how to run OS 9 and OSX on the same machine?

[mraroid]

I can not argue with you Night.  It all makes good sense.  The main reason I am working on this B&W is to make a support

Mac for my Color Classic Mystic.  I want to learn 9.22 and a early version of OSX. 

It would be awkward to down load files in OSX and then somehow transfer them to 9.2.2.  I also want to link this B&W via appletalk to my Mystic.  I want to down load files on the B&W, and then drop them into a shared folder/drive so they appear in the Mystic.  I guess that can happen under OSX?

mraroid

 

[Trash80toHP_Mini]

It's good to put your requirements up front in a post like this. If you're only using the B&W as a bridge machine/training /plaything you can easily get away with using one drive with two partitions and keep your downloads backed up on CD-RW.

<TLDR>

My own method for transferring files might be handier and more secure than what you're planning: I use my dedicated, quarantined Win10 Firefox workstation for downloads where they are in primary, easily searched storage when I'm not using the QS. I started transferring files by thumb drive to the QS, where the archive remains backed up there in solid state and on the QS as well for triple redundancy. I then transfer my files via Zip to the toys in my collection. Networking would be easier, but I've always preferred sneakernet to networking which I find to be more of a hassle. The reason for this is that I use the QS/OS9 for doing my graphics work and I've lost a couple of drives over the years. One to failure of the original drive from my DA, which was moved to the QS backup machine after a PSU magic smoke containment failure. The second one was lost to corruption due to my own foolishness in installing a too large partition in a Beige G3 without doing my homework after a second magic smoke incident. That one had the files that were "backed up" from the first and not backed up after becoming the primary. Live and learn. [:I]

</TLDR>

 

[mraroid]

I must be really stubborn.  Just when I am ready to give up and install two hard drives, or install OS 9 and OSX on separate partitions, I try yet again.  I keep thinking I am missing an option or something.  I have tried installing OS 9 first and always choose the extended format option.  Then I try to install Panther.  It will not install.  Then I wipe the drive yet again and install Panther, then try to install OS 9.  It fails. When I install Panther I always make sure the "Load OS9 drivers" option is checked.  It always fails for me. I think I need to bang my head against the wall a little longer before i give up.  I have head that this was possible for a few years, and that is one reason I bought the B&W in the first place.
 
I think I can down load faster and easier under Panther.  Cory posted good information on how to link appletalk under OS 9 to my Mystic running 8.1  So, I want to down load files for the Mystic using OSX, and then drop them into a folder/shard drive that my Mystic can see. And I would like to do this without re booting the machine.
 
Will Panther (and Tiger) let me share a folder/drive with the Mystic running 8.1? That would work for me.
 
mraroid



 

 
 
 
 

 

[nglevin]

I don't think it's worth struggling to get OS 9 and OS X to share a partition. OS 9 will never need as much space as Mac OS X for anything besides raw media.

You can very easily partition HFS Extended (aka HFS+) to squeeze in another OS. I actually just did that on my PowerBook G4's boot drive to cram in a new 16 GB Tiger partition from what was previously a one partition, 256 GB Mac OS X Leopard Server drive. The partitioning was done by Mojave via FireWire Target Disk Mode. And 16 GB is more than plenty for classic Mac OS... 4 GB or 8 GB will be fine, too.

Will Panther (and Tiger) let me share a folder/drive with the Mystic running 8.1? That would work for me.

I'm a bit curious what you need Panther for since Tiger was essentially a refined Panther. That aside...

Yes, that's what AppleTalk is for.   The System 7 Today walkthrough for getting that set up with System 7 and Leopard is very similar. "Mac OS 8.1" is very similar to System 7, the only parts that would be different would be dealing with some Tiger bugs around AppleTalk. I imagine Jaguar would be better for this, though.

 

[mraroid]

I'm a bit curious what you need Panther for since Tiger was essentially a refined Panther. That aside...

My stock B&W came with a CD drive.  I have a apple branded CD of Panther.  I have a apple branded DVD of Tiger.  I ordered a replacement CD/DVD drive for the B&W, but it has not arrived yet.

Yes, that's what AppleTalk is for.   The System 7 Today walkthrough for getting that set up with System 7 and Leopard is very similar. "Mac OS 8.1" is very similar to System 7, the only parts that would be different would be dealing with some Tiger bugs around AppleTalk. I imagine Jaguar would be better for this, though.

Well, if I can set up AppleTalk between Panther/Tiger and the Mystic running 8.1, then that would solve all my problems. 

