# When did computers get “Good Enough”?



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

When did computers get “Good Enough” for you? (or did they?)

I haven’t had a burning desire to get a new, or even newish, computer in a few years now. This applies to both Macs and PCs. At work I have a Pentium II 400 MHz PC that was purchased new a few years ago. It runs Windows 98 and has its quirks, but it does the job I need it to do without too much fuss. I use it for email and Excel primarily. There are a few special Engineering programs I use, but they don’t require massive computing power. I spent a couple hundred bucks to put in a larger drive, CD burner and more ram. Speed doesn’t seem to be a problem.

My Macs are homebodies so mostly they’re used for Web browsing and email. I have MS Office and Photoshop 4 and lots of other stuff that I rarely use. The main desktop is a 9600 with a 400 MHz G3 card. I also have a couple of Wallstreets at 300 MHz. These work well with OS9. 

Computers are getting to be like cars. An older one will still do the job. You give up a few cosmetic features, but you save a ton of money.

I think that the hardware and OS’s from about 4 years ago became “Good Enough” to meet my needs. Say a G3 or Pentium III with USB and Firewire (built-in or upgraded).

How about you?


----------



## The Doug (Jun 14, 2003)

For me, "good enough" came more than 10 years ago, when I was running System 7 on my Color Classic. What a great little machine that was. Since then, it's been onwards and upwards; now running Panther on my Dual 2Ghz G5 is a dream - this is a superb system.

In contrast, when I got my Color Classic way back when, I had Windows 3.1 stuttering along on some crappy 286 at work. Even though I'm using WinXP on an Athlon box at work now, the overall user experience is hardly more satisfying than it was in the days of Windows 3.1. In other words, on the dark side of the computing world, it isn't "good enough" yet in my view. I'm pretty sure Wronghorn won't change anything.

Thank goodness for Apple; long live the Mac.


----------



## stand_1998 (Aug 13, 2003)

This is a great question as I have been asking myself this recently.

My G4 iMac 800mhz is good enough. I have wasted a lot of money trying to find the perfect video production studio (PeeCee), but am thrilled at using my Mac in this way and more.

Living in Canada and owning a Mac...can it get any better?


----------



## Trevor... (Feb 21, 2003)

For the average user, the Pentium II/G3 generation is pretty much good enough, 

My uncle used to upgrade his computers constantly, but I believe he has not upgraded since the Pentium II 450 he bought in 1999.

We reached a point a few years ago where the average user didn't really get anything out of increased performance. There were things that the average user could do with a Pentium or PowerPC that you couldn't do before, Microsoft word isn't any better at 2000mhz than it is at 200mhz, if your just using the internet and general purpose software, that old computer still works, even with the latest software, atleast on the PC. Windows XP is fairly usable on a 233mhz Pentium.

The mac situation is not quite the same as Apple drops support for older machines sooner and the Mac OS X is alot more demanding of the hardware than Windows. But it still applies to a lesser degree, as exhibited by the millions of Mac OS 9 users who find it good enough.


----------



## Lawrence (Mar 11, 2003)

I think that the biggest issue was hard drive space when it came
to the older computers, But as the space grew then so did
everything else, The speed grew, The RAM grew, Then the software grew.

Nowadays it seems that we are trying to keep up with the
software demands.

Maybe I'll pull out my old 68k Mac and play a few games in OS 7.1

Dave


----------



## Script Kiddie (Jan 30, 2003)

Is that 233mhz box up to surfing websites with, say, QuickTime embedded movies? I'd guess not. Options begin to narrow.


----------



## Trevor... (Feb 21, 2003)

Most Quicktime content will still actually play quite well on 68k machines, it is nowhere nearly as demanding as Divx or MPEG2


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

Cool question.

Well, we have an old Compaq PII / WIN98 laptop that charges along very nicely as a machine, soon to upgraded to the much better Win2000.

For a lot of our folks this is a useful tool. At work I alternate between my PB and a PIII running NT4.

I would say that for office work I started to get a lot more comfortable when I had PCs running NT / 2000, and some of the original iMacs from the mid-life of the product are still running very well.

