|
|
||
|
||
|
|
Quicklinks: · Power Macs · 'Books · Early Macs · Week's Best Deals · Best Buys · OS Downloads |
Abandoning the Low EndLow End Mac Reader SpecialsMemory To Go Special: New 2008 iMac 2GB $42 / iMac Intel Core2 DUO & MacBook Pro 2GB $36 - 1GB $20. MacPro 8 Core Memory 4GB kit $154 / 2GB kit $94 -- Free shipping available. Download Typestyler, still the Ultimate Styling Tool for Internet, Print and Video Graphics. Works great in Classic with a Native OS X Version on the way. Free Tryout: www.typestyler.com
OWC: Mercury Elite FW800/FW400/USB2/eSATA up to 2.0TB TOP-RATED Solutions offer High Performance, Reliable storage for all your data storage needs. 500GB $159.99, 750GB $199.99, 1.0TB from $299.99 Mac users can finally play Party Poker for Mac. Not only that, they can also learn how to play PokerStars for Mac.
Compare products like desktop computers, laptops, and LCD TVs side by side! All the information and reviews to make the best purchasing decision for a new cell phone GPS products or MP3 players. The Ciao network makes searching products easy for you.
Jonathan Ploudre
On Low End Mac, we are interested in value computing - getting the most for your money. Usually we look at ways to do cool things with inexpensive Macs, like using a Quadra as an MP3 server. But when is the right time to forsake the low end? Is there a point where the time we spend putzing around with old Macs isn't worth the effort? Last week I decided to stop working on 68K Macs. I was playing
around with my Quadra 630 and
On eBay you can get a complete Power Mac 7200 for $30. Or, if you want to do audio/visual work, you can find a Power Mac 7500 for $50. At those prices, it's hard to justify troubleshooting a Quadra. Even when I get it running, I am unlikely to really use it if I have a Power Mac nearby. At best, a 68K Mac is a backup computer in case my main computer breaks. I'm not saying a Quadra isn't a great computer. Mine is fabulous. I found a motherboard that has two SIMM slots so I could max out the memory at 56 MB of RAM. And I put a 68040 in it, so that it has an FPU - not that I ever noticed the difference. Because the Quadra has IDE and an ethernet card, it served MP3s to my network for half a year from a 60 GB hard drive. It runs Mac OS 8.1 and ClarisWorks and can do some Internet work, if you are very patient. But the Quadra will never do certain things. It will never play MP3s. It will never run great PPC-only utilities like FinderPop. It will never run Mac OS 8.5, let alone Mac OS X. Although running FinderPop may seem like a detail, it is not. With the best utilities, I learn to rework my computer habits. With FinderPop, for example, I have all my application launching and switching and window-switching all hidden in the unused part of my menu bar. It takes up no screen space, and I use it dozens of times a day. Going back to a 68K Mac means that I have to laboriously navigate through the Finder if I want to launch another application. Sure, I could set up a bunch of aliases to make things quicker but the work isn't worth it for a machine I use irregularly. Over the years, Mac users have had to fight against the "one platform standardization" argument. It's usually heard from a Windows user. You already know it, it goes like this: "Our organization would save time/money/resources if we didn't have to support two platforms. If we standardize on Windows and get rid of the Macs, things will be better." The argument is not persuasive for Mac users, because we can't imagine that things will be better if we go with the worse of two platforms. Choosing the lowest common denominator is not the pathway to bliss. But what about comparing PPC Macs and 68K Macs? Would life be better if we standardized on PPCs? As much as I love my Mac IIsi and Quadra 630, I would rather have a Power Mac 8600 any day of the week. When all my Macs have a PowerPC processor, it means that I can begin to rely on things that don't work on 68K Macs. It's easier for me to set up a new Mac if I don't have to try to remember what does and doesn't work on the 68K. As Dan Knight has noted before, the low end is a shifting target. Older Power Macs are now at the ridiculously low priced low-end today. In my mind, it becomes ridiculous when the shipping costs more than the computer, and that's true of most 68K Macs. Several Power Macs are ridiculously low-priced, too. If you really want a 6100 or a 7200/75, you just need to ask the right person. You can probably find one for free just for clearing out the space for someone. Maybe we've gotten to the point where we should abandon 68K Macs? When I say abandon 68K Macs, I imagine The argument for abandonment is a slippery slope. Today it is 68K Macs. Maybe tomorrow it might be the the Classic Mac OS. Where do we draw the line? Even though I'm not using Mac OS X, I'm looking forward to the day where we can abandon the Classic Mac OS. Recent Content on Low End Mac
Latest Deals on Low End Mac
|
|
Power Macs iMac Channel iBook/PowerBook MacInSchool Computer Profiles iMac Power Mac PowerBook/iBook Performas Mac Clones Older Macs Lisa • NeXT Editorial Archive Mac Daniel's Advice Email Lists LEMchat (uses AIM) Online Tech Journal Consumer advice, reviews guides, deals Software Apple History Best of the Web Best of the Mac Web surveys Miscellaneous Links Best Used Mac Buys Used Mac Dealers Video Cards Mac OS X Mac Linux Macspeak RAM Upgrades About Low End Mac Site Contacts
Support LEMAffiliates
|