Following Up on G3 Pismo Resurrection
From Paul in response to Charles Moore's Pismo Has a
Near Death Experience:
Hi Charles,
I read with great interest your recent article about reviving a
G3 Pismo from the
dreaded crash-on-sleep syndrome. I have experienced the same thing and
have tried many remedies, including replacing the logic board and the
PRAM battery, but after initial success both times, it reverted back to
the same behavior after a few days.
Any ideas on why the thing works for a little while and then goes
back to the same ol' thing? I would think it would be an all-or-nothing
deal. And I would appreciate your pointing me to any previous writing
you've done on converting a Pismo to a G4 processor. I didn't know that
was even an option.
I love this old machine and want to keep it ticking . . .
thanks so much for sharing your experience the way you have.
-Paul
Hi Paul,
I waited a few days to answer your query to make sure
my fix would stick, but after a week of flawless performance, I'm now
cautiously optimistic.
Last weekend I swapped out the video inverter board
(very easy to get at) on the hunch that the fault seemed video-related,
and Wegener Media also
suggests that is a likely fault in cases of refusal to light the
screen.
While I was at it, I also took the opportunity to
switch the display screen in my workaday Pismo, which has been
succumbing to the dreaded "pink screen" disease over the past several
years, with the screen in my "parts mule" Pismo, which is the best
screen of the three I have, and also not difficult or time-consiuming
to do, especially if the video inverter is already out.
I'm happy to tentatively report that the operation
seems to have been an unqualified success. After putting putting the
machine back together - the whole job took about half an hour - the
screen brightened normally during boot-up and has continued to do so
through many sleep/wake cycles throughout the past week. The much nicer
display is a treat as well.
I ran with my test 500 MHz G3 chip and 768 MB of RAM
for a week, but on Saturday restored the Pismo to 550 MHz G4 power and
1 GB of memory. Still working great.
My problem manifested sporadically as well over a
period of several months, but gradually got more frequent. Presumably a
gradually-worsening issue.
As for the G4 upgrade, it's a simple matter - other
than paying the substantial cost of the upgrade itself. The G4
processor comes on a Pismo processor daughtercard, and it's only a few
minutes work to pop the keyboard, heat shield, and heat sink; remove
the press-in daughtercard; swap your RAM over to the G4 daughtercard;
and reassemble. I've described the process in detail with pictures in
Wegener
Media G4/550 MHz Upgrade for Pismo on PB Central.
Wegener Media and FastMac both offer 550 MHz G4
upgrades for the Pismo.
$200 to $240 is quite a chunk of money to spend on an
old computer, but a couple of weeks back on a G3 has reminded me why
it's worthwhile if that machine is used as a workhorse.
Charles
iCab: I Like It
From Demetrios, following up on Flash Navigation Problem with PPC
Opera:
Hi Charles,
Thanks for the informative email!
I'd never heard of iCab. I've
downloaded it (32-bit for Tiger) & I'll be registering it soon, as
I believe that such ventures should be supported (hopefully the reg.
no. will also work for the earlier version on the G3 running Jaguar).
That iCab also make a version that runs on OS 8.5 - 9.2 (or earlier)
is, well, unbelievable.
I've come across your pages when searching for information regarding
browsers on older Macs. But I haven't seen any mention of iCab, just
Opera, which I have never used because of Flash.
I've also found other bits of info about my Macs on the Low End Mac
site. One bit of info appears on this page. Apple Australia is
arguably a great reason not to buy Macs in Australia.
With regards to the iPad, you're probably aware of [the
BlackBerry PlayBook], a genuine competitor made by the phone
company which is recommended for business, and it runs Flash.
Flash & the "bag of hurt" (Blu-ray) for the iPad & Mac
respectively - would be good to see (why is Jobs so stubborn).
Demetrios
Hi Demetrios,
I've been using iCab off and on since back when it was
a German-only beta in the late '90s.
Here are some of my more recent reviews of the
application.
Here is my take on the iPad vs. PlayBook:
Apple Lucky RIM PlayBook Won't Launch Before Yule.
Charles
Young Drivers Are Not Fully Prepared to Drive
From Greg after reading Google's Self-Driving Cars?
Real Auto Enthusiasts Want Manual Control:
No doubt. Enthusiasts of anything want at least the option of the
full experience of that thing. But whether it's cars, computers, or any
of a huge number of other objects, for the non-enthusiast majority of
users they're a tool and nothing more. They don't want the experience
of using it to be exciting or even interesting. They just want it to do
what it's supposed to do in order to make their life easier or, in some
cases, practical at all.
