10.4.11 + Classic + Hackintosh = ???????

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

I've come up with a few questions about OSX, I've been sitting on the fence about adopting it.

First, I recall a discussion about a specific eMac install set that's a universal X installer, does anyone know the details about this set offhand?

I've been looking into eBuy-ing the retail box disks of the last version of X that supports Classic. EveryMac specs 10.4.11 Tiger as the very last Classic-X, so I guess that's what I'm looking at when I go to buy it?

I've been sitting on an ATOM NetTop board for two years now, so I'm curious if it, or a Dell D430 or D460, can be coaxed into running Tiger/Classic?

Does it require a newer version of X than Tiger to do the Hackintosh thing?

Conveniently enough, my Pismo came with a 10.4.11 install on it. Now I finally have a good reason to mess around with the Pismo/BookEndz Dock a bit! [] ]'>

 

[uniserver]

I liked this version of 10.4.11, was pretty good you could install it on a large variety of older P4 systems as well.

(xxX OS x86 10.4.11 Install Disc Rev 2.0)

 

[markyb86]

I don't know if classic worked on intel systems? I would ASSume that it might work because 10.4 and 10.5 had PPC support built in and 10.6 has rosetta PPC emulation.

 

[Gorgonops]

Classic *never* worked on Intel systems. And there were never install disks that could install both Intel and PPC versions of Tiger. (Leopard was the first version of the OS with a "universal" install, in the form of the first retail disk.) The only way to get Intel 10.4 is a 2006/early 2007 restore disk set as bundled with the first gen x86 Macs or as a hacked ISO off the Internet.

(If you really wanted it on an x86 board the hacked ISO's the way to go frankly. Not saying this to encourage piracy or anything, it's just that the methods to install OS X on generic hardware using a separate EFI emulator/pre-boot environment and an unmolested Mac install CD weren't really developed until later. Either way you're violating the shrink-wrap agreement.)

But, again, if you're doing this because you want "Classic" than there's no point. The only way to run MacOS 9 software on Intel, regardless of OS, is Sheepshaver, and Sheepshaver runs about as well on Linux as it does on OS X. (And Windows as well, if slightly worse than either of the previous two.)

 

[CC_333]

Classic won't run on the Intel version of 10.4, and to my knowledge, there's no way to enable it (in fact, it may even be impossible since Classic requires certain PPC instructions which don't exist on Intel, even with Rosetta).

SheepShaver is adequate for some things, but it's relatively tricky to st up, and very fickle (it likes to crash a lot if you don't configure it (and the emulated Mac OS install) very carefully). Also, it's only limited to 9.0.4 because it doesn't emulate an MMU.

There might be other solutions out there, but from what I've seen, SS is the most viable (for now) for classic PPC software (I think some (most?) Carbonized software WILL run on Intel 10.4, with some caveats, because Rosetta is capable of supporting them).

And of course, if you want to give it a try (and don't mind being limited to 68k), you could get the Mac II version of Mini vMac and run System 7 on it. It, too, is rather buggy and incomplete, though (but it has the advantage of having major new features, such as more complete emulation, being added on a semi-regular basis).

I hope this helps?

c

EDIT: Of course, if you only want to run OS X by itself, then it should actually work quite well. I recommend machines based on some variant of the Intel GMA 945 chipset, with which 10.4 is most compatible (in my experience, anyway).

I also recommend using at the oldest a late model Pentium D CPU (ideally, you should use some sort of Core2Duo CPU). Although hacks have been developed to support older processors, such as the Pentium 4, I prefer to err on the side of caution and only install it on computers which have all the required instructions built in, rather than relying on potentially buggy hacks and workarounds.

EDIT #2: I agree with Gorgonops. He makes a lot of good points (which I have repeated here).

 

[Gorgonops]

There might be other solutions out there, but from what I've seen, SS is the most viable (for now) for classic PPC software (I think some (most?) Carbonized software WILL run on Intel 10.4, with some caveats, because Rosetta is capable of supporting them).

