which os is best for my imac G4

[kaitlin4599]

ok so as most of you know i recently picked up a cheap imac G4 below are the specs for my imac

Machine Name:
iMac G4/1.0 15-Inch "FP" (USB 2.0)
Group:
iMac
Subgroup:
G4
Screen Size (inches):
15
Colour:
White
Model Identifier:
PowerMac6,1
Model Number:
M9285LL/A
Model Code
iMac USB 2.0
CPU Speed:
1.0GHz
RAM Type:
DDR PC2700 SODIMM & DIMM 333MHz
RAM Slots:
1 (only 1 SODIMM user accessible, with a DIMM slot internally)
Max RAM by Slot:
1 gig in the dimm sslot and the sodimm slot is empty

also an 80gig ide HDD

now here are a list of the mac OS i have to chose from please tell me which would be best for my mac and why

Jaguar Mac OS X 10.2.
Panther Mac OS X 10.3.
Tiger Mac OS X 10.4.

 

[redheeler]

10.4 Tiger for more speed, 10.5 Leopard for usability/app compatibility. Anything earlier than Tiger is too old to be very usable, and a 1 GHz G4 with 1 GB RAM should run it fine.

 

[AmazingHenry]

Tiger is a good choice. I run it on my 700MHz and web browsing performs really well considering the age of the computer. Your 1GHz can run Leopard, however, which will run more software. If you end up choosing Leopard, read the guide here to speed up your iMac.

 

[MysticCow]

Pick Tiger. That's the best of the three choices right now.

If you do pick 10.3 or 10.2, you will need to use Classic and run Classilla just for web browsing. Clunky, but workable. On Tiger, you have TenFourFox to use, which runs natively.

 

[AmazingHenry]

Pick Tiger. That's the best of the three choices right now.

If you do pick 10.3 or 10.2, you will need to use Classic and run Classilla just for web browsing. Clunky, but workable. On Tiger, you have TenFourFox to use, which runs natively.

With 10.3.9 you can run an older version of Camino, which will run faster, but it's pretty outdated, only good for things like Google and Wikipedia.

 

[0248294]

Yeah, forget about Jaguar and Panther, unless you have very specific software that only runs on that and not on 10.4+. Tiger is pretty balanced in speed and software availability. That said, if you're willing to trade some speed in for more software availability, go for Leopard.

 

[eyoungren]

I always suggest Leopard. It'll run on a 1GHz machine with 1GB ram.

It just depends on how far down the rabbit hole you are willing to go. If you just want to use the Mac with minimum hassle then stick with Tiger.

But if you're looking to expand your knowledge and tinker then making Leopard work may interest you.

Leopard gets a bad rap because initially it's slow. But few people bother to optimize it. There are things you can do, but only if you're willing to go beyond what the average user is willing to do.

So, Tiger if you just want to use the Mac. Leopard if you want to tinker.

 

[MysticCow]

As much as I love all of you, READ THE OP. He doesn't appear to have access to Leopard. He has access to 10.2, 10.3, and 10.4. No 10.5 access.

And even if he wanted to find shady access to Leopard, we can't help him.

 

[akator]

IMO Tiger is really the best option for G4 Macs. There's an abundance of rock-solid driver and software for Tiger and the OS runs extremely well on G4s. Both at the time and recently, I ran Leopard on various G4 machines but always ended up downgrading back to Tiger.

 

[AmazingHenry]

IMO Tiger is really the best option for G4 Macs. There's an abundance of rock-solid driver and software for Tiger and the OS runs extremely well on G4s. Both at the time and recently, I ran Leopard on various G4 machines but always ended up downgrading back to Tiger.

Same for me. I tried installing Leopard on my 700MHz Mac but I downgraded within 30 minutes. My 1.33GHz G4 is on Leopard because of more software support, but I may end up downgrading it. Tiger is very fast and stable and it probably is the best choice.

 

[eyoungren]

Tiger is very fast and stable and it probably is the best choice.

I have to disagree with this. I had nothing but problems with Tiger in a mixed OSX/Windows environment with a Windows server. Finder crashing with more than two copy commands and constant beachballs. Tiger was crap.

 

[AmazingHenry]

I have to disagree with this. I had nothing but problems with Tiger in a mixed OSX/Windows environment with a Windows server. Finder crashing with more than two copy commands and constant beachballs. Tiger was crap.

I have to disagree with this. I've never had these problems in Tiger before. Windows servers slow it down a bit, but other problems, I've never had.

 

[0248294]

I have to disagree with this. I had nothing but problems with Tiger in a mixed OSX/Windows environment with a Windows server. Finder crashing with more than two copy commands and constant beachballs. Tiger was crap.

Never had these problems either. Sorry Erik, but I think that's crap. Sounds more like a problem on your side than with the OS. Tiger is a solid operating system and is faster on older machines with less robust graphics options. Leopard might be a good OS, but it's quite a bit more system, and specifically GPU, intensive.

 

[bunnspecial]

Of the 3 you listed, I think you will find Tiger to be the fastest, most stable, and have the best software support.

Tiger-to date(and probably for the foreseeable future) was Apple's longest lived version of OS X at 29 months. It made the PPC to Intel transition. They had a LOT of time to get it right, and overall it morphed into a great OS.

 

[1042686]

On a side note, wouldn't the spinning beach ball/rainbow pizza of death be related to not enough ram or a unresponsive hard drive causing apps to hang? So more hardware related than software? if not, I'd love to know why - would be great to know!

 

[eyoungren]

I have to disagree with this. I've never had these problems in Tiger before. Windows servers slow it down a bit, but other problems, I've never had.

Never had these problems either. Sorry Erik, but I think that's crap. Sounds more like a problem on your side than with the OS. Tiger is a solid operating system and is faster on older machines with less robust graphics options. Leopard might be a good OS, but it's quite a bit more system, and specifically GPU, intensive.

Jaguar worked fine.
Panther worked fine.
Tiger had issues.
Leopard worked fine.

Whenever the server dropped a connection Tiger would beachball. Jaguar and Panther would simply disconnect and tell me so. Leopard would tell me that the server connection had dropped and ask me if I wanted to reconnect.

Between those four versions only Tiger gave me trouble.

That said…I never had any issues with Tiger on my personal laptop. I run it on one of the G4s at work and other than being inadequate as a print server it does what I need it to do.

I know it was an incendiary remark however. I was writing quickly at the time. I should have qualified my statement.
[doublepost=1474828937][/doublepost]

On a side note, wouldn't the spinning beach ball/rainbow pizza of death be related to not enough ram or a unresponsive hard drive causing apps to hang? So more hardware related than software? if not, I'd love to know why - would be great to know!

If you are meaning the beachballs I encountered, all of this was with a 1.8Ghz G5 with 4GB ram.

 

[chickenninja]

Imac G4 tip: You can get a wireless presentation remote from keyspan, and then use frontrow on your imac too

 

[DearthnVader]

Debian or bust.

 

[nglevin]

Tiger's probably the best choice of the three. Tiger versus Leopard comes down to personal preferences and whether you want a more modern Mac OS X and the Mac has a Quartz Extreme capable GPU (Leopard) versus the last OS X that can run Classic Mode for Mac OS 9 virtualization (Tiger).

There's some less obvious advantages mentioned, like how Leopard's better for networking with classic Macs. Anecdotally I, too, have found Leopard handles AppleTalk more reliably than Tiger.

Though most areas where I'd say Leopard is better, would be for quality-of-life features like Time Machine and lack of brushed metal (this can be easily fixed in Tiger, thanks to donationware).