Our home eMac is more than good enough for 90% of the jobs it is called on to do, and very competent at some of the more demanding photo / video stuff.


----------



## groovetube (Jan 2, 2003)

there's 6 more ram slots in my new G5 that are screeching daily to be filled...


----------



## Toca Loca Nation (Jun 22, 2004)

I've been puttering along for five years on the same machine, an ibm thinkpad 770x (pII-300, 128 ram, dvd/cd, 8g hd, 13.4 beautiful screen, modem, ethernet). way back in 1998, it was a sweeeeet piece of laptop-dancing machinery. now it is just starting to slow me down a little. as an internet browser, or word pro computer, it is still quite functional. but try running multiple apps or anything resembling photoshop and you are doomed. 

      

the good news is, i've put in an order for a g4 ibook and 15 gig ipod (which i'm going to sell). so i'm soon going to be back on the mac side of the fence (my first computer was an apple II+) and have another computer that'll hopefully last six or seven years. 

which reminds me, if you know of anyone that wants a cheapie laptop (with external cd-r, mouse, and lots of obsolete games with original cd's), let me know!


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

Welcome back, Toca Loca nation


----------



## IronMac (Sep 22, 2003)

On the PC side for work, probably this Pentium III (not sure of the speed) that's about 4 years old. Of course, if it was a gaming machine then it would be way past its prime.

On the Mac side for home use, my G4 933 and it looks good for the next couple of years at least. Or until Apple decides that it won't support 10.5.


----------



## Fred (Jan 14, 2004)

All issues of software user experience aside, I found the perfect ballance of hardware useability at the 500mhz mark, regardless of whether it was a Mac or PC. I built my own PC around the AMD K6-2 500 chip when it was new, and loaded the system with hardware that was top-of-the-line for it's time. This was some time between 1998-2000, I forget exactly when.
A year and a half ago, I bought a used PowerMac G4 'Sawtooth' 500, and promptly gave it the same video card my PC had, a Radeon 9000, and put 1.5gb of RAM in it. That machine ran so well.
In a couple weeks, I'm picking up a Pismo Powerbook 400. I am looking around eBay for anyone who might be selling a 500mhz Pismo processor card. I will be maxing out the ram in it to 1gb. I love 500mhz!


----------



## monokitty (Jan 26, 2002)

I find my Mac to generally be good enough until the newest Mac OS no longer supports my setup.


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

LMAO Groovetube!  

For most people doing web, iLife and Office-like stuff, a single ~1Ghz G4 is quite (eve more than) sufficient. if it wasn't or my professional needs, even my stock Sawtooth would have been okay. I don't think I'd want to edit and render home movies on a 68k machine, however.

When you start talking professional media manipulation, on the other hand, that's a whole different ballgame. So, the "you" in your question is relevant and needs will differ. For my work, I need MORE than my 2Gb of RAM, and could even use more than my dual 1.3Ghz G4s.


----------



## Klaatu (Jun 3, 2003)

> I find my Mac to generally be good enough until the newest Mac OS no longer supports my setup.


That's the part that burns me. The hardware has been fine for ages, but the software keeps getting more and more bloated, putting on demands for more speed, more ram, and more disk space. For example, after 3 years, Microsoft Office is finally updated. It's about twice as big as the previous version, will only work on the latest OS (10.2.8 or later) and there is no significant change.

But, if you want to keep up with things -- especially if you want to migrate to OS X -- you're in a tough spot if you buy the machine today, and the software tomorrow.

*sigh* remember when a 80 MB hard drive was WAY more then you needed? At least that's my memory


----------



## Macaholic (Jan 7, 2003)

And you're not alone, Klaatu. Bill Gates, Thomas Watson (Chairman IBM 1943) and Ken Olsen (President Digital Computers 1978) all had their interesting quotes, too


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Jeez, this thread must be striking terror into resellers and manufacturers. I think the days of having to upgrade every few years are essentially over as there are few, if any, killer apps on the scene. There are compelling reasons to upgrade every 4-5 years (apart from hardware failures). The fact that Apple has been able to sell a revised OS every year or so for the past four years indicates that a significant number of people do want the latest software (although I've yet to see a compelling argument to buy Office 2004). Apple hasn't exactly made older machines prematurely obsolete - Tiger will run (reasonably well) on an iMac SE that will be 5 years old in 2005. If you buy at 4-5 year intervals, the speed/capacity increases are 5-8X for the same price. You get a lot for your money.

