Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

ebuddy · Sep 23, 2003, 09:06 AM

There are probably posts all over the place regarding this topic and I've read many elsewhere. Most of what I read stated the installation process would be painfully slow and the apps would be agonizingly slow. Well... THEY WERE WRONG!

I'm giving the old iMac to the kids, giving the Tibook to wife, and now I'm waiting on Dual 2Ghz G5. I needed the old iMac to recognize my airport network. D-link makes a USB to wireless adaptor. (D-link DWL-122 w/ updated drivers for Mac OS 10.2+), but my iMac was still running OS9.2. What to do?! Update the iMac to Jaguar of course!

Installation; 2 hours
266mhz iMac w/ 190 mb's of RAM
6mb's video RAM
running 10.2.6.

MY OLD IMAC'S ALL GROWED UP AND RUNNING THE LATEST SOFTWARE LIKE A CHAMP! I can honestly tell you that the apps are not running painfully slow. In fact I was quite impressed w/ how quickly it can bring up the Classic environment. Naturally, it runs a little slowly on more CPU intensive projects, but not bad at all. Start up time-comparable to my 500mhz Tibook. Shutdown time, same. Bringing up Classic environment=same. If you're considering upgrading your 266mhz REV D+ do not hesitate. It's well worth running the most stable OS around! Just make sure you've got at least 190mb's RAM, 6mb's Video RAM and you're good to go Jaguar!!!

philzilla · Sep 23, 2003, 10:11 AM

i run it on my strawberry 266 w/384Mb. it's a bit chuggy, and i couldn't use it as my main machine, but it runs okay

JKT · Sep 23, 2003, 10:18 AM

It'll start running painfully slow once you get the dual 2.0GHz G5!

Personally, I'd try and up the RAM to greater than half a GB just to improve the performance even further.

wataru · Sep 23, 2003, 10:34 AM

I got my mom set up with Jaguar on a rev B iMac. After the initial complaining that she always does when anything changes, she settled down and enjoyed the stability.

I she couldn't tell the difference between 56k and DSL, so I don't think she has any complaints about the speed.

philzilla · Sep 23, 2003, 10:45 AM

Originally posted by JKT:
It'll start running painfully slow once you get the dual 2.0GHz G5!

who bloody told you i'm getting one of those?

damn Londoners, eavesdropping all over the country

mitchell_pgh · Sep 23, 2003, 11:48 AM

Ugh, I do wish I had the $$$'s for a G5, but I'll hang out with my little G4 for now. Perhaps when the first round of bumps come around.

I have a Rev. D iMac running OS X. It's great... I wouldn't want to do photoshop work or anything, but for email, music, surfing, etc. etc. It's just fine.

BZ · Sep 23, 2003, 12:17 PM

I have a friend (BIG PC GUY) who bought an iMac a long long long time ago (might be original blueberry).. Anywhoo... he recently came to me and asked if he could install OSX (providing he ups the RAM). I said yes, but now that I think about it I want to wait till Panther b/c everything I have heard sounds like Panther will be doable on old old old iMacs with a 20-40% increase in GUI speed.

FYI or can anyone validate?

BZ

malvolio · Sep 23, 2003, 05:34 PM

Yeah, if you like the way Jaguar runs on those old iMacs, you will love Panther!

blackbird_1.0 · Sep 23, 2003, 07:51 PM

i think there was a suggestion somewhere that panther actually somehow supported the original imac's vid card now, or seemed to, i just heard that somewhere

waffffffle · Sep 24, 2003, 12:05 AM

I've got 10.2 running on a Rev C. Tangerine 333 MHz iMac with 160 MB RAM. It is running as a web server with PHP and MySQL and performance is pretty good for those purposes.

I first had 10.1 server but then moved to 10.2 (10.2 Server won't install, it kernal panics on boot).

Works pretty well. I have it in a closet with a 600MHz Celeron PC running Mandrake. I wish I knew a good way of benchmarking the two so I could see which is faster.

cenutrio · Sep 24, 2003, 10:08 AM

I installed Jaguar in 233 and a 333 iMacs, they run fine. Installing basic Jag was faster though (around 35-45 minutes).

I'm very happy with performance.

I'll buy Panther the minute is out.

blackbird_1.0 · Sep 24, 2003, 09:03 PM

anybody know if the original imac's card is supported in panther or not?

mudzilla · Sep 25, 2003, 02:29 AM

Works pretty well. I have it in a closet with a 600MHz Celeron PC running Mandrake.

OMG!!!! he's a closet PC user!!!!

blackbird_1.0 · Sep 25, 2003, 04:18 AM

lol

Cipher13 · Sep 25, 2003, 04:37 AM

OSX on a 266 G3?

And you think it's quick? Goddamn, you must have a screwed up preception of speed.

iJed · Sep 25, 2003, 06:59 AM

I've stuck Jag on my old iMac 233 rev B and given it to my parents. My dad uses it all the time and only complains about the internet connection speed (56K modem) but that can't be helped until we get ADSL installed. However I would advise putting Panther on one of these machines as the UI performance increase on slow G3s seems incredible. Its so unbelievably faster on my 500MHz iBook that I'm sticking with a Panther beta over running Jaguar.

theolein · Sep 25, 2003, 07:27 AM

Got 10.2 running on my old Lombard 333MHz with 190MB RAm and, while it's a bit slower than my TiBook, it's usable and definitely a good idea as that's where I do all my testing of system customisation etc.

ebuddy · Sep 25, 2003, 07:49 AM

[q]And you think it's quick? Goddamn, you must have a screwed up preception of speed.[/q]

Now wait a minute. I don't recall saying I thought it was quick. It's a 266mhz iMac w/ (correction)160mb's of memory. It's never been quick.

