Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
should I...?

Thanks for any and all advice,

Stu
(who is remembering when the IIFX was so fast)

NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy

In article <BF178583.19C72%stumark@earthlink.net>,
Stu Mark <stumark@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
> iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
> should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
> should I...?
>
> Thanks for any and all advice,
>
> Stu

Here's what you need to do. Buy a new 2GHz iMac, and send your old,
obsolete boat-anchor 800MHz iMac to me, because it's 300 MHz faster
than mine.

==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==

In article <BF178583.19C72%stumark@earthlink.net>,
Stu Mark <stumark@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
> iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
> should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
> should I...?
>
> Thanks for any and all advice,
>
> Stu

Here's what you need to do. Buy a new 2GHz iMac, and send your old,
obsolete boat-anchor 800MHz iMac to me, because it's 300 MHz faster
than mine.

==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==

In article <party-C3F365.20290405082005@news-fe-01.texas.rr.com>,
Hugh Gibbons <party@my.house.com> wrote:

> In article <BF178583.19C72%stumark@earthlink.net>,
> Stu Mark <stumark@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
> > iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
> > should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
> > should I...?
> >
> > Thanks for any and all advice,
> >
> > Stu
>
> Here's what you need to do. Buy a new 2GHz iMac, and send your old,
> obsolete boat-anchor 800MHz iMac to me, because it's 300 MHz faster
> than mine.
>
> ==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==

If there is something that your current Mac can't do, then it is time to
replace it. If it _is_ time to replace it, don't spend too much time
waiting for something better to come along: there is always something
better coming along - either a cpu speed bump, a memory bump, a price
drop, some new technology, or just a better configuration.
Once you decide to buy, buy and don't look back.

And then, send your old mac to Hugh :)

--
Phil Pinkney
ppinkney-at-a5.com
~ Life is too important to be taken seriously!~

In article <party-C3F365.20290405082005@news-fe-01.texas.rr.com>,
Hugh Gibbons <party@my.house.com> wrote:

> In article <BF178583.19C72%stumark@earthlink.net>,
> Stu Mark <stumark@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> > Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
> > iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
> > should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
> > should I...?
> >
> > Thanks for any and all advice,
> >
> > Stu
>
> Here's what you need to do. Buy a new 2GHz iMac, and send your old,
> obsolete boat-anchor 800MHz iMac to me, because it's 300 MHz faster
> than mine.
>
> ==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==

If there is something that your current Mac can't do, then it is time to
replace it. If it _is_ time to replace it, don't spend too much time
waiting for something better to come along: there is always something
better coming along - either a cpu speed bump, a memory bump, a price
drop, some new technology, or just a better configuration.
Once you decide to buy, buy and don't look back.

And then, send your old mac to Hugh :)

--
Phil Pinkney
ppinkney-at-a5.com
~ Life is too important to be taken seriously!~

Phillip Pinkney wrote:

> In article <party-C3F365.20290405082005@news-fe-01.texas.rr.com>,
> Hugh Gibbons <party@my.house.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <BF178583.19C72%stumark@earthlink.net>,
>> Stu Mark <stumark@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
>>>should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along,
>>>
>>>Stu
>>
>>Here's what you need to do. Buy a new 2GHz iMac, and send your old,
>>obsolete boat-anchor 800MHz iMac to me, because it's 300 MHz faster
>>than mine.
>>
>> ==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==
>
>
> If there is something that your current Mac can't do, then it is time to
> replace it. If it _is_ time to replace it, don't spend too much time
> waiting for something better to come along: there is always something
> better coming along - either a cpu speed bump, a memory bump, a price
> drop, some new technology, or just a better configuration.
> Once you decide to buy, buy and don't look back.
>
> And then, send your old mac to Hugh :)
>
Or to me, I only have a 333mhz G3 iMac.
GW

Phillip Pinkney wrote:

> In article <party-C3F365.20290405082005@news-fe-01.texas.rr.com>,
> Hugh Gibbons <party@my.house.com> wrote:
>
>>In article <BF178583.19C72%stumark@earthlink.net>,
>> Stu Mark <stumark@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
>>>should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along,
>>>
>>>Stu
>>
>>Here's what you need to do. Buy a new 2GHz iMac, and send your old,
>>obsolete boat-anchor 800MHz iMac to me, because it's 300 MHz faster
>>than mine.
>>
>> ==> ALL COMMENTS IMO <==
>
>
> If there is something that your current Mac can't do, then it is time to
> replace it. If it _is_ time to replace it, don't spend too much time
> waiting for something better to come along: there is always something
> better coming along - either a cpu speed bump, a memory bump, a price
> drop, some new technology, or just a better configuration.
> Once you decide to buy, buy and don't look back.
>
> And then, send your old mac to Hugh :)
>
Or to me, I only have a 333mhz G3 iMac.
GW

