Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/18/16 8:36 PM, N0body H0me wrote:

>> Which bare board did you see?
> 
> Long ago, on "The auction site that must not be named", some guy 
> was selling an apple-branded case, with a bare motherboard inside
> (or, perhaps only sparsely populated).  The seller stated it was
> the prototype motherboard for an 88k Mac that was never built.  It
> sold for a stupid amount of money
> 

If it was a Mac si case, that would have been "RLC" (RISC Low Cost)

They most definitely did work, and was what demonstrated that you could
run MacOS with an emulated 68K on a RISC processor.

I also remembered that at the same time as the 88100, a consultant was
working on bringing up the code on an AMD 29000 but that was abandoned
when RLC ran.

The only thing I can think of offhand that I liked better on PPC were the
bitfield insert/extract instructions, which are very useful in the core of
the 68K emulator. It's unlikely that there would have been as many 
implementations
of the 88k as PPC if only Moto would have been involved, and they wouldn't have
gotten IBM's copper fab process, which was critical in getting faster parts.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Liam Proven]

On 19 July 2016 at 16:08, Swift Griggs  wrote:
>
> IMHO, it's a PITA and not really worth it.


That's my impression, yes.

> Hardware-based Hackintoshes can
> be fast and somewhat well supported.

I know, because I hackintoshed my PC in London before I left.

It was a decent machine off the local Freecycle group -- Core 2 Quad
Extreme, 8GB RAM, SATA DVD-RW. No hard disks or graphics card, which I
cannibalised off my old PC.

As it was the first all-Intel machine I'd had in a long long time --
well over a decade -- I tried hackintoshing it. (At first, it ran
Ubuntu, natch, and I also tried Windows 8 on it for a month or so
before the eval period expired and it started nagging.)

It took days of trial and error but it worked. I intentionally used
Snow Leopard (although Mountain Lion was by then current) because [a]
I wanted PowerPC app support, mainly for MS Office 2004 and [b] it was
an old version already, so probably no patches would come along and
break my installtion.

It worked fine and was a fast, useful, stable machine. I intentionally
didn't try to get sleep/resume working -- it was a desktop; when not
in use, I turned it off. One boot in 50 might fail but a press of the
reset button and it always came up. Floppy drive and PS/2 ports didn't
work, but I could always just reboot into Ubuntu for them.

When I get the box over here, I might try to get it running a more
modern version, just for kicks.

> You just have to be very careful
> about what hardware you pick. If one decides to build one, I'd recommend
> checking the Buyers Guide on http://www.tonymacx86.com.

I'm not that rich!

I bought a used Mac mini, with my 26Y old Apple ABD keyboard on it. :-)

> As far as VMware or VirtualBox goes, that's a different story. I've used
> both of them and as of about a year or so ago, I didn't get satisfactory
> results. For one, even when you use an EFI BIOS, you still need to load
> EFI hackery-loaders, and driver-hacks to get it working.

Yes, tried that.

> I tried to do it
> the "legal way" by buying a copy of OSX Server standalone etc...
>
> https://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US=displayKC=2005793

OK, never tried that!

> Eventually I got a working guest VM with OSX on it, but I think the
> graphics drivers and other niggly bits were non-optimal to the point it
> was just painful and slow to use. It took quite a bit of time even to get
> it that far (lots of trial and error with the guest VM settings). Perhaps
> things are easier these days, but I certainly couldn't recommend the
> process unless you just wanted/needed OSX Server running in a VM for some
> kind of infrastructure stuff. That's probably exactly what Apple intended,
> too.

I'm tempted to, but the machine I'd want to run it on is AMD-based, so
I think the chances are not good.

> BTW, I've heard it all runs peachy under OSX. Obviously, I'm talking about
> the host-server being FreeBSD, Linux, or Windows.
>
> With Mac Minis and other OSX hardware being pretty accessible, and with my
> bad-attitude toward most modern commercial OSs (app store full of malware
> anyone?) I'm not enthusiastic enough to jack with VM'ing it much. My
> impression is that Apple seems much more interested in iPhones and perhaps
> tablets these days than some "old" desktop OS.

Up to a point, yes. But it's still a damned fine desktop, and the
least-hassle Unix there is. Ubuntu is getting close, though.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2011/may/17/computing-opensource

http://lifehacker.com/5993401/im-cory-doctorow-and-this-is-how-i-work

> You'd think a company with a bazillion notional dollars equity value would
> have a few spare cycles for keeping the OS interesting. However, lately,
> my impression is that their idea of "interesting" seems to mean they put
> higher walls around the garden. Oh, wait, they are making it mo' betta'
> for to read in traditional Chinese and throwing in a bunch of bundled
> application tweaks that have little to do with the actual OS. Uhh.
> Grrat.

I have no issues with it myself. I don't use Apple phones or laptops,
I don't have a tablet, so the integration features are irrelevant to
me. I don't use Apple's email client, chat client, calendar, notes,
cloud storage, anything. Mostly I use FOSS and freeware apps, so
there's no tie-in for me.

But the integration is, I hear, amazing and best-of-breed.

I gather they're adding Siri to the next version, macOS Sierra, and
after that, there will be more AI features. Not sure that I want any
of that, but we'll see.

> Hey Apple, you might want a modern volume management scheme (ie.. not Core
> Storage) before you slap "Server" on anything else. It's no small wonder
> OSX Server was a failure in the marketplace.

Well, they nearly added ZFS, but bottled out, possibly due to Oracle
and its licensing. Now they're working on a new one:

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[geneb]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Liam Proven wrote:


On 19 July 2016 at 15:44, geneb  wrote:

You have to patch VMWare to turn on the MacOS support - it's not available
by default.



Ah. Well, since I don't own it and prefer FOSS, I'll stick to
VirtualBox and try to uncover the secret. I know people manage to do
it.


VMWare Player can do it as well, but does need the patch tweak to make it 
work properly.


g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Swift Griggs]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Liam Proven wrote:
> I've heard that but I have never once got it to work, either in VMware 
> or VirtualBox. :-(

IMHO, it's a PITA and not really worth it. Hardware-based Hackintoshes can 
be fast and somewhat well supported. You just have to be very careful 
about what hardware you pick. If one decides to build one, I'd recommend 
checking the Buyers Guide on http://www.tonymacx86.com. 

