2x iMac Grape off side of road, which one to keep?

[fairchild]

Today found 2 grape imac g3's on the side of the road in my neighborhood. One's a fruit tray load 333 with 6 gb drive and 160 mb ram running 9.2.2. The other one is a 400 dv with 12 gb drive, 640 mb ram on 10.3.9. Both are cosmetically nice and both function perfectly with their original keyboards and mice, actually the dv has a blue keyboard. I'd say the 333 is almost mint. Problem is, I've only got room for one of these imacs, so one has to go. I was thinking I would keep the older one, but it is significantly less powerful with It's 66 mhz bus vs 100 and tiny hardrive, but it's a better period piece cause It's like a bondai but in a funky color. I want to use one of these machines for some retro ppc games in classic. Would the 160 mb of ram cut it for late 90's early 2000s games? Cause I really don't want to spend money on pc-66 ram which you must get for the older models. Ideally I would keep both, but music/computer room is getting quite cluttered.

Thanks in advance for helping me decide. Pictures to follow.

 

[Byrd]

You don't need PC66 RAM for original iMac machines, just good quality stuff PC100/PC133 is fine. I'd keep the DV model, considerably faster and cheap to upgrade to Airport/bigger HD. Just check the machine works well though, as the PAV in these fail hard.

 

[iMac600]

I'd almost be inclined to say the Tray Loader, as the plastic frame inside the Slot Loaders likes to crack and flake with age. If the 333MHz if mint as well, it's an even better deal. It won't be as quick as the Slot Loader DV however. I would think 160MB of memory would cut it for what you want to do with it. I think most machines of that era had between 64MB and 128MB standard (although the early iMacs only had 32MB, so chances are someone stuck a 128MB extra module into yours), so you should have some room to move.

You can't however add AirPort to the Tray Loader, and the hard drive needs to be split into two partitions for Mac OS X. For OS 9 this isn't a problem. Both machines use ATA drives and are capped at 128GB maximum.

Of course, each model has its pros and cons, and ultimately it's up to you at the end of the day.

 

[uniserver]

Today found 2 grape imac g3's on the side of the road in my neighborhood. One's a fruit tray load 333 with 6 gb drive and 160 mb ram running 9.2.2. The other one is a 400 dv with 12 gb drive, 640 mb ram on 10.3.9. Both are cosmetically nice and both function perfectly with their original keyboards and mice, actually the dv has a blue keyboard. I'd say the 333 is almost mint. Problem is, I've only got room for one of these imacs, so one has to go. I was thinking I would keep the older one, but it is significantly less powerful with It's 66 mhz bus vs 100 and tiny hardrive, but it's a better period piece cause It's like a bondai but in a funky color. I want to use one of these machines for some retro ppc games in classic. Would the 160 mb of ram cut it for late 90's early 2000s games? Cause I really don't want to spend money on pc-66 ram which you must get for the older models. Ideally I would keep both, but music/computer room is getting quite cluttered.Thanks in advance for helping me decide. Pictures to follow.

I would keep the slot loader, it's got a dvd rom in it! heck use it as a dvd player...

Slap in a Airport card get some WIFI

Slap in a couple 512mb sticks of ram, (1gig total) pc-100 or pc-133

Slap in a modern EIDE hard drive up to 320gig

Over Clock it 50 mhz, (helps)

Install 10.4 tiger, and then 9.22 classic, dual boot.

Then you will have a very nice little machine.

 

[Macdrone]

I second the DVD version.

 

[Strimkind]

I'd be inclined to go with the 333mhz tray loader. Better build quality, fairly easy to upgrade, and more like the original iMac.

 

[BlastoiseBlue]

You could pick up both and sell one, that way the other one doesn't just sit outside and get rained on. :c

Personally I'd take the tray loader, but that's because I already have a slot loader Indigo model. Either way, if you pick both up and it turns out the tray loader doesn't work I'd take it off your hands, I'm actually looking for a fried grape tray loader for one of those "someday" projects.

 

[fairchild]

Wow! thanks for the great responses. You've all given stated great reasons for keeping one or the other and given me more to think about. I didn't know about the Pc-66 ram being replaceable by 100 or 133, that's a big plus! Also i forgot about reading about the slot loaders having problems with the interior plastics deteriorating. I'm thinking the older model is of better build quality as well and more of a collectable, but i'm still on the fence.

