17 Jul
2016
17 Jul
'16
3:56 p.m.
that is interesting to know the old os can be run under the newer.
I am confused on some of the G5 stuff.
there is a real early one that has non intel processor
then there is a 1.1 ( i have one too) but you can not upgrade to the
latest os (bummer)
then there is the G% 3 or 3.3 dated one that will run currect os too.
is there a way to force the 1.1 one to run currest os somehow!?
Ed#
In a message dated 7/17/2016 12:47:17 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
cmhanson at eschatologist.net writes:
On Jul 15, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Austin Pass <austinpass at gmail.com> wrote:
I have several G5's, but am at a loss as to what
to do with them. If
they supported classic Mac OS I'd have one up and running
in a heartbeat.
You can't boot MacOS 9 on them, but you can run Classic under 10.4 on a G5
and it screams.
-- Chris
17 Jul
17 Jul
4:20 p.m.
And SheepShaver is an option to run Classic/Mac OS apps on Intel based Mac OS X
boxes.
Jerry
On 07/17/16 02:56 PM, COURYHOUSE at aol.com wrote:
that is interesting to know the old os can be run
under the newer.
I am confused on some of the G5 stuff.
there is a real early one that has non intel processor
then there is a 1.1 ( i have one too) but you can not upgrade to the
latest os (bummer)
then there is the G% 3 or 3.3 dated one that will run currect os too.
is there a way to force the 1.1 one to run currest os somehow!?
Ed#
In a message dated 7/17/2016 12:47:17 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,
cmhanson at eschatologist.net writes:
On Jul 15, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Austin Pass <austinpass at gmail.com> wrote:
I have several G5's, but am at a loss as to
what to do with them. If
they supported classic Mac OS I'd have one up and
running in a heartbeat.
You can't boot MacOS 9 on them, but you can run Classic under 10.4 on a G5
and it screams.
-- Chris
8:28 p.m.
And SheepShaver is an option to run Classic/Mac OS
apps on Intel based
Mac OS X boxes.
It's an option, but it's not a very good one. It has various compatibility
issues with certain programs (usually the most interesting/useful ones)
and it does not run anything past 9.0.4. For the programs it works with, it's
a godsend, but Classic (not to mention OS 9 itself) is the best reason to
keep a Power Mac around. It's a bit pokier than OS 9 due to the virtualization
overhead, but it's highly compatible and infinitely better integrated with
the host operating system. This is a big reason I'm "Tiger Forever" on my
PowerPC gear.
For that matter, you might as well run Jaguar on a G3, G4 or early G5,
because Jag didn't have double-buffered Classic windows and did have better
classic AppleTalk networking support.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- FORTUNE: Ten weeks from Friday you won't remember this fortune at all. -----
10:57 p.m.
I'm not disagreeing with you. I have multiple PPC Mac's and a couple of
PowerBooks. I'm set.
Apple systems from the past typically had 2 big advantages over windows based
systems.
* significantly easier to administer, and at least some level of stability over
MS code
* Apple systems last forever where a box was typically good for 2 to 3 years on
the x86 side. I had an 8600, purchased brand new, and although it wasn't our
sole system (lots of Sparc boxes at home also), we used that 8600 daily, or
almost daily for 8 years.
Whether the current boxes being produced today are still usable for 8 years
really isn't up for debate, whether they are or not. The vast majority of Mac
users don't view the technology as usable for an extended period of time. At
least that is my observation.
Back on topic, many Mac users today would/have stuck their nose up at PPC and
68K powered boxes, and don't even acknowledge them. If a critical piece of Mac
OS code crossed their path, SheepShaver would be their only option.
As for me, restating again, as I already have hardware that can run Mac OS code,
SheepShaver is a novelty for me, and I have never attempted to use it for
anything serious or for any significant length of time for a big project.
I also agree with your comment on "Tiger forever" comment. Most people only see
that we lost the Classic environment. For me, 10.5 + has been like a country
music song, i.e. you know what you get if you play a country music record backwards?
