Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
eMac vs iMac G3?
- Thread starter iCaleb
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ok yes the eMac 1.42 is faster then a iMac g3 , and yes it will run leopard ,
ok i would never run leopard on a ppc Mac , tiger runs way better as it was developed to run on the eMac , leopard does focus already to much on intel Mac's and was only a stopgap for snow leopard
and the eMac 1.42 should be upgraded to the full 2 gb ram to see is full potential
but the iMac g3 700mhz runs very well with 1gb ram
does everything as good as a eMac 700mhz , as only apps which can make use of the altivec in the G4 will run better in the eMac
ok i would never run leopard on a ppc Mac , tiger runs way better as it was developed to run on the eMac , leopard does focus already to much on intel Mac's and was only a stopgap for snow leopard
and the eMac 1.42 should be upgraded to the full 2 gb ram to see is full potential
but the iMac g3 700mhz runs very well with 1gb ram
does everything as good as a eMac 700mhz , as only apps which can make use of the altivec in the G4 will run better in the eMac
Leopard runs fine with 1gb+ ram on an eMac. And what are you talking about?
Leopard was the revolutionary OS while Snow Leopard was the refinement of leopard with intel and 64 bit optimization. Tiger is at the end of the line for software while many things still support leopard even on the PPC.
Leopard runs fine with 1gb+ ram on an eMac. And what are you talking about?
in my mini g4 1.42 and in my eMac 1.42 the leopard performance was hmm not up to standard to be polite, but on the iMac g5 it was running sufficient enough , but i installed there tiger too as most software still has as minimum requirement osx tiger , and all my ppc Mac's build after 2000 are running osx tiger and soon my intel iMac too
I have a 1.42 GHz eMac and it is indeed better than the iMac G3. Though it's heavier (the one thing about eMacs I don't like), it has a better display, and the 2004-2006 models had USB 2.0 ports, while iMac G3s only had USB 1.1. In addition, not all iMac G3s had FireWire ports (the eMac does) or Wi-Fi support. And of course, most eMacs can run Leopard while the iMac G3s cannot. I actually think the 1.42 GHz eMac G4 even outperforms the latest iMac G4.
In fact, the G3 and G4 processor difference seems rather big. I remember when the first PowerMac G4 "Yikes" model came out, it was for the most part identical to the B&W PowerMac G3, but with a 350-400 MHz G4 processor, and if you ran the two side by side, the "Yikes" would easily outperform the G3, and would probably run pre-Leopard OS X versions better than the G3 would.
In fact, the G3 and G4 processor difference seems rather big. I remember when the first PowerMac G4 "Yikes" model came out, it was for the most part identical to the B&W PowerMac G3, but with a 350-400 MHz G4 processor, and if you ran the two side by side, the "Yikes" would easily outperform the G3, and would probably run pre-Leopard OS X versions better than the G3 would.
Eh? I think PowerPC software will diminish long before leopard has run its coarse.With the release of Tiger a lot of software companies will ditch support for Tiger altogether.
emac vs imac g3
I think that the eMac is way better. The iMac g3 is really cool and it is one of my favorite apple products but the eMac is the win because: 1. It runs a Apple OS X
2. It's still old but newer than the imac
3. WI-FI! The eMac can use WI-FI. The iMac only uses FireWire.
I think that the eMac is way better. The iMac g3 is really cool and it is one of my favorite apple products but the eMac is the win because: 1. It runs a Apple OS X2. It's still old but newer than the imac
3. WI-FI! The eMac can use WI-FI. The iMac only uses FireWire.
2. It's still old but newer than the imac
3. WI-FI! The eMac can use WI-FI. The iMac only uses FireWire.
I give up on stopping people from stumbling upon threads on google and bringing them back from the dead...
so heres a cat sleeping with a duck
That's a myth. While this is true for early versions of Leopard (I think until 10.5.3), it is not for the last/latest version of Leopard. In fact, some underlying components such as graphics and Spotlight have been greatly improved, when compared to Tiger. I'm using my Powerbook G4 with the latest Leopard for live performances, where timing and performance is vital. Never had any hick-hups or dropouts with Traktor and Ableton. The only thing that feels a bit slower is the Dock. You can change it into the faster 2D mode, though.
2. It's still old but newer than the imac
3. WI-FI! The eMac can use WI-FI. The iMac only uses FireWire.
1. Even the oldest iMac can run OS X
2. Not completely true. The eMac was introduced in April 2002. The iMac G3 was killed off in March 2003, so there are certainly several iMac G3's newer than some eMacs out there.
3. ...I'm not sure I can properly set this straight. Early models of the iMac G3 lacked both wi-fi and FireWire. Later on, FW and wi-fi capability were added to the line. The eMac always has had FW, and an option for wi-fi.
1. Even the oldest iMac can run OS X
2. Not completely true. The eMac was introduced in April 2002. The iMac G3 was killed off in March 2003, so there are certainly several iMac G3's newer than some eMacs out there.
3. ...I'm not sure I can properly set this straight. Early models of the iMac G3 lacked both wi-fi and FireWire. Later on, FW and wi-fi capability were added to the line. The eMac always has had FW, and an option for wi-fi.
All emacs were g4s right? I don't recall there being a g3
I don't if modernized is the word. Perhaps "updated" would be a bit more accurate. They still use the CRT and look similar.
I'd use the words "toned-down", "not as loud (design-wise)", "more subtle" and "easier to take in / doesn't stand out as much".
It's +/- true only when you have CI capable graphics card. 10.5 GUI is more CI dependent than 10.4 one. If all eye candy is rendered by CPU (when your GPU does not handle CI) you'll see a significant slow down in 10.5 in comparison with Tiger.
...and shame on us, necro-thread-philes
It's +/- true only when you have CI capable graphics card. 10.5 GUI is more CI dependent than 10.4 one. If all eye candy is rendered by CPU (when your GPU does not handle CI) you'll see a significant slow down in 10.5 in comparison with Tiger.
...and shame on us, necro-thread-philes
Haha!
Yes, having a CI (and QE for that matter) capable GPU is one of the most important things if you want to run Leopard. That's why I went for a 17" last revision iMac G4 instead of a 15" or an earlier model.