Really, it's just for the kids and since all they're doing is surfing NEOPETS and reading their email and doing the occasional internet research for school, the old iMac suffices. I didn't want the kids learning Mac OS on an antiquated OS and I needed the iMac in my home network so...had to do it. I wanted to let others know not to hesitate. It's worth it. I will say this; the G5 will aide my perception of speed greatly.

Not delivery speed mind you as I'm still on wait list.

Someone had mentioned upgrading to at least 1/2 a gig. Unfortunately, not doable for anything REV A-D as the top slot is outfitted to accept a 128mb chip and the bottom cannot exceed 64...or so I read.

You notice latency in video (dock expanding kind of chunky) occasional flickers of screen when doing things, this kind of stuff, but more than acceptable for these rugrats!!!

Plus, it'll be nice to not have them bugging me about using the Tibook. Something about handing a $2500.00 laptop to a child-eesh.

Mac Write · Sep 25, 2003, 10:32 AM

I am running Jag on my beige G3 and it runs great. and when it's promoted to server duty in a few hours it will run even faster (at least if my G4 clears customs pay Apple for overnight and they send it Econo class!!! $60 for econo class ouch).

I have a Radeon Mac:Edition and apps run well. of course I haven't used anything faster so this is all I know.

Who cares about app launching time? just do something else on the computer while launching. I will miss the RCA out to my stereo though. Now I have to get a mini jack to RCA cable

I still don't get why Apple won't support a 333mhz PowerMac but support a 233mhz consumer Mac with Panther. it's purely political AKA jobs doesn't want Panther running on anything he didn't design.

philm · Sep 25, 2003, 04:12 PM

Originally posted by ebuddy:
[B]266mhz iMac w/ 190 mb's of RAM

I was thinking about putting OS X on my daughter's 266MHz iMac, but I read this Apple web site which I thought suggested that the max RAM for this machine is 128MB. Everyone here has more than this. Have I misunderstood the Apple web site?

Phil

Spheric Harlot · Sep 25, 2003, 06:14 PM

Originally posted by philm:
I was thinking about putting OS X on my daughter's 266MHz iMac, but I read this Apple web site which I thought suggested that the max RAM for this machine is 128MB. Everyone here has more than this. Have I misunderstood the Apple web site?

Phil

Yes.

Spheric Harlot · Sep 25, 2003, 06:16 PM

Originally posted by Mac Write:
I still don't get why Apple won't support a 333mhz PowerMac but support a 233mhz consumer Mac with Panther. it's purely political AKA jobs doesn't want Panther running on anything he didn't design.

Do a google on Apple and "new world architecture". Apple implemented a new motherboard design with the smurfMac and the iMac.

-s*

Zimwy · Sep 25, 2003, 07:35 PM

Hey all,
I'm running 10.2.6 on a Rev B Blueberry iMac, 266 160 MB Ram, 120 GB Hd right here! (Those are pictures of it).

It currently does web serving, music serving, irc serving, PHP, MySQL, File Serving, Remote Backup, the works. All pretty quickly! Does anyone know about Panther though? Does it indeed speed things up? I have everything set up so nicely I don't want to break it. Maybe I'll just stick with 10.2.6.....

gabe

austeros · Sep 25, 2003, 09:11 PM

Originally posted by Zimwy:
Hey all,
I'm running 10.2.6 on a Rev B Blueberry iMac, 266 160 MB Ram, 120 GB Hd right

very cool, but it cant be a rev b if its blueberry.

rev b was still a 233mhz bondi machine only, just had the better rage chip. the 266ers were rev c

ebuddy · Sep 26, 2003, 09:05 AM

and it wouldn't be 266mhz if it's a Bondi. I think those were 233mhz. Although, his pic looks like a blueberry so I think he got the mhz right.

that cube is the funniest thing I've ever seen my man! That ROCKS! Big ol' clear box with a power cord stickin' out of it's rear end. I'm crackin' up. Ol' Job's would be rolling in his grave if he were dead.

Someone was asking about max RAM in the old iMacs. Again, you can have a maximum 128mb chip in the top and 64 in the bottom for a total of 192mb's of RAM for any REV A-D machine. The later iMacs I believe can have two 256's, but I'm not sure. I hope that helps.

Spheric Harlot · Sep 26, 2003, 09:29 AM

Originally posted by ebuddy:
Someone was asking about max RAM in the old iMacs. Again, you can have a maximum 128mb chip in the top and 64 in the bottom for a total of 192mb's of RAM for any REV A-D machine. The later iMacs I believe can have two 256's, but I'm not sure. I hope that helps.

I'm running my 400 MHz iMac DV with 768MB RAM (512+256), so no, you're wrong.

The previous iMacs would take 256 MB ("Maximum will be 384 MB when higher-density DIMMs are produced.")

-s*

ebuddy · Sep 26, 2003, 10:05 AM

'm running my 400 MHz iMac DV with 768MB RAM (512+256), so no, you're wrong.

That's why I stated I wasn't sure. Your machine is upgradeable to a gig, so yes I was wrong. And of course, the later you go the more you get.

Phil is talking about revA-D. I'm not much aware of anything iMac beyond that as I went Tibook. Good luck Phil. We weren't much help to AJ, but perhaps some good can still come of the thread.