So what are the upgrade drivers for non-business purchases? Games have always been on the edge for performance (esp. in PCs) but that seems to be slowing down too. Integration is another driver as more electronics are able to interact (Airport Express, Firewire, Rendezvous, etc). But these aren't really "must have" features for many people. I think design is becoming more important as computers become commoditized. Take a look at a Dell from 4 years ago compared to today. They've hired at least one person with some design sense!

The upgrade cycle in business is more of an oddball. A lot of companies lease computers and renew the leases every three years. This is horrendously expensive but they get tax breaks on the leases. Remove that incentive, and the PC market would fall flat. Seriously, who needs to replace a business located 1 GHz machine (PC or Mac) that's primary use is for word processing and email?


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

klaatu, check out the estimated current price of the machine you linked!









it's at the bottom of the page


----------



## Pelao (Oct 2, 2003)

used to be jwoodget,

In our business we are entering a major upgrade cycle (sadly it has to be PCs) but that is nearly 6 years after the last one.

Performance is an issue because much of the software has become very demanding of system resources. MS Odffice is a particular issue here as a lot of our folks need at least 3 of the apps open. However, we will be switching most of our people to an alternative Office Suite, yet to be chosen. Less demanding on the system, less expensive (up-front and over time) and more than adequate for most needs.

A bigger reason for the upgrade is increasing levels of hardware issues. Our machines are mostly clones, and they have worked very hard over the years. We're getting too many component failures etc. 

Given what we use most of the PCs for, we will not see a huge performance increase with new machines. We pay cash for everything, so we don't have the lease issue.

So, apart from wear and tear issues, we could get more out of our current machines, purchased in 1999.


----------



## TroutMaskReplica (Feb 28, 2003)

> In our business we are entering a major upgrade cycle (sadly it has to be PCs)


pelao, i thought you ran a design studio (am i thinking of someone else?). are you replacing your macs with PCs or are you replacing PCs with more PCs?


----------



## used to be jwoodget (Aug 22, 2002)

Pelao, I wish the Toronto city council had taken similar measures. But then, I guess Dash Domi isn't your hardware rep...









Our hospital (the clinical side of things - not research) has a lease and service contract with Compaq/HP. I frequently see the technicians wheeling new monitors and desktops around. The cost for a laptop lease is something like 3,000 per year. It's a joke. But I guess they need that to cover the support.......


----------



## m_gear (Jul 12, 2004)

Grr... It seems I'm a little late to this party, but I'll voice my opinion anyways.

A computer is "good enough" for me when it can do everything I want to do, at a reasonable pace. Which includes: gaming, file server, p2p, video playback (which was sorely lacking pre-G5, IME), dvd authoring, generic internet stuff (like e-mail, IM, web browse, RSS, etc...); some of which may run on top of each other. 

I find the G5 beautifully able to compress multi-gigabyte archives while also running Warcraft3 at full tilt, in the background of which the servers are still running. And that's how I like it. I used to own an iBook 500, I used to also own an original AlBook 867, but they couldn't cut it for most of the things I listed up there. For all the money I paid for that AlBook, I found it to be a lot less powerful than I had expected. The G5 tho, with it's much faster internal arch, has lived up to every expectation I could hold it to, and then some.

I admit a G5 may be a bit over-the-top, but I came from a PC-land of tweaking and buying bleeding-edge parts, I just have to have the best. Just... because it exists. No one really _needs_ this much power, but isn't it marvelous to click that safari icon and watch the little black triangle appear almost simultaneously with the blank safari window? It's the same reason people buy fast cars, you don't need that much horsepower, but it sure makes doing those mundane things that much more fun!


----------



## fugu (Mar 17, 2003)

I think this is a great topic.