As far as VMware or VirtualBox goes, that's a different story. I've used 
both of them and as of about a year or so ago, I didn't get satisfactory 
results. For one, even when you use an EFI BIOS, you still need to load 
EFI hackery-loaders, and driver-hacks to get it working. I tried to do it 
the "legal way" by buying a copy of OSX Server standalone etc... 

https://kb.vmware.com/selfservice/microsites/search.do?language=en_US=displayKC=2005793

Eventually I got a working guest VM with OSX on it, but I think the 
graphics drivers and other niggly bits were non-optimal to the point it 
was just painful and slow to use. It took quite a bit of time even to get 
it that far (lots of trial and error with the guest VM settings). Perhaps 
things are easier these days, but I certainly couldn't recommend the 
process unless you just wanted/needed OSX Server running in a VM for some 
kind of infrastructure stuff. That's probably exactly what Apple intended, 
too.

BTW, I've heard it all runs peachy under OSX. Obviously, I'm talking about 
the host-server being FreeBSD, Linux, or Windows.

With Mac Minis and other OSX hardware being pretty accessible, and with my 
bad-attitude toward most modern commercial OSs (app store full of malware 
anyone?) I'm not enthusiastic enough to jack with VM'ing it much. My 
impression is that Apple seems much more interested in iPhones and perhaps 
tablets these days than some "old" desktop OS.

http://www.osnews.com/story/29299/Apple_PC_sales_fall_below_market

You'd think a company with a bazillion notional dollars equity value would 
have a few spare cycles for keeping the OS interesting. However, lately, 
my impression is that their idea of "interesting" seems to mean they put 
higher walls around the garden. Oh, wait, they are making it mo' betta' 
for to read in traditional Chinese and throwing in a bunch of bundled 
application tweaks that have little to do with the actual OS. Uhh. 
Grrat.

http://www.apple.com/osx/all-features/

Hey Apple, you might want a modern volume management scheme (ie.. not Core 
Storage) before you slap "Server" on anything else. It's no small wonder 
OSX Server was a failure in the marketplace.

I'd rather install a 20 year old OS I've never seen versus OSX on VMware, 
but that's just me.

-Swift

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Liam Proven]

On 19 July 2016 at 15:44, geneb  wrote:
> You have to patch VMWare to turn on the MacOS support - it's not available
> by default.


Ah. Well, since I don't own it and prefer FOSS, I'll stick to
VirtualBox and try to uncover the secret. I know people manage to do
it.


-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[geneb]

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016, Liam Proven wrote:


On 18 July 2016 at 22:50, geneb  wrote:

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, couryho...@aol.com wrote:


Liam, thank you so much for this  information!
I did not know about  all the HACKINTOSH  action out there!


If you've got an Intel cpu, you can run it with VMWare too. :)


I've heard that but I have never once got it to work, either in VMware
or VirtualBox. :-(


You have to patch VMWare to turn on the MacOS support - it's not available 
by default.


g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Liam Proven]

On 18 July 2016 at 22:50, geneb  wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, couryho...@aol.com wrote:
>
>> Liam, thank you so much for this  information!
>> I did not know about  all the HACKINTOSH  action out there!
>>
> If you've got an Intel cpu, you can run it with VMWare too. :)


I've heard that but I have never once got it to work, either in VMware
or VirtualBox. :-(

-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> "Shiner" shipped as the ANS with AIX
> 
> http://www.erik.co.uk/ans/
> 
> though that isn't what the original "Shiner" was at all.

Chuck Goulsbee talked about a prototype 601 in a Q950 case, but that
sounds like the ancestor to the WGS 9150, not the ANS. Was the
original "Shiner" that system, or was it something else?

I keep hoping another ANS 300 turns up (the only extant one I know is
Chuck's). However, my 500 and 700 systems are still doing just fine.

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- MOVIE IDEA: E.T.E.S.: The Extra Terrestrial E-Mail Signature ---

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[N0body H0me]

> -Original Message-
> From: a...@bitsavers.org
> Sent: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 12:59:44 -0700
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/18/16 12:44 PM, N0body H0me wrote:
> 
>> I'm astounded.  I didn't think any ever made it to prototype or
>> hard-model
>> stage!  I've seen bare boards for these (up to this point) mythical
>> beasts, but never a living, breathing machine.  Must have been a piece
>> of work.  Do any functional machines still exist?  How did you encounter
>> them?
>> 
> 
> The 88100 si worked. Hurricane never got a functional 88110 before the
> IBM/Apple
> deal. Tessaract never booted MacOS.
> 
> Which bare board did you see?

Long ago, on "The auction site that must not be named", some guy 
was selling an apple-branded case, with a bare motherboard inside
(or, perhaps only sparsely populated).  The seller stated it was
the prototype motherboard for an 88k Mac that was never built.  It
sold for a stupid amount of money

> I was in the RISC products group doing driver and cpu board bringup
> starting with
> the 88100 nubus boards to IBM RSC (never had a functional 88110) then 601
> over to high end desktop product development with TNT.

Wow, so as Walter Cronkite would have said: "...and you were there."
The question I'm dying to ask is: Given the choice between the PPC
and the 88k (and ignoring Motorola's propensity to shoot itself in
the foot), which archetecture would you tend to favor (and why)?


Receive Notifications of Incoming Messages
Easily monitor multiple email accounts & access them with a click.
Visit http://www.inbox.com/notifier and check it out!

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Eric Smith]

On 7/18/2016 11:10 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
> you won't find anything on the web about any of this

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 3:22 PM, ben  wrote:
> Can you enlighten the masses, or have you sold your soul to Lucifer
> for this knowlage?

Even worse! It was sold to Apple!
:-)

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[ben]

On 7/18/2016 11:10 AM, Al Kossow wrote:



On 7/18/16 9:11 AM, Liam Proven wrote:

On 18 July 2016 at 17:03, Al Kossow  wrote:

"Shiner" started out as an 88110 machine, and some of the architectural
quirks are remnants of that.



This is not enough for me to Google. Could you clarify, please?



you won't find anything on the web about any of this



Can you enlighten the masses, or have you sold your soul to Lucifer
for this knowlage?

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[geneb]

On Mon, 18 Jul 2016, couryho...@aol.com wrote:


Liam, thank you so much for this  information!
I did not know about  all the HACKINTOSH  action out there!


If you've got an Intel cpu, you can run it with VMWare too. :)

g.

--
Proud owner of F-15C 80-0007
http://www.f15sim.com - The only one of its kind.
http://www.diy-cockpits.org/coll - Go Collimated or Go Home.
Some people collect things for a hobby.  Geeks collect hobbies.

ScarletDME - The red hot Data Management Environment
A Multi-Value database for the masses, not the classes.
http://scarlet.deltasoft.com - Get it _today_!

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[COURYHOUSE]

Liam, thank you so much for this  information!
I did not know about  all the HACKINTOSH  action out there!

Good to hear that one system will use SATA drive > I will just have  to  
find  some old installable  OS   for it.
The  family of the deceased engineer that passed these on to us  at  the 
SMECC  Museum project   tossed most any  paperwork or media , so  we have  
what is   installed  on the system  and of  course  for the diskless one we are 
 empty handed.
 
