What would be better for my Clamshell-- a RAM upgrade or an OS upgrade?

Ariii

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
682
5
Chicago
Hi! I have a triple boot of OS 9, OS X Puma, and Debian Linux with FVWM installed as well on my Indigo. I have a restore disk of Tiger for a G4 Mac Mini, and I had no problems using a 800 MHz (I'm pretty sure) iMac G4 install disk for Puma on my Clamshell. It was laggy and I've heard that it has become more efficient. Panther just costs so much I'm not sure I want to buy it, though. Would it make up for my lack of RAM? I think I might upgrade the RAM after getting a new battery. Mine's a FireWire so I'm pretty sure it was supported, and I would just disable DashBoard and SpotLight. Which would boost functionality the most for the least money? I would otherwise be fine with deleting my OS 9 partition, but the previous user left Office on it, which I never had before. I do have enough disk space, so that wouldn't be an issue.
 

tayloralmond

macrumors 6502
Mar 26, 2009
446
4
Michigan, USA
Hi! I have a triple boot of OS 9, OS X Puma, and Debian Linux with FVWM installed as well on my Indigo. I have a restore disk of Tiger for a G4 Mac Mini, and I had no problems using a 800 MHz (I'm pretty sure) iMac G4 install disk for Puma on my Clamshell. It was laggy and I've heard that it has become more efficient. Panther just costs so much I'm not sure I want to buy it, though. Would it make up for my lack of RAM? I think I might upgrade the RAM after getting a new battery. Mine's a FireWire so I'm pretty sure it was supported, and I would just disable DashBoard and SpotLight. Which would boost functionality the most for the least money? I would otherwise be fine with deleting my OS 9 partition, but the previous user left Office on it, which I never had before. I do have enough disk space, so that wouldn't be an issue.
There's really no reason to upgrade to Panther...Panther is just as dead as Puma is (in regards to software support). Unless you're willing to spend the money on Tiger, I'd save money for other upgrades. In regards to the RAM, I sincerely doubt you'll see performance improvements by going from Puma to Panther. If I were you, I'd forget about Panther, max the RAM, then look into installing Tiger when you get the money down the road.
 
Comment

Aameiel

macrumors regular
Jan 22, 2011
159
4
Cape Coral, FL
There's really no reason to upgrade to Panther...Panther is just as dead as Puma is (in regards to software support). Unless you're willing to spend the money on Tiger, I'd save money for other upgrades. In regards to the RAM, I sincerely doubt you'll see performance improvements by going from Puma to Panther. If I were you, I'd forget about Panther, max the RAM, then look into installing Tiger when you get the money down the road.
I agree i feel that maxing out your ram would be a better upgrade :)
 
Comment

Ariii

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
682
5
Chicago
There's really no reason to upgrade to Panther...Panther is just as dead as Puma is (in regards to software support). Unless you're willing to spend the money on Tiger, I'd save money for other upgrades. In regards to the RAM, I sincerely doubt you'll see performance improvements by going from Puma to Panther. If I were you, I'd forget about Panther, max the RAM, then look into installing Tiger when you get the money down the road.
I heard that they made Tiger more efficient but then made it run slower with less features, so I've seen things to minimize in Tiger such as the Dashboard, etc. that I'll try. And I'm not in that big of a hurry since Debian supports a lot of modern applications. Thanks!
 
Comment

iThinkergoiMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 20, 2010
2,666
4
Terra
I heard that they made Tiger more efficient but then made it run slower with less features, so I've seen things to minimize in Tiger such as the Dashboard, etc. that I'll try. And I'm not in that big of a hurry since Debian supports a lot of modern applications. Thanks!
Don't know where you heard that Tiger has fewer features than the versions of OS X that came before it. That's complete bunk.

If you don't need more features than what you've got, then just max out the RAM.
 
Comment

Ariii

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
682
5
Chicago
Don't know where you heard that Tiger has fewer features than the versions of OS X that came before it. That's complete bunk.

If you don't need more features than what you've got, then just max out the RAM.
Ahh... sorry. I meant more features. I saw the Server edition for $40, but it was a Universal binary. I'm buying a G3 as a server, so I might need that later. Does the fact that it's a universal binary change its performance?

Also, I've seen how expensive it is, and I've always wanted a TiBook, so would it be a better idea to buy a TiBook with Tiger pre-installed, clone the hard-drive, and sell it? I'd want one with Leopard, though, so I'd probably just buy a 12'' and then over-price it on eBay and then see if I can find the 1 GHz model in 15'' or 17'' with Leopard (There's a couple features that I used a lot and a couple applications that I used frequently. Plus the dock in Leopard looks amazing and the things to emulate in Tiger don't work that well).
 
Last edited:
Comment

iThinkergoiMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 20, 2010
2,666
4
Terra
Ahh... sorry. I meant more features. I saw the Server edition for $40, but it was a Universal binary. I'm buying a G3 as a server, so I might need that later. Does the fact that it's a universal binary change its performance?
A slight niggling nuance, but Universal Binary refers to whether an application can run natively on both PPC and Intel or not. Though the entire OS will install on both PPC and Intel machines, it's not Universal Binary (because the installer will install different stuff depending on your platform and because the OS is not an application). Performance, however, will be unaffected.
 
Comment

Ariii

macrumors 6502a
Original poster
Jan 26, 2012
682
5
Chicago
A slight niggling nuance, but Universal Binary refers to whether an application can run natively on both PPC and Intel or not. Though the entire OS will install on both PPC and Intel machines, it's not Universal Binary (because the installer will install different stuff depending on your platform and because the OS is not an application). Performance, however, will be unaffected.
Oh, thanks! I'll look into that. Do you know if you can clone a hard-drive of a G4 to a G3 using Super-Duper or the dd utility in Terminal to create a bootable operating system? A G4 iMac restore disk worked on my Clamshell, so does it have a chance of working?
 
Comment

iThinkergoiMac

macrumors 68030
Jan 20, 2010
2,666
4
Terra
Oh, thanks! I'll look into that. Do you know if you can clone a hard-drive of a G4 to a G3 using Super-Duper or the dd utility in Terminal to create a bootable operating system? A G4 iMac restore disk worked on my Clamshell, so does it have a chance of working?
It may work. There are some significant differences between the G3 and G4, but it should still work. I've done it between two Intel Macs, but not between a G3 and a G4. I suggest backing up the G3 and then trying it. The absolute worst thing that could happen is it doesn't work.
 
Comment

Similar threads

  • dbdjre0143
6
Replies
6
Views
668
  • Haemoglobin
6
Replies
6
Views
680
  • dbdjre0143
10
Replies
10
Views
951
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.