Re: Another Opinion wanted

There is no 800x600 option for the LCD monitor. I have not tried to pretend it has a crt monitor. There are several different color profiles which disappear when the check box specifying show for only this monitor is selected. What about at 800x600? Don't you get a millions option? -- Nick ht

Re: Another Opinion wanted

On Thu, 26 May 2005, Tom Peterson wrote: > If you hold down the option key and select the color prefs does it give you > the option for millions at 800? > > No dice! In x 10.3.9 with patched rage pro drivers the only options are > thousands or 256 at1024x780. What about at 800x600? Don't you ge

Re: Another Opinion wanted

-Original Message- From: G-Books [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Nick Marshall Sent: Thursday, May 26, 2005 7:55 AM To: G-Books Subject: Re: Another Opinion wanted On Wed, 25 May 2005, Tom Peterson wrote: > > > 1024x780>thousands. I don't have the "option

Re: Another Opinion wanted

On Wed, 25 May 2005, Tom Peterson wrote: > > > 1024x780>thousands. I don't have the "option" in display prefs for > "millions" at 800x600. Really? 2MB of vram should give you millions at 800x600. I use to run my 7300 at 1024 at thousands 99% of the time and when I needed to edit some pics I wou

Re: Another Opinion wanted

Nick Marshall wrote: On Tue, 24 May 2005, Tom Peterson wrote: Nick Marshall wrote: On Mon, 23 May 2005, Tom and Lisa P wrote: What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? Unless the ap

Re: Another Opinion wanted

Exactly. That's what I was trying to get across by comparing my Ti to my friends Pismo. 'Elegantly' is a much nicer way to put it. :) The good thing is Tom and Lisa now know there is a third option. 500MHz G4. What are you running the display at? 800x600 millions or 1024x768 thousands. --

Re: Another Opinion wanted

On Tue, 24 May 2005, Tom Peterson wrote: > Nick Marshall wrote: > > >On Mon, 23 May 2005, Tom and Lisa P wrote: > > > > > > > >>What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a > >>WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? > >> > >> > > > > > >Unless the apps you are

Re: Another Opinion wanted

Nick Marshall wrote: On Mon, 23 May 2005, Tom and Lisa P wrote: What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? Unless the apps you are going to use have been optimized by Altivec, iTunes for instance, go with

Re: Another Opinion wanted

On Tue, 24 May 2005, Tom and Lisa P wrote: > >on 23/05/05 22:28, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > >>> on 23/05/05 22:05, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> > What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a > WS isnt an optimal solut

Re: Another Opinion wanted

on 23/05/05 22:28, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: on 23/05/05 22:05, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? thanks, Probably the G3/500. What is

Re: Another Opinion wanted

Someone will probably disagree with me but I say go for the G3 if you want to use Jaguar or the G4 if you want to use Panther. Panther is more G4 optimised... If you want to use Photoshop or apps like that, go for the G4.. On 24/05/2005, at 13:19, Nick Marshall wrote: On Mon, 23 May 2005, Tom

Re: Another Opinion wanted

On Mon, 23 May 2005, Tom and Lisa P wrote: > > What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a > WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? Unless the apps you are going to use have been optimized by Altivec, iTunes for instance, go with the G3. The extra 100Mhz w

Re: Another Opinion wanted

on 23/05/05 22:28, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> on 23/05/05 22:05, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> >>> What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a >>> WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? >>> >>> thanks, >> >> Probably t

Re: Another Opinion wanted

on 23/05/05 22:05, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? thanks, Probably the G3/500. What is the speed of the backside cache? -Laurent. Both would have 250 Mhz

Re: Another Opinion wanted

on 23/05/05 22:05, Tom and Lisa P at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a > WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? > > thanks, Probably the G3/500. What is the speed of the backside cache? -Laurent. -- ===

Another Opinion wanted

What would be better for running OS X on a Wallstreet (yes, I know a WS isnt an optimal solution); a G3/500 or a G4/400 ? thanks, Mad Dog -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site