Drive setup help needed for 128GB dual-boot (7.5.3 + 8.1)

[Bubheart'sDaddy73]

Hi,

I'm about to setup my 1400C for dual-booting systems 7.5.3 and 8.1. I've read that 7.5.3 will only support 4GB max partition whereas 8.1 is good for up to 2TB.

So, I recently got hold of a nice 1400C that already has a 8GB CF card in place of its spinning HD (7.5.3 and 8.1 installed on 2 x 4GB partitions). Right now I have my upgrade 128GB CF card waiting in the cardbus slot and I'm unsure how best to proceed:

Should I...

a) Format two partitions (One 4GB standard + one 124GB HFS extended) then copy the files from each system partition over?, 124GB for system 8.1 obviously.

Or:

b) Format three partitions, 2 x 4GB + a single 128GB partition for shared storage accessed by both systems.

(Will this actually work? Can 7.5.3 and 8.1 read from HFS standard and HFS extended, interchangeably?)

Or:

c) Format for four partitions, 2 x 4GB (one standard, 1 extended), then 2 x 60GB partitions (again, one standard storage for 7.5 3 and one extended storage for 8.1).

Thanks!

 

[Gorgonops]

b) Format three partitions, 2 x 4GB + a single 128GB partition for shared storage accessed by both systems.

(Will this actually work? Can 7.5.3 and 8.1 read from HFS standard and HFS extended, interchangeably?)

7.5 cannot read HFS Extended, period, so this shared partition would have to be HFS. And HFS becomes *horribly* inefficient when used on large volumes. The TL;DR is that it has the same allocation limits as FAT16, IE, only 65,536 blocks. That means on a 128GB partition the minimum file size would be, what, something like 2MB?

Unless you really think you're going to be spending a lot of time under 7.5 (I'm not sure why you'd bother, 8.x is a real improvement over any 7.x version on Power Macs because of the greater use of native code) I'd personally recommend you allocate just a small amount of disk space to be readable to the older OS and format the rest HFS+.

 

[Bubheart'sDaddy73]

Thank you Gorgonops, you've given me a lot to think about here. I read (somewhere...!) that System 7 was preferred by some due to it running much quicker than System 8. Is there any truth to that? Or is any speed difference negligible?

 

[AlpineRaven]

The earlier system the better/faster than newer system. ie. on 68k Mac 8.1 was slow to perform over System 7.1 which is tons faster.

As what Gorgonops is correct. Some Macs doesn't like dual booting - your 1400c is more likely will accept dual booting.

That is why I have Macs there with specific system software there, ie. Macintosh IIsi has System 6.0.8, PowerBook 540c has System 7.1, Quadra 840av 7.1, Quadra 700 has 7.1.2 (PowerPC), PowerBook 3400 has System 8.6, Pismo has 9.2.2. If I wanted to use later system I will pick the Mac that has/compatible to run that system comfortably.

What I am saying above - think about why you want to run 8.1 or 7.5.3?

If you like 8.1 GUI feel - you can pull out the Appearance control panels and extensions and plop them in 7.5.3 then you will get 8.1 feel.
Cheers

AP

 

[Gorgonops]

I read (somewhere...!) that System 7 was preferred by some due to it running much quicker than System 8. Is there any truth to that? Or is any speed difference negligible?

If you have enough RAM the greater amount of native code in OS 8 will basically counterbalance it being "heavier" than System 7; the advice that "earlier is better" breaks down pretty badly on PPCs. (There probably is some truth to it on 68k Macs, although you still need to think about how much of your time it's worth to track down all the control panels and extensions you need to essentially turn System 7.1 into 7.5.5 minus some phantom bloat that I'm frankly skeptical exists once the two are actually configured the same.) Again, the *only* justification I can see for going with the lesser OS is if you're seriously RAM constrained; if you have at least 20-something MB I'd not bother with 7.5.x at all unless there's some very specific thing you want to run.

 

[Bubheart'sDaddy73]

That is why I have Macs there with specific system software there, ie. Macintosh IIsi has System 6.0.8, PowerBook 540c has System 7.1, Quadra 840av 7.1, Quadra 700 has 7.1.2 (PowerPC), PowerBook 3400 has System 8.6, Pismo has 9.2.2. If I wanted to use later system I will pick the Mac that has/compatible to run that system comfortably.

What I am saying above - think about why you want to run 8.1 or 7.5.3?

Thanks AlpineRaven, logically this makes perfect sense and probably the way to go if money were no object [] . To be honest, I'm the proverbial kid in the candy store (ok, well a 46-yr-old kid in a candy store then hehe). It's been a while since I've used Classic Mac but recall the apps I used stretched from system 6.08 to 8.6. It's all food for thought and I imagine there will be no one 'ideal' Mac that has maximum compatibility through those specific releases. Right, I will don the old thinking cap!! Cheers, Matt

 

[Bubheart'sDaddy73]

If you have enough RAM the greater amount of native code in OS 8 will basically counterbalance it being "heavier" than System 7; the advice that "earlier is better" breaks down pretty badly on PPCs. (There probably is some truth to it on 68k Macs, although you still need to think about how much of your time it's worth to track down all the control panels and extensions you need to essentially turn System 7.1 into 7.5.5 minus some phantom bloat that I'm frankly skeptical exists once the two are actually configured the same.) Again, the *only* justification I can see for going with the lesser OS is if you're seriously RAM constrained; if you have at least 20-something MB I'd not bother with 7.5.x at all unless there's some very specific thing you want to run.

Thanks Gorgonops, I have 32MB on the 1400C at the moment, and seems quite responsive. Personally I preferred (still do prefer) the cleaner look of System 7 but probably used more apps under 8+. I've gone ahead and formatted one partition at 4GB for 7.5.3 and the remainder 124GB as HFS extended for 8.1. Thankfully both do dual boot without problem, so think I will leave like this for now. Thanks again, Matt