Of course, if you're installing OS X on an Intel machine to run Carbon applications with Rosetta you might as well go with 10.6. The compatibility will be "about the same" as 10.4 and at least you'll be able to run a wider selection of newer software alongside them. (Software for 10.4 is getting pretty thin on the ground these days; it's only a matter of time before 10.6 gets cut off, for that matter.) And, of course, even as good as Rosetta was, on something like a Nettop motherboard performance isn't going to be fabulous. It was quite an achievement that the original batch of x86 Macs managed to be "feel" about as fast as the PowerPC boxes they were replacing, but detailed benchmarks show the truth, which is it was *totally* worth your time upgrading to native applications.

In short, if you really want "Classic" in a shoebox or a laptop your best bets are a G4 Mini or a G4 Powerbook respectively. I'm certainly not going to make the case that SheepShaver is a great solution. It's worked... okay, for me, and actually seems to run 7.x pretty well if you find the right ROM, but it is really fragile with 9.

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Note that Apple did release a boxed copy of Mac OS X Server 10.4.7 that supported both PPC and Intel processors. (It coincided with the release of the Mac Pro and Intel Xserve.) If looking for a used copy of OS X Server, look for the sticker that proclaims it is 10.4.7 with Intel support.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Thanks for all the info gang! Too bad about Classic on intel, but I figured that was a long shot.

Mac OS X Server 10.4.7 is interesting, did it come with both sets of install disks or is it a universal installer? There are a few sealed packages on eBay right now, none with the sticker though. Is that on the shrink wrap or on the cardboard in case I find one that's not boxed.

Is there anything about 10.4.11 to recommend it over 10.4.7 or vice versa besides the PPC/Intel feature of .7?

For now 10.4.11 for PPC seems to be the ticket, the next machine on the gottahaveit list is the MDD/FW400 with the fastest processor upgrade I can find to fit it.

ubuntu will work fine for the NetTop and a Dell if I get one.

The eMac universal installer was for any PPC Mac, not just the eMac, IIRC. I'd still like to find out what that one was and if it included a 9.2.2 CD, mine's still AWOL.

 

[CC_333]

10.4.11 included a bunch of bugfixes I think (and more software is supported). Not to mention it was (at least at the time of it's release) more secure.

Also, unless you really *NEED* Classic mode, Leopard (10.5.x) would be more modern, more secure, and more supported by somewhat more modern software.

That's my 20,000 cents.

c

 

[Anonymous Freak]

Definitely upgrade to 10.4.11 - it's just that the boxed version was either 10.4.0 - PowerPC only, or 10.4.7, Universal (PowerPC+Intel on one disc.) There was no boxed 10.4.11 disc.

But once you install any version, immediately upgrade to the latest patch for that major version. (True for any software.)

 

[Bunsen]

Consider the possible approach of having a separate machine for each OS (X and 9). You need a PPC to run Classic anyway, so might as well stick that on a fast G4 Mini or Powerbook, and run a pure OS X install on whatever Intel device.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

The 10.4.11 upgrade will be for running Classic with USB2 support on the QS'02 and the MDD/FW400 whenever I get around to rounding my G-4 collection. 9.2.2 is still my daily driver.

The Hackintoshing of a D430 is more for a just wanna try it kinda deal, no rush on that, ubuntu will be the OS of choice. The thing that intrigues me about that design is the possibility of upgrading it to a TrackBall for me with the idiot-stick for the GRLF. She hates trackpads as much as I do, but she doesn't like to use a mouse because all she's ever used is the ThinkPads they provided while working for IBM->Lenovo. Hacking a 9-cell bat down to 6-cells to make room for the TrackPad/Point electronics and punching a hole from top to bottom for the fitting largest recessed trackball possible into a $50-$75 Hackintosh is just too tempting to even attempt resistance.

Bonus points for having the bottom of the TB protrude into a dished clear plexi window bolted up to the bottom of the Battery! }

 

[jruschme]

The Hackintoshing of a D430 is more for a just wanna try it kinda deal, no rush on that, ubuntu will be the OS of choice.

