Save the TiBook!

[bluekatt]

designed specifically for that hrd ware ? in 2001 mac os X 10.1 was released and that was nothing more then an elaborate beta

this is also a 6 year old laptop the cost for it isnt really that prohibitive any more

i dont want to run ubuntue or xubunutu or kubuntu or knoppix

but i could if i wanted to cost doesnt enter in to it especially not with older machines

 

[equant]

I hesitate to get involved, but I just want to say -- from personal experience -- linux is usually better for keeping old hardware usable in the modern age in many situations. OSX does not run as fast as Xubuntu on my iMac or iBook - it's not even close. Not to mention that it's a far more supported OS by both the OS developers and application developers than 10.2 or 10.3 which those machines would be stuck with (I'm so tired of 10.4 or higher only apps!)

Also, the PPC port of the linux kernel isn't just some hacked port of x86 code. Linux has been designed to be easy to port to many architectures. It's not the x86 kernel that it was in 1994.

In the end, I say run what you want. I won't complain

 

[equant]

some configuration is harder

lol, yeah, *some*.

 

[gobabushka]

tomorrow, ill be doin my own complete rebuild on my trusty friend my pismo. its had a rough life, but thanks to iamdigitalman, it'll be back in no time (with a new screen!!!)

 

[Temetka]

I love OS X.

Linux is great for some things. But to frank, I would run OS X on it though.

My Ti runs OS X just fine.

Although I do understand the appeal of running PPC Linux on a G4 though. Certain operations would be very fast.

Linux will never be as pretty as OS X though. For me I am tired of ugly UI's and will not run Linux until the entire UI matches across the board from app to app. Since that day will never come, I won't be running Linux (in GUI mode) anytime in the near and semi-near future.

Besides, what would his Steveness say?

 

[Maccess]

Inferior?How so? I use both on a regular basis and Ubuntu is, on average, as good as OSX once you get it running. Like I said, it's on average, so Ubuntu's worse at some things(installation, some configuration is harder) and OSX is worse at some things(program installation, upgrading)

I can see his point. Mac OS X would surely run faster, given that it's designed specifically for that hardware whereas Linux is designed mainly for x86.

I'm not too sure about that. The first time I laid my hands on an Intel Mac I was amazed by how snappy the OS was. Remember the Mach Kernel and BSD core were built for x86. Steve said so himself. Running it on PPC was the hack.