How many people are still using iMac & iMac DV G3's with OSX 10.2.3&2.4 regularly?

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by 3777, Feb 14, 2003.

  1. 3777 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    #1
    I am:eek: My 400MHZ iMac DV also has high speed internet, 320megs of memory, 70 gig firewire drive, and runs great:cool: Runs Photoshop fine too :cool:


    P.S......Now I do have a newer PC as a primary system, but the iMac is still my primary Mac.... though I'll probably get a 17in LCD iMac when they bump it to 1.25 or 1.4 GHZ later this year :D
     
  2. 3777 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    #2
    Here's my desktop

    Yes I like the icons on the main screen...:D
     
  3. bokdol macrumors 6502a

    bokdol

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2002
    Location:
    VA
    #3
    i am running 400 dv 256. its not bad for an old machine. but it does make me want more.. when i see new stuff:D
     
  4. FredAkbar macrumors 6502a

    FredAkbar

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2003
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    #4
    I'm running an iMac 400 MHz DV 256 as well, with 10.2.4, and it runs fine...people are always complaining about OS X being slow, but I think it runs fine, even on my fairly old computer.

    --Fred
     
  5. sedarby macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 29, 2002
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    #5
    Rev A

    I am using a Rev. A iMac 233 mhz G3 and (since last night) 10.2.4. In some respects it works fine but is a little sluggish but still very usable. Not bad for a machine almost 5 years old.

    I use Logic Audio 5.5 on OS/X and OS9 but Pixels 3D will have to wait for a more capable machine.
     
  6. bennetsaysargh macrumors 68020

    bennetsaysargh

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Location:
    New York
    #6
    here's my family's DV iMac
    hopefully something a little faster in a while but still ok
     
  7. FattyMembrane macrumors 6502a

    FattyMembrane

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2002
    Location:
    bat country
    #7
    10.2.4 actually feels a tiny bit snappier than 10.2.3 on my 500mhz imac. 10.2.3 was a nice boost as well, thanks to better rage 128 support. i have 384 megs in the machine and i think i'm going to buy a 512 meg pc133 chip (133 can't hurt, right?) since the origional 256 i bought gave me a noticible performance improvement. as much as i'd like a brand new mdd, my little imac is an incredibly great computer in osx (still impresing my friend with his brand new 2gig p4 laptop). it runs photoshop elements, imovie, and blender quite well, while mundane tasks like web browsing and word processing are as fast as any other machine. i'll probably swap out the hd with one of those maxtor diamondmax plus 9 7200rpm drives with the fluid-dynamic bearings in the next few months to get a little more speed out of the thing. i plan on having it as my primary machine for at least another 2 and a half years (i used a 6116 for 7). my only complaint is that apple should have used the radeon 7000/7500 chipset instead of the rage128. it would have cost about another $50 maybe and we would have qe.
     
  8. Megaquad macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2001
    #8
    whoa!! crappy slow sluggish imac g3 users unite!! :D
    I have imac G3 350 mhz-blueberry, 320 MB ram, dvd-rom (which replaced built-in cd-rom), 120 GB maxtor hdd
    running... 10.2.4
    It is very very slow for my needs, itunes lagging whole system, spinning beachballs, apps launch slow.. baaah its driving me crazy

    i think i'll replace this imac with albook 17"
     
  9. 3777 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    #9
    I used to have the spinning beachballs all the time too when I had dial up. Once I got the high speed internet, my system now seems to run as fast as my 1.1Ghz Athalon laptop. Still it is pretty much obsolete in terms of gaming or anything involving video editing. Thogh is runs online & streaming video really well.
     
  10. vniow macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    I accidentally my whole location.
    #10
    I'm using OSX 10.2.4 on my 300Mhz iBook upgraded with 320MB RAM and a 5400rpm 40GB hard drive, does that count?
    10.2.4 definatly did a bit of a speed imptovement for me.
     
  11. brogers macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2002
    Location:
    Greensboro, NC
    #11
    I had an iMac DV SE 400 and gave it to my wife. I moved it down the hall and put an Airport card in it to share my Road Runner account. I now use an iMac 800 Superdrive. Everyonce in a while I go down the hall and play with my old machine. I keep it updated with the latest and I still love it. I works great under 10.2.4 and oddly enough sometimes seems faster than my 800 on certain Finder tasks.

    Long live my iMac DV SE 400 with the Graphite shell.
     
  12. Billicus macrumors 6502a

    Billicus

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    Charles City, Iowa
    #12
    I too use a G3 iMac 400 DV. It's starting to feel its age, but it runs OS X great. 10.2.4 definitely seems like it has sped the computer up to me. It feels awful slow on the new things - namely iPhoto 2. :rolleyes: Its still a great computer. :D
     
  13. kanaka macrumors member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2002
    #13
    Yup, definitely still using my iMac 400 MHz G3 as my main machine (384 MB RAM). I want a new desktop simply because I like new toys, but I haven't been able to justify plunking down the doughnero because my old iMac performs great on 10.2.4. I recently bought a new iBook, but my iMac is still my main machine unless I'm on the move.
     