I ordered some option pins to change the Yikes! motherboard to 500Mhz.  As soon as that arrives, I can roll in the G4.

I ordered some stuff from:

http://www.headgapstore.com/

They advertise on the EveryMac.com web site.  But after more then a week, nothing.  They took my money, but never did send me a tracking number.  I sent them email 4 days ago, and no response. 

I hope they are not a scam.

mraroid

 

[traildog64]

I've ordered stuff from them before. It's just a man and wife operation, as far as I know, so may take a while.

 

[mraroid]

I've ordered stuff from them before. It's just a man and wife operation, as far as I know, so may take a while.

OK  thanks.

mraroid

 

[Cory5412]

One thought, I don't see any note in here about updating to Mac OS 9.2.2, which became important for classic mode and dual booting with OS X at some point. The other thing you'll want to do is use Disk Utility in the Utilities folder of your OS 9 CD to re-partition the disk before doing the install of OS 9.

Perhaps consider using the eMac 2003 9.2.2 install CD to get started, and then install whatever version of OS X on the disk after that.

If one OS has a catastrophic failure it can chew up the entire drive.

I had this happen to me back in the day. I've heard lots of people swear up and down that it almost never happens, but.

 

[nglevin]

So... heading wayyy back to this thread, I feel like I've got some sharing of notes regarding what I've done with my B&W now that I have a PowerPC 7410 ZIF and Tiger to play with. Nothing fancy!

Here's what I did:

1. Started with Mac OS 9.2.2 (no idea what was the original install media, sorry).
   
2. Installed the Sonnet Encore/Crescendo G4 patch for Mac OS 9 version 2.3.1 to hack the B&W firmware to accept G4 ZIFs again.
   
3. Installed the ZIF ( almost forgot to write down this step! )
   
4. Installed Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger from the version that came on four CD-ROMs by restarting the Mac, holding down the "C" key to boot from CD, and let it install without anything else special. The Startup Disk X control panel wouldn't let me boot from the Tiger CD, I had to reboot with the C key for the Tiger installer to do anything.
   
5. ...After more than 12 hours of Tiger, I got bored of Tiger for being a little buggy, not modern enough like Leopard and not different enough like Jaguar, so I'm in the process of replacing it with Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar... which also shipped on CDs...
   

With Tiger, everything worked out of the box with the Sonnet ZIF. A thread that's nearly twelve years old reports that the Sonnet ZIFs don't need any jumper block changes, and that's consistent with what I've seen. My 7410 ZIF is automatically bumped to run at 500 MHz without any changes.

Jaguar needed a SonnetCache Enabler 1.4 for Mac OS X to see the Sonnet ZIF's L2 cache, but that's the only other thing that I've seen it needs so far.

In my opinion, Jaguar seems happier on a G3 and early G4. The software that requires Tiger at a minimum really wants beefier GPUs to take advantage of Core Image without taxing Altivec.

EDIT: I have a budget Radeon 9200 in this B&W. It's better than a Rage but it doesn't have the right DX9-era features to make Core Image and Quartz Extreme work. Those are the bits that Tiger wants and Leopard needs... which explains why some G4 Mac Mini impressions on OS X were so lacking, between the 9200 and the very slow hard drive it came with.

That doesn't help with the web browser problem. The worst tradeoff of Jaguar is that it came with Internet Explorer, with Safari 1.0 introduced with the 10.2.8 combo update. Both are positively ancient in all the bad ways.

I'm coming to the conclusion that recent TenFourFox is too slow for any G3 or early G4 and as far as good Tiger browsers are concerned, Camino's last release is exactly one year older than Classilla. I'm running every browser with Java and JavaScript turned off and all plugins uninstalled, and the experience of using the modern web is... awful, still. Not awful compared to a Chromebook, awful compared to my PowerBook G4 running Leopard, which already limps along in its own ways when web browsing.

One issue that I'm having with this B&W is that I can't get the keyboard combinations to select between multiple partitions in Open Firmware to work, at least "Option" at boot isn't doing anything. I'm having to switch between Mac OS X and Mac OS 9 through their respective flavors of Startup Disk. This reminds me of a similar problem I had back when I owned a Sawtooth, I'm wondering if I have the keyboard combinations wrong for this early version of Open Firmware.

 

[Gorgonops]

EDIT: I have a budget Radeon 9200 in this B&W. It's better than a Rage but it doesn't have the right DX9-era features to make Core Image and Quartz Extreme work.