We we were out  scrounging now I wish  I had  picked up  more  vintage  MAC 
  paperwork and  discs   now.
We  saved stuff related to the   early MAC and of course  ANYTHING we could 
 find  for the APPLE II.
 
We do also have  something that looks  like an APPLE LISA but not  the 
twiggi (sp?) drive model  I have heard reference to. it turned on  last  time I 
 
tried but just a bunch of  diddle  crap all  over the screen. (bogus 
contents of memory mapped  video or!??  http://www.smecc.org)  
 
 
In a message dated 7/18/2016 12:03:32 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
lpro...@gmail.com writes:

On 18  July 2016 at 20:18,   wrote:

Ed,  *please* will you get a proper email client? They work fine with
AOL mail.  I know, I am also liampro...@aol.com & have been for  20y!

>
> will not  load  curvet  os  because?
> "This  is caused by the lack of the 64 bit EFI bios. The  hardware of the
> Mac Pro 1.1 is  already complete 64bit capable  but they do ship the efi 
bios
> only in 32bit   version."
>
> Ed  says. OK whatever an EFI Bios  is

There are ways around  it.

http://www.pro-tools-expert.com/home-page/2015/3/2/how-to-resurrect-a-2006-m
ac-pro-11-so-it-can-run-osx-yosemit.html

Ask  the Hackintosh community:

http://hq-a.weebly.com/

>  -
> ok we also have a -
>
> "The   Power Macintosh G5 shipped from 2003 until 2006. All models pack
>  64-bit PowerPC  970 (G5) processors in an easy-to-upgrade aluminum tower 
 case
> design with a  single external optical drive  bay"
>
> This  one is missing disc  drives...   this  has the neatest  form  
fitting
> insides  of  any of the macs  I have  seen.

Takes any old SATA drive, as  far as I recall. No special firmware needed.

Will run up to OS X 10.5,  nothing later.



-- 
Liam Proven • Profile:  http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk •  GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com •  Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) •  +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/18/16 12:44 PM, N0body H0me wrote:

> I'm astounded.  I didn't think any ever made it to prototype or hard-model
> stage!  I've seen bare boards for these (up to this point) mythical
> beasts, but never a living, breathing machine.  Must have been a piece
> of work.  Do any functional machines still exist?  How did you encounter 
> them?
> 

The 88100 si worked. Hurricane never got a functional 88110 before the IBM/Apple
deal. Tessaract never booted MacOS.

Which bare board did you see?

I was in the RISC products group doing driver and cpu board bringup starting 
with
the 88100 nubus boards to IBM RSC (never had a functional 88110) then 601 over 
to
high end desktop product development with TNT.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[N0body H0me]

> -Original Message-
> From: a...@bitsavers.org
> Sent: Mon, 18 Jul 2016 07:41:10 -0700
> To: cctalk@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.
> 
> 
> 
> On 7/18/16 12:38 AM, N0body H0me wrote:
> >The 88k should have
>> been in RISC-based Mac's.  But of course, the 88k's absence was not
>> really
>> Apple's fault, either.  Just another example of 'what could have been'.
>> 
> 
> I worked on Apple's 88K Macs. You wouldn't have liked them.

I'm astounded.  I didn't think any ever made it to prototype or hard-model
stage!  I've seen bare boards for these (up to this point) mythical
beasts, but never a living, breathing machine.  Must have been a piece
of work.  Do any functional machines still exist?  How did you encounter 
them?


FREE ONLINE PHOTOSHARING - Share your photos online with your friends and 
family!
Visit http://www.inbox.com/photosharing to find out more!

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/18/16 10:49 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
> 
> Give me a while to collect what I have together.

My memory was fuzzy, BLT was a part of "Tesseract", PPC follow-on to 
"Hurricane" 88110.
Tesseract became "TNT" ("The New Tesseract" aka the 9500) when Steve Manzer 
ordered the
group to use PCI instead of BLT because PCI already had an installed base of 
3rd party
cards.

I ul'ed a picture of the Tesseract protype to bitsavers under 
apple/powerpc/Prototypes.
Mirrors should have it in about an hour.

I should have the Hurricane proto board somewhere along with Nubus 88100 and 
IBM RSC
CPU development boards (like 
http://www.computerhistory.org/collections/catalog/102674143)

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[COURYHOUSE]

 
apples   support  seems  hosed...
Load  of URL http://support.apple.com/index.html failed with error code 
-310.
 
but  from this  page
https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202888
there  is a good  guide.
--

this is my 1.1

Mac Pro ---MacPro1,1  ---  MA356LL/A
it works... it is a good representative artifact  too  .
 
will not  load  curvet  os because? 
"This  is caused by the lack of the 64 bit EFI bios. The hardware of the 
Mac Pro 1.1 is  already complete 64bit capable but they do ship the efi bios 
only in 32bit  version."
 
Ed  says. OK whatever an EFI Bios is (( remember this is my  first  
real  exposure to USING a MAC -  yes  we have a 9 inch   screen one in the 
museum but have  never even used  that))
---
Ha   wish it  was a
 Mac Pro (Early 2008) --   MacPro3,1  ---  MA970LL/A
then I could current  OS  upgrade it.
 
-
ok we also have a - 
 
"The  Power Macintosh G5 shipped from 2003 until 2006. All models pack 
64-bit PowerPC  970 (G5) processors in an easy-to-upgrade aluminum tower case 
design with a  single external optical drive bay"
 
This  one is missing disc  drives...  this  has the neatest  form  fitting 
insides  of any of the macs  I have  seen.  
 

 
then  we have Blue iMAC still in box
 

 
Then  we have the   old  9 inch one in museum  collection.
(  I do not see many of these  around as I used to)
 
-
 
thanks   for any  help and tips   Ed#  _www.smecc.org_ 
(http://www.smecc.org)  
 


 
In a message dated 7/17/2016 7:23:10 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
spec...@floodgap.com writes:

> 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 * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Don't be humble ... you're not  that great. -- Golda Meir  
---

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

Give me a while to collect what I have together. I haven't looked at what paper 
documents i still have since the
early 90s. I need to do this since someone I worked with then saved some 
prototype 88k CPU boards that I need to give to
CHM. I only know of one 88100 si that survived into this century, and I don't 
know if the guy still has it.

Very little from the server group that did the ANS survived after the division 
imploded.

On 7/18/16 10:21 AM, Austin Pass wrote:

> Finding this fascinating, Al. Any time you take to relay your Apple 
> experiences here is very much appreciated, let me assure you.
>

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Alexandre Souza]

Grabbing the popcorn... :)

Enviado do meu Tele-Movel

Em 18/07/2016 14:27, "Fred Cisin"  escreveu:

> you won't find anything on the web about any of this
>>
>
> now you have our attention!
>
>
>
>

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Fred Cisin]

you won't find anything on the web about any of this


now you have our attention!

