Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

macintologist · May 20, 2003, 03:01 AM

It's hard choosing between the oringinal 8100/80 and the B%W G3 but I gotta say that the Blue & White G3 was the greatest Powermac (professional mac) ever made for its time.

I'm working on a friend's and I installed jaguar and did some other things and it works just beautifully, and it has firewire too for iMovie.. and it opens so quickly.. and its just beautiful.

What do you think is the best powermac ever made for its time?

DrBoar · May 20, 2003, 03:34 AM

B&W G3 towers above the rest

The 8100 still was a quadra on steroides, not easy to intall stuff in and that old nubus standard. IMO the PPC did not take of until the PCI generation.

Anyone with a a B&W G3/450 had no reason to upgrade to G4 for years, even now it is a nice machine! A computer can not age with more grace than the B&W G3

The IIfx also lasted a long time, but it was a quirky design with its PAL memory shared with no other computer and the black SCSI terminator block.

My hope is that a new classic master piece is coming up soon

Mac Zealot · May 20, 2003, 03:38 AM

Hrmmm...

Long hard thoughts. For me it's on the fence between the cube, blue and white, and quicksilver.

The b&w g4 was beautiful, you must admit that.. it was also the start of a new generation.

I never really liked the graphite G4s, they're cool, but when I first started wanting a mac guess what it was...
lol

Dp533/cinema display.

I was totally ecstatic when the QS came out, because even though they ditched the cube, it was just as beautiful, but in desktop form... expansion.. it seemed the perfect balance of looks and function for me!

It still is

But the cube was beautiful as well, and the coolest computer ever, and from time to time I find myself looking at them on ebay. The B&W tho, I almost wanted one more then I did a g4, and so I had a really tough decision to make lol

macintologist · May 20, 2003, 04:57 AM

the problem is that the quicksilver colored powermacs are overshadowed by the fact that the fastest PeeCees are faster.

Back in the days of the B&W, it was the fastest personal computer, could beat the pants off any Pentium II

jwest · May 20, 2003, 01:41 PM

Well while the B&W was a sweet machine I would say the 8/9600's were some of the sweetest machines.

But fear not.. i won't recommend the pm 7100..

used one for a year. I was thankful to upgrade to a pmac g3 266.

Jeff

Scotttheking · May 20, 2003, 02:03 PM

Powermac 9600, the dual one if there was one, otherwise the 350MHz one.
Apple has never made tower that compares since (curse them for killing the 9700).
6 PCI, lots of drive bays, just one nice machine all around. Oh, and very very expandable.

thefamousmred · May 20, 2003, 07:33 PM

The 75/76/86/9600-class machines were absolutely incredible. The 85/9500 were great too, although they lose points because their cases tried to kill you if you tried to upgrade them. The x600-class machines could take pretty much any upgrade you threw at them, and many of them are still going strong. My 7600 is on its 4th CPU, 3rd graphics card, hard drives 5, 6, and 7, and 3rd optical drive. Sound + video in/out were great, too. They even run OS X reasonably well. Not bad for an architecture that was introduced in 1995.

You only asked about Powermacs, but the SE/30 and IIci deserve some recognition, too. They were powerhouses for their day.

Lateralus · May 20, 2003, 08:54 PM

Gotta say the 86/9600 line.

Incredible machines.

drHo · May 20, 2003, 09:37 PM

Gotta agree with the B&W g3's. Were the fastest personal computer for the time (the 450 model), VERY easy to upgrade, held a unheard of 1gig-o-ram of RAM (its still a good amount this days), had Firewire, USB...and looked very different. Thats why i bought one!! :-D Use it till this day running 10.2.6! Lets see an old PII run Windows XP! HA!
Only thing i wish it had? An AGP slot!!

horrorbiz · May 21, 2003, 12:39 AM

<<Only thing i wish it had? An AGP slot!! >>

I hear that! If it wasn't for the lack of agp I probably wouldn't even be thinking of replacing my B&W G3!

jcadam · May 21, 2003, 12:58 AM

Originally posted by horrorbiz:
<<Only thing i wish it had? An AGP slot!! >>

I hear that! If it wasn't for the lack of agp I probably wouldn't even be thinking of replacing my B&W G3!

