beige g3: 10.2.x or 10.3.x?

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by jhu, Nov 3, 2005.

  1. jhu macrumors 6502a


    Apr 4, 2004
    i just recently erased my netbsd install and put 10.2.8 on this beige g3 on a ufs filesystem. would 10.3.x be faster on this thing or should i just stick with 10.2.8?
  2. disconap macrumors 68000


    Oct 29, 2005
    Portland, OR
    What are the specs (specifically HD, RAM, and processor speed? There are a lot of decent processor upgrade for beige G3s, btw...

    I would stick with 10.2 if it's running everything as you want it run. I'd go to 10.3 if your RAM can handle it, but it's WAY more of a RAM hog and takes up more HD space, depending on your install. Half our OSX machine run 10.2 and the other half run 10.3. The G3s run 10.2, but that's mostly because they are lower end...
  3. FFTT macrumors 68030


    Apr 17, 2004
    A Stoned Throw From Ground Zero
    10.2.8 is about as far as you can go without a USB/FW card.

    Even then, I'm not sure if you can get Panther installed or not.

    I guess they'd know more over at Xlr8yourmac
  4. prostuff1 macrumors 65816


    Jul 29, 2005
    Don't step into the kawoosh...
    The only way to get 10.3 on a Beige G3 is to use XPostFacto.

    I have done this succesfully and it runs pretty well. I put a larger HD in mine (40 GB) and i max the ram out to 768 MB. with that it ran pretty well and was usable for general tasks and a few other. The only thing i wish i would have done was put a PCI video card in it.
  5. jhu thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Apr 4, 2004
    do you notice any difference between 10.2 and 10.3?
  6. kingtj macrumors 68020

    Oct 23, 2003
    Brunswick, MD
    Beige G3 with 10.2 or 10.3

    I tried both 10.2 and 10.3 on a beige G3 for a while. My experience was, both versions seemed to run similarly. I preferred 10.3 just so it felt a little more up-to-date, and because it was supposed to have improved video drivers in it.

    I'd say the single most important upgrade to a beige G3 running any version of OS X is putting a PCI IDE controller card in it! The controller built onto the motherboard itself is SLOW. Plus, with a controller card, you no longer run into limitations with the bootable OS X partition having to be no larger than 9GB in size - because OS X sees the IDE controller cards as though they're SCSI drives. I think Sonnet makes a nifty little PCI card that gives you this IDE controller, firewire and USB ports all in one. Works great for a beige tower, where you've only got 3 slots you can use.

    After that, of course, would be some type of G3 or G4 processor upgrade.

  7. jhu thread starter macrumors 6502a


    Apr 4, 2004
    several things i've noticed so far:

    1) hfs+ is faster than ufs. that's good except hfs+ is case insensitive.
    2) 10.2.8 crashes randomly. i think it's due to the ati rage iic driver. i have 10.2.5 installed now and don't have any problems like that (i just jinxed myself)

Share This Page