Need "apropriate" replacement for G3

[cybrix]

Hi.

My parents had a 300MHz G3 PowerMac (beige) that died during a flood at their house. The computer is always on and the water fell through the ceiling and flooded a few inches on the floor. Both the computer and the monitor are dead (amongst other things) The insurance asked us to detail what was in the computer but also recommend and get a price for what would be "equivalent" today. I did just that but they don't like my suggestion because it's "too expensive". The problem I have is with the monitor. The old one was a 17" CRT from Apple. My way of thinking was that everything used to be Apple-branded and looked consistent, then the new PC should be Apple-branded and look consistent. Apple computers have always looked "good" and that is part of what you buy when you buy a Mac. So I suggested a 1.8 G5 with the 20" Cinema Display because that is the smallest available (?) and is made to match the look and feel of the G5 box. They were quick to point out that there is a black 17" crt from mitsubishi available in the online store.

What do I do, what should I give them as an argument or what should the appropriate "replacement" be? What about RAM? I think the G3 had 128MB (an used MacOS 9) would a G5 with 256MB on Mac OS X be sufficient for an "equivalent performance ratio"? I don't think they understand the difference in requirement from the new OS and I can't prove it because I've never used OS X. The computer is now mostly used for web-browsing and my niece plays her games on it but the G3 was originally bought for a graphic design purpose using Photoshop, Illustrator and QuarkXpress.

Thanks.

 

[Blue Velvet]

What about an iMac then? The middle or top one?
All-in-one with the Apple look...

Just as capable for what you say it's for and a huge step-up from a G3, that's for sure...

 

[cybrix]

I thought about that and it is a nice machine but I'm afraid of all-in-ones. I like the tower because it's more upgradable and having a seperate monitor means you can change one without the other. Power-wise I'd be happy with any of the offerings, but I want the flexibility that the PowerMac gave us.

 

[redAPPLE]

i'd say, get the iMac (besides you had an iMac before the tragedy, right?).

 

[flyfish29]

I agree that the iMac is the way to go. A much better machine than you ever had and no worries about replacing anything..by the time anything needs replacement you would want to buy a new one anyway to keep up probably. that being said, wait a few days and see if this headless imac shows up at the keynote...that might be your best option. Also, you are talking about replacing a cRT with a flatscreen...don't get too greedy or they will tell you HAVE to replace it with a CRT which is the same as you had before...enjoy the fact that they will probably buy you a brand spankin new imac......well not you, but your parents or whoever it is. good luck

 

[wordmunger]

It all depends on what they consider the "equivalent" computer. The PowerMac G3 300 was the top of the line computer when it came out. A 17-inch monitor was a luxury monitor at that time; most computers had 15-inchers (though up to 21-inchers were available). I'd say a dual 2.5 with a 23-inch cinema display would be about the current equivalent.

OTOH, you could buy a current eMac and blow that computer's socks off. But that's like replacing a 1998 BMW with a 2005 Hyundai.

You'd have a better case if the computer was a little newer. A 7-year-old computer is dangerously close to being a doorstop.

EDIT: About RAM. The Beige G3 had a maximum of 192 MB RAM, so you could argue that 128 MB is 2/3 of 192. You should get a new computer with 2/3 the max of 8 GB, or about 5 GB of RAM: 1 pair of 1GB sticks, and 3 pairs of 512 MB sticks.

 

[26139]

iMac

The new iMacs are pretty versatile with all the user serviceable parts....if not, maybe a 1.6 tower?