What Mac model is equal to a PIII 700mhz

[Maconthemove]

Would hooking up a scsi drive to a PC(gasp) and do a low level format

be just as good as a six pass erase? Going to check out the magnetiic bulk erase for the PB scsi drives.

 

[madmax_2069]

a low level format will remove everything making it to where you have to redo the partition and everything else. basically making it like a new drive but still might be posable to recover data on them after

you got to watch out tho cause something can happen during this and screw the drive. i havent had that happen yet but i guess there is always the chance.

i have never done a LLF on a scsi drive before so i dont know what to watch out about.

 

[techfury90]

Would hooking up a scsi drive to a PC(gasp) and do a low level formatbe just as good as a six pass erase? Going to check out the magnetiic bulk erase for the PB scsi drives.

Can't you just use DBAN on the PC or whatever you use to erase the disks? It makes no difference if they've been used on a Mac. Also, an LLF does not really erase data. It just rewrites some sync tracks and stuff. The data is still on the platters.

Edit: In fact, you can erase disks from just about ANY platform with this way. IBM RS/6000, Sun, SGI, Mac, PC, pretty much anything.

 

[Bunsen]

Would hooking up a scsi drive to a PC

How do you propose to do that? These are 2.5" SCSI drives we're talking

 

[Maconthemove]

Since the 2.5 scsi drives are toasted when they come in, I am going to use a desktop ide to laptop ide adapter to see if they can be reformated.

 

[techfury90]

You can't use one to do that. You would need a desktop SCSI to laptop SCSI adapter.

 

[Maccess]

A pity since Pentium III 500Mhz runs perfectly under Windows 98SE (which is what it usually shipped with). Just make sure to install autopatcher for Windows 98. http://www.mdgx.com provides endless tips and tricks for patching Windows Machines. It's over a hundred pages, but autopatcher is a one shot installer to install all the patches.

Now, back to the original question: I would say that any of the G3s running OS 9.22 or 10.3 would be equivalent to a PIII 700. Also, any of the 604e Machines (7300, 8600, 9600) would be equivalent under OS 8.6

 

[david63]

I have an old PIII 500Mhz running Win 98SE. I think it scores heavily over the G3's by virtue of the fact that there are several browsers that will run on it(Firefox and Opera) whereas the G3 running 0S 9 is very limited. Most other everday things they appear equivalent.

 

[The Macster]

Windows 98 is pretty horrible by today's standards though - to be honest XP will run nicely on a 500 MHz as long as you have a reasonable amount of Ram or do a little tweaking, I think it would be a waste to only run 98 on one. As for a G3, why would you run only OS 9 on one? Stick some memory in there and OS X flies on them! Macs seem to remain modern and useful for longer than PCs - while a 500 MHz PC is from the G4 era, G3s from 1998 are still very very useable (with Tiger).

 

[bluekatt]

id consider windows 2000 to be a bare minimum these days i woudl not touch a 9x winodws with a 20 foot pole and a mouse attached to it

 

[iMac600]

Depends on preference and use really. Personally, I quite like Windows 95. Agreed though, functionality is requiring a baseline of Windows 2000 these days.

 

[Maccess]

Windows 98 is pretty horrible by today's standards though - to be honest XP will run nicely on a 500 MHz as long as you have a reasonable amount of Ram or do a little tweaking, I think it would be a waste to only run 98 on one. As for a G3, why would you run only OS 9 on one? Stick some memory in there and OS X flies on them! Macs seem to remain modern and useful for longer than PCs - while a 500 MHz PC is from the G4 era, G3s from 1998 are still very very useable (with Tiger).

I beg to disagree. I'll take a properly patched Windows 98 SE computer with at least 256MB of RAM anyday over a fully patched XP machine. About the only things that I need to run that I can't are iTunes and Google Earth, everything else runs well.

Win98 Autopatcher (watch Windows 98 fly, fast and stable).

http://www.msfn.org/board/index.php?showtopic=80800

I guess that's one advantage over OS9, 98SE can run most modern browsers (except IE7: not a problem since Maxthon is more stable and has a better feature set, and Safari for Windows).

Of course, I'll take a Mac with OS X and lots of RAM above anything running Windows, but I have to manage some windows machines, so I try to make them their best.

 

[bluekatt]

Depends on preference and use really. Personally, I quite like Windows 95. Agreed though, functionality is requiring a baseline of Windows 2000 these days.

stability mostly the idea that 9x is stable is a farce

half of the time the damn thing blinks out on me 2000 is stable and i value stability over other features