Stu Mark wrote:
>
> Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
> iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
> should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
> should I...?
>
> Thanks for any and all advice,
>
> Stu
> (who is remembering when the IIFX was so fast)
>
> NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy

For what you do I see no reason for such an investment.
Although internet works faster thats for sure.
You might consider a mini mac with a boost to 1Gb Ram. Much
cheaper and you have the peripherals. It will work for your needs.
--
steg

Stu Mark wrote:
>
> Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
> iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
> should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
> should I...?
>
> Thanks for any and all advice,
>
> Stu
> (who is remembering when the IIFX was so fast)
>
> NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy

For what you do I see no reason for such an investment.
Although internet works faster thats for sure.
You might consider a mini mac with a boost to 1Gb Ram. Much
cheaper and you have the peripherals. It will work for your needs.
--
steg

On 8/9/05 2:40 PM, in article 42F922E9.8AA960CD********.com, "steggy"
<steggy2001********.com> wrote:

> Stu Mark wrote:
>>
>> Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
>> iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
>> should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
>> should I...?
>>
>> Thanks for any and all advice,
>>
>> Stu
>> (who is remembering when the IIFX was so fast)
>>
>> NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy
>
> For what you do I see no reason for such an investment.
> Although internet works faster thats for sure.
> You might consider a mini mac with a boost to 1Gb Ram. Much
> cheaper and you have the peripherals. It will work for your needs.

First, thanks to all who replied.

Second, what if I just increase the RAM on this iMac? I have 512MB. Maybe
if I increased that, it might improve the performance of FireFox. And maybe
I'd be able to keep more windows open at one time. Thoughts?

Stu
(who is avoiding a healthy walk)

NP: Microcosmic by Moodswings

On 8/9/05 2:40 PM, in article 42F922E9.8AA960CD********.com, "steggy"
<steggy2001********.com> wrote:

> Stu Mark wrote:
>>
>> Most of my Mac-ing is email and usenet and surfing and downloading from
>> iTunes, with the rare iMovie creation. Should I buy the new 2 GHz iMac,
>> should I stick with my 800 MHz iMac until a better machine comes along, or
>> should I...?
>>
>> Thanks for any and all advice,
>>
>> Stu
>> (who is remembering when the IIFX was so fast)
>>
>> NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy
>
> For what you do I see no reason for such an investment.
> Although internet works faster thats for sure.
> You might consider a mini mac with a boost to 1Gb Ram. Much
> cheaper and you have the peripherals. It will work for your needs.

First, thanks to all who replied.

Second, what if I just increase the RAM on this iMac? I have 512MB. Maybe
if I increased that, it might improve the performance of FireFox. And maybe
I'd be able to keep more windows open at one time. Thoughts?

Stu
(who is avoiding a healthy walk)

NP: Microcosmic by Moodswings

Stu Mark wrote:
>
> On 8/9/05 2:40 PM, in article 42F922E9.8AA960CD********.com, "steggy"
> <steggy2001********.com> wrote:
> >> NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy
> >
> > For what you do I see no reason for such an investment.
> > Although internet works faster thats for sure.
> > You might consider a mini mac with a boost to 1Gb Ram. Much
> > cheaper and you have the peripherals. It will work for your needs.
>
> First, thanks to all who replied.
>
> Second, what if I just increase the RAM on this iMac? I have 512MB. Maybe
> if I increased that, it might improve the performance of FireFox. And maybe
> I'd be able to keep more windows open at one time. Thoughts?
>
> Stu
> (who is avoiding a healthy walk)
>
> NP: Microcosmic by Moodswings

Stu, it all depends............

I think more clock speed is the answer. I am right now
typing on an "old" iMac G3, the all-in-one Transparent one.
It had 256 Mb RAM, I boosted it to 512 and I was a happy
camper, even though there is not more than 400Mhz inside.
Because for me working with heavy software is important.

A few weeks ago I boosted up a G4 at work to 1Gb RAM, I did
not notice much change, it is also a 400 Mhz machine.
Granted, it is easier now to use Photoshop/InDesign and
Illustrator at the same time without having trouble with
internet and get mail:)
So yes more simultaneous work is possible with more RAM.
Photoshop and other heavy software will improve. But internet?

Now there is a new iMac G5 with 1Gb RAM and 2Mhz
clock........internet is sooooo fast. Same account, same provider.
I believe it is the clock speed that does the trick when it
comes down to internet. Besides your account with the ISP of course.