Keep in mind that you don't necessarily need to run the latest-of-the-latest operating system. I have some older machines here (G3 300's) which I use Yellowdog Linux on. Perfect for surfing, office applications, etc.

My two cents.


----------



## jfpoole (Sep 26, 2002)

Until it takes less than a second for my builds to finish (they can take upwards of two hours on a bad day) then computers aren't certainly fast enough (or good enough).


----------



## Klaatu (Jun 3, 2003)

> klaatu, check out the estimated current price of the machine you linked!


A year or so ago it was 20 bucks U.S. It sure does depreciated fast... I have a friend who still uses that machine to write in Word (something like a 200k program!) and send e-mails. That's all she wants, and all she needs.



> Until it takes less than a second for my builds to finish (they can take upwards of two hours on a bad day) then computers aren't certainly fast enough (or good enough).


And by the time hardware get that fast, they'll invent even more software toys for boys that demand even more memory. Vicious cycle. 

Still, this drive for more speed means the average consumer can now afford the kind of power only professionals could afford just a few years ago -- and back then they managed to produced some damn fine work for so little.


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

When we have computers that can give me true 3D displays, then I think computers will be good enough.


----------



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

I caught this link on MacSurfer Today. I think it's apt for this thread.

Tech Junkie Swears Off New Hardware For One Year


----------



## elmer (Dec 19, 2002)

Ooh ... I like Kevin Webb's choices for the one-year freeze of tech: PB G4/667, Tungsten T2, iPod, Sony Ericsson T610.

It depends on the person, first.
Switching to Mac was the end of my affair with endless PC upgrades. I still upgrade, but my upgrades enable me to do new things, instead of just fixing stability/performance issues.
Since switching to a Mac, I upgraded to a laptop, then later added WiFi to it.
Since switching to Mac, my computer has never been "not good enough". I can dream of doing more while still being satisfied with what I can do now.
Second, it depends on the software.
I dream of playing Halo at full resolution on a flat LCD screen with digital surround sound.
But I'm satisfied being able to scan photos, collage them in Photoshop Elements, listen to tunes and get instant email alerts all at the same time with no interruptions, not even from power failures. (That's what I was doing last night). I'm satisfied to be able to play some really good games which keep their interest for a long time simply because I don't have time to play them all that often. My occasional urge to tinker is easily satisfied by scripting possibilities in Terminal, and endless programs to evaluate in Fink/X11. There's a new version of OpenOffice.org for X11 out recently which is very good.
Hardware comes last. I won't repeat what others have already said on that subject.
As far as criteria for success goes, computers got "Good Enough" whenever the experience became usable, stable and inspiring.
Finally, computers have always been "good enough" if your money and time were equal to your aspirations. The question is best answered top-down: person, software, hardware.


----------



## vacuvox (Sep 5, 2003)

I have to say... the first computer i bought that really made all my headaches go away was a B&W G3/450. All my problems just seemed to disappear - everything just worked. However, it wasn't long before my software (Logic Audio) started to take advantage of new processing power and I was compelled to upgrade the hardware by way of a G4 cpu replacement, max ram, video card, ATA controller...

Then it was an MDD G4/1.25.

Now - less than a year later - I've just purchased a 15" PowerBook 1.33 and it is pretty dreamy. I just took it on the road - used it to record audio on location, in studios, download photos from the camera, watch DVDs in the evening, surf and email my family back home whenever I found an access point - which seems to be most coffee shops.

I had a lot of trouble gathering the nerve to spend this much money on a portable, but now I'm so happy with it i am thinking of selling the tower!


----------



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

Well it's been over a year now since I asked the question.
I'm still chugging along quite happily with my 9600 and Power Tower Pro using OS9.

The prices of G4 towers have dropped quite a bit this year with the intro of the mini. Earlier this year I was thinking I might move up to a dual boot G4 tower when they dropped under $500. Now that they have I'm still not really tempted to make the jump. I think I'll wait till next year when I can get them at garage sales.

Right now things are more than "Good Enough" with what I've got.


----------



## poisonmonkey (Sep 20, 2004)

Well my PB 1Ghz is good enough.

