Talk:Power Macintosh G3

message: I noticed that there is a link to the copper metal wiki but could someone please add a reference to the how copper is used in the G3 processors manufactured by IBM? mattabat
Explain to me what you mean. You need help explaining it, or you don't know how to link a page you wish to? Dan 00:35, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're looking for Copper-based chips (I already linked there). -- grm_wnr Esc 11:35, 16 February 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding reference to copper technology? 

message: I feel it's pointless to include Gibibits for several reasons.. though, mainly because it's just sort of ridiculous. And all that ;nbsp just sort of makes things confusing. Angelic Wraith 18:37, 16 March 2006
:My argument is based on Wikipedia guidelines (WP:MOSNUM). Putting nbsp between the value and the unit is unambiguously specified by WP:MOSNUM. Using binary multipliers is specifically recommended. Indeed, there is a specific guideline that revisions to binary multipliers should be accepted where the value is a binary-based value. I believe that in this case there is no reason to go outside the Wikipedia guidelines. If you don't like the guidelines, you are free to contribute and work towards having them revised. Duckbill 19:42, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Dear Angelic Wraith, I am pleased that you are enuthusiastic on having this article be the best it can be.  I had a sniff around and had a read on the articles Wikipedia:Assume good faith, Wikipedia:No angry mastodons, and Wikipedia:Resolving disputes, and found them to be helpful for me.
I have been working on the assumption that Wikipedia guidelines outweigh individual opinions. Do you think that idea makes sense, and if so do you think it might apply here? Duckbill 22:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

text: Thank you for responding candidly and cordially. That's more than I can say for myself- at least the cordial part :)
No, you're right, as a rule the guidelines usually outweigh personal opinion. It's just that I can't see any reasoning behind them whatsoever, and I feel that following rules for their own sake isn't necessarily the thing to do, especially if it irritates some people (let's just use the name "Dan"), and in no way increases (or even decreases) the effectiveness of the page. 
When I look at a webpage and it says something along the lines of "The Power Mac G3 was introduced at 233, 266 and 300 MHz," I almost  immediately leave, because it looks like it was written by someone who doesn't know what they're talking about; it's sort of like reading an essay full of spelling and grammar errors, and by grammar I mean not only the stuff you normally see, but misused tenses and plurals. It just irritates me; it comes across as ignorance, and on pages I've been working on for months, it greatly annoys me. Especially when I used to get issues of MacWorld and read up about Apple's new computers (I was what, twelve at the time when G3s were new?). 
"The 300 MHz model shipped with 1 MiB L2 Cache" makes me want to rip my hair out. Why on earth are there discussions about Apple's own Manual of Style... regarding things like possessiveness (you shouldn't write "G3's"), when we go against the very way they present their products? MiB is also very likely to confuse anyone not used to Wikipedia articles... I've been reading about computers for years, and I never once stumbled across "MiB." At least a byte is by itself, and there's no BiB :P
You wrote I believe the reasoning for that is a consensus has been reached that numbers with units are best with a space between them, and that a consistent style is better than having each individual contributor use their own style.
That's not reasoning, that's an opinion for which I have yet to see any substantiation. I asked why it's considered better.
Also, I believe that it has been felt that breaking the line between the value and the unit looks sufficiently bad that a non-breaking space should be used to keep them together, even if this makes the wiki markup marginally less easy to follow.
You lost me with this.
The size limit for LBA(28) addressing is a function of the size of the LBA address space (which is a function of the representation of the LBA as a 28-bit value, resulting in an address space of 228 blocks) and the size of a hard disk block (512 or 29 bytes). This results in a total size of 228 × 29 bytes or 228+9 bytes or 237 bytes. So everything in the derivation of this value was a power of two. As a result, this is a prime candidate for representation using one of the binary multiplier prefixes. The appropriate prefix is the one equivalent to 230 which is gigabinary. So we end up with 27 or 128 as the value before the prefixed unit, resulting in a representation of 128 GiB.
Here I'm completely lost. I don't mean to be rude, but this seems really circuitious and tautalogical, to the point where I'm just not understanding you. 
Mentioning the 128 GiB is probably superfluous. Hard disks are normally measured in gigabytes. This isn't an article about the 28-bit-LBA limitation. We can write the whole thing more succinctly and avoid gibibytes altogether.
I would normally agree with you, except there is no such thing as either a 128GB or 137GB HDD. Maybe you're right, though. 
Anyway, as it is, I don't see the need to change the units. If on a personal level you don't care, then why bother? Dan 00:21, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:MOSNUM]] 