 

[fairchild]

You could pick up both and sell one, that way the other one doesn't just sit outside and get rained on. :c
Personally I'd take the tray loader, but that's because I already have a slot loader Indigo model. Either way, if you pick both up and it turns out the tray loader doesn't work I'd take it off your hands, I'm actually looking for a fried grape tray loader for one of those "someday" projects.

I actually picked up both. There was no way i was going to leave one behind!

 

[onlyonemac]

I'd keep both!

 

[fairchild]

Here's the really clean tray loading 333 grape

 

[fairchild]

more 333 grape

 

[markyb86]

looks tasty! :lol:

 

[fairchild]

You don't need PC66 RAM for original iMac machines, just good quality stuff PC100/PC133 is fine. I'd keep the DV model, considerably faster and cheap to upgrade to Airport/bigger HD. Just check the machine works well though, as the PAV in these fail hard.

actually, everymac states the fruit colors use 144 pin sdram and the more modern slot loaders use 168 pin sdram

 

[Gorgonops]

I'd be inclined to go with the 333mhz tray loader. Better build quality

Seriously, I can't help but wince whenever I see the quality of the tray loading iMacs compared in positive terms to *anything*. I've never owned a slot-loader, but wow, they must be awful.

(Maybe my problem stems from a tendency to conflate "quality build" with "quality design". I suppose other than the stupidly fragile hinged door over the ports the tray-loaders are at least mostly made out of sturdy materials and reasonably "well built". But the internal design is such a hack. Completely, irredeemably, south-end-of-a-north-facing-mule bu** ugly through and through. And it's not just physical; technically the machines are essentially Beige G3s in drag, with most of the weird glitches and gotchyas of that machine plus a few of their own. They work okay under "classic" Mac OS but once OS X enters the equation they just flat-out suck.

For whatever quality problems the slot-loaders have at least they're a clean design.

Of course, both were ultimately designed to be disposable. It's pretty impressive to find two abandoned ones that both have working monitors. Both models were infamous for blowing out their flyback transformers/analog boards in droves after they hit three or four years old.)

 

[fairchild]

I'd be inclined to go with the 333mhz tray loader. Better build quality

Seriously, I can't help but wince whenever I see the quality of the tray loading iMacs compared in positive terms to *anything*. I've never owned a slot-loader, but wow, they must be awful.

(Maybe my problem stems from a tendency to conflate "quality build" with "quality design". I suppose other than the stupidly fragile hinged door over the ports the tray-loaders are at least mostly made out of sturdy materials and reasonably "well built". But the internal design is such a hack. Completely, irredeemably, south-end-of-a-north-facing-mule bu** ugly through and through. And it's not just physical; technically the machines are essentially Beige G3s in drag, with most of the weird glitches and gotchyas of that machine plus a few of their own. They work okay under "classic" Mac OS but once OS X enters the equation they just flat-out suck.

For whatever quality problems the slot-loaders have at least they're a clean design.

Of course, both were ultimately designed to be disposable. It's pretty impressive to find two abandoned ones that both have working monitors. Both models were infamous for blowing out their flyback transformers/analog boards in droves after they hit three or four years old.)

I can think of much poorer apple designs like the performa all in ones and the ugly tacked on look of the beige g3 towers to name a couple. I'm not a huge fan of the iMac g3's but considering most of them come from schools where they may have been run incessantly and abused, i'd say they've stood the test of time all right. In terms of the internal design, i would say they did a pretty clever job with the odd shaped boards etc to max out the available space. I agree, the slot load models have a slightly better look, smoother lines.

These machines weren't designed to be apple's top performers and as such their performance reflects that compared to the g3 towers. For the purpose that they were designed for, i'd say they fit the bill perfectly. If the flyback transformer goes out, it's a $ 20 part that you can re-sodder as opposed to say an ibook g3 with graphics failure that requires either a new logic board or a reflow $$$. To be honest, the only reason i'm going to keep the 333 tray loader is because a) i got it for free, B) i'm a fan of all in ones, c) will make a decent os9 retro game machine that doesn't take up piles of space.

 

[BlastoiseBlue]

Mmm... Jealous, hehe! Can we get some pics of the slot loader too? Love that the tray loader came with the matching mouse and keyboard.

 

[fairchild]

grape 400 dv slot load

 

[fairchild]

I've decided to keep the 333 tray loader! Main reasons were nostalgia, condition, and build quality. I would like to keep both, but my girl is going to start snapping with too many machines around, and i'm honestly starting to stumble over things in my production room.

The only way i'd take on another iMac g3 is if i found one NIB.

Thank you all for your input!