For now...


----------



## DBerG (May 24, 2005)

About now. Speed is no more a problem to do the usual stuff. Boot speed is decent. Loading time is decent. Everything is decent. Okay I know that in a few years, it won't be decent anymore, but we ain't in the mid-80s. Technology has advanced and the basic things are pretty fast. Some things aren't that fast yet, but that's not all that important for me.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

A PC I bought back in 2002 was good enough, but then I found out that good enough came with spyware and viruses, so I switched to my iBook which is awesome but I don't consider it good enough yet, we'll see in the next couple of years.


----------



## satchmo (May 26, 2005)

It's all relative to what you use your computer for.
You could say computers have been "good enough" for quite a while doing simple word processing.

But I suspect heavy intensive mathematical computations for applications such as 3-D rendering are still pushing computers to "be faster".
However, the majority of users don't need this processing power and many fall into the trap and the megahertz numbers game.


----------



## Stephanie (Jul 21, 2004)

At work, my iMac G4 1GHz is "Good Enough", for anything I do at work. If I could upgrade anything there, I'd want a 2nd flatscreen monitor but not sure I can do that with the iMac. (Mirroring isn't what I want)

At home, my PowerMac G4 MDD Dual 1.25 is "Good Enough"... it has two LCD panels, two video cards, 400GB of hard drive space, and 1.5GB of ram. It handles all my working-from-home requirements, plus handles the occasional Garageband, iMovie and iDVD use very nicely.

My 12" iBook G4/800MHz is "Good Enough" for surfing, checking email, and telecomputing from bed when I can't sleep, or from the backyard when it's nice out. It handles Keynote just fine for when I have to do presentations. Although if they came out with a micro-mini iBook with an 8" screen, chicklet keyboard, bluetooth and airport, I'd trade up (down?) immediately.

And my B&W G3 'server' is "Good Enough" to handle light webserver and fileserver duties.

I'm very content with my computers, they're all Good Enough.

Although a shiny new Nano would be sweet. 

-Stephanie


----------



## elmer (Dec 19, 2002)

What a perfect thread to resurrect after a year.

I have since bought a 6 MP digital SLR camera and I sometimes get tired of waiting as the 867 G4 with its 133-odd MHz bus chugs through RAW files. But hey, that just means it's time to tidy up the office. I'm still playing Warcraft III and Starcraft.


----------



## DBerG (May 24, 2005)

Stephanie said:


> At work, my iMac G4 1GHz is "Good Enough", for anything I do at work. If I could upgrade anything there, I'd want a 2nd flatscreen monitor but not sure I can do that with the iMac. (Mirroring isn't what I want)


Get Screen Spanning Doctor, works for my iBook.


----------



## ncoffey (Apr 6, 2005)

*It will never be enough*

For myself, we're still short of a direct neurological link between my brain and the computer, so I'm not happy yet. Brings up an interesting question... If in the future we can grow neural networks using human neurological tissue to make a brain that is vastly more intelligent that ourselves, should we? (I call it, skynet)


----------



## yuwing (Aug 13, 2005)

i just need a computer that starts up in less than a minute. my ibook and sempron 2800 does that for me. so it's good enough for now 

my old computer which is P3 450mhz starts up in 5 minutes. yes, unbelievably slow!
I had to switch to a new one and inexpensive too. I built myself the comp for around $320.

$180 - CPU + Motherboard
$70 - 80gig HDD
$70 - 512mb ram 

what i need to buy now is a dvd burner, then i'm all set.

I wanna build another computer for fun and plug it to the TV tho. I wanna surf the net in my living room... or offer my guests the ability to  (also wireless mouse/keyboard, and wireless internet)

that project should be around $360-400 tho i think 
$30 case + power supply
$200 - cpu, motherboard
$40/$70 - 256mb/512mb ram
$50 - video card
(using 7.8 gig harddrive from my old P3 system)


----------



## okcomputer (Jul 18, 2005)

I currently have a P4 2.6 and once I upgrade the RAM to 1gb and get another HD in it, I will set for quite a while. It runs Photoshop and such just fine (alhtough the extra 512 will make it all much smoother), and audio editing is a snap. XP will still be around and supported for years after Vista is introduced. And if MS is smart, they will make Vista like Mac OS - an upgrade that actually works on older machine and makes them run faster in most instances.

