Not So Much About Macs...
Old Macs a Better Bet than Going Hackintosh
From Owen in response to Going
Hackintosh and Aperture 3:
Leaving PowerPC Behind:
Hi Charles,
Let me chip in my 2 cents about Hackintosh Luke's iMac/AIO
[All-in-One] comments. It's true - iMacs are not as expandable. You
can't really add multiple drives internally, and you can't upgrade the
graphics. But my G3 &
G4 iMacs have served me very
well up to about 8 years old just by upgrading the RAM, hard drive, and
optical drive - and adding WiFi. I've played with external stuff but
always find that one bigger drive is far more useful than two smaller
ones.
Some models can be trickier than others to work on, but none should
be a challenge for someone capable of building a Hackintosh. Dig around
on the Internet to find the service manual PDF, or better yet one of
the photo-illustrated how-to sites, and just print it out or follow
along on a backup machine.
If something breaks, replacement parts are available. I've had to
replace the monitor bezel and fan on my G4 - I waited until I found
cheap "pull" parts on
eBay. The only problem I've had with the G3s is when I installed a
new hard drive & it failed - so I had to put the old one back
in.
Though I have to say that, by reputation, I am glad to have skipped
the G5 iMac series.
I think the more relevant point here, for both Hackintosh Luke and
Aperture Dan, is why buy new when you can buy a 2-3 year old model for
a fraction of the price? Compared to the 5-7 year old machine you have
been using, a 2-3 year old model will still a huge performance
improvement. This is Low End Mac after all - if you needed to live on
the bleeding edge, you wouldn't be using those older machines
anyway.
Thanks!
Owen
Thanks, Owen.
Good points all. I agree that the best and most
hassle-free Mac upgrade is usually a newer old Mac - unless, of course,
you have a Pismo.
;-)
Charles
Dialup and Such Unhappy Things
From Pat:
Hello Charles,
Has been a while since my MacHome days, has it not? I find great
comfort in reading your words still, a rare constant in an ever
changing industry. Good work.
Back at MacHome I did one of the first reviews for Nexland, a PPPOE
bridge company, now within Symantec. The WaveBase was groundbreaking at
the time and really set the standard, but what is of interest here was
its fallback mode, which would use dial-up as backup if PPPOE
failed.
Perhaps could you use one, or something similar and more
contemporary, to bridge dialup and your home network?
I am unsure if it could solve your issue, but your Macs would
be fooled into thinking they are connected to a high-speed network on
the LAN side, albeit a low speed one on the WAN side. It did connect on
demand, and connections time to live on inactivity were
customizable.
Plus, it's purple. Any piece of technological equipment is better
when purple, everyone knows that.
In regard to Eudora, what desperate news you bring. I have the same
email account bloat you have, though I did aggregate a few to pass them
through Gmail before pulling the lot from that one POP3 account.
After so many years of loyalty - Claris Emailer was my
only other program before switching - I am quite upset at Qualcomm for
that "Eudora" 8 decision. I strongly dislike Thunderbird, a big and bloated
crow of a software if I have ever seen one. I can, however, understand
it from a business decision, since Apple Mail removed much of the
market for third party commercial email programs. Apple has had a way
of biting the feeding hands of resellers and developers alike since the
iMac came into the world.
Aside from multi accounts management, the two key points Eudora
offers for me are the text format used for storage of mail and the
almost unlimited, deep customization possibilities. I do not expect to
see that in any modern software. They use proprietary database files
for storage and lock you in a "we know better what you need" interface.
I am not keen on that.
One could hope that the original Eudora code would fall in Open
Source. One could also dream winning the lottery and not needing to
work using email, too. Meanwhile I will have a look at the alternatives
you mentioned.
I should go to NS one of these days for more than airplane
transfers. My wife is a d'Entremont too, so if you are anywhere near
Pubnico, you'll know what that means. I'll make sure to buy you a pint
so as to have someone my own age to commiserate with about olden Apple
eras and yesteryears ;)
Best
Pat in Montreal
Hi Pat,
Great to hear from you again. Thanks for the kind
words, information, and suggestion. Right now my dialup fallback is
ultra-low tech. A friend who has stuck with dialup generously lets me
log into her account during power failures, and the thus far rare (once
to date since last Sept. 10) wireless broadband outage.