Yep, instead of buying my new 867 MDD, I would have just slapped a G4 upgrade and a Radeon 8500 into my B&W.

One question though:

At the time of the B&W's release, had AGP 2X been introduced? If not, AGP 1x would have been pretty worthless (and not much faster than 66mhz PCI), since very few modern cards would run on it. Most are AGP 2x/4x dual mode. Some are 8x/4x/2x.

Powaqqatsi · May 21, 2003, 08:46 AM

9600/350, duh.

Cipher13 · May 21, 2003, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by Powaqqatsi:
9600/350, duh.

Ditto.

Easy.

angelmb · May 21, 2003, 01:20 PM

Blue & White indeed !

and if you ask about the pro-portable I would say the Pismo.

horrorbiz · May 21, 2003, 02:25 PM

at the time of the B&W G3 I don't think AGP was introduced at all... so I am not saying it's their fault.. it's just the only reason that I need to give it a new friend_

bateman1 · May 21, 2003, 03:43 PM

I'm running 10.2.6 sans problems on my 350/B&W. I only have 384 RAM installed on it, but the fact that i just recently overclocked it too a 400 G3 really gives it some longer legs to stride on. I'm surprised how easy it was to do this and stabillity has not waivered a bit.

I wish that i could do more while burning CD's or play some newer games (UT is more than playable), but for the day to day work that i do, including mediocre Photoshop work (more play than work), I am impressed that this computer doesn't feel like I'm lugging a cement block around on a small string.

Actually I'm not surprised, this was a great computer, and will hold me over until the 970 for sure!

cocamix · May 21, 2003, 03:57 PM

Blue and White!!

Lateralus · May 21, 2003, 07:03 PM

Originally posted by drHo:
...held a unheard of 1gig-o-ram of RAM...

Not entirely true.

The Power Mac 7500, which was released in 1995, is capable of holding 1GB of RAM. As were it's cousins, the 7300 and 7600.

The Power Mac 9500, which was released in 1996, is capable of holding 1.5GBs of RAM. And it's little brother, the 9500, which was also released in 1996, is capable of holding 1GB or RAM as well.

The Power Mac 9600, which was released in 1997, is capable of holding 1.5GBs as well. And it's little brother, the 8600, which was also released in 1997, is capable of holding 1GB of RAM as well.

CubeBoy · May 21, 2003, 07:50 PM

Best Pro-Mac by Category

Aethestics: Cube
Innovation: Cube
Speed: B&W G3
Portability: Pismo

drHo · May 21, 2003, 09:35 PM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Not entirely true.

The Power Mac 7500, which was released in 1995, is capable of holding 1GB of RAM. As were it's cousins, the 7300 and 7600.

The Power Mac 9500, which was released in 1996, is capable of holding 1.5GBs of RAM. And it's little brother, the 9500, which was also released in 1996, is capable of holding 1GB or RAM as well.

The Power Mac 9600, which was released in 1997, is capable of holding 1.5GBs as well. And it's little brother, the 8600, which was also released in 1997, is capable of holding 1GB of RAM as well.

Sh1t! Really? I though those held 768MB of Ram...or 768MB was the claim by apple..and now since they make bigger ram chips they can hold 1GB-1.5GB? Same story was for the pismo..apple said it would only hold 512mb...but back then they didnt make 512MB chips like they do now..so now they hold 1gb...

Lateralus · May 21, 2003, 09:55 PM

Originally posted by drHo:
..and now since they make bigger ram chips they can hold 1GB-1.5GB?

Correct.

But it is understandable that most people don't know that since most/many Mac-specification web sites still list the 'official' specs from Apple that were made upon the machines initial release.

drHo · May 22, 2003, 02:06 AM

cool. so if thats the case...will the B&W hold 2GB? 512X4?

Scotttheking · May 22, 2003, 02:13 AM

Originally posted by drHo:
cool. so if thats the case...will the B&W hold 2GB? 512X4?

no, unfortunately

chrisutley · May 22, 2003, 02:27 AM

http://www.silicium.org/images/catal...mac/mac2ci.jpg

The Macintosh IIci, the best Pro-Mac ever!

