H3NRY wrote:If you don't like 10.6, don't upgrade.
If new Macs come on the scene that will only run 10.6 and higher, then the suggestion of "don't upgrade" would apply to the purchase of an entire computer as well.
H3NRY wrote:If you don't like 10.6, don't upgrade.
JDW wrote:If new Macs come on the scene that will only run 10.6 and higher, then the suggestion of "don't upgrade" would apply to the purchase of an entire computer as well.
H3NRY wrote:Hang on to that Cube! It's a good bridge machine as well as being "the most beautiful computer ever" in most polls.
H3NRY wrote:I haven't seen anybody mention the fact that Snow Leopard is a from-scratch 64-bit Intel rewrite of most of MacOS. Now given that your job is to write the network stack for OS 10.6, you're going to write a modern TCP/IP stack and test and debug it. Would you take on the additional task of writing a new AppleTalk stack? This isn't a case of some old feud resulting in code getting ripped out, it's new code not being developed. Same for file system support. And the brand new Finder looks just like the old Finder except has different bugs. If you don't like 10.6, don't upgrade. Or at least wait till 10.6.5 or so when things have settled down.
It just means that same as 10.4 and 10.5, you need an intermediate machine or two to get stuff from the early OSes to your shiny new Mac. A G3 or G4 which can boot either OS9 or OSX is your friend. I keep intending to look into XModem file software for OSX for file transfers to Apple][s and early Macs. I hope there's a good thread or two on this forum to help. (Noob here.)
napabar wrote:I want to get a Cube and install an SSD drive into it. That would make for totally silent computing. And a Mac 512k can connect to it over AppleShare.
Mike Richardson wrote:Is it really such a substantial re-write?
Mike Richardson wrote:Why would they discard a perfectly good network stack? Does a network stack really need to be 64-bit?
H3NRY wrote:These are the same screams as were heard when floppies went away, and serial ports, and SCSI ports.
H3NRY wrote:The only time I remember Apple has backed down over user protests was dropping FireWire from the MacBook. Apple responds a lot more quickly to Steve than to its users.
Charlieman wrote:Isn't FTP broken? Most contemporary sites require that the client uses SFTP or FTP over SSL. Not easy on a classic or vintage Mac.
H3NRY wrote:I keep intending to look into XModem file software for OSX for file transfers to Apple][s and early Macs. I hope there's a good thread or two on this forum to help.
napabar wrote:Mac OS X will let you format a USB floppy with HFS+. Classic Mac OS would never let you do this. HFS+ floppies can be read by System 8.1 and up.
Mac128 wrote:napabar wrote:Mac OS X will let you format a USB floppy with HFS+. Classic Mac OS would never let you do this. HFS+ floppies can be read by System 8.1 and up.
In thinking about what Mini vMac will have to do to support vintage Mac hardware, I realized the one simple thing that will allow us to transfer files from Snow Leopard to a Mac Plus, IIx and up, is the ability to use Zip drives and floppy disks, respectively. Clearly there is no way to use AFP without one or two intermediary Macs. But the sneaker method would work quite well if one small thing were possible: Disk Copy.
Since the ZIP and 1.44MB floppy disks can be formatted HFS or HFS+ using the same rotational speed and media, it should be a simple task to duplicate an HFS disk image to the media bit-by-bit. This is even easier than Apple's Disk Copy which could write an MFS disk image to a 400K or 800K disk regardless of whether the Finder could read the disk, but only on a SuperDrive capable of variable speed control.
Anyone see a reason why an OS X Disk Copy utility couldn't be written under Snow Leopard to copy an HFS disk image created in Mini vMac to a standard USB floppy disk or ZIP drive?
Mac128 wrote:H3NRY wrote:I keep intending to look into XModem file software for OSX for file transfers to Apple][s and early Macs. I hope there's a good thread or two on this forum to help.
It's easy to miss in a thread that seems to wander around a bit, but did you see this post? Napbar has successfully used ZTerm & XModem protocols to send Mac binary files directly from OS X to a classic Mac running MacTerminal. This is based on the method I have been using with a Keysapn serial adapter to transfer data from a MacBook/Tiger running Sheepshaver and Clarisworks/MacTerminal 1.1 to a 128K Mac using MacTerminal 1.1. Of course this method is a bit slower than AppleTalk, but considering the average file size on a 128K through SE, that's not a huge problem.
napabar wrote:Hey guys, I have some partial good news. I updated to 10.6.2 last night. One of the fixes listed was "compatibility with third-party AFP servers". I fired up my 6500 with OS 9.2.2 and was able to connect to it from Snow Leopard with full read/write access! I can confirm this work with 7.6.1 and ShareWay IP as well. On the downside, neither OS 9.2.2 or 7.6.1 were able to connect to Snow Leopard as a client. At least it's something.
Mike Richardson wrote:
We got very lucky in this case. It's rare that Apple will throw us a bone. Good to hear ShareWay works too. What's the oldest OS you can load ShareWay on?
Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 0 guests