You're right about purple. ;-) The LinkSys
router I have now is sort of a purplish-blue.
As for Eudora, have you tried MailForge?
It's definitely Eudoraesque in appearance and function. Not as refined
yet, but not a bad interpretation of what Qualcomm might have done with
Eudora Classic had they stuck with it.
Personally, I'm actually finding Eudora 8/T-Bird
easier to live with than I ever anticipated. It's still not as slick or
versatile as real Eudora, but it has some neat features I like, such as
the latest version's browser-like tabbed interface. It's also proved to
be admirably stable and reliable. Absurdly big, of course, and you're
right about the proprietary archive format being a pain after
open-archives-with-virtually-anything classic Eudora text archives, but
not a bad tool, really, and I like it a lot better than Apple's Mail
app.
Pubnico is in the other end of Nova Scotia from me - a
six or seven hour drive - but thanks for the thought.
Charles
Macintosh Keyboard Layout
From Antonio:
Dear Charles,
Thanks for the informative article about the diNovo models - I
hadn't seen too much written about them, unfortunately!
Apple's original Extended Keyboard.
Logitech diNovo for Mac.
Apple's aluminum keyboard.
That said, I was a bit puzzled by your explanation of the supposedly
nonstandard layout. Based on your description and the images provided,
the layout of this keyboard is identical to Apple's current extended
keyboard: They put the Fn key in place of the Help key
that nobody uses anyway, and put 19 F-keys along the top, plus an
Eject key. Aside from Help becoming Fn, the keys
in the center block (including forward delete) are in the standard
locations, exactly the same as on the original 1987 Apple Extended Keyboard, which
set the standard for Mac keyboard layouts.
Is there something I'm missing?
Best regards, and keep up the great work on the site!
Antonio
Hi Antonio,
Glad you enjoyed the article in spite of my key layout
comment blooper. I've been using my Kensington SlimType keyboard for so long now
that I guess I've come to regard its slightly unorthodox key layout as
"standard". A brain fade lapse on my part. You're correct, and my
comment was mistaken.
Kensington SlimType keyboard.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Charles
iBook Purchase Query
From Donna:
Hi Charles,
Let me apologize in advance for my lack of knowledge and incorrect
language usage in referring to computers. I have very limited computer
literacy and with the help of the one to one that I purchased with my
new iMac, I am hoping to expand my computer literacy skills going
forward.
My sister sent me the link to your column. I am a very new Mac user.
I recently bought a new iMac which I am still learning how to use. I
have been looking for a used laptop which I will use at work.
I will only be using the laptop to access the Internet and for
email. I would also like to use the laptop while I recuperate after my
hip replacement surgery. That said, a friend of a friend is selling an
iBook G4. These are
the specs that she sent to me. I don't know if they are accurate.
- 133 GHz Power PC G4 Processor
- Memory is 60 GB hard drive
- 256 MB RAM OS 10.3.
- 13" screen.
- No wireless card but wireless capable
- 5-6 years old.
She is asking $150. I don't have a lot of money to spend, $150 to
$200. is the maximum. The computer needs to be wireless capable,
because we don't have Internet access at work. I will have to access
public wireless service to use the Internet.
Do you think that this computer is worth considering, or should I
continue my search? I found an amazing MacBook Pro this past summer at
a yard sale, and I made a deal with the seller to hold it while I went
to the bank to get the cash. When I returned, he had sold it to someone
else. Only 2 years old and $100 - a great deal which I am still
kicking myself about. The seller was in the movie industry and was
updating his computer and was selling very cheap. Any ideas
where I can get one of those deals?!
