Has anyone been able to install MacOS 8.6 or 9.2.2 on a Mac II or Quadra with a PowerPC upgrade card?

[nathall]

Perhaps that’s what I used. I know I used it to try to get 9.2 to work on the 6300/120 and 1400cs, to no avail.

 

[superseth]

I recall a few of the G3 upgrade cards Sonnet shipped stated in the manual that they only worked up to 9.1. It is possible people found workarounds later, but in general at the time I recall 9.1 being the ceiling for anything Pre-G3.

 

[croissantking]

Any practical reason to go to 9.2 on an unsupported Mac, other than for OS X classic mode compatibility?

 

[superseth]

I was wondering the same thing - it is possible there are some later applications like iTunes or something that require 9.2 but at this moment I don't recall.

 

[nathall]

Any practical reason to go to 9.2 on an unsupported Mac, other than for OS X classic mode compatibility?

As far as things that only work under 9.2 and not 9.1, I’m not sure. But I do find 9.2 faster than 9.1. You can still get some of the speed boost by installing 9.1 on machines that won’t boot 9.2 but dropping in the Finder from 9.2 in place of the 9.1 Finder.

 

[volvo242gt]

Necrobump... If you wanted to use MSN Messenger back in 2003, it required 9.2.2 to work. So, on my old 7500/100, which had been upgraded with a 604e from a 7300/200, I acquired the necessary install media, downloaded OS 9 Helper, then was able to apply the necessary patches to install 9.2.2 on said machine. If I remember correctly, that same 9.2.2 System Folder lives on, on my G4's hard drive.

 

[LaPorta]

Yes, I have to be that guy.

What's the point?

 

[volvo242gt]

Back in the day, the point was to be able to use somewhat current software, while not having to buy a new Mac. At the time, a B&W G3 was still in the $400-$500 range, so it made sense to hack a newer OS onto a PCI PowerMac or even a Nubus PowerMac (or 68k Mac with PPC upgrade).

Now, there's no real point, except to say that it can be done. Case in point, I can run 7.6.1 on my IIfx and could hack 8.1 onto it, but I have it running 7.5. My 650 does run 7.6.1, since it has more than 8MB, and I'm unlikely to use 24-bit addressing with it anyway. The 7100, I may upgrade to 8.6, since I found that my previous 7100/80 was more stable under 8.6 than it was under 8.1 or 7.x. That machine does run 8.1 at this time. My G4, I do have running the latest versions it can run. Makes more sense, since 10.x requires 9.2.2 for Classic mode, even though I never run the computer in the Classic environment with 10.4.11 booted.

 

[nathall]

Now, there's no real point, except to say that it can be done. Case in point, I can run 7.6.1 on my IIfx and could hack 8.1 onto it, but I have it running 7.5. My 650 does run 7.6.1, since it has more than 8MB, and I'm unlikely to use 24-bit addressing with it anyway. The 7100, I may upgrade to 8.6, since I found that my previous 7100/80 was more stable under 8.6 than it was under 8.1 or 7.x. That machine does run 8.1 at this time. My G4, I do have running the latest versions it can run. Makes more sense, since 10.x requires 9.2.2 for Classic mode, even though I never run the computer in the Classic environment with 10.4.11 booted.

Yeah, I always found Classic under 10.x a bit pointless on the machines that could boot 9.x natively. It always seemed slower and a little buggy. Rebooting into 9.2.2 on such machines only takes a minute or two.

To your earlier point, my IIfx does have an 8.1 partition. If I ever get that thing fixed.....