GlobalNomad · May 22, 2003, 04:16 AM

The best pro mac ever, PISMO 500Mhz. Wasn't it the fast laptop in its day?

Also it was the last of the Black Macs. Plust most Wintel laptops have all copied it (Dell, Compaq, do i need go on?).

Mac Zealot · May 22, 2003, 04:52 AM

Agreed to an extent.

The g3 days...

[imitates strongbad]

Those were... good days.

Commodus · May 22, 2003, 09:27 AM

I would definitely say that the B&W G3s were the best. The most important thing they did was to introduce the new case style. Everyone was wondering what Apple would do after the iMac, and that was the answer. It instantly declared that Macs weren't going to be beige anymore, and offered case design features that weren't going to show up for awhile yet in the x86 world (mainly that side door for the mainboard).

I also remember them because of the Quake 3 Test release that hit Macs first. Anyone who happened to have a B&W PowerMac G3 for the weeks when Q3Test was Mac-exclusive was suddenly the hippest person in all of gamedom. I didn't have a Mac, but I know that if I'd had the money back then, I would have been sorely tempted...

wulf · May 22, 2003, 11:15 AM

Yep, the x600's rocked. At work I had a 9600 (sweeet) and at home an 8600, which my mum still uses to surf and run Quark. Every time I visit her I have a little daydream about taking it back for a mod-fest

As for the portables, my gf has a Pismo, and to this day I am still p!**ed off about my tricked-out Lombard getting robbed from my flat. Man I loved that machine. When I got it, it was as fast as the fastest PowerMac (400Mhz), though actually there may have been a 450Mhz B&W by then... but still, it smoked.

Despite the fact that the insurance eventually replaced it with a Ti867, I still miss my trusty Lombard...

booboo · May 22, 2003, 05:10 PM

Of all my Mac's I've used as my main machine over the years, in order:

Centris 610, 650, PowerMac 6100, 7100, 6100 DOS, 8500/120, 9500/150, 7600/132, 8600/200, 8600/250 (Mach3) G3 266, G3 300, B&W 350, G4/400, G4/733, G4/533DP and briefly a G4/867 MDD

The ones that really stick out as excellent examples of power/price are:

6100/66
8600/250 Mach3
B&W G3/350 Sawtooth
G4 533/DPP

My favourite, if I had to pick one, would be the G4 533/DP which I've had longer than any other Mac, and still doesn't disappoint (especially when compared with subsequent models)

The ones that did disappoint:

8600/200
G3/266
G4/733 DA
G4 MDD 867

PS: A scott who calls himself the king needs to grow up.

drHo · May 22, 2003, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
no, unfortunately

drHo · May 22, 2003, 06:15 PM

Originally posted by booboo:
Of all my Mac's I've used as my main machine over the years, in order:

Centris 610, 650, PowerMac 6100, 7100, 6100 DOS, 8500/120, 9500/150, 7600/132, 8600/200, 8600/250 (Mach3) G3 266, G3 300, B&W 350, G4/400, G4/733, G4/533DP and briefly a G4/867 MDD

The ones that really stick out as excellent examples of power/price are:

6100/66
8600/250 Mach3
B&W G3/350 Sawtooth
G4 533/DPP

My favourite, if I had to pick one, would be the G4 533/DP which I've had longer than any other Mac, and still doesn't disappoint (especially when compared with subsequent models)

The ones that did disappoint:

8600/200
G3/266
G4/733 DA
G4 MDD 867

PS: A scott who calls himself the king needs to grow up.

The B&W didnt use the Sawtooth mobo, they used the Yosemite mobo. the 2nd Generation G4's (with AGP) used the Sawtooth. Hope i'm right

Scotttheking · May 22, 2003, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by booboo:
PS: A scott who calls himself the king needs to grow up.

Now that's just mean. I wanted Scott, but it was already taken. That was about my 5th try for a username that wasn't taken.

Please either refrain from posting personal attacks or refrain from posting.

Lateralus · May 22, 2003, 09:36 PM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
Now that's just mean.

I got 'ya back G-Dawg.

Fo Shizzle.