Many thanks in advance for your expert advice
Donna
Hi Donna,
$150 is about the right price range for a G4 iBook,
but you'll also have to find a wireless card and have it installed,
since there is no expansion shot in the iBook for a PCMCIA CardBus or
ExpressCard wireless adapter. That could easily put you over $200. 256
MB of RAM is pretty marginal as well. I don't like less than 640 MB for
running OS X efficiently.
Also be aware that the dual USB iBooks - both G3 and
G4 versions - have a very spotty record for reliability. I had a 700
MHz G3 that lasted six years and then died suddenly. My daughter had a
1.2 GHz G4 model that was
troublesome for the four years that it lasted before dying, but our
experiences were a lot better than some folks'.
However, in your price range, it's more the individual
machine's condition and the particular deal that are more important. I
still have two nearly 10-year-old Pismo PowerBooks that are still in
daily production use and have never missed a beat, and they support
both internal or PC CardBus wireless.
A two year old MBP for $100 would've been a tremendous
deal.
Hope this helps a bit.
Charles
Hi Charles,
Thank you so much for responding so quickly. your email was very
helpful. I passed on the computer and will continue my search.
Donna
Not So Much About Macs...
If you're inclined to take umbrage at non-Mac/IT topics being
discussed on Low End Mac, this might be a good place to stop scrolling,
as most of the rest of this column is about cars. Personally, I've
always thought there is a good deal of crossover in these respective
technological interests/passions, and it's likely to increase in the
future as automobiles become more electric and computerized as well as
integrated with entertainment and communications technologies.
For example,
Electronista reported this week that BMW's sub-label 2011 Mini
Countryman SUV will be one of the first cars to have tight app-level
integration with the iPhone and will support an optional central
computing system known as Mini Connected that will tie into Apple's
handset through two native apps. At its simplest, a "web radio" app
will use the iPhone's 3G connection to reach any one of a set list of
Internet radio stations; the car's center column display will give
control over radio stations using the Countryman's own interface.
Steve Jobs and Bill Gates are both longtime car nuts (motorcycles
too, in Jobs' case), and I know lots of motorhead/computerheads.
Driving Sports TV, in
partnership with Wizzard Media, just announced the immediate
availability of the official Driving Sports mobile application for
iPhone and iPod touch, which brings together news and entertainment
from Driving Sports TV, as well as bonus features from the Driving
Sports editorial team, to create a continuously updated and engaging
digital magazine that will appeal car enthusiasts.
"Think of this as a form of digital magazine for a new generation of
car enthusiast," stated Driving Sports founder and producer, Ryan
Douthit. "Automotive magazines have done their job for the past century
but the days of ink are numbered. Our new App allows Driving Sports to
deliver more depth and entertainment by combining and connecting video,
audio and pages to create an optimized mobile experience. It's simply
better."
I don't know about that, and I'm still a subscriber to Road and
Track, Automobile, and Car & Driver in their hard copy
forms, although even these traditional car mags all now have a major
online presence.
Onwards....
Old Chevys
From Steve:
Hi Charles,
Actually, the original Corvairs were 1960
models. The Corvair just passed it's 50th anniversary of going on sale
(October 2nd, 1959). Also, the Monzas were a late introduction to make
the Corvair more "upscale". I still own two 1966 Monza's. It's nice
working on a car where the closest thing to a computer is the fuel
gage.
Steve
Hi Steve,
I should've said "original series" Corvairs - i.e.:
the 1960 to '64 models with the Volkswagen Beetle style swing axle rear
suspension that got Ralph Nader's knickers
in a knot and made his Unsafe at Any Speed a runaway bestseller
(I at one time had a copy, but I have lost track of it).
A book about cars by a litigation lawyer, and about as
technically accurate and erudite as a book about legal technicalities
by your average auto mechanic would be, but it sunk the Corvair.
In the Spring and Summer of 1971 (two years after GM
discontinued the Corvair) the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) finally ran an extensive series of comparative
tests during to demonstrate the handling of the 1963 Corvair against
four of its contemporary market competitors - the Ford
Falcon, Plymouth Valiant,
Volkswagen
Beetle, and the Renault Dauphine
plus a second series 1967 Corvair (which, as you know, had a full
four-link rear independent suspension) for reference. I had a '66 Monza
coupe.
