the date or time. Even the stripped down version of iMovie 08 time-stamps imports in the early 1900's. 1903 and 1904 seem to be the norm.

Jeffrey

[TomWaltz]

Is there any possibility this is all because of something YOU did? If the problem was that bad, I would think it would be much more widespread.

[Anonymous]

How, goes not work and I have so many details to reuse.