Luca Rescigno · May 22, 2003, 11:43 PM

AGP was around when the B&W G3 came out. Heck, AGP 2x was even around when the beige G3s were released in 1997. My brother recently obtained a boatload of old PCs, Pentium IIs and IIIs from 1997-1999, and all of them have AGP 2x. He has a GeForce 4MX in one of them.

My vote is for the 9600... super expandable, super powerful, just an awesome computer. Honorable mention goes to the Radius System 81/110 for being utterly kick-ass for its day (110 MHz 601 processor, Thunder IV graphics), and also to the Daystar Genesis MP233+ for having quad 233 MHz 604es.

Simon · May 23, 2003, 04:15 AM

Originally posted by booboo:
PS: A scott who calls himself the king needs to grow up.

OT:

I agree 100%. Especially if it's the same guy who does a **** job as a mod (like telling people not to post because he doesn't share their views instead of telling others to stop attacking that person -> http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=161437 ).

Back on topic:

I second the IIci. Do you guys remeber how fast its 25MHz 030 felt when you came to it after using the sluggish II? A godsend.

The IIfx was a beast. But it was too exotic and buggy.

The 9600 was great for people who like to expand, but it was huge and I always cut my hands on the sharp internals "PC-style" when trying to upgrade.

The cube was a beauty. But not all that practical compared to the present iMac G4.

I'd say take the case of a MDD, give it a third mirror (with USB/FW/Audio ports behind), make it as quiet as a G4 iMac and you have a killer.

Lateralus · May 23, 2003, 02:48 PM

Originally posted by Simon:
OT:

I agree 100%. Especially if it's the same guy who does a **** job as a mod (like telling people not to post because he doesn't share their views instead of telling others to stop attacking that person -> http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=161437 ).

Hey man, **** off.

I am sick of you people trying to undermine the authority of the moderators. These people volunteer to do what they do. Show some damned respect.

And FYI, I think that what he did showed some good insight. Anybody that has followed any of Digi-J's postings should know that if he isnt flaming at a given moment, he will be not much later on. Scott was simply trying to stop an impending flame war which ended up happening anyways because Digi-J decided to yet again be defiant in the face of authority.

I cannot believe anyone on this board would decide to stand with a troll instead of a volunteer moderator who is only trying to keep things civil.

Simon · May 23, 2003, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by PowerMacMan:
Hey man, **** off.

Nice tone there. Keep up the good work.

BTW buddy, respect is something people have to earn. It's not something you own. That's true for mods as well as for anybody else.

Authority arises from respect. The other way around is called fascism. But since you want me to "**** off" just because I have a different view on this issue than you, you seem to favor fascist methods anyhow. Congrats.

Lateralus · May 23, 2003, 05:13 PM

Originally posted by Simon:
Nice tone there. Keep up the good work.

BTW buddy, respect is something people have to earn. It's not something you own. That's true for mods as well as for anybody else.

Authority arises from respect. The other way around is called fascism. But since you want me to "**** off" just because I have a different view on this issue than you, you seem to favor fascist methods anyhow. Congrats.

Haha. I'm a fascist for telling somebody who told a volunteer moderator that he was doing a **** job to **** off?

RyanG3 · May 23, 2003, 09:36 PM

Put my vote in for B&W G3!!!
My G3 400 still going strong today running 10.2.6!

Simon · May 24, 2003, 02:44 AM

Lots of B&W G3 fans here.

The B&W G3s are good machines, but doesn't the look kind of wear off too fast? I mean, after having it for a couple of months I found that it just looked too much like tupper ware. The QS are also made out of plastics but somehow they look much more serious...

stuffedmonkey · May 24, 2003, 01:47 PM

No votes for the Sawtooth G4s? I love mine. Hasent given me ANY problems in 3 and a half years, tons of upgrades available, 4 ram slots, agp, reliable firewire.....

OreoCookie · May 24, 2003, 03:36 PM

I know that my PowerBook G3 Kanga was pretty much a souped up PowerBook 3400, but it kicked ass back then. I still have the review saying that it is the fastest notebook on the planet at that time!