The NHTSA 's resulting 134 page report
exonerated the Corvair from Nader's charges, noting that "The 1960-63
Corvair compares favorably with contemporary vehicles used in the
tests" and "The handling and stability performance of the 1960-63
Corvair does not result in an abnormal potential for loss of control or
rollover, and it is at least as good as the performance of some
contemporary vehicles both foreign and domestic."
A moral victory, but too late, alas, to save the
Corvair from Nader's calumnies. He was as wrong about that as he has
been about most every windmill cause he's tilted at since then.
I well remember the market intro of the new compact
models from Chevrolet, Ford, and Plymouth in the fall of 1959, even
though I was only 8 at the time. The Corvair was the most interesting
and imaginative, and the Plymouth probably the best car of the three,
but that rather prosaic original Ford Falcon design formed the basis
for Lee Iacocca's Mustang four years
later.
I agree about pre-electronics automotive iron being
much nicer to work on, but I have to concede that electronic fuel
injection and engine management (as long as it keeps working) makes
cars much better appliances. Of course, Toyota is now experiencing the
downside of drive-by-wire technology.
Charles
Hi Charles,
Actually, Nader may have extended the life of the Corvair. If you
look at the Corvair history, the Corvair was introduced in 1960 to
compete with the Falcon and Valiant. The Falcon outsold the Corvair by
a considerable margin. Chevrolet's response was the Chevy II in 1962, a
conventional vehicle to compete with the Falcon. In the meantime,
Chevrolet took the Corvair upscale by introducing the Monza, and in
1962 the turbocharged Spyder, convertible, buckets seats, and "four on
the floor". In effect, the 1962 Spyder was the first "sporty compact"
(the term "pony car" did not exist yet).
The tables turned in April 1964 when Ford introduced the Mustang.
There was no way a turbocharged 6 cylinder (150 horsepower in the
Spyder) could compete with even a mild V-8 in straight line
acceleration. The Corvair beat the Mustang in handling (the 1965
Corvair was a good handling car and was praised for its handling in
Unsafe at Any Speed. Nader actually criticizes the handling of
early Mustangs in Unsafe at Any Speed) and gas mileage, but
straight line acceleration ruled.
Chevrolet used the Mustang model (deriving the Mustang from the
Falcon) to create the Camaro for 1967 (the Camaro
is derived from the Chevy II). Chevrolet stopped development of the
Corvair, except for safety and emissions changes, in the 1965 to 1966
time frame. There are indications (e.g., deleting the turbocharged
engine, special order for the four carb engine) that Chevrolet wanted
to drop the Corvair in the 1967 model year so it would not compete with
the Camaro. Speculation is that Chevrolet continued the Corvair through
1969 so it would not look like they were capitulating to Nader. The
production numbers in 1967 through 1969 suggest this is true (27,300 in
1967, 15,400 in 1968, 6000 in 1969), as these numbers are similar to or
less than Corvette
production.
Steve
Hi Steve,
That's a fascinating analysis (sincerely) and food for
thought. I think you're the only commentator I've ever heard suggest
that Nader might've done the Corvair any good.
Gotta wonder, however, what might have been if not for
the storm of negative publicity Unsafe At Any Speed generated,
which essentially doomed the second series Corvair from the get-go.
I do have to dispute your contention that "There was
no way a turbocharged 6 cylinder could compete with even a mild V-8 in
straight line acceleration." Think Porsche 911 turbo, or
for that matter Porche 911 normally-aspirated.
The Chevy II was indeed rushed into production (they
did a pretty good job with it even so) for 1962 as a Falcon-fighter
while the '65 Corvair was still being developed, so had GM really
wanted to drop it, it seems that would've been the logical time.
However, I agree that a certain inevitability was in play once the
Chevy II/Nova-based Camaro with its available small-block V-8 made its
debut in 1967. I liked the Camaro (a friend of mine had one of the
original 302 CID Z-28s, which was awesome), although I thought the
overhead cam six-cylinder Pontiac used in the (same floorpan and
chassis) early Firebirds was more
technically interesting.
