Mac OS X

[MacJunky]

It was more or less 11MB and I am on dialup. Anyway, if that was an official Apple service manual(the official Apple iMac DV one is around 11.2MB) then if I recall they would have said to remove the whole CD/HD Carrier (with the HD and optical drive still in it). Don't quote me on that though, it has been quite a while since I looked at it so I may well be wrong.

Also, assuming I said the same thing that was in what you linked to what happens if that link dies? Also, what about other people who need to get an iMac up but do not have the time to wait that 45min to 1 hour or more to download it?

 

[equill]

you do know i posted a link to a take apart guide right under that post right right ?

And you also referred to a straightforward process as 'fiddely', and opined that 'you need to dissasamble the whole machine to get to it'.

Neither is the case. As for whether Apostrophe is 'up to it' or not, why not let him, rather than you, decide that? Your posting of the link to a take-apart manual was a good beginning point for him to start his own assessment. He'll never start younger than he is now.

de

 

[bluekatt]

you do know i posted a link to a take apart guide right under that post right right ?

And you also referred to a straightforward process as 'fiddely', and opined that 'you need to dissasamble the whole machine to get to it'.

Neither is the case. As for whether Apostrophe is 'up to it' or not, why not let him, rather than you, decide that? Your posting of the link to a take-apart manual was a good beginning point for him to start his own assessment. He'll never start younger than he is now.

de

i was assuming the same process of the tray loaders would be used where you indeed need to disassable the whole machine ( i should know i did that more times then i cared to admit )

as far as apostrophe is not up to it yes it is up to him to decide if he is up to it but judging from his questions i rather doubt he is

the official take apart guide is the best i could find on a very short notice

 

[equill]

... i was assuming the same process of the tray loaders would be used where you indeed need to disassable the whole machine ( i should know i did that more times then i cared to admit ) as far as apostrophe is not up to it yes it is up to him to decide if he is up to it but judging from his questions i rather doubt he is ...

Your good will is not in question. I did but point out that your assessment of the difficulty of the job was needlessly pessimistic.

As an owner/repairer/upgrader of more than a handful of tray- and slot-loaders, I consider neither to be insuperably difficult to work on, but your assessment of the greater time occupied by tray-loaders is accurate enough.

For both MacJunky's and Apostrophe's benefit, it is worth recording that work on the HDD of a slot-loader does not necessitate removal of the complete drive carrier, but work on the optical drive does.

de

 

[Apostrophe]

Okay, I'm trying to gather all needed info that I can before I install OS 9. I bought it yesterday on eBay, and it should be arriving soon. But first I need to know what partitioning a hard drive is and whether or not it's necessary?

Thanks

 

[bluekatt]

partitioning a hard drive is well like slicing a hard drive in to parts with out it actually happening

sounds confusing ? it isnt

basically what partitioning does is put a wall at a specified by you point on the hd and splice the hd in two so the computer thinks it has now two seperate hard drives while there is only one in there

your hd wont actually become bigger by it it wil just be spliced in two parts either 5 gig and 5 gig or 1 and 9 2 and 8 etc but you are limited to the actual amount of hard disk space you have on your hd in your case 10 gig

this kind of thing is useful if you want to keep your files and operating systems seperated have more then one os on your hd or if you are a paranoid windows user its also easier to reinstall your os with out wiping your data just copy it over to the partition

do you really need to do it ? no

do you plan to use os x in the future ? you can install x over os 9 do you want to use them both in their own enviroments then you need to partition

its up to you really but strictly speaking you dont need it

and to instal os 9

turn the imac on push in the cd reboot hold c and well you know the drill from there dont you ?

initialise the hard drive and then install mac os 9

 

[The Macster]

If I was you, I'd boot from the OS 9 CD, run Drive Setup, and use it to format the hard drive in two HFS+ partitions, one of about 2 GB for OS 9, and the rest for OS X. You'll then get two drives on the desktop (as if you had two hard drives installed), and can name one Mac OS 9 and the other Mac OS X. Install OS 9 to the smaller one, then reboot from it, and you will see OS 9 working. Then apply the iMac Firmware Update if you don't already have it, and reboot from the OS X CD, and install OS X to the larger partition. You'll then have a 9 drive and an X drive, and on my Mac at least, it defaults to booting X and if you want 9 you hold Option from pressing the power button until you see the old "Happy Mac" appear instead of OS X's grey Apple logo.

 

[bluekatt]

for some reason when trying to explain partitions i always need to think of pies

 

[Apostrophe]

Great, thanks.

No, I'm only going to have one OS at a time on there.

So if I just want to reinstall OS 9, do I need to partition it, or will it be just fine whole?

Say I make 2 equal partitions (not that I will) but can you either be in partition 1 or 2, but not both?

And just one more question: Is partitining necessary for mult. users?

 

[TheNeil]

Great, thanks.
No, I'm only going to have one OS at a time on there.

So if I just want to reinstall OS 9, do I need to partition it, or will it be just fine whole?

Say I make 2 equal partitions (not that I will) but can you either be in partition 1 or 2, but not both?

And just one more question: Is partitining necessary for mult. users?

If you want to just re-install OS 9 then re-partitioning isn't necessary. It might not even be necessary if you wanted to install OS X and OS 9 but, as was pointed out earlier, it's 'advised'. If you're in any doubt as to whether you're going to install OS X at a later date then it might be wise to take the opportunity to partition the hard disk anyway - you don't lose any space and it keeps your options open for the future (you could always use one partition for OS 9 and any applications you install, and the other one for any documents etc.)

If you make more than one partition then you can still see and use all of them (they'll just appear as separate drives on the desktop)

There's no need to partition for multiple users

 

[Apostrophe]

Oh, I see. Okay, now I understand.

So, just for verification, if I ONLY have OS 9 installed and no other OS, then keeping the HD whole won't present a problem?

Thanks everyone, for your help.

 

[bluekatt]

no problem what so ever and even if you want to instal os x at a later date ove rit you can do that

 

[equill]

Remember that homework? If you had done it, you would already know that the 'volumes' (one or more) that 'mount' on a desktop are logical divisions, not physical divisions of your hard drive. The Apple scheme is for five such divisions, of which the visible minimum of one data partition on your desktop is just one, albeit by far the largest, partition. Software 'drivers', which translate between the hard-drivese spoken on your HDD and the systemese spoken by your OS, and other housekeeping activities occupy the other partitions. If you 'partition' your hard drive, it is the data partition that is further subdivided.

It is as if CRIME SCENE. DO NOT CROSS tapes were strung across your Granny's back yard to divide it into plots. In one, nothing but garden tools is allowed. In another, fertilizer and seeds only. And so on. In the largest is the barbecue, the pool and the parties. Once the divisions are made and the pool is built, the spaces cannot be redistributed without real sweat and tears. Especially irksome is the safe alternative storage of the pool water. So you think hard before you string the tapes up, and provide