As for Macs, I've used a G4 Dual-1.25 and I honestly don't need anything more than that for Photoshop, Final Cut, Pro Tools, etc. As long as there is 512mb-1gb of RAM and hard drive space, I'm set.

As for older machines, I couldn't make do with a G3 or a PII. I'm addicted to multitasking and tabbed browsing, and I do a lot of video, audio, and graphics work. The machines I mentioned above were available last year or the year before, so I think they are doing well for their age.


----------



## Strimkind (Mar 31, 2005)

I bought an 8500 about 4 years ago for cheap and I loved that old machine. It did all I wanted it to, however, web browsers were not updated for OS9 and it quickly began to show its age as the HDs became slower and slower regardless of a fresh install. I now have a PC for gaming that is 3 years old (1800+ AMD) and a iBook. I plan to purchase a shuttle PC and use it as a multimedia PC as I wein myself away from gaming.


----------



## saxamaphone (May 18, 2004)

I have my Dad on a dell desktop (actual pizzabox desktop) with a PII400 and 256MB RAM running XP. It works great.

I have my mom on an iMac G4 700 (sunflower) with 256MB RAM running Tiger. It works great.

They dont do anything too crazy. Mom runs email, safari and iPhoto occasionally. Dad mostly just email and web. Both should be good for a couple of more years yet.


----------



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

Editing not working. My post got wiped out.


----------



## rondini (Dec 6, 2001)

Dead thread walking! please pull the plug, or throw the switch


----------



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

It’s been over 2 years now since my original post so it’s time for an update.
Believe it or not I’m still using my old G3 upgraded 9600 as my primary computer. I’m also still happy using OS9.1 as my primary OS. My secondary Mac is an old G3 upgraded PowerTower Pro. I use an old Wallstreet when I’m on the road. 

Within the last year I’ve purchased a used Quicksilver G4 with a 1.33 GHz upgrade card. This box works very well with OSX Tiger, and speed is no longer an issue. I rarely use it though since I don’t have OSX versions of some key software such as Microsoft Office and Photoshop.

At work I’ve upgraded to a used IBM Pentium 4 1.8 GHz box ($200). This runs very well with some of my complex Excel macro programs. I still like Window 98 on this box. I also bought a used PC laptop since they are practically giving these things away now. I’ve got Windows XP on the laptop and I find it veeeeery slow to start up. I’d put Win98 on it except some key drivers are not available.

All that being said, I’m more than satisfied with my ancient computer hardware. The only thing that doesn’t work well is YouTube. The sound and video are always out of sync. I revert to my PC laptop when I really want to see a You Tube video. 

So I guess I’m saying that around 1999 Mac computers became (still) good enough for me


----------



## Jason H (Feb 1, 2004)

I'd disagree with the some of you, to a point.

I've got a g4 450 and its lagging even on basic websites. If you could run Safari 2.0 (or whatever we are upto now) on os x 10.1 then I would agree that a slower machine is all thats needed, but at the moment I'd say anything running 10.4 is the bare minimum for smooth sailing.


----------



## green_ears (Feb 26, 2005)

Rob said:


> When did computers get “Good Enough” for you? (or did they?)


Years ago. It's the software that's been getting crappier and bloated. I've been playing with my old Macintosh SE... The only thing missing is a color screen, inet access and a DVDR. Everything else is flawless and fast and stable and quiet and cool.

Honestly, the hardware boom should make way for the software boom (in terms of performance and quality I mean, we certainly have enough diversity to a point where quality has become diluted). If the hardware evolution slowed down a bit, we could focus on optimizing our software and producing quality code instead of getting sloppy just because our hardware can take it.

Mind you, I'm generalizing, but you get the point: there's no incentive to make quality code when the hardware will pick up the slack. I'm sure the Apple ppl that worked on my Macintosh with 1MB RAM put a lot more sweat into their code and it shows.