Honestly, I can't comprehend the notion that it's "distressing" that
a majority of a 16-year-olds aren't in a hurry to get their licenses,
given substantial evidence that they're not emotionally and mentally
prepared to do so. And for what it's worth, in about a quarter of the
US states (including very densely populated ones like New York and New
Jersey), you can't get a license at (just) 16 anyway.
What I do find distressing is that at least in the parts of the
country I'm familiar with, having a driver's license has become
practically an entitlement. You can probably go into any high school in
the nation and discover that the kids know which of the nearby testing
centers is "the easy one." The one that has at least one tester that
may very well pass you without even asking you to turn the ignition
key. We do not reliably make sure that people are qualified to drive a
car before saying they're allowed to do so, and we don't consistently
take their license away when they demonstrate clearly that they
shouldn't have it.
FWIW, I'm going to be 40 in December, and like your older daughter
I've never taken the test. I'd get a motorcycle license if my state
allowed me to do so without getting a car license first, but they
don't, and I've got a serious mental block about driving a car. I know
my state's driving laws, and I learned how to drive at 15; I just
haven't been able to bring myself to actually do it since my lessons
because the implications of being responsible for that much momentum
are, with no hyperbole whatsoever, paralyzing.
Greg
Hi Greg,
I guess you're the polar opposite of an automobile
enthusiast?
Actually, it's my younger daughter who hasn't bothered
to get a license. She's had a learner's permit several times, and she's
a decently good driver but keeps letting the license lapse without
getting around to taking the test.
I partly agree with you that the bar for getting a
license is too low, but it should be predicated on driving ability
rather than age (within reason). I've seen survey data somewhere that
it matters little to actuarial accident probability whether someone
starts driving at 16 or 18 or 22 or whatever. Those first few years of
gaining experience are a rough patch, which is why newly-licensed
drivers pay higher insurance premiums. There's an argument to be made
that it's probably better to get the steep part of the learning curve
under your belt while you're still (hopefully) under some parental
oversight.
However, as I said, I'd be all for prospective drivers
to have to demonstrate decent driving skill before getting licensed,
rather than just memorizing the rules of the road and being able to
parallel park. My impression is that it's much more demanding to get a
license in Europe, partly because of the necessity to handle higher
speeds.
By global standards, North American speed limits are
absurdly low. In most European countries, the highway speed limit is
either 120 kmph or 130 kmph. Britain and Sweden have the strictest
limits at 110 kmph, the same as on Nova Scotia's 100 series highways.
About three-quarters of the famous German Autobahnen have no speed
limit at all. The "recommended velocity" is 130 kmph, but average
speeds traveled in unregulated areas are about 150 kmph, with some
vehicles cruising at 200 kmph or more. (An interesting sub-note is that
the Autobahn limit in construction zones is 80 kmph [50 mph]!)
Nevertheless, the overall safety record on Autobahnen
is comparable to that on controlled-access highways in European
countries with speed limits. A 2005 study by the German Interior
Ministry found sections with unrestricted speed had the same accident
record as sections with speed limits. That wouldn't be so at those
speeds with North American drivers.
Thanks for the exchange of views.
Charles
Hi back, Charles.
There's one part of your response that I think really needs some
follow-up:
"I've seen survey data somewhere that it matters
little to actuarial accident probability whether someone starts driving
at 16 or 18 or 22 or...."
You're right, but only because you stopped where you did.
Statistically, and taking experience into account, age stops being a
factor in accident rates in the mid-20s. Not coincidentally, that's the
point in life at which one is typically mature enough to exercise
meaningful impulse control and accurately assess risk.
I'm not sure if I'm the polar opposite of an auto enthusiast. I'm
not averse to them in principle, appreciate their utility, and am a
willing passenger. I just have no interest in them as mechanical
constructs and can't bring myself to use one because of the danger that
I expect I would present to those around me. (Which is why I'm okay
with a motorcycle. Much less risk to others.)
Have a good day.
Greg
Hi Greg,
Insurance actuaries do know that accident rates fall
off around age 25, which is why coverage premiums (at least where I
live) drop dramatically at the 25th birthday (earlier if the driver
gets married, which also statistically makes one a lower risk).
However, I wonder if there could be any really
meaningful subject pool of drivers who get their first driver's license
at age 25 or later. The numbers must be exceedingly small.
According to a National Institutes of Health
study:
"Since few people in the United States learn to
drive after their teen years, data are not available in this country to
allow comparison of the experiences of younger and older novice
drivers. Countries in which waiting past the teen years to begin
driving is more common, such as Canada and New Zealand, have found that
older novice drivers also have higher crash rates during their initial
years of driving than do their peers with more driving experience."