  14. biscool macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2002
    #14
    Does my snow G3 600mhz/ SL CDRW/1gb RAM count? It runs everything that doesnt require a G4, photoshop, FCE, iapps, qt pro, etc. It looks cool, too...
     
  15. unc32 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    #15
    I've got a 250MHz G3 iMac here and it is essentially useless. It is so sluggish, it only has 128 mb RAM though. It's only real role is as a file server.
     
  16. Stelliform macrumors 68000

    Stelliform

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    #16
    I am noticing that 10.2.4 is using less RAM on my TiBook.

    Yesterday I was using 600 MB right after boot, and then it would slowly Max out the ram. I didn't notice a speed decrease, so I figure it was just optimizing my RAM usage. However today I only using 490MB after 7 hrs uptime with 10.2.4.

    Mabey it will go back to the usage it was at after a few days uptime.
     
  17. mac-lad macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Mar 21, 2002
    Location:
    Calgary, Alberta
    #17
    I have a 233 iMac running 9.1.
    With 160 Megs of RAM, there's no way I'm even contemplating OS X.

    But it's getting pretty close to upgrade time and the new 17" iMac is looking pretty good....:)
     
  18. 3777 thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2002
    #18
    Yes any G3 iMac......and even a really old tiBook can count:eek:

    There seems to be a real difference in reactions between people with 233mhz - 350mhz iMacs, and people with 350mhz+ systems.........I didn't think 200Mhz could make that big of a difference, but I guess it does with the G3. I can only imagine what OSX will be like on a 1.4Ghz G4, 17inch LCD iMac:D Can't wait......... though my iMac DV will probably be a viable internet system with an up to date OS for as long as the built in monitor works.
     
  19. biscool macrumors member

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2002
    #19
    My imac is on a cable connection, which makes everything on the net work great. I think a 500mhz G3 or higher with more than 256mb of RAM should run OS X with no problem. I just wish the video was upgradeable on imacs, games newer than quake3 are crap on a ATI Rage Ultra 16mb. But my mac is not meant to be a game machine, than what my gc, xbox, and ps2 are for...
     
  20. FredAkbar macrumors 6502a

    FredAkbar

    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2003
    Location:
    Santa Barbara, CA
    #20
    What is up with half the people on these threads having 400 or 500 GHz G3 iMacs with Jaguar that run really really slowly? I see that some of these guys have loads of memory and hard drive space (well, more than I do), but some of them say that their computers run really slowly with beachballs everywhere. What is up with you guys's computers? Sorry 'bout the rant, I'm just curious as to why some people say that OS X runs so slowly...it runs fine on my 400 MHz G3 with 256 MB RAM.

    --Fred
     
  21. rice_web macrumors 6502a

    rice_web

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2001
    Location:
    Minot, North Dakota
    #21
    I'm about to say goodbye to my old, trusty iMac DV 400. Though we've put hundreds into the machine (80GB hard drive and 768MB RAM), it's time for a DVD burner and a flat-panel display.

    I'm moving up to the FP iMac with the DVD burner sometime this month (or early March). Not so much for the speed of general tasks, but iMovie 3 and iDVD.

    Goodbye iMac DV. :(

    Hello iMac FP. :)
     
  22. coolsoldier macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2003
    Location:
    The 909
    #22
    I have an iMac G3 350, 192 MB of RAM, 10MB HD. Nothing spectacular, and it's no longer my primary system, but it runs fine and does everything I want it to do.
     
  23. Billicus macrumors 6502a

    Billicus

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2002
    Location:
    Charles City, Iowa
    #23
    10 MB HD eh? Seems pretty small to me...:D

    You know, I really don't know. I think that they are talking comparatively as to when their computers used OS 9.x only. My iMac 400 DV runs OS X as fast as I need it to. I rarely get beachballs.:rolleyes:
     
  24. job macrumors 68040

    job

    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2002
    Location:
    in transit
    #24
    i'm running 10.2.4 on a slot-loading imac too.

    blueberry DV to be precise.

    it was when the imacs were just as fast as the pro towers...

    i've maxed out the ram on my mobo (512MB) and tinkered with the internal parts to fit a 30GB HDD in place of the original 10GB. had some problems with the optical drive for a while...
     
  25. weev macrumors regular

    weev

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    #25
    Interesting to hear people found ye olde imac useful for running OSX.

    I gave it a go on my 500 graphite DV but found the OS way too sluggish and beachballs of death abounded.

    Also didn't like the way it blotted out parts of the screen in Classic, where type was over the desktop. My income app is Quark and so I was rebooting often between play and work.

    But alas, ended up having one almighty hard drive crash and had to reformat (lucky I do regular backups onto a 20Gb Imation Firedisk, a fine device), and now only run 9.2.2. I suspect one beachball too many...

    I think I'll wait to a) I have the dosh, b) the Powermac is proven to be a quiet machine. And that new 20" monitor -- droooool

    Miss the X experience but anticipation is everything, isn't it?
     

Share This Page