message: The article was giving the USB 1.1 full-speed data rate in both Mbit/s and MB/s (12 and 1.5).
Really we only need to say that it is a USB 1.1 port, and quickly, as an aid to memory mention what the data rate was, in the way that it is usually specified, which is 12 Mbit/s. Supplying a conversion of 1.5 MB/s is a bit over-the-top here. Confusingly, it's also the same number as the bit rate for low-speed USB, which the port would also have supported, but which doesn't get a mention. Duckbill 23:51, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  USB 1.1 full-speed data rate 

message: The article claims an "NCR 53C96 SCSI controller". This controller can neither be found in Apple's specification (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G3/PowerMac_G3/PowerMac_G3.pdf) nor on this site: http://www.heise.de/ct/97/13/208/ nor on any other site in the internet. Even a detailed picture (http://www.heise.de/ct/97/13/208/gossamer.jpg) of the Gossamer mainboard does not show any dedicated SCSI chip. Instead, both Apple's document and the computer magazine c't clearly state that the I/O controller Heathrow handles SCSI (among other interfaces). This solution is called MESH.
Of course it could be possible that NCR's controller is included as a part/module of Heathrow, but this is nowhere documented.
Thus there are a lot of proofs that there is no dedicated SCSI controller chip, and there is not a single proof that there is one. So either the article must be corrected, or a new photo of a Gossamer motherboard must be added that clearly shows the NCR chip.
This article is meant to be objective and should not reflect a single subjective idea or opinion or memory of a single person.
:MESH is Macintosh Enhanced SCSI Hardware. I'm also familiar with that picture.. and with the insides of the Beige G3.. I have three of them. The 53c96 isn't a chip, at least not in the G3s; I'm fairly certain it's incorporated into the MESH custom IC... which includes the SWIM3 controller (floppy drive), heathrow (IDE) etc, so you wouldn't see anything labeled "NCR 53C96". Software, such as TechTool Pro, even reports the presence of the 53c96 SCSI chip.. as well as the VIA1, SCC, etc. Dan 00:08, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Update mmm, nope, you were right. Though, if it had used the 53c96 chip, it wouldn't have been visible... it still would have been part of the Heathrow; it's MESH-based. I was under the impression that the 53c96 was part of MESH. My apologies :) Dan 19:19, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  On Board SCSI controller 

message: In addition to the above problem the article states that the computer has "...Fast SCSI chain (up to 5 MB/s..." This is an error Fast SCSI has a 10MB/s speed. The original SCSI standard was 5 MB/s. Either this machine has Fast SCSI @ 10MB/s or else SCSI @ 5MB/s. Will a knowledgable party please correct it?
:The article was right in alternate cases. They had 2 SCSI buses - internal & external. The internal bus was fast scsi, the external was normal scsi  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pantergraph (talk • contribs) 21:43, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  SCSI Error 

message: Given the section on optical drive compatibility, it would probably be beneficial to compile a list of what is known to work.
I have found that a BTC CDRW5224 reads and burns correctly on a Revision A G3 with Mac OS 9.2.2, and supports booting. Removing the front panel of the tray will allow the drive tray to open when the case is put back on. Dashwarts (talk) 18:57, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Compatible optical drives 

message: Where the slots 32 or 64-bit wide? The article is ambiguous in this respect. Someone not using his real name (talk) 06:49, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: If this photo is depicting what it claims to (and it seems to), then they were 32-bit, unlike in the successor Power Macintosh G3 (Blue & White). Someone not using his real name (talk) 06:51, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  PCI 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on Power Macintosh G3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100105005854/http://www.macworld.co.uk/business/news/index.cfm?RSS to http://www.macworld.co.uk/business/news/index.cfm?RSS&NewsID=19652
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.apple.com/
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.apple.com/hotnews/features/ads/
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120711060629/http://forums.xlr8yourmac.com/action.lasso?-database=faq.fp3&-layout=FaqList&-response=answer.faq.lasso&-recordID=33781&-search to http://forums.xlr8yourmac.com/action.lasso?-database=faq.fp3&-layout=FaqList&-response=answer.faq.lasso&-recordID=33781&-search
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080330001622/http://www.insanely-great.com/reviews/b%26wg3.html to http://www.insanely-great.com/reviews/b%26wg3.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071128060807/http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G3/PowerMac_G3/PowerMac_G3.pdf to http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G3/PowerMac_G3/PowerMac_G3.pdf
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Hardware/Developer_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G3/PowerMac_G3/PowerMac_G3.pdf
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:41, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified