So i scored one of the 1.5 GHz G4 Minis from eBay yesterday for $100 shipped. This is NOT the core solo version that was 1.5, but rather a secret model sold under 1.42 ghz name but given a hidden hardware bump in specs. it IS power PC. anyways ive seen that some *other forum based on os9* has gotten the mini to boot into os9. has anyone tried this and what were your experiences. My goal was to have OS9 on a machine thats not so vintage that it needs recapping, but can run mid 90s titles.
-
Hello MLAers! We've re-enabled auto-approval for accounts. If you are still waiting on account approval, please check this thread for more information.
1.5 GHz G4 Mac Mini and OS9
- Thread starter 68kMacx86
- Start date
Yes! I have the patched version of OS 9 on my G4 mini...
Its great, if you can put aside a few things...
Volume of output jack is all the way up, and needs to be controlled from external device (speaker /w volume knob).
No wireless - There are no drivers for OS 9. E-net works fine.
Apple DVD player app doesn’t work.
1 out of 10 boots, mouse / USB will freeze
If you also have OS 10 on it, you can only boot OS 9 by holding option at startup.. I have other machines for OS 10, so I only use it for OS 9.
Also, check that your computer wasn’t overclocked. Use system profiler or about this mac to check the video memory. The 1.5 GHz was the only one to have 64mb, all the others have 32mb.
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac_mini_g4_1.5.html
I have a 4.2Ghz that I overclocked to 1.5..... A whopping 800mhz!! (Yes, sarcasm)
check my other posts. I put a SSD in there too.. and a full 1GB RAM. In the memory control panel, it gives the message “too much RAM to enable Virtual Memory “.
Its great, if you can put aside a few things...
Volume of output jack is all the way up, and needs to be controlled from external device (speaker /w volume knob).
No wireless - There are no drivers for OS 9. E-net works fine.
Apple DVD player app doesn’t work.
1 out of 10 boots, mouse / USB will freeze
If you also have OS 10 on it, you can only boot OS 9 by holding option at startup.. I have other machines for OS 10, so I only use it for OS 9.
Also, check that your computer wasn’t overclocked. Use system profiler or about this mac to check the video memory. The 1.5 GHz was the only one to have 64mb, all the others have 32mb.
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac_mini_g4_1.5.html
I have a 4.2Ghz that I overclocked to 1.5..... A whopping 800mhz!! (Yes, sarcasm)
check my other posts. I put a SSD in there too.. and a full 1GB RAM. In the memory control panel, it gives the message “too much RAM to enable Virtual Memory “.
Idly, someone from #68kMLA did this and they got great MacBench results, so although there are some quality of life things that aren't so hot, if you need raw performance for, say, rendering something in a video/compositing/3d app, or something graphical that doesn't necessarily involve sound, or you have good control of the sound in some other way, as indicated above.
@jimjimx Did you overclock from 1.25 or 1.42? Those are 250 and 80MHz respectively. It's arguable whether or not it's meaningful. Especially when, as an OS 9 machine, any G3 is "fine".
Re 1GB of RAM: That's normal for OS 9. I don't think Apple ever imagined a use case for it, and to be honest, I think they're correct: there's no real use case for over around 256-512 or so megs of ram on Mac OS 9 where, from a technical perspective, you aren't meaningfully better off moving to Mac OS X.
Having that much won't really hurt anything, I've got a couple OS9 machines with a full gig and they run fine, even though I never need that much, by a long shot.
Overall, a Mac mini would be a good OS9 machine, but in general, if you don't need a powerhouse for period-correct RAW photo batch processing or video work, a Power Macintosh will run '90s software "fine", and most Power Macintoshes (save the first generation, if I remember correctly) aren't yet at the point of needing capacitor work.
That said: A mini is also smaller than most of the other machines, save PowerBooks, which can be troublesome for different reasons.
@jimjimx Did you overclock from 1.25 or 1.42? Those are 250 and 80MHz respectively. It's arguable whether or not it's meaningful. Especially when, as an OS 9 machine, any G3 is "fine".
Re 1GB of RAM: That's normal for OS 9. I don't think Apple ever imagined a use case for it, and to be honest, I think they're correct: there's no real use case for over around 256-512 or so megs of ram on Mac OS 9 where, from a technical perspective, you aren't meaningfully better off moving to Mac OS X.
Having that much won't really hurt anything, I've got a couple OS9 machines with a full gig and they run fine, even though I never need that much, by a long shot.
Overall, a Mac mini would be a good OS9 machine, but in general, if you don't need a powerhouse for period-correct RAW photo batch processing or video work, a Power Macintosh will run '90s software "fine", and most Power Macintoshes (save the first generation, if I remember correctly) aren't yet at the point of needing capacitor work.
That said: A mini is also smaller than most of the other machines, save PowerBooks, which can be troublesome for different reasons.
"
Officially, the Apple Mac mini G4/1.5 does not exist, as Apple never formally introduced it. However, starting on September 27, 2005, Apple quietly upgraded the Mac mini G4/1.42 to include a 1.5 GHz PowerPC 7447a (G4) processor with the AltiVec "Velocity Engine" vector processing unit and a 512k on-chip level 2 cache, 512 MB of 333 MHz PC2700 DDR SDRAM memory, a faster 5400 RPM 80.0 GB Ultra ATA/100 hard drive, a slot-loading 8X DVD/CD-RW "Combo" Drive in the US$599 configuration, as before, or a faster, and dual-layer read 8X DVD�RW/CD-RW "SuperDrive" in the US$699 configuration.