----------



## tendim (Apr 6, 2004)

"Good enough" is such a relative term.

Until I started university, my Commodore 128 was "good enough". In fact, I used it up until 2nd year uni. when I upgraded to an LC575 because I got tired of competing for the SUN Sparcstations at school to run Photoshop (photography classes).

The LC575 was good enough until fourth year when I started doing serious Photoshop work and needed more RAM (256 MB minimum) vs the LC575's 36MB ceiling. At that point I upgraded to an 8500.

The 8500 got incremental upgrades to a G3/400 until a G4 QuickSilver was given to me. On the side I've always had a decent PowerBook, more for portability.

Long story short: a computer is good enough until it can no longer do what you need it to do. My G4/733 is pretty good for me, since I don't do anything that intensive; scanning is the most time consuming thing I do I think, but an upgrade to this tower will fit me better than upgrading to a different machine. If you can run the software you need, there isn't much point in upgrading unless you are making a living off of the gear and you can justify the cost of upgrading. Case in point: I need Photoshop CS2 now for 16-bit editing, so my 8500 would not have been capable of the job anymore (highest version I had then was 5.5, purchased when I was in school). If I was still doing 8-bit editing, didn't deal with RAW files and I still had good scanner software, I would've been happy on OS 8!


----------



## tendim (Apr 6, 2004)

Jason H said:


> I'd disagree with the some of you, to a point.
> 
> I've got a g4 450 and its lagging even on basic websites. If you could run Safari 2.0 (or whatever we are upto now) on os x 10.1 then I would agree that a slower machine is all thats needed, but at the moment I'd say anything running 10.4 is the bare minimum for smooth sailing.


But Safari is such a bloated browser! Have you tried any of the alternatives? I only stick with Safari in my Pismo because I'm used to it; but Camino was my browser of choice before upgrading to 10.4 on my desktop machine (Pismo still runs 10.3.9).


----------



## Jason H (Feb 1, 2004)

tendim said:


> But Safari is such a bloated browser! Have you tried any of the alternatives? I only stick with Safari in my Pismo because I'm used to it; but Camino was my browser of choice before upgrading to 10.4 on my desktop machine (Pismo still runs 10.3.9).


I have not found a problem with safari yet no need for an alternative :lmao:


----------



## sheamusj (Sep 21, 2006)

This is a wonderful thread... Interesting and informative and... love reading the many views as expressed here by ehmac community members.

Good enough... Hmm

LOVE my G3 iMac 450 MHz, DVD model bought 6 years ago. Over time I have upgraded RAM, OS and (because of work demands) Microsoft Office. Within the past few days I bumped my RAM from 320 MB to 768 MB, upgraded from OS 10.3.9 to OS 10.4.8, and this morning upgraded to Firefox 2 (RC version I think). Because of ehmac community dialogue I now realize that my G3 ought to have a couple more years of useful service in some capacity.

At the same time... I (and my darling wife) want a new iMac, 20 or 24 inch with 2-4 GB RAM and (at least) 250 GB HD. Could probably come up with lots of great excuses (oops, I mean good reasons) for getting new iMac but I would be fibbing. Fact is it's a step into the future.


----------



## Script Kiddie (Jan 30, 2003)

The problem with "my ancient computer works great" argument is that really fun and interactive web sites (just as an example) will be out of reach. Examples

Something fun:
http://microsites.audicanada.ca/AudiTT/tt.html?language=en&country=ca

Something very cool and informative (see a neural net solve the TSP problem):
http://to-campos.planetaclix.pt/neural/hope.html

And if you can't see these you should just go back to sticks and rocks:
http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/showtime06/


----------



## JPL (Jan 21, 2005)

Great thread, very interesting reading. My last Mac was an LC630 /OS 8 circa 1995. Switched to PC at that time because I wanted to try some games and learn about PCs, not because the Mac wasn't good enough. My wife has always used a Mac, presently, she is using a 17" 1GHz G4 iMac and it does everything she wants and needs, no way will she give it up, she absolutely loves that Mac. I started dreaming of a return to Mac with the announcement of the new Intels. In April I got a new 20" Intel iMac, dumped my PC, and have been extremely happy to be back in the Mac fold.