On the other hand, the researchers also say:
"Nevertheless, there is evidence that even slight
age differences in the adolescent years may have some effect
. . . suggesting that fatal crash rates are higher the
younger the driver . . . a variety of studies support the
conclusion that it is newly licensed drivers' lack of experience that
is the most significant problem, even considering that the youngest
drivers fare the worst. For example, one analysis of police reports of
almost 2,000 crashes in which newly licensed drivers were involved
pointed to inexperience as the major contributor."
but:
"...there is a learning curve for all new
drivers, regardless of the age at which they begin driving [with a]
steep decline in crash rates for both male and female newly licensed
drivers as they accumulate miles of practice."
I don't think the evidence would warrant raising the
legal driving age to 25, although probably that would have some
positive effect on highway safety. As with speed limits, it's about
determining the acceptable risk-benefit compromise.
I suppose somethng analogically similar would apply to
deciding whether to drive oneself. If one tend to be easily distracted
or impulsive, it might be a responsible determination not to. But
skills are learnable. The main point for auto enthusiasts is that
driving can be highly enjoyable as well as useful in a utilitarian
sense, and one does not need to be a driver to be fascinated by
automobiles. I can't remember when I was not.
Charles
The Danger of Self Driving Cars
From Steve:
Charles,
Are self driving cars significantly different from "self flying"
airplanes? Safety experts have argued for years that the many aids
(e.g. auto-pilot, collision avoidance systems) available to pilots
improve flight safety. When everything works correctly, this is true.
It's the times when things do not work correctly that the loss of
operational skills, e.g. "stick and rudder" pilots, will result in
disaster, since the operators will have no clue how to respond. Another
problem is recognition of when the automated systems have failed.
Total faith in advanced systems causes individuals to enter unsafe
environments. I'm sure we have all seen or heard news stories about
individuals who drove off open bridges or were stranded in the middle
of nowhere because they blindly followed their GPS directions.
Total automation or total manual operation are probably safer than
semi-automatic operation. In the general aviation industry, the
accident rate is higher for "glass" cockpit airplanes. Pilots spend
their time trying to understand their displays or utilize new features
rather than trying to fly the airplane. Crashes have occured because
pilots were "fighting" the logic of the automated systems (there is an
ongoing debate over Boeing and Airbus designs as to how to respond to
pilot intervention in automated operations).
My recommendation, for drivers who want self driving cars is to sit
in the back seat and let the taxi driver or Greyhound do the work.
Steve
Hi Steve,
Excellent points made in your letter. I distrust all
automatic systems, whch, as you say, are just fine until circumstances
present where they're not. I doubt that the automatic flight aids were
much help to Capt. Sullenberger in safely landing US Airways Flight
1549 on the Hudson River last year with complete loss of thrust from
both engines of the Airbus A320-214. It was encouraging that the Airbus
could be successfully flown under manual control, since, as Wikipedia
notes,
"The Airbus A320 is a digital fly-by-wire
aircraft: the flight control surfaces are moved by electrical and
hydraulic actuators controlled by a digital computer. The computer
interprets pilot commands via input from a side-stick, making
adjustments on its own to keep the plane stable and on course, which is
particularly useful after engine failure by allowing the pilots to
concentrate on engine restart and landing planning."
Also relevant:
"The mechanical energy of the two engines is the
primary source of routine electrical power and hydraulic pressure for
the aircraft flight control systems. The aircraft also has an auxiliary
power unit (APU), which can provide backup electrical power for the
aircraft, including its electrically powered hydraulic pumps; and a ram
air turbine (RAT), a type of wind turbine that can be deployed into the
airstream to provide backup hydraulic pressure and electrical power at
certain speeds. According to the NTSB, both the APU and the RAT were
operating as the plane descended into the Hudson, although it was not
clear whether the RAT had been deployed manually or automatically."
So maybe the automated systems aren't all bad, but
excessive dependence on them or trust in them still is.
Charles
Hot Rodding
From Scott:
Hey Charles,
I guess I don't understand why an automobile performance magazine
would be a fan of manual transmissions. Go to any drag strip, and
you'll see the fastest transmissions are heavily modified 2 speed GM Aluminum
Powerglides from the 1960s. Any automobile performance enthusiast
driving a manual transmission, especially one with 5 or 6 speeds,
hasn't been paying attention for a looong time. One of my friends built
a land speed racer that ran over 205 mph at Bonneville, and he used a
TurboHydramatic
350.