FYI... best resource for Hackintoshing a Dell Latitude laptop is http://www.osxlatitude.com. They should have a pretty easy howto for your D430; that was where I got the bits for my D630.

 

[Cory5412]

One sidenote.

Given that we've established that Mac OS X 10.4 on Intel won't run Classic mode, have you considered running a newer version of the operating system, either on true Apple hardware (it's not hard to find out which machines are the best in terms of durability and performance) or on a non-legitimate system?

It's safe to say that Mac OS X as far forward as 10.6 is nearing the imagined support cycle for Mac OS X releases (if it's not already there, I've forgotten how it goes), given that 10.9 is going to be released this year. And Mac OS X 10.9 actually has a reasonable number of compelling reasons why it's a good upgrade from 10.8, including memory compression, better multiple-display support, filesystem tagging, the removal of the skeumorphism in the UX, and it also bears mentioning that the requirements haven't changed, so at release it'll be safe to say it'll run on everything five years old and newer. (and older, the GeFORCE 8600m GT MacBook Pros from 2007, although not particularly stable, should have no problems running it, just as an example.)

As an aside specifically about classic. I realize many people have had really good experiences with it, but my individual experience with it has been very poor, and using it as a wrapper for your Mac OS 9 applications is a very poor idea unless you're going to be upgrading to a WILDLY powerful system like the 2.7GHz dual-core Power Macintosh G5, which should handily outperform almost any G4 that can natively boot 9. Otherwise, I recommend a speedy upgraded G4 for 9 tasks, and using networks, Firewire, or USB 1.1 for your file transfer needs. Your apps will be more stable, will have access to more resources (and direct access to resources such as the graphics accelerator) and (again, my own experience) the whole thing will be happier.

As far as the eMac disc being a universal installer goes, that's for installing Mac OS 9.2.2 onto the newest and fastest G4s that can boot it, such as the eMac 800MHz, the iMac G4s, and the 867/1000MHz PowerBook G4s.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

With the Zip250FW I'm pretty much set for sneaker-netting between that on the QS'02/Dual 1GHz and the USB-2 Zip250s on the NetBooks. But I was curious about some discussions we had about a specific USB2 PCI Card a while back, enough so to get me to try Tiger. Thankfully, it's on the Pismo.

The graphics I knock together in AI8 under 9.2.2 for posting here are about all I need to do ATM. If I get a couple of yards of fresh high performance vinyl for the plotter, I can cut some etch resists for PCB work, that's about all I really need to do. GraphicConverter of course, but add AppleWorks to list and that just about does it for me lately.

One day they'll develop the killer app that forces me to upgrade to X as a daily driver . . .

. . . but I ain't holdin' my breath! )

 

[Cory5412]

Well, holding your breath would be inadvisable anyway. Everything you write indicates that you're actively looking for reasons to stay away from Mac OS X, so my guess is you don't keep up with what's new and fresh, both in the app store and out of it.

To be honest, I'd look at putting a fast single core chip in that Quicksilver, or grabbing an MDD that can boot system 9.2.2 and pop the fastest processors you can find in there, if you're just looking for the fastest system 9 computer you can get. Of course, this issue has been discussed on the forum, some suggestions are here: viewtopic.php?p=173984#p173984

Some more QS/MDD discussion is here: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=14853

There's also this: viewtopic.php?f=13&t=11099

The main thing I'd probably add to any of those is that a SATA controller and a good SSD should make Mac OS 9 fly right along.

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

Yep, I've often said I'm on the lookout for a Dual 1.25 GHz MDD/FW400 as the far bookend of the G4/OS9 collection. Ianj's retired MDD/Proc upgrade sounds about perfect. He'd mentioned it a while back and got me thinking about looking for the upgrade before the box, which will show up on craigslist here at a bargain price before long.

The NetBooks <-> OS9 bubble is fine for a while, eventually a Mac Mini or some such and some updated graphics apps will be in the cards, there's no doubt about that, there's just no hurry.