Search results

The one about Macintoshes with 680x0 processors. "Modern" PPC on isn't terribly interesting, especially with OS X >10.2/any cross-platform Unix. Just run an x86 box, less hassle, just as interesting, and far faster.

Well jeez, then you'd be just running Ubuntu on crustier hardware. Whoop de doo.

Man, the word "gigaoctet" is just /weird/. When I was using a French translation of Windows, it weirded me out, along with the arbitrarily resized dialog boxes that make no sense for their contents. On the e-reader: is there any sort of firmware hacks for it? There's all sorts of cool ideas...

You aren't going to run Windows 98 natively on a PowerBook, it'll be solely in emulation in VPC. I'm not sure if it can pass through battery info. Windows NT on PPC had basically no software and was only supported on CHRP or similar IBM systems. It did support the ThinkPad 800 series, but I'm...

Virtual PC was the main one. SoftPC started to fade out of relevancy by this time and so did hardware PC cards.

Until you do.

I really don't recommend Objective-C. It's a hybrid of C and Smalltalk, and that gives you the burdens of both. Swift is actually really nice and Apple is backing it with full force. If you want something more universal, C#, JavaScript, and Python are all safe horses to bet on.

Haha, what a name - he's Simon AND Garfunkel! He also wrote the Unix Haters' Handbook, the prime choice of outdated rants on Unix.

It's probably not happening as the devs think it would slow it down, the devs are inactive, and SheepShaver is basically a very thin emulator. My hope for proper PPC emulation is in QEMU.

9.1 and above requires an MMU, not emulated by SheepShaver.

Disk Copy 4.x will have problems. Disk Copy 6.x is fine on Basilisk, but probably not anything that fiddles with the disk.

Basilisk likely doesn't provide the shims to run it. Unsurprising, considering how (in)accurate Basilisk is.

Maybe it's on Bitsavers - I know they have a lot of datasheets for old chips, maybe they'll have some for Mac accelerators.

There's really no point to "securing" it with a password. Most people don't or can't mass-suck bandwidth over Gopher, so you should be fined.

Most Gopher clients do NOT support Gopher+. At that point you may just want to go for HTTP.

No, Gopher is (intentionally) minimalistic and intended for things that are publically accessible. Maybe with a kludge that operates as a search service that outputs the listing with a password, but that can be circumvented.

As a local ThinkPad enthusiast/purist, Edges are Not Real ThinkPads©. (Only X, W and T series count for modern ThinkPads.)

Then it's just a thin client, and there are cheaper ways of doing thin clients, with or without a Mac.

Said no one who bought DDR2 recently.

Which is /exactly/ what I proposed in the OP, after coming to this consensus over IRC.