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Austin Pass]

> On 18 Jul 2016, at 18:10, Al Kossow  wrote:
> 
> you won't find anything on the web about any of this

...which is why this ClassicCMP'er just drew his chair closer and cracked out 
the popcorn!

Finding this fascinating, Al. Any time you take to relay your Apple experiences 
here is very much appreciated, let me assure you.

-Austin.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

"Shiner" shipped as the ANS with AIX

http://www.erik.co.uk/ans/

though that isn't what the original "Shiner" was at all.


On 7/18/16 10:10 AM, Al Kossow wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/18/16 9:11 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
>> On 18 July 2016 at 17:03, Al Kossow  wrote:
>>> "Shiner" started out as an 88110 machine, and some of the architectural
>>> quirks are remnants of that.
>>
>>
>> This is not enough for me to Google. Could you clarify, please?
>>
> 
> you won't find anything on the web about any of this
> 
> 

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/18/16 9:11 AM, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 18 July 2016 at 17:03, Al Kossow  wrote:
>> "Shiner" started out as an 88110 machine, and some of the architectural
>> quirks are remnants of that.
> 
> 
> This is not enough for me to Google. Could you clarify, please?
> 

you won't find anything on the web about any of this

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Liam Proven]

On 18 July 2016 at 17:03, Al Kossow  wrote:
> "Shiner" started out as an 88110 machine, and some of the architectural
> quirks are remnants of that.


This is not enough for me to Google. Could you clarify, please?

-- 
Liam Proven • Profile: http://lproven.livejournal.com/profile
Email: lpro...@cix.co.uk • GMail/G+/Twitter/Flickr/Facebook: lproven
MSN: lpro...@hotmail.com • Skype/AIM/Yahoo/LinkedIn: liamproven
Cell/Mobiles: +44 7939-087884 (UK) • +420 702 829 053 (ČR)

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> > What were some of their issues?
> 
> The two big ones were a new, incompatible expansion bus interface (BLT)
> and that it was going to run Pink.
> 
> "Shiner" started out as an 88110 machine, and some of the architectural
> quirks are remnants of that.

That is extremely interesting -- was that intended as the ANS, or was that
what would become the 9150?

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- MARXISTS SCHEME CLASSLESS SMALLTALK! -- Arch Robison ---

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/18/16 7:39 AM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:

> What were some of their issues?
> 

The two big ones were a new, incompatible expansion bus interface (BLT)
and that it was going to run Pink.

"Shiner" started out as an 88110 machine, and some of the architectural
quirks are remnants of that.

Going on in parallel with Hurricane (88110 desktop) was a 88100 si sized
machine where the 68k emulator and nanokernel were developed. That evolved
into the first generation PPC macs and (V0) software (OS 7 with enhancements)
V1 was the redo of MacOS, which never happened.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/18/16 12:38 AM, N0body H0me wrote:
>The 88k should have 
> been in RISC-based Mac's.  But of course, the 88k's absence was not really
> Apple's fault, either.  Just another example of 'what could have been'.
>

I worked on Apple's 88K Macs. You wouldn't have liked them.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/17/16 7:57 PM, Jerry Kemp wrote:
> If a critical piece of Mac OS code crossed their path, SheepShaver would be 
> their only option.
> 

Or MAME

I've been working with them a lot to correctly implement the I/O ASICs

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[N0body H0me]

>> On 16 Jul 2016, at 3:33 pm, TeoZ  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>> Most 840av's these days have bad motherboards from leaking capacitors
>> and the plastics break if you sneeze too hard close to them.
>> 
> 
> Yes, I just gave away my 840av. It was working (and looking) fine a
> couple of years ago, but when I checked a few months ago the capacitors
> had died and the plastic bits were just falling apart. If it was just the
> caps I would have fixed it. Was my favourite 68K Mac, I did video editing
> on one back in the day. Can’t remember what video card(s) and software I
> used on it, but I know that the big (maybe 2GB?) SCSI drives and the max
> amount of RAM cost me a lot of $ back then.. Great machine but the case
> is horrible to work with.

I'll agree, the 840's physicality was a total mess.  But you know, I'm
willing to forgive indiscretions of a mechanical nature; it doesn't affect
how well the thing runs (barring cooling issues, of course).

The capacitor issues are another matter; I've seen MANY products (not
just computers) that suffer from this malady.  It's a bit like cancer;
caught early, the patient can make a complete recovery.  If the affliction
is too far advanced, it's likely terminal.  It would seem there are two 
causes for this: Bad manufacturing techniques (causing the parts to overheat
during assembly), and low quality parts, or parts with latent defects not
detectable when the parts are new.  I'd like to hear other opinions on this
topic.

Why the 840?  To me, it represents the highest refinement of the 68k
Mac, and this is very desirable to me (defective cabinetry and all).
The SE/30 is my second choice; I feel it's the best 'all in one'
design.

Further, I'll probably start a flamewar by stating that I really don't
recognise PPC Macs as 'classic', despite their age.  The 88k should have 
been in RISC-based Mac's.  But of course, the 88k's absence was not really
Apple's fault, either.  Just another example of 'what could have been'.

Just N0bodys $0.02


Can't remember your password? Do you need a strong and secure password?
Use Password manager! It stores your passwords & protects your account.
Check it out at http://mysecurelogon.com/password-manager

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> 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 * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Eight out of ten voices in my head say, "don't shoot!" -

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Ryan K. Brooks]

On 7/17/16 9:23 PM, Cameron Kaiser 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!?

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.


I believe he's referring to MacPro1,1

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[COURYHOUSE]

oppssorry  many typos... see clarification  interlaced..
 
 
In a message dated 7/17/2016 8:04:07 P.M. US Mountain Standard Time,  
cmhan...@eschatologist.net writes:
 
 
 

That would be a PowerMac G5. No Power Macintosh has an Intel  processor

yes that is  first   g5 has a more elegant  interior design!  I need a  
disk for this have no disc have no  software  but have nice system.

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.

 1.1" do you mean the Mac Pro  yea this  runs  nice  and has  2  drive and 
7 gig mem

> then there is  the G% 3  or 3.3  dated one that   will  run current  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.
 