Core Image won't go on a 9200, but theoretically Quartz Extreme works. The reason it doesn't in the B&W is that OS X contains an artificial block to prevent it from kicking in on non-AGP video cards. Here's an article about how to remove said block.

https://hints.macworld.com/article.php?story=20020830061842401

As I vaguely recall it "works" to speed up some video effects, but there are also complaints about how it utterly murders disk performance. (Quartz Extreme requires shoving textures from main RAM into the video card, and doing that on the B&W entails a ton of bus contention.)

 

[nglevin]

I’d try it to laugh at the results.  I’m already using ATI’s 9200 driver with a later iteration of ATI Displays, which has this very funny checkbox to boost PCI graphics performance at the expense of every other PCI device connected. The best part is it seems to actually work pretty well... it seems to have made more of a difference for games than the Altivec.

There are several net-negative performance tweaks to OS X that still get shared around that I find.. well, I wasn’t laughing when I had ITish responsibilities. One is turning on QuartzGL, the other is disabling Spotlight indexing on root (not the same as turning off Spotlight entirely, which is not possible, as it's needed to associate files with apps among many other less obvious things)

The former buffers rendering to a degree that scrolling’s great and everything else stinks. The latter causes Mac OS X’s ability to find out binary files via metadata to break, which forces Apple software like Xcode and Final Cut to find files through hard coded paths that will cause them to subtly break in ways that users don’t understand. Very fun to explain how your break points in Xcode will not work for cloud builds because of this hot Spotlight tip.

 

[Gorgonops]

One oddity about Quartz Extreme vs. Core Image; if you install a Core Image capable PCI card in a B&W (the one common way I know of to do this is to use a generic Geforce FX5200 PCI card flashed with a Mac firmware) my recollection is that you *don't* need to apply any hacks to make that work. (IE, they decided no one would be stupid enough to try this?) There are threads about this floating around, I think the TL;DR is obviously that it doesn't work very well either... but it is *technically* possible.

 

[nglevin]

That makes some sense.

Before Metal, Quartz Extreme (terrible name btw) backed each window with a GPU buffer via clever use of OpenGL textures. Texture calls are easily the most bandwidth heavy interaction between CPU and GPU, because you're streaming relatively large buffers of image data instead of abstract draw calls and commands. AGP has some features to avoid copying from CPU owned memory to GPU owned memory and some other clever bits, which PCI can't really compensate for.

Core Image is a higher level abstraction that was architected with an interface for CPU based rendering and GPU based rendering, and it gives developers the option to let the OS choose or for them to demand one device over the other. On the CPU, it's SIMD based vector processing of image transforms, which is Altivec on PowerPC, and on the GPU it's a slightly heavyweight abstraction over the already heavy OpenGL abstraction for doing similar commands with OpenGL 2.x shaders on GPU textures.

Despite that overhead over plain OpenGL, GPUs are made for extremely parallel computation so the act of performing, let's say, a blur filter on the GPU ends up being really fast once that image data is in the GPU's buffers. Back when I was playing with these bits, I was pretty impressed by that line where the CPU was better for the job than the GPU, it's not all that obvious!

Thinking on this all a bit, it makes sense that the C2D Mac Minis were great and the Core Solo and G4 Mac Minis were not as good at Leopard. The two cores left a CPU free to compensate for a lacking Intel GMA GPU (which already had some OpenGL operations running as a SIMD operation on the CPU thanks to Apple's OpenGL driver). Those lacking Intel GMA GPUs had some of the same problems as the budgety Radeon 9200 and then some.

 

[Gorgonops]

I’d try it to laugh at the results.

I never bothered with mine because on top of the PCI bandwidth limitations (which are extremely harsh on the B&W, the "northbridge/southbridge" pipe on that machine is just a 66mhz 32 bit PCI bus; the video slot alone can theoretically completely saturate it) my B&W's "Upgraded" (sidegraded?) video card is a Radeon 7000. Sure, it's Quartz Extreme compliant in that it supports arbitrary-sized textures, but, well, in OpenGL it squeaks out being about, I dunno, 60% faster than the original Rage 128 on a good day? Definitely nothing to write home about.

For a while I *was* holding onto a dual-port FX5200 PCI I scavenged out of an old Dell Precision (it'd been set up to drive four monitors) with thoughts of trying the Core Image experiment, but I never got around to it. The B&W (well, Yikes, effectively, since I have a G4 ZIF) doesn't run the shipping version of Leopard anyway, and while Core Image did *exist* in Tiger it wasn't really used much.