I believe this Mac does everything I need, and more, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future. That of course doesn't mean that I will stay with it -). More and bigger is better no?


----------



## Rob (Sep 14, 2002)

Well we've passed the 3rd anniversary of this thread so it's time to look back and see if anything's changed.

I've had some new additions to the family this past year. They include a Quicksilver G4, Cube with upgraded CPU, Titanium PB, and a Pismo. With all that added firepower I'm still using my old 9600 and PowerTower Pro and OS9 as my primary machines. They both have G3 cards and are plenty fast in OS9. The only drawback at the moment is the poor playback of some YouTube videos.

Tiger has been a very solid version of OSX and I haven't had any complaints using it on the newer boxes. It's just that the old ones still work well and do almost everything I need them to do. I'm at the crossroads now where I could use either OS and be reasonably happy. I still find that OS9 has crisper text display. No matter what adjustment I make in Tiger I can't get the text to display as clearly.

At work I'm still using the P4 and Windows 98. I run a lot of analysis in Excel and write a lot of macros. It seems to be a fast and solid setup. One piece of advice is to steer well clear of the latest version of Office for the PC. It's the bloatware megamonster of all bloatware. Slow, buggy, and completely unnecessary.


----------



## keebler27 (Jan 5, 2007)

i just hope my wife doesn't see this thread or i'm never upgrading again


----------



## messed_kid (Jun 13, 2007)

September 21st 2006. The day I got my first mac. 

:lmao: It has, and does everything that I need. Sure it lacks a graphics card...yada yada, but it's still "good enough".


----------



## MACSPECTRUM (Oct 31, 2002)

for me it came in two waves

1st - Tiger - finally OS X was pretty quick and reliable
2nd - Blackbook core2duo - with bootcamp and 2 GB RAM, it runs both OS X and XP very well

finally I am happy and not looking for more speed


----------



## jaline (Jul 7, 2007)

I would say that I expect more from a system than what I actually need, and usually I end up buying something of a high quality anyway since I do lots of research before making big purchases. 

I'm not sure about the customer service that used to exist, as I'm quite young, but I feel like it's going downhill in larger chains. I do know that products (specifically electronics) don't seem to last as long as they used to, and this can be further examined when looking at the warranty systems in place for each product. Now that we have a warranty for everthing, does that mean that we have better, longer, and more accessible customer service? Or that the product is expected to fail after just a couple of years?

As for upgrading, it kind of sucks that most people will never have the "biggest" or "greatest" new thing because of how rapidly technology changes and shifts. Most of what we have is great when looking at it from a surface point of view, but things don't seem to last as long as they used to (according to lots of people I know).


----------



## lreynolds (Dec 28, 2005)

I'm pretty happy with my MacBook hooked up to a nice Samsung 215W 21" widescreen display.

The iMac G5 is kind of dragging though, and 17" feels small now. We use it for everything, photos, internet, Office, and watching DVD's. Would love to upgrade to an Intel iMac, doesn't need to be the latest, although they are pretty. Really want a 24".

Other than that my wishlist has BT keyboards for both machines, Leopard when it gets here, iLife and other software for work.


----------



## vacuvox (Sep 5, 2003)

I have no complaints about my G5 dual 1.8 and Tiger. This is my pro setup and its earning its keep very well these days. The new Pros look interesting... I just don't need to go there. It will be interesting to see how long this setup will work for me - now well into the third year.

My primary software, Logic Pro, has not been upgraded or updated at all in almost a year (last support update September 27, 2006)! 

And my new MacBook Pro is amazing - I'm almost tempted to sell off the G5 and do everything on the laptop. Only thing is I have to plug so many peripherals into the MBP (storage, interface, monitor, mouse, dongle, etc etc) to be able to work the way I like to work, I might as well have a dedicated tower set up and ready to go. Having two main computers is not such an extravagance as it once was. These high performance computers and peripherals are now so affordable it's downright rediculous.


----------