G5   version  3  vrs the earlier  1.1   i  



> 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.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Chris Hanson]

On Jul 17, 2016, at 12:56 PM, couryho...@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

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Jerry Kemp]

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.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> 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 * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Don't be humble ... you're not that great. -- Golda Meir ---

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> 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 * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- FORTUNE: Ten weeks from Friday you won't remember this fortune at all. -

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Jerry Kemp]

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, couryho...@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,
cmhan...@eschatologist.net writes:

On Jul  15, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Austin Pass   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

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[COURYHOUSE]

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,  
cmhan...@eschatologist.net writes:

On Jul  15, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Austin Pass   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

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Chris Hanson]

On Jul 15, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Austin Pass  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

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Chris Pye]

> On 16 Jul 2016, at 3:33 pm, TeoZ  wrote:
> 
> 
> Most 840av's these days have bad motherboards from leaking capacitors and the 
> plastics break if you sneeze too hard close to them.
> 

Yes, I just gave away my 840av. It was working (and looking) fine a couple of 
years ago, but when I checked a few months ago the capacitors had died and the 
plastic bits were just falling apart. If it was just the caps I would have 
fixed it. Was my favourite 68K Mac, I did video editing on one back in the day. 
Can’t remember what video card(s) and software I used on it, but I know that 
the big (maybe 2GB?) SCSI drives and the max amount of RAM cost me a lot of $ 
back then.. Great machine but the case is horrible to work with.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/15/16 11:39 PM, Cameron Kaiser wrote:

> You didn't ask, but my preferred heavy duty 68K is the Q800.

Yup, I'd take it over the baroque 840AV any day.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> I'll hit eBay too for some PSU replacements.

There are a few modified aftermarket supplies for the MDD which are also
infinitely more reliable. I have an Antec one around here somewhere. The
lower-watt AcBel units seem more reliable.

> What graphics card do you use, out of interest?

I use an ATI Radeon 9000 Pro, but the GeForce 4Ti is probably the ultimate
OS 9 card (it benches a bit quicker). That said, the 9000 is a very good
card. I have it connected to a 1080p display which the ATI handles with
absolutely no problem.

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- boom boom boom Nothing outlasts the Energizer. It keeps going and going ...

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[couryhouse]

I am following this closely  as we were recently given A g4 ... not the mirror 
frontA g4  mirror frontA g5 1st model drive missing nice internalsA g5 w 
Intel but not 3. So Cann not update to free latest  os..is there a workaround 
..internal design us not as cool as first g5
We have just what is on disc drive in them.. need to collect up a few things.
Then we already had blue iMac already in boxPlus early little screen mac wife 
used
This mac stuff is all new to me so learning curve...
Ed#  www.smecc.org

Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone

 Original message 
From: Cameron Kaiser <spec...@floodgap.com> 
Date: 7/15/16  23:39  (GMT-07:00) 
To: cctalk@classiccmp.org 
Subject: Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac. 

> I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although I'm
> having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the ultimate
> representation of the type is, so was looking for a little input from
> Classic CMP'ers.

My "heavy duty" OS 9 rig is an dual 1.25GHz MDD that I upgraded to a dual
Sonnet 1.8GHz, with 1.5GB RAM and OS 9.2.2. Everything flies on it. I haven't
had any obvious compatibility problems.

Al makes a good point though: have a spare power supply. My MDD blew
through two.

You didn't ask, but my preferred heavy duty 68K is the Q800. You can
overclock them easily with chipclips and they are the beefiest 68K Mac
that will still run A/UX. A/UX at 40MHz is a delight.

> In terms of hardware I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm intending
> to use.  I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get
> 9.2.1 on it relatively easily.  Are there any add-in cards (PCI) I should
> be considering?  It has a built in Airport Card (possibly Airport Extreme?)
> although my home Wi-Fi is 802.11n or better with WPA2 so I'll just use
> Ethernet to connect it to my LAN.  Was a gigabit ethernet card ever
> released with Mac OS 9 drivers?  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks that I
> can use with it, but has there ever been a SATA implementation that worked
> with classic Mac OS?

I've never seen a GigE card for OS 9. There is of course 100Mbit support.
I would love to be proven wrong.

The Sonnet SATA cards work well with OS 9 and are completely bootable. I
used such a card in a 7300.

> In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I
> should look to get my hands on?  What's the state of the art in classic Mac
> OS browsing nowadays, Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?

Sort of, as I have time. I'd like to do more with it but TenFourFox consumes
much of my free hacking cycles currently. That should let up relatively soon
since I've made the executive decision to fork TenFourFox at Firefox 45ESR
(due to the looming spectre of Rust becoming a build-requirement, and
known and expected issues with Electrolysis multi-process with the 10.4 SDK).
Still, the biggest need for Classilla currently is moar crypto and that's
rather hard to get right.

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Know what I hate most?  Rhetorical questions. -- Henry N. Camp -

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Austin Pass]

On 16 Jul 2016, at 07:39, Cameron Kaiser  wrote:

>> I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although I'm
>> having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the ultimate
>> representation of the type is, so was looking for a little input from
>> Classic CMP'ers.
> 
> My "heavy duty" OS 9 rig is an dual 1.25GHz MDD that I upgraded to a dual
> Sonnet 1.8GHz, with 1.5GB RAM and OS 9.2.2. Everything flies on it. I haven't
> had any obvious compatibility problems.
> 
> Al makes a good point though: have a spare power supply. My MDD blew
> through two.
> 
> You didn't ask, but my preferred heavy duty 68K is the Q800. You can
> overclock them easily with chipclips and they are the beefiest 68K Mac
> that will still run A/UX. A/UX at 40MHz is a delight.
> 
>> In terms of hardware I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm intending
>> to use.  I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get
>> 9.2.1 on it relatively easily.  Are there any add-in cards (PCI) I should
>> be considering?  It has a built in Airport Card (possibly Airport Extreme?)
>> although my home Wi-Fi is 802.11n or better with WPA2 so I'll just use
>> Ethernet to connect it to my LAN.  Was a gigabit ethernet card ever
>> released with Mac OS 9 drivers?  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks that I
>> can use with it, but has there ever been a SATA implementation that worked
>> with classic Mac OS?
> 
> I've never seen a GigE card for OS 9. There is of course 100Mbit support.
> I would love to be proven wrong.
> 
> The Sonnet SATA cards work well with OS 9 and are completely bootable. I
> used such a card in a 7300.
> 
>> In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I
>> should look to get my hands on?  What's the state of the art in classic Mac
>> OS browsing nowadays, Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?
> 
> Sort of, as I have time. I'd like to do more with it but TenFourFox consumes
> much of my free hacking cycles currently. That should let up relatively soon
> since I've made the executive decision to fork TenFourFox at Firefox 45ESR
> (due to the looming spectre of Rust becoming a build-requirement, and
> known and expected issues with Electrolysis multi-process with the 10.4 SDK).
> Still, the biggest need for Classilla currently is moar crypto and that's
> rather hard to get right.
> 
> -- 
>  personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ 
> --
>  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
> -- Know what I hate most?  Rhetorical questions. -- Henry N. Camp 
> -

I think that has me decided then - I'll go with the MDD.