Standards are great for fuel economy, and they usually don't require
expensive overhauls that high mileage automatics always need, so for
the average driver who can drive a standard well, without burning up
the clutch, a standard is the way to go. You can save a lot of money
and headaches with a well driven standard transmission. My Toyota
pickup went over 375,000 miles on its original clutch, even pulling
heavy loads and trailers over the Rocky Mountains. Somehow I doubt an
automobile performance magazine cares about the economy, longevity, or
serviceability of standard transmissions though. I think they're
probably stuck in the performance past or something.
What I want to see come back is hot rodding. By that I mean
automobile enthusiasts who build an old car into a performance car. You
hardly ever encounter an auto enthusiast anymore who built his own
engine or even knows how to maintain his own car. Basically today's
auto enthusiasts buy a new car that's advertised as being fast and then
drive like jerks on a public road, endangering everyone around them. If
they ever dare go to the drag strip, they get totally embarrassed by
some guy with an old car he built himself with a heavily modified
automatic that only shifts once.
I also really like when a hot rod still has it's own original engine
and transmission and everything still intact, but heavily modified for
performance. I like to look under the hood and see it look as original
as possible, but that's just me. I do love the sound of tubular
headers, even though they don't look original when you open the hood of
course.
Today's new cars with automatics shift constantly, usually between
third and fourth gear all the time. When you're cruising down the
highway in today's cars and hit the accelerator to pass another car,
the automatic transmission drops two gears, then realizes the long
stroke engine is now overspeed and upshifts again, wasting three shifts
while hardly going any faster. An Aluminum Powerglide with an old style
short stroke V8 doesn't shift at all, it just goes - fast!
Today's cars have a lot of gears, which can be very helpful at low
speeds, but not so much on the highway. I love my old Aluminum
Powerglide and all its weird moaning, whirring, flying saucer sounds it
makes, including the loud thump and lurch forward when it goes into
gear. I like standard transmissions too, but not for performance in
today's world.
Years ago standard transmissions were better performers than
automatics, but those days are gone forever. I know every auto
enthusiast will disagree with me. but they're still wrong (grin) Also,
what does this have to do with old Macintosh computers. I musta missed
it...
Oh yeah, computers are gonna drive our cars for us, so we should
teach kids to drive standards - and that has something to do with old
Macs?... (confused look)... gotcha
Scott
Hi Scott,
You're right about automatics and raw performance, and
the new dual-clutch, automatic shifting "manual" gearboxes even more
so. Test after test has proved that even the most highly skilled
drivers can't match the performance of a dual-clutch auto-shifter. And
for fuel economy, continuously
variable transmissions (which I detest) dust manuals.
However, the point of the
Save the Manuals campaign is driving fun and enjoyment, and the
satisfaction of developing a skill - not cold logic.
I've owned more than 50 cars - more than half of them
with manuals - and I've never had to replace a clutch, much less repair
a manual transmission. Wish I could say the same for the
automatics.
My current truck has a four-speed overdrive automatic
that's programmed to shift between 3rd and 4th (overdrive) at about 50
mph, which drives me nuts. If only I could lock it in overdrive and lug
the engine if I want to.
I agree with you about hotrodding, although it's not
entirely dead. My daughter and her friend just finished building a hot
rod VW Super Beetle, which has a Porsche-spec engine with two Weber
two-barrel carbs, lowered and stiffened suspension, the largest tires
that will fit in the wheel-arches on Porche 928 rims, and is painted
bright orange. It's uncomfortable, you really should wear earplugs
inside, the suspension has the resiliancy of concrete, the modified
shift linkage is positive but very high effort, and the high lift cam
makes it gutless below 3,000 RPM, but it's a blast to drive, and
handles like a go-kart. Plenty of suds if you keep the revs up.
She's also building a 1968
Imperial LeBaron convertible hot rod with a 440 CID V-8. Currently
a Torqueflite tranny, but she's planning to swap in a 4-speed manual.
Latest acquisition is a '51 Mercury with a 258 CID flathead V-8, in
rough but complete and restorable condition.
I liked my old Powerglides too, and as you say, they
offered amazing performance for a 2-speed, at least with high-torque,
relatively low-revving engines.
The topical context of the article was Google's
"driverless" car project, which is more or less the polar antithesis of
Car and Driver's "Save The Manuals."
Charles
Editor's note: Not everything published on Low End Mac
has to do with Apple or Macs, but the vast majority of it does. We took
a detour in September 2001 to respond to the attacks on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon. I've shared bits and pieces of my life,
particularly while going through an unwanted divorce seven years ago.
And we've gone down technological side streets to look at Linux, the
Windows world, and Google - which is how Google's self-driving cars
dovetail with Macs.
Given the choice between Google or Microsoft having
control over my car, I'll take Google. dk
Go to Charles Moore's Mailbag index.