Answer, house, wife, job, horse, money, best friend, etc.
Thanks for the reply,
Jerry
On 07/17/16 07:28 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
And
SheepShaver is an option to run Classic/Mac OS apps on Intel based
Mac OS X boxes.
It's an option, but it's not a very good one. It has various compatibility
issues with certain programs (usually the most interesting/useful ones)
and it does not run anything past 9.0.4. For the programs it works with, it's
a godsend, but Classic (not to mention OS 9 itself) is the best reason to
keep a Power Mac around. It's a bit pokier than OS 9 due to the virtualization
overhead, but it's highly compatible and infinitely better integrated with
the host operating system. This is a big reason I'm "Tiger Forever" on my
PowerPC gear.
For that matter, you might as well run Jaguar on a G3, G4 or early G5,
because Jag didn't have double-buffered Classic windows and did have better
classic AppleTalk networking support.
11:34 p.m.
Back on topic, many Mac users today would/have stuck
their nose up at PPC
and 68K powered boxes, and don't even acknowledge them. If a critical piece
of Mac OS code crossed their path, SheepShaver would be their only option.
True, and that's a shame, since Classic happily runs most 68K apps too. It's
a nice one-stop shop.
On the other hand, Basilisk II isn't bad.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Eight out of ten voices in my head say, "don't shoot!"
---------------------
17 Jul
17 Jul
10:23 p.m.
that is interesting to know the old os can be run
under the newer.
I am confused on some of the G5 stuff.
there is a real early one that has non intel processor
then there is a 1.1 ( i have one too) but you can not upgrade to the
latest os (bummer)
then there is the G% 3 or 3.3 dated one that will run currect os too.
is there a way to force the 1.1 one to run currest os somehow!?
I'm not sure what you're referring to. If the 1.1 is clock speed, the
slowest G5 is 1.6GHz. No Power Mac can run anything past 10.5.8; there is
no PowerPC code left in the kernel to run.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckaiser at floodgap.com
-- Don't be humble ... you're not that great. -- Golda Meir -------------------
11:15 p.m.
On 7/17/16 9:23 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:
I believe he's referring to MacPro1,1
that is
interesting to know the old os can be run under the newer.
I am confused on some of the G5 stuff.
there is a real early one that has non intel processor
then there is a 1.1 ( i have one too) but you can not upgrade to the
latest os (bummer)
then there is the G% 3 or 3.3 dated one that will run currect os too.
is there a way to force the 1.1 one to run currest os somehow!?
I'm not sure
what you're referring to. If the 1.1 is clock speed, the
slowest G5 is 1.6GHz. No Power Mac can run anything past 10.5.8; there is
no PowerPC code left in the kernel to run.
11:04 p.m.
On Jul 17, 2016, at 12:56 PM, COURYHOUSE at aol.com wrote:
that is interesting to know the old os can be run
under the newer.
This was a standard feature of Mac OS X on PowerPC hardware from the 10.0 developer builds
through 10.4.
I am confused on some of the G5 stuff.
there is a real early one that has non intel processor
That would be a PowerMac G5. No Power Macintosh has an Intel processor.
then there is a 1.1 ( i have one too) but you can
not upgrade to the
latest os (bummer)
By "1.1" do you mean the Mac Pro? The Mac Pro has always had an Intel processor,
and the model code for the first Mac Pro was MacPro1,1.
then there is the G% 3 or 3.3 dated one that will
run currect os too.
This is confusing. Can you restate it or at least correct your typos before posting?
There's no G3 that can run the latest macOS, since a G3 is a kind of PowerPC CPU.
is there a way to force the 1.1 one to run currest os
somehow!?
Not any supported way, which is the only way I'd be allowed to discuss.
-- Chris
2924
days inactive
2925
days old
8 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
aek＠bitsavers.org -
cmhanson＠eschatologist.net -
COURYHOUSE＠aol.com -
other＠oryx.us -
ryan＠hack.net -
spectre＠floodgap.com