I'll hit eBay too for some PSU replacements.

I'd love one of the Sonnet upgrades but sadly Mac upgrades seem very thin on 
the ground this side of the pond, unless I'm looking in the wrong places.

What graphics card do you use, out of interest?

-Austin.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Austin Pass]

> On 15 Jul 2016, at 21:54, Swift Griggs  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Austin Pass wrote:
>> I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although 
>> I'm having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the 
>> ultimate representation of the type is, so was looking for a little 
>> input from Classic CMP'ers.
> 
> I've recently been through that exercise with M68k Macs. I settled on the 
> Quadra 700 and the Quadra/Centris 660AV. However, I think you'll hear a 
> lot of people also recommend the Quadra 950 and Apple Workgroup Server 95. 
> However, I realize you aren't interested and are looking at the PPC 
> systems.
> 
>> I'm aware that there's a clear divide between Motorola and PowerPC CPU'd 
>> variants, so I'm going to plump for a PowerPC based version so that I 
>> can get access to newer hardware and use it as a kind of bridge system 
>> between my current computers and the more historic versions.
> 
> I've contemplated doing a PPC rig, too. For me, I don't care much about 
> hyper-expandibilty. I like the more blingy hardware. So, for me, at the 
> top of the pyramid stand two systems: the G4 Cube and the 20th Anniversary 
> Mac. The Cube is now cheap on fleabay. It's prime time to grab those. If 
> one comes up on cheap Craigslist here in Denver, I'll probably snag it and 
> warehouse it for a while. I am just not motivated enough to pay shipping 
> or Ebay prices, yet.
> 
> IMHO, most of the tower systems were too "plasticy" and the desktop 
> Performa-styled boxes were uglier than homemade sin.
> 
>> I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get 9.2.1 on 
>> it relatively easily.
> 
> You'll want to Google MacOS PPC. Let's simply say "it's out there" and 
> easy to get. Unless you just want the manuals an screen-printed discs, 
> which I understand, too.
> 
>> Was a gigabit ethernet card ever released with Mac OS 9 drivers?
> 
> O, yeah. Lots of them. Check out lowendmac or the like. They have 
> lists of them.
> 
>> I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks that I can use with it, but has 
>> there ever been a SATA implementation that worked with classic Mac OS?
> 
> Not sure about that, but I can tell you that there are ton of SCSI 
> controllers and you can use an expensive SATA-to-SCSI bridge like the one 
> sold by ACARD. I use several of those on various machines and they rock. 
> 
>> In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I 
>> should look to get my hands on?
> 
> Yes. Get the disk utilities that allow you to use non-Apple disks. The one 
> that comes to mind the fastest is Lacie Silverlining and LIDO. 
> 
>> What's the state of the art in classic Mac OS browsing nowadays, Mr 
>> Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?
> 
> He will know better than me, but your best bet IMO, is either iCab or 
> Clasilla, for sure. 
> 
> -Swift

I have a G4 Cube, complete with ADC Apple Cinema Display but it (subjectively) 
feels slower in normal use than the MDD, with a single 400Mhz G4 and PC100 
SDRAM vs dual 1.25Ghz and PC2700 DDR RAM.

I have lots of 68k Macs and love them dearly, but was looking for the biggest, 
best, fastest that could be used with Mac OS 9.

-Austin.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> I've never seen a GigE card for OS 9. There is of course 100Mbit support.
> I would love to be proven wrong.

I have been proven wrong.
http://www.everymac.com/mac-answers/mac-os-9-classic-support-faq/gigabit-ethernet-for-macos-9-wireless-pc-cards-macos-9-compatible.html

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- You're only as good as the last problem someone had. -- Ballmer on security

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Cameron Kaiser]

> I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although I'm
> having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the ultimate
> representation of the type is, so was looking for a little input from
> Classic CMP'ers.

My "heavy duty" OS 9 rig is an dual 1.25GHz MDD that I upgraded to a dual
Sonnet 1.8GHz, with 1.5GB RAM and OS 9.2.2. Everything flies on it. I haven't
had any obvious compatibility problems.

Al makes a good point though: have a spare power supply. My MDD blew
through two.

You didn't ask, but my preferred heavy duty 68K is the Q800. You can
overclock them easily with chipclips and they are the beefiest 68K Mac
that will still run A/UX. A/UX at 40MHz is a delight.

> In terms of hardware I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm intending
> to use.  I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get
> 9.2.1 on it relatively easily.  Are there any add-in cards (PCI) I should
> be considering?  It has a built in Airport Card (possibly Airport Extreme?)
> although my home Wi-Fi is 802.11n or better with WPA2 so I'll just use
> Ethernet to connect it to my LAN.  Was a gigabit ethernet card ever
> released with Mac OS 9 drivers?  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks that I
> can use with it, but has there ever been a SATA implementation that worked
> with classic Mac OS?

I've never seen a GigE card for OS 9. There is of course 100Mbit support.
I would love to be proven wrong.

The Sonnet SATA cards work well with OS 9 and are completely bootable. I
used such a card in a 7300.

> In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I
> should look to get my hands on?  What's the state of the art in classic Mac
> OS browsing nowadays, Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?

Sort of, as I have time. I'd like to do more with it but TenFourFox consumes
much of my free hacking cycles currently. That should let up relatively soon
since I've made the executive decision to fork TenFourFox at Firefox 45ESR
(due to the looming spectre of Rust becoming a build-requirement, and
known and expected issues with Electrolysis multi-process with the 10.4 SDK).
Still, the biggest need for Classilla currently is moar crypto and that's
rather hard to get right.

-- 
 personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/ --
  Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com * ckai...@floodgap.com
-- Know what I hate most?  Rhetorical questions. -- Henry N. Camp -

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[TeoZ]

A Quadra 950 is also a decent machine if you want to fill it up with cards.

Most 840av's these days have bad motherboards from leaking capacitors and 
the plastics break if you sneeze too hard close to them.






-Original Message- 
From: N0body H0me

Sent: Saturday, July 16, 2016 1:05 AM
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts
Subject: Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

If I had the time and money (mostly money) to do this, I
would settle for nothing less than a Quadra 840AV.  Be
prepared to spend , though; the 840 is quickly approaching
'investment grade'.

If I wanted the "all in one" experience, I would get the
SE/30.  Once again, these are kinda pricey.



-Original Message-
From: ot...@oryx.us
Sent: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:26:06 -0500
To: gene...@classiccmp.org
Subject: Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

I went thru this exercise myself a couple of years back.  Even kicked off
a
thread on a Mac email list.

I don't/didn't have any experience or background with the Mac on the 68K,
so
that didn't come into my decision making.