Charles
Hi Charles,
The second generation Corvair engine (for installation in a third
generation Corvair) had been built in prototype form. It was an
interesting engine in that it copied aircraft engine practice of
separate "jugs" for each cylinder. Also, the heads were integral with
the cylinders in that design and the pushrod tubes eliminated. One
could imagine that engine in some of the Corvair show cars, e.g., the
Monza GT and Monza SS.
The Porsche 911 engines are quite capable, but they also are proof
of the old adage, "There are two ways to make power, cubic inches or
cubic dollars". In the 1960s context, the turbocharged Corvairs were
rated at 150 - and later 180 - horsepower. The base 283 Chevy and 289
Ford two barrel V-8 engines were rated at 195 and 200 horsepower
respectively (depending on year). Higher output small blocks or big
block engines easily exceeded 300 horsepower. In the long run, the
Corvair engine may have been doomed by its air cooling and difficulties
in meeting emissions requirements (Porsche has thrown lots of
technology at that problem).
Finally, I agree with you that the
OHC Pontiac straight 6 is an interesting engine. Apparently they
were quite smooth and had good power when equipped with a 4 barrel carb
(I think they called it the Sprint). The straight six does not fit
current design trends, because it is tall (unless you slant the engine,
like Chrysler
did), long, and relatively heavy.
I've enjoyed talking cars with you,
Steve
Hi Steve,
I've enjoyed this thread immensely, and I am
thoroughly impressed with your historical erudition on this topic. For
instance, I was previously unaware that there ever had been a
second-generation Corvair engine, even in prototype. Those wretched
pushrod tubes were, of course, the bane of Corvair owners and the most
prolific source of oil leaks and puffs of smoke from the heater vents
on vigorous cornering.
Too bad that GM devalued the Monza name with that
execrable Vega-based monument
to mediocrity back in the 70s.
My reference to the Porsche pancake six was slightly
tongue-in-cheek. As you say, there are some economic realities that
obtain in countering cubic inches with technological sophistication
that could never have applied to the Corvair.
I love inline sixes of pretty much any sort - my
favorite engine configuration, although not as musical to the ears as
the throaty burble of a V-8, but soooo smooth and with lots of
torque for displacement. The Chrysler slant six was one of the great
engines of all time.
BTW, do your recall that Car & Driver
magazine shoehorned one of those Pontiac OHC sixes into an E-type Jag
coupe as a project car? It was a modestly successful swap, with the GM
engine proving more reliable but not as gutsy as the stock Jag DOHC
six.
Charles
Chevies and LaserWriters
From Rick:
Hello Charles,
My parents had a 1965 Impala 9-passenger
station wagon that was the car that I learned to drive with. It came
with a 396/401 engine and was an absolute pain to parallel park. I got
fairly proficient at parking it, though, and years later amazed several
friends by parallel parking a Winnebago motorhome in downtown Berkeley
CA! When it came time to purchase my own car, despite my 6'5" frame, I
chose a 5-year-old Nash Metropolitan
and have been a small car guy since...
I have an old LaserWriter that I use with my SE and 9600, and I had a similar problem
to the one that Owen described in his letter to you. In my case, the
cooling fan had deposited a dusty buildup along one edge on the mirror
inside of the printer, resulting in a smudged area on the right side of
the printed page. While it's not a procedure that I'd recommend for the
faint of heart, the printer can be taken apart and cleaned. The mirror
is an easy part to miss while doing a casual cleaning, and the
realignment is fairly critical. There are some professionals around
here (Salem, Oregon) that still clean the old laser printers, so I
would expect that their counterparts could be found in most larger
cities!
-Rick
Hi Rick,
That Chevy with the 396 would be one potent big
wagon!. My '65 Chevy was only a 230 CID six-cylinder, but it had manual
steering (about seven turns lock-to-lock, if I recall correctly) which
also made parallel parking a workout challenge.
