Which would you rather have?

Zwhaler

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
Jun 10, 2006
6,746
1,023
Ok, just for fun, I thought it would be interesting to see how die-hard some of you die-hard mac users are, so answer me this. Which would you rather use (or be stuck on :D ) for one year:

A 633 Mhz G3 with 128mb of RAM (BUT you get to run Mac OSX 10.4 (let's pretend that the computer can handle it) OR

A quite fast 2.0 Ghz Pentium 4 with 512mb of RAM, BUT you have to run Windoze XP, with only the STOCK protection that comes with SP2. Toughie, eh?

Just thought I'd ask ;)

-ZW

(edit: arrrgh i forgot to add a poll :mad: )
 

AvSRoCkCO1067

macrumors 65816
Sep 6, 2005
1,401
0
CO
I wouldn't call a computer with 512 MB of Ram "quite fast", but definitely the Windows box. I love OS X, but only on nice hardware. It ran pretty well on my iBook G4, but anything slower than that would be pretty annoying to use IMO.

On the other hand, the Windows box would probably handle media and productivity apps a bit better, even though it is Windows.

Still, though, I bet the G3 could handle more open programs simultaneously than the Windows box!!! :p
 

Zwhaler

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
Jun 10, 2006
6,746
1,023
For what it's worth, is there any way to add a poll after you post the darn thread :eek:
 

kered22

macrumors 6502
May 26, 2006
354
1
Torrance, CA
Call me insane, but I'd use the 633Mhz G3. LOL Why? Because I've installed and run OS X on my Wallstreet Powerbook G3 266Mhz. 4GB hard drive, the RAM isn't maxed, 96MB I believe. It wasn't fast, wasn't great at multi-tasking but it actually runs things quite nicely if you use 10.2 Jaguar. 10.4 does run on it but both it and 10.3 are really too demanding.
 

Zwhaler

macrumors demi-god
Original poster
Jun 10, 2006
6,746
1,023
Well, I kind of figured that 633 mhz was just a tad slow? Maybe I am wrong but compared to the 2 gig i think its a tough decision.
 

kered22

macrumors 6502
May 26, 2006
354
1
Torrance, CA
633 with 128MB of RAM would be pretty bearable I think. 266Mhz didn't drive me insane (that I know of anyways LOL) but it is pretty slow.
 

ripfrankwhite

macrumors regular
Dec 13, 2005
184
5
Just goes to show how much I hate windows. LOL! It is a tough decision. I think that is hilarious that two machines so far apart in the spec department, can create such a tough decision. It says a lot for OS X.

With that said, you should probably go with the Pentium. I'm sorry to say such a thing. It breaks my heart. :(
 

Nermal

Moderator
Staff member
Dec 7, 2002
18,718
1,200
New Zealand
I'd go for the G3. My first Mac was an 800 MHz G3, and it "felt" faster than the Athlon 2000 it replaced.
 

tedrjr03

macrumors regular
Feb 9, 2006
174
0
id go with the mac because soon enough the pc is going to be unusable with all the viruses,trojan horses, and spyware, it will accumilate in just a few hours,lol
 

eXan

macrumors 601
Jan 10, 2005
4,714
18
Russia
I think I'd rather take a G3, but install OS 9 on it. 128 MB isnt enough for OSX, hell, even 512 MB isnt! :eek:
 

After G

macrumors 68000
Aug 27, 2003
1,583
1
California
Short answer:
G3. They're not so shabby. And I have a lot more I want to run on OS X than Windows.

Long answer:
This is assuming usable means I can open up at least one or two programs at a time. OS X wasn't usable for me when the HD kept thrashing. (I had an eMac with the minimum of memory before. Even G4, it's not pretty). Windows has a lot of free software, but being out of the loop for a while means that I forgot what cool things I wanted to run on Windows that were worth running anyway.
 

pknz

macrumors 68020
Mar 22, 2005
2,479
1
NZ
I really dislike using computers that can't keep up with me. So probably neither.
 

Spaceman Spiff

macrumors regular
Oct 9, 2003
243
0
The G3. The old 422mhz iMac I keep around is still pretty snappy, I have it on 10.3. Sometimes it seems to outperform my 1ghz eMac. Besides, I love having machines around that can still boot into classic. Original C&C LAN party! :D
 

NJuul

macrumors 6502
Mar 15, 2006
492
0
Boston
The G3. I have a 400 mhz sawtooth that is running Tiger quite well, so if you max the ram, it's probably going to perform just fine. It's a laptop, right?
I don't want to ever spend money on a windows box. Just not an option.
 

oblomow

macrumors 68030
Apr 14, 2005
2,857
6,281
Netherlands
I would take Windows laptop and replace the OS with a good linux distribution. Mind you, I'm not a linux guy, but it sure beats Windows anytime. Ubuntu would be a nice option. With Evolution (mail), OpenOffice,
Firefix and Gimp you're all set.