I ultimately decided that I didn't need the fastest/biggest/most memory
power
house Mac that would run Classic.  I just needed to run my Mac OS apps
and games
that would never be ported to x86.

I purchased a G4 cube and have been happy with that decision.  I can boot
up
into Mac OS 9.x, and also boot into OS X 10.4 with Classic support.

This was what worked well for me.  I will be interested to see what you
ultimately end up choosing.

Jerry


On 07/15/16 02:03 PM, Austin Pass wrote:

I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although
I'm
having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the
ultimate
representation of the type is, so was looking for a little input from
Classic CMP'ers.

I'm aware that there's a clear divide between Motorola and PowerPC CPU'd
variants, so I'm going to plump for a PowerPC based version so that I
can
get access to newer hardware and use it as a kind of bridge system
between
my current computers and the more historic versions.

In terms of hardware I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm
intending
to use.  I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get
9.2.1 on it relatively easily.  Are there any add-in cards (PCI) I
should
be considering?  It has a built in Airport Card (possibly Airport
Extreme?)
although my home Wi-Fi is 802.11n or better with WPA2 so I'll just use
Ethernet to connect it to my LAN.  Was a gigabit ethernet card ever
released with Mac OS 9 drivers?  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks
that I
can use with it, but has there ever been a SATA implementation that
worked
with classic Mac OS?

Also, I have an Asanté ether bridge tucked away somewhere that I hope to
be
able to use to connect some of my older Mac OS boxen without Ethernet.

In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I
should look to get my hands on?  What's the state of the art in classic
Mac
OS browsing nowadays, Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?

-Austin.




FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your 
desktop!

Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[N0body H0me]

If I had the time and money (mostly money) to do this, I
would settle for nothing less than a Quadra 840AV.  Be
prepared to spend , though; the 840 is quickly approaching
'investment grade'.

If I wanted the "all in one" experience, I would get the
SE/30.  Once again, these are kinda pricey.


> -Original Message-
> From: ot...@oryx.us
> Sent: Fri, 15 Jul 2016 16:26:06 -0500
> To: gene...@classiccmp.org
> Subject: Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.
> 
> I went thru this exercise myself a couple of years back.  Even kicked off
> a
> thread on a Mac email list.
> 
> I don't/didn't have any experience or background with the Mac on the 68K,
> so
> that didn't come into my decision making.
> 
> I ultimately decided that I didn't need the fastest/biggest/most memory
> power
> house Mac that would run Classic.  I just needed to run my Mac OS apps
> and games
> that would never be ported to x86.
> 
> I purchased a G4 cube and have been happy with that decision.  I can boot
> up
> into Mac OS 9.x, and also boot into OS X 10.4 with Classic support.
> 
> This was what worked well for me.  I will be interested to see what you
> ultimately end up choosing.
> 
> Jerry
> 
> 
> On 07/15/16 02:03 PM, Austin Pass wrote:
>> I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although
>> I'm
>> having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the
>> ultimate
>> representation of the type is, so was looking for a little input from
>> Classic CMP'ers.
>> 
>> I'm aware that there's a clear divide between Motorola and PowerPC CPU'd
>> variants, so I'm going to plump for a PowerPC based version so that I
>> can
>> get access to newer hardware and use it as a kind of bridge system
>> between
>> my current computers and the more historic versions.
>> 
>> In terms of hardware I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm
>> intending
>> to use.  I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get
>> 9.2.1 on it relatively easily.  Are there any add-in cards (PCI) I
>> should
>> be considering?  It has a built in Airport Card (possibly Airport
>> Extreme?)
>> although my home Wi-Fi is 802.11n or better with WPA2 so I'll just use
>> Ethernet to connect it to my LAN.  Was a gigabit ethernet card ever
>> released with Mac OS 9 drivers?  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks
>> that I
>> can use with it, but has there ever been a SATA implementation that
>> worked
>> with classic Mac OS?
>> 
>> Also, I have an Asanté ether bridge tucked away somewhere that I hope to
>> be
>> able to use to connect some of my older Mac OS boxen without Ethernet.
>> 
>> In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I
>> should look to get my hands on?  What's the state of the art in classic
>> Mac
>> OS browsing nowadays, Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?
>> 
>> -Austin.
>>


FREE 3D MARINE AQUARIUM SCREENSAVER - Watch dolphins, sharks & orcas on your 
desktop!
Check it out at http://www.inbox.com/marineaquarium

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Jerry Kemp]

I went thru this exercise myself a couple of years back.  Even kicked off a 
thread on a Mac email list.


I don't/didn't have any experience or background with the Mac on the 68K, so 
that didn't come into my decision making.


I ultimately decided that I didn't need the fastest/biggest/most memory power 
house Mac that would run Classic.  I just needed to run my Mac OS apps and games 
that would never be ported to x86.


I purchased a G4 cube and have been happy with that decision.  I can boot up 
into Mac OS 9.x, and also boot into OS X 10.4 with Classic support.


This was what worked well for me.  I will be interested to see what you 
ultimately end up choosing.


Jerry


On 07/15/16 02:03 PM, Austin Pass wrote:

I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although I'm
having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the ultimate
representation of the type is, so was looking for a little input from
Classic CMP'ers.

I'm aware that there's a clear divide between Motorola and PowerPC CPU'd
variants, so I'm going to plump for a PowerPC based version so that I can
get access to newer hardware and use it as a kind of bridge system between
my current computers and the more historic versions.

In terms of hardware I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm intending
to use.  I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get
9.2.1 on it relatively easily.  Are there any add-in cards (PCI) I should
be considering?  It has a built in Airport Card (possibly Airport Extreme?)
although my home Wi-Fi is 802.11n or better with WPA2 so I'll just use
Ethernet to connect it to my LAN.  Was a gigabit ethernet card ever
released with Mac OS 9 drivers?  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks that I
can use with it, but has there ever been a SATA implementation that worked
with classic Mac OS?

Also, I have an Asanté ether bridge tucked away somewhere that I hope to be
able to use to connect some of my older Mac OS boxen without Ethernet.

In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I
should look to get my hands on?  What's the state of the art in classic Mac
OS browsing nowadays, Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?

-Austin.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Swift Griggs]

On Fri, 15 Jul 2016, Austin Pass wrote:
> I'm toying with putting the "ultimate" classic Mac together, although 
> I'm having a little difficulty pinning down the definition of what the 
> ultimate representation of the type is, so was looking for a little 
> input from Classic CMP'ers.

I've recently been through that exercise with M68k Macs. I settled on the 
Quadra 700 and the Quadra/Centris 660AV. However, I think you'll hear a 
lot of people also recommend the Quadra 950 and Apple Workgroup Server 95. 
However, I realize you aren't interested and are looking at the PPC 
systems.