Interesting coincidence: My first car was a Nash Metropolitan
as well, purchased for $125 when I was 15 - a year before I could drive
(legally ;-) ). Mine was a '59 model, which was the
best-selling year for Metros, in two-tone "Sunburst Yellow" and white.
A cool and interesting little car - one of several I now wish I'd held
on to. Unfortunately, I don't have a photo, but this Metro in "Coral
Red" (courtesy of nashmet.com) is
pretty much a dead-ringer except for the color.
I like all sizes of cars, I guess. My hotrodder
daughter has a very cool '68 Imperial
convertible, which is about as big as the USS Nimitz and has a honking
great 440 CID V-8.
Charles
Hello Charles,
I was also 15 when I bought my Metropolitan in 1967, but mine cost a
whopping $250 - still, half as much as my '59 MGA that I bought three years
later!
The 396 in the '65 wagon was eventually replaced with a 425 hp 427
cid salvaged from a wrecked Corvette. On a good day, it could manage 9
mpg, but my teenaged lead foot often pushed the average down to about 5
mpg. My sister finally got the wagon so that she could tote around her
double-bass violin. It eventually got traded-in for a new Toyota Corolla in the
early '70s. The Corolla made a lot more sense, but it was much less
impressive!
-Rick
Hi Rick,
I also had a MGA - a '57 of which I do have a
photo.
Cool car (literally, in Canadian chilly weather). I have to say that
I preferred the '67 MGB that I had later on. My
then-new wife and I made a couple of long road trips in the "B". I
remember driving through the grape-growing district of upstate New York
in the fall of 1976 with the top down and the aroma of the ripe grapes
redolent (we stopped at a u-pick). Ah, to be young again!
That 396 must have been one of the first
built. 1965 was the year of the changeover from the 409 to the 396 as
the big block used in Chevies. I remember seeing a 409 in a '65, but no
396s in full-size models.
A 427, eh? It gets better and better! Was your dad a hotrodder, or
was that your update? How did your sis like having all that power?
Charles
Hello Charles,
The 427 transplant was the result of some calamitous engine failure
of the 396. The economics of dropping in the 427 must have made sense
at the time, but I can be certain that the power increase had a certain
allure to my father! My sister has always had a thing for big cars (my
favorite of hers was a 1955 Oldsmobile), and the last time that I
visited her (2008), she was driving an early '70s Chrysler. By
contrast, I was driving my Subaru Justy.
I've had a few British cars over the years - the Metro and the MGA,
a '59 Austin-Healey
100-6, and three Jaguar E-Types (1963,
1964 and 1967). The MGA was, by far, the most fun to drive, and the
Healey was my overall favorite, but the Jags were the best looking cars
broken down alongside the road! I finally gave up on British cars when
my work took me further from home than I was prepared to walk.
-Rick
Hi Rick,
I've owned somewhere between 30 and 40 British cars, but never
anything as exotic as an E-Type or a big Healey. I agree that the
Healeys were one of the most desirable sports cars ever built - the
mid/late '60s 3000s would be my ideal pick. Those early E-Type Jags are
near the top of my short list of the most beautiful cars ever built,
but as you say left a lot to be desired in the reliability department.
They were a real cash cow for a British car specialist shop where I
worked for a while as a mechanic - specializing in doing engine jobs on
Austin 1800s.
I loved the Farina-bodied Austin Cambridges
and Morris
Oxfords (I owned 17 - not all at once obviously), and I had a
couple of Riley 1.5s,
which were a sort of factory hotrod built by BMC with a MGA engine
shoehorned into what was essentially a tarted-up Morris Minor. The
favorable power-to-weight ratio facilitated a relatively high rear axle
ratio that in turn resulted in higher speed capability than one would
expect from an early '60s 1.5 litre four-door sedan. It had formfitting
leather bucket seats and a real wood blond walnut dashboard as well.
Yet another one I wish I hadn't sold.
Charles
Go to Charles Moore's Mailbag index.