--
steg

Stu Mark wrote:
>
> On 8/9/05 2:40 PM, in article 42F922E9.8AA960CD********.com, "steggy"
> <steggy2001********.com> wrote:
> >> NP: When My Left Eye Jumps by Buddy Guy
> >
> > For what you do I see no reason for such an investment.
> > Although internet works faster thats for sure.
> > You might consider a mini mac with a boost to 1Gb Ram. Much
> > cheaper and you have the peripherals. It will work for your needs.
>
> First, thanks to all who replied.
>
> Second, what if I just increase the RAM on this iMac? I have 512MB. Maybe
> if I increased that, it might improve the performance of FireFox. And maybe
> I'd be able to keep more windows open at one time. Thoughts?
>
> Stu
> (who is avoiding a healthy walk)
>
> NP: Microcosmic by Moodswings

Stu, it all depends............

I think more clock speed is the answer. I am right now
typing on an "old" iMac G3, the all-in-one Transparent one.
It had 256 Mb RAM, I boosted it to 512 and I was a happy
camper, even though there is not more than 400Mhz inside.
Because for me working with heavy software is important.

A few weeks ago I boosted up a G4 at work to 1Gb RAM, I did
not notice much change, it is also a 400 Mhz machine.
Granted, it is easier now to use Photoshop/InDesign and
Illustrator at the same time without having trouble with
internet and get mail:)
So yes more simultaneous work is possible with more RAM.
Photoshop and other heavy software will improve. But internet?

Now there is a new iMac G5 with 1Gb RAM and 2Mhz
clock........internet is sooooo fast. Same account, same provider.
I believe it is the clock speed that does the trick when it
comes down to internet. Besides your account with the ISP of course.


--
steg

On 8/11/05 1:48 PM, in article 42FBB9A9.7AB21191********.com, "steggy"
<steggy2001********.com> wrote:

>> Second, what if I just increase the RAM on this iMac? I have 512MB. Maybe
>> if I increased that, it might improve the performance of FireFox. And maybe
>> I'd be able to keep more windows open at one time. Thoughts?
>>
>> Stu
>> (who is avoiding a healthy walk)
>>
>> NP: Microcosmic by Moodswings
>
> Stu, it all depends............
>
> I think more clock speed is the answer.

Thanks for the reply. I agree, that clock speed is the answer.

After all is said and done, I'm in love with the Flat Panel display on the
G3 iMac. I can turn it to any position, based upon where I happen to be
sitting or leaning (or standing)... It really is beautiful. I think the new
iMac is a step backwards for screen manipulation. So I realize that I'm
just not in love with the new iMac (and I'm an early adapter from way
back)... And so I want to feel the 2 GHz wind in my hair, but at what
emotional price of leaving behind my beloved. (and let's not over-romance
this. If the new iMac had a similarly cool screen mover-arounder, I'd be
all over it and drop my current honey like old news)...

Is there a display made by any company that has that same ease-of-adjustment
as the G3 Flat Panel iMac (with no code name)? Because if there was, maybe
I'd buy a mini or a tower and the cool screen.

Stu
(who is thankful for all the opinions)

NP: Exercise #4 by Frank Zappa (performed by The Ensemble Modern)

On 8/11/05 1:48 PM, in article 42FBB9A9.7AB21191********.com, "steggy"
<steggy2001********.com> wrote:

>> Second, what if I just increase the RAM on this iMac? I have 512MB. Maybe
>> if I increased that, it might improve the performance of FireFox. And maybe
>> I'd be able to keep more windows open at one time. Thoughts?
>>
>> Stu
>> (who is avoiding a healthy walk)
>>
>> NP: Microcosmic by Moodswings
>
> Stu, it all depends............
>
> I think more clock speed is the answer.

Thanks for the reply. I agree, that clock speed is the answer.

After all is said and done, I'm in love with the Flat Panel display on the
G3 iMac. I can turn it to any position, based upon where I happen to be
sitting or leaning (or standing)... It really is beautiful. I think the new
iMac is a step backwards for screen manipulation. So I realize that I'm
just not in love with the new iMac (and I'm an early adapter from way
back)... And so I want to feel the 2 GHz wind in my hair, but at what
emotional price of leaving behind my beloved. (and let's not over-romance
this. If the new iMac had a similarly cool screen mover-arounder, I'd be
all over it and drop my current honey like old news)...

Is there a display made by any company that has that same ease-of-adjustment
as the G3 Flat Panel iMac (with no code name)? Because if there was, maybe
I'd buy a mini or a tower and the cool screen.

Stu
(who is thankful for all the opinions)

NP: Exercise #4 by Frank Zappa (performed by The Ensemble Modern)