Think of it, 1998: 5 gigs of hd (the largest one available -- the smaller Wallstreets had only two), 96 Megs of RAM (!) -- far above the overall average of somewhere between 32 and 64, 250 MHz G3 CPU (the best Intel could do back then was a 233 PI!), 2.5 hours of battery life, SCSI, etc. I loved that machine. I had to sell it for two reasons: It is the only G3 class Mac that does not support OS X (yes, you could hack it ...), and the 800 x 600 screen. Too small. So I saved some cash and bought a first gen iBook. Pretty disappointing as it felt a lot sluggisher than my Kanga!

coolmac · May 24, 2003, 09:28 PM

It's the only Powermac I've ever had, but my Quicksilver 2002 933Mhz Powermac has not given me even any problems in 18 months of use.

It's quiet, unobtrusive and fast, and the case is very nice.

michaelb · May 25, 2003, 04:50 AM

SE/30 was da Mac.

You guys are all kids!

In its day, the 68030 processor with onboard FPU kicked some serious ass, running about 5x the speed of a Mac Plus.
.
.
.

Anyway, I'm surprised no one's mentioned the obvious...

The Best Pro-Mac ever: the 970-based PowerMac that has my name on it 1 second after it's announced.

Doesn't exist yet, you say?

Oh, I bet it does, in some Taiwanese factory, perhaps getting on a boat right this moment on its way to Apple in Cupertino for an unveiling over the next several months.

And the design... it will make the B&W G3 look like some rock formation in Yellowstone National Park!

Simon · May 25, 2003, 04:55 AM

Originally posted by michaelb:
SE/30 was da Mac.

You guys are all kids!

In its day, the 68030 processor with onboard FPU kicked some serious ass, running about 5x the speed of a Mac Plus.

Yeah, the SE/30 was much better than the Plus, but when we got the first IIci the SE/30 got degraded to a print server.

michaelb · May 25, 2003, 05:30 AM

Originally posted by Simon:
Yeah, the SE/30 was much better than the Plus, but when we got the first IIci the SE/30 got degraded to a print server.

Oh yeah, well when the G4 came out the B&W G3 that everyone's raving about got its guts ripped out (DVD drive, RAM, etc) and put in the G4!

mike one · May 25, 2003, 02:50 PM

Originally posted by macintologist:
It's hard choosing between the oringinal 8100/80 and the B%W G3 but I gotta say that the Blue & White G3 was the greatest Powermac (professional mac) ever made for its time.

I'm working on a friend's and I installed jaguar and did some other things and it works just beautifully, and it has firewire too for iMovie.. and it opens so quickly.. and its just beautiful.

What do you think is the best powermac ever made for its time?

as an owner of a rev 1 bw350 i'd have to say i loved it, except for no ata slave support, and only 1 5" drive bay. both were unforgivable, and a complete pile of horse $hite on apple's part, damn bastards.
i just got a beige g3 running at 450MHz, by far a better machine than the bw. 4 full size 5" bays! WTF! 4!!! and slave support! and the blue and white had 1!!!???!?!? i think it was a firewire conspiracy on apples part, to get people to buy goddamn external peripherals.... what crap....

BEIGE G3 wins.

jog · May 26, 2003, 11:22 AM

IIfx.

k2director · May 26, 2003, 02:45 PM

The original Mac II gets my vote. Few here will even remember it (released in '87), but it was the first Mac ever to have:

1) Color
2) Expansion slots
3) Separate monitor

I don't think there's ever been a Mac that's had so many significant firsts.

Every other Mac to date had used the all-in-one design with a black&white monitor. Using the Mac II truly put you in a different world.

OreoCookie · May 28, 2003, 02:20 AM

Originally posted by k2director:
The original Mac II gets my vote. Few here will even remember it (released in '87), but it was the first Mac ever to have:

1) Color
2) Expansion slots
3) Separate monitor

I don't think there's ever been a Mac that's had so many significant firsts.

Every other Mac to date had used the all-in-one design with a black&white monitor. Using the Mac II truly put you in a different world.

That's not so many firsts at all. I have had an Amiga 500 with a separate 14" color monitor in 1988 (but the machine was out for quite a while). The Amiga 2000 had also expansion slots, color and a separate monitor. And a GUI.

The Mac II didn't have novelties in that sense.