> I'm aware that there's a clear divide between Motorola and PowerPC CPU'd 
> variants, so I'm going to plump for a PowerPC based version so that I 
> can get access to newer hardware and use it as a kind of bridge system 
> between my current computers and the more historic versions.

I've contemplated doing a PPC rig, too. For me, I don't care much about 
hyper-expandibilty. I like the more blingy hardware. So, for me, at the 
top of the pyramid stand two systems: the G4 Cube and the 20th Anniversary 
Mac. The Cube is now cheap on fleabay. It's prime time to grab those. If 
one comes up on cheap Craigslist here in Denver, I'll probably snag it and 
warehouse it for a while. I am just not motivated enough to pay shipping 
or Ebay prices, yet.

IMHO, most of the tower systems were too "plasticy" and the desktop 
Performa-styled boxes were uglier than homemade sin.
 
> I have the original media that shipped with this, so I can get 9.2.1 on 
> it relatively easily. 

You'll want to Google MacOS PPC. Let's simply say "it's out there" and 
easy to get. Unless you just want the manuals an screen-printed discs, 
which I understand, too.

> Was a gigabit ethernet card ever released with Mac OS 9 drivers?

O, yeah. Lots of them. Check out lowendmac or the like. They have 
lists of them.

>  I have a couple of 600GB PATA disks that I can use with it, but has 
> there ever been a SATA implementation that worked with classic Mac OS?

Not sure about that, but I can tell you that there are ton of SCSI 
controllers and you can use an expensive SATA-to-SCSI bridge like the one 
sold by ACARD. I use several of those on various machines and they rock. 

> In terms of the software - any top-line utilities or System Extensions I 
> should look to get my hands on?

Yes. Get the disk utilities that allow you to use non-Apple disks. The one 
that comes to mind the fastest is Lacie Silverlining and LIDO. 

> What's the state of the art in classic Mac OS browsing nowadays, Mr 
> Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?

He will know better than me, but your best bet IMO, is either iCab or 
Clasilla, for sure. 

-Swift

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Austin Pass]

> On 15 Jul 2016, at 21:15, Al Kossow  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 7/15/16 12:58 PM, Austin Pass wrote:
>> I have a "pinstripe" grey G4 PowerMac with (if memory serves) a 400Mhz CPU - 
>> would this be a safer bet?
> 
> Yes, that or a slightly faster one. I like the ones where we went with 
> gigabit ethernet (2nd gen G4?)
> 
>> Is there any way to underclock the 1.25Ghz CPU's in the mirror door for 
>> improved reliability in the mirror door?
> 
> Not without a rom change.
> One of the big problems was this was the first machine with tightly tuned ddr 
> memory and there
> was a lot of magic performed to get it reliable.
> 
> It's been a while, if it's 1.25, this may have been a next generation G4 that 
> wasn't so power hungry.
> First gen MDD was bad.
> I was off of G4 and working on bringing up G5 by that time.
> 
> 
> 

I didn't realise the ethernet was gigabit! We had it connected to a fairly 
undistinguished 100Mbit switch.

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.

What was the juciest AGP graphics card for the G4? Some form of GeForce?

-Austin.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[r.stricklin]

Anecdotally, this may be the case. I ran my dual 1.25 MDD for six or seven 
years without a single hardware failure. It's probably still fine, but I 
haven't tried to turn it on since I upgraded to a Mac Pro (geez, eight years 
ago).

ok
bear.

-- 
Sent from my iPhone

> On Jul 15, 2016, at 13:15, Al Kossow  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 7/15/16 12:58 PM, Austin Pass wrote:
>> I have a "pinstripe" grey G4 PowerMac with (if memory serves) a 400Mhz CPU - 
>> would this be a safer bet?
> 
> Yes, that or a slightly faster one. I like the ones where we went with 
> gigabit ethernet (2nd gen G4?)
> 
>> Is there any way to underclock the 1.25Ghz CPU's in the mirror door for 
>> improved reliability in the mirror door?
> 
> Not without a rom change.
> One of the big problems was this was the first machine with tightly tuned ddr 
> memory and there
> was a lot of magic performed to get it reliable.
> 
> It's been a while, if it's 1.25, this may have been a next generation G4 that 
> wasn't so power hungry.
> First gen MDD was bad.
> I was off of G4 and working on bringing up G5 by that time.
> 
> 
> 

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Tapley, Mark]

On Jul 15, 2016, at 2:03 PM, Austin Pass  wrote:

….
> Mr Kaiser - is Clasilla still maintained?
….

Yup:

http://www.floodgap.com/software/classilla/

Have not used it, but I am up-to-date on a G3 (iMac) and a G4 
(PowerBook) with TenFourFox and use them regularly. 

http://www.floodgap.com/software/tenfourfox/

Depending on your PowerPC and choice of OS, that might be attractive. 
Either can still run OS9 applications.
- Mark

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Al Kossow]

On 7/15/16 12:58 PM, Austin Pass wrote:
> I have a "pinstripe" grey G4 PowerMac with (if memory serves) a 400Mhz CPU - 
> would this be a safer bet?
> 

Yes, that or a slightly faster one. I like the ones where we went with gigabit 
ethernet (2nd gen G4?)

> Is there any way to underclock the 1.25Ghz CPU's in the mirror door for 
> improved reliability in the mirror door?
> 

Not without a rom change.
One of the big problems was this was the first machine with tightly tuned ddr 
memory and there
was a lot of magic performed to get it reliable.

It's been a while, if it's 1.25, this may have been a next generation G4 that 
wasn't so power hungry.
First gen MDD was bad.
I was off of G4 and working on bringing up G5 by that time.

Re: Building the Ultimate Classic Mac.

[Austin Pass]

I have a "pinstripe" grey G4 PowerMac with (if memory serves) a 400Mhz CPU - 
would this be a safer bet?

Is there any way to underclock the 1.25Ghz CPU's in the mirror door for 
improved reliability in the mirror door?

We used the MD PowerMac as an OS X 10.3 server running Macintosh Manager 
catering for two suites of eMacs and iMacs running 9.2.1 "back in the day", and 
I don't recall it being overly unreliable.

-Austin.

Sent from my iPhone

> On 15 Jul 2016, at 20:29, Al Kossow  wrote:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 7/15/16 12:03 PM, Austin Pass wrote:
>> I have a lovely mirror-door G4 PowerMac I'm intending
>> to use.
> 
> bad idea.
> 
> Mirror door G4's were the least reliable machines we released.
> Too many compromises getting to a GHz, esp WRT noise and heat.
> 
> I personally like Beige G3's, or mid-life G4's for differing reasons.
> 
> And I use a Wallstreet daily (last portable with ADB and SCSI).
>