 |
 |
os 10.0.2
|
|
|
|
|
Fresh-Faced Recruit
Join Date: Aug 2006
Status:
Offline
|
|
Hello i would like to put os 10.0.2 on my old imac g3 can you get msn on that operating system
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Dec 2000
Status:
Offline
|
|
Your iMac should be able to run at least Mac OS X 10.3.x. Depending on what model it is, it may be able to run 10.4.x. You should look into one of those instead of 10.0.x, because using 10.0.x is about as pleasant as eating your own eyeball.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status:
Offline
|
|
If not 10.3 then get at least Mac OS 10.1. I agree, 10.0 = asking for trouble.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Mar 2004
Status:
Offline
|
|
April Fool's is supposed to be the first day of April... not the last.
|
|
-HI-
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Buenos Aires
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by CharlesS 
using 10.0.x is about as pleasant as eating your own eyeball.
I was about to say "eating your testicles, while they're still attached".
|
Y no entienden nada... ¡y cómo se divierten!...
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Los Angeles
Status:
Offline
|
|
You need 10.1 at the bare minimum. 10.0 was so incomplete that Apple gave the 10.1 upgrade away for free.
|
"The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield and government to gain ground." TJ
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Addicted to MacNN
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: The Sar Chasm
Status:
Offline
|
|
I've got 10.3 running here on a Blueberry 350 mz G3 iMac, and it runs fine. 10.4 would just about fill up the drive. Also, RAM is a consideration. I think 10.3 will run on 128 mb, though 10.4 requires at least 256, and really need 512 for acceptable performance. 10.3 will actually seem a good bit faster than 10.0.x.
|
When a true genius appears in the world you may know him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. -- Jonathan Swift.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Seriously, you would not like to put 10.0.2 on there.
|
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Baninated
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: In yer threads
Status:
Offline
|
|
10.3 is QUITE a bit faster than 10.0
10.0 was barely NOT beta.
Anyone remember the public beta days? I was running that on a 350mhz G3.
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: San Diego, CA, USA
Status:
Offline
|
|
Originally Posted by Kevin
10.3 is QUITE a bit faster than 10.0
10.0 was barely NOT beta.
Anyone remember the public beta days? I was running that on a 350mhz G3.
Which was pretty swank at the time, if I recall.
|
|
Chuck
___
"Instead of either 'multi-talented' or 'multitalented' use 'bisexual'."
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Senior User
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: California
Status:
Offline
|
|
lol, i had my pretty new gigabit dual G4 running the beta [fall 2000] and it was so horribly slow. nothing was optimized. can't believe i payed money for that.
|
not all who wander are lost.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 
|
|
|
Forum Rules
|
|
|
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top