Bunsen Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 Here's my little rundown of the Classic II vs. the SE/30: Is it only the first Classic (ie not the II) that can boot from ROM? Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kallikak Posted May 4, 2007 Report Share Posted May 4, 2007 Yes - the 1st Classic is the only macintosh model with that capability unfortunately. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Applemeister Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 Looks like I'm the only one to vote for the SE. Like most other peeps, I voted for the one I own. I'm sure the SE/30 pwnz the SE, but I like my SE FDHD lol!! I'd like to get my mitts on something pre-SE or a colour compact Mac, like a Colour Classic. LCs/Performas may be faster than Compacts, but they don't look so cute Quote Link to post Share on other sites
QuadSix50 Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 For me, it's the SE/30 hands down. However, many of the previous posts now have me curious for the first runner up, the Classic II. I haven't ever played with the Classic II so I can't really say (I have played with the Classic I and you can keep it ), but I do remember the SE/30 being quite fast for a compact Mac. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Maniacintosh Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 SE/30. So much SPEED in System 6! I wish I had one... The Plus...well, mine does nothing more than run the "Mandelbrot" AD screensaver since it doesn't have a KB or mouse Quote Link to post Share on other sites
II2II Posted May 6, 2007 Report Share Posted May 6, 2007 SE/30. I just have something with FPUs. Runner up would be the SE, with it's internal hard drive and 68000. It should be pretty compatible with archaic Mac software. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Scott Baret Posted May 7, 2007 Author Report Share Posted May 7, 2007 You can also add an FPU to a Classic II. That internal expansion slot is perfect for them. I have one with this card, they apparently are rare. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quadraman Posted May 8, 2007 Report Share Posted May 8, 2007 I found it hard to choose between the SE/30 and the Classic II. They each have slight advantages in certain areas, but are more or less equal. I don't recall any upgrades being avalable for the Classic II, though, so in that regard I had to give the advantage to the SE/30. I have three Pluses, btw. One platinum, one beige, and one that looks like a 128 or 512 that was converted using an Apple upgrade kit. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
puckman Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 SE/30 always get the most votes which aint fair. The plus is the OLDEST you can do almost everything with. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
tomlee59 Posted May 9, 2007 Report Share Posted May 9, 2007 Re: Classic II vs. SE/30. The SE/30 is faster. Not just a little bit faster; much faster. The Classic II crippled the bus; unforgivable, to my taste. Add to that the fact that the FPU is built-in (don't have to hunt for a rare and expensive add-on card), and the amazing 128MB ram ceiling, the SE/30 stands head and shoulders (er, crt and disk drives?) above the Classic II. The SE/30 remains a quite usable Mac -- it can surf ok, it supports CD burners, and has that terrific form factor. Love it, love it, love it. But yes, I still have a great fondness for the Plus. Although it can't do nearly as many things as its far more capable younger brother, it has a certain retro charm that is difficult to resist. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
bluekatt Posted May 11, 2007 Report Share Posted May 11, 2007 I judge by my assessment of a machine's contribution to the "Macintosh phenomenon" Plus is therefore my choice. Surely the original is the one that contributed the most to the "Macintosh phenomenon"? Except it wasn't successful. what do you mean it wasnt succesfull ? it was succesfull enough to release the fatmac in 85 succesful enough to release the plus it was succesfull enough to release the whole macintosh line with out the orginal you woudl not be here saying it was not succesfull and i woudl not be typing this on imac G5 sounds very succesfull to me Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Kallikak Posted May 11, 2007 Report Share Posted May 11, 2007 I mean it didn't sell anything like what they'd hoped, and was pretty much unusable because of the memory and other limitations. You seem to be claiming it was successful just because it had successful progeny. Not much of a criterion to employ when trying to choose between them. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Quadraman Posted May 11, 2007 Report Share Posted May 11, 2007 I judge by my assessment of a machine's contribution to the "Macintosh phenomenon" Plus is therefore my choice. Surely the original is the one that contributed the most to the "Macintosh phenomenon"? Except it wasn't successful. what do you mean it wasnt succesfull ? it was succesfull enough to release the fatmac in 85 succesful enough to release the plus it was succesfull enough to release the whole macintosh line with out the orginal you woudl not be here saying it was not succesfull and i woudl not be typing this on imac G5 sounds very succesfull to me The 512 was released to address deficiencies in the 128 that were holding it back from being more successful, like the low memory and the super slow hard drive port that accessed at floppy drive speeds. The Plus was released to fix further deficiencies found in the 512. The original 128 wasn't even outselling the Apple II line and the early Macs were losing money for Apple. They may have been selling, but they were still negatively impacting Apple's profits, so from that perspective, they weren't successful until after enough improvements were made to call it the Plus. You only have to look at how long the 128 and 512 models were on the market and compare them to how long the Plus was. The Plus was their longest running Mac model, ever. They wouldn't have kept selling it in the numbers they did if it was losing money, so by measures of both sales and profits, the Plus was the first really successful Mac. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
funkytoad Posted May 15, 2007 Report Share Posted May 15, 2007 I voted Classic II, because I have two of them, I use them all the time. And they never let me down! Quote Link to post Share on other sites
applefreak Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) i voted SE/30 powerfull enough to run 2D CAD (vellum) Edited July 11, 2007 by Guest Quote Link to post Share on other sites
equant Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 Can the Classic II accept an ethernet card? That would affect my second place ranking. If it does, then it'd be 2nd to the SE/30. If it doesn't, it'd be 3rd. Nathan Quote Link to post Share on other sites
equill Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 No. Its only built-in expansion possibility (after a smidgin of RAM) is an FPU, on a card that makes hensteeth seem common. However, with an Asanté EN/SC adapter and System 7.5 or higher, it can talk to its fellows over ethernet at a dizzying 10Mb/s. The Classic II is remembered with affection in this household as an indefatigable workhorse for four years, but the palm still has to go to the SE/30 for sheer muscle, though the Classic II wins on any assessment of looks. de Quote Link to post Share on other sites
TylerEss Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 The best one is clearly the one that you love most dearly. We all have a best one. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.