"
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac_mini_g4_1.5.html
Officially, the Apple Mac mini G4/1.5 does not exist, as Apple never formally introduced it. However, starting on September 27, 2005, Apple quietly upgraded the Mac mini G4/1.42 to include a 1.5 GHz PowerPC 7447a (G4) processor with the AltiVec "Velocity Engine" vector processing unit and a 512k on-chip level 2 cache, 512 MB of 333 MHz PC2700 DDR SDRAM memory, a faster 5400 RPM 80.0 GB Ultra ATA/100 hard drive, a slot-loading 8X DVD/CD-RW "Combo" Drive in the US$599 configuration, as before, or a faster, and dual-layer read 8X DVD�RW/CD-RW "SuperDrive" in the US$699 configuration.
"
https://everymac.com/systems/apple/mac_mini/specs/mac_mini_g4_1.5.html
Last edited by a moderator:
@Cory5412 1420 MHz, now its 1500 MHz, all jumpers removed. (Well, I didn’t touch the bottom one, that will bring it to 2GHz, I think that one is empty anyway, I can’t remember)
As far as RAM, Its fun to open 12 apps and look at the about this Mac and see that I still have more than 700 MB available!!
..And the mSATA SSD I put in there is amazing..
@68kMacx86 I’m a computer & networking nerd, and I don’t have a cat, or a Microsoft!
...And I like smoking, drinking, and ordering in restaurants. - Bridget Von Hammersmark.
As far as RAM, Its fun to open 12 apps and look at the about this Mac and see that I still have more than 700 MB available!!
..And the mSATA SSD I put in there is amazing..
@68kMacx86 I’m a computer & networking nerd, and I don’t have a cat, or a Microsoft!
...And I like smoking, drinking, and ordering in restaurants. - Bridget Von Hammersmark.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep. I got my #s wrong. I don’t have a 4.2 GHz G4, and I didn’t OC it 800 MHz. Ha! Point yer fingers at me and yell “proofread”.
My apologies, my wording sounded more harsh than I meant it to be.
I think I was originally working toward "800MHz is really meaningful" but when I calculatored it out it ended up being less.
1.25 to 1.42 or 1.5 is "meaningful" but 1.42 to 1.5 isn't very. If i had to guess, it was a few bucks cheaper for Apple to use the same part an existing PowerBook or iBook had been using, after the other 1.42GHz G4s had been discontinued.
I think I was originally working toward "800MHz is really meaningful" but when I calculatored it out it ended up being less.
1.25 to 1.42 or 1.5 is "meaningful" but 1.42 to 1.5 isn't very. If i had to guess, it was a few bucks cheaper for Apple to use the same part an existing PowerBook or iBook had been using, after the other 1.42GHz G4s had been discontinued.
That's probably a more meaningful upgrade than the CPU if the original 1.42 config shipped with a 4200RPM drive.
Yeah, just one data point here but I tried powering up a disused 8100/80 (i.e., first-gen Power Mac) last year after about 20 years of disuse. I got a chime but no video and instant overwhelming fish caps smell. I was delighted to find the hard drives still work perfectly, though, complete with all my files from college...
Um.......
Yeah. I’ve seen plenty of modern big screen TVs trashed, and then repaired and resold, with the only repair being caps!
In the audio world, when things start “humming”, they get recapped.
Recapped isn't a “Mac” thing. If you get a 40 year old Microsoft, that’ll need to be recapped too..
Don't blame it on max.
I’ve got a 1969 Fender amp that needed to be recapped. Is that because Apple / Foxconn provided the caps?
Come on. Stop being a Microsoft sheep.
bbbbb but I use Linux. Well than, why is it that every time you start up your computer it boots Microsoft?
Last edited by a moderator:
well then, as a side note I pose a question. GM Cars since the early early 90s use fuel injection and coil packs. all of that in controlled by a computer of sorts. do car computers need to be recapped? if so, are mechanics aware of this? if this is a thing, how many cars get trashed for computers having bad caps.
In GM-speak, these are called PCM (powertrain control module) and ICM. (ignition control module) These modules can and do fail, but the failure rates tend to be fairly low compared to other powertrain components. Based on some of the failure modes, capacitor failure certainly does occur. Typically, a mechanic will replace the PCM or ICM with a remanufactured unit. These modules are quite ruggedized as the ICM is almost always mounted in the engine bay near or under the coil packs and the PCM may or may not be in the engine bay. They're sealed and aren't designed to be serviceable at a garage, but parts suppliers take the broken unit back as a "core" and refurbish it, selling it as a reconditioned part. GM, along with other automakers have used similar technology since electronic fuel injection became standard on most models in the 1980s.
Edit: Notably, the capacitors and other electronic components used in these modules will be automotive or industrial grade, thus have much longer expected usable lives than what you'd get in consumer electronics/computers.
Edit: Notably, the capacitors and other electronic components used in these modules will be automotive or industrial grade, thus have much longer expected usable lives than what you'd get in consumer electronics/computers.
Last edited by a moderator:
So did you get it up and running? How’s your experience so far? Have you run into any problems / quirks?
I have seen reports of folks recapping automotive computer modules and resurrecting them. Can't remember where. Either in a car specific forum or on Bad Caps.
Heck, I resurrected my 20 year old sprinkler system controller with caps replacement and my old VCR.
Caps are used to smooth power. When they go bad, often microcontrollers are no longer getting reliable power and so they behave erratically.
Heck, I resurrected my 20 year old sprinkler system controller with caps replacement and my old VCR.
Caps are used to smooth power. When they go bad, often microcontrollers are no longer getting reliable power and so they behave erratically.
Similar threads
