In article <dallard-1310941731220001 at gsomac10.gso.uri.edu>, dallard at gsosun1.gso.uri.edu (David Allard) writes:
>In article <106303186wnr at genesys.demon.co.uk>, Duncan at genesys.demon.co.uk wrote:
>>I would suggest any Mac as fast, or faster, than a Mac IIci (25Mhz 68030
>with math chip (68882) included). I don't think that the currect version
>The new Quadra 630 would be a good choice (again, get the one with the
>built-in math chip, the 33Mhz 68040, not the 68LC040 (the 680LC40 is like
>the 486SX chips - math dead). This machine would be very nice for Image,
>the base model has 4MB of RAM, you would probably want to bring this up to
>8MB. The video is built in on this machine (like all Macs) and would
>probably suffice for your needs. Monitors up to 19 inches supported, 256
>colors are standard for 14-16 inch monitors, more if additional VRAM is
>put on the mother board - Apple's monitors are nice, so are Sony's and
>those by NEC.
Doesn't NIH Image require a separate graphics display card? I heard that
the built in video of Mac models later than the IIci won't work properly.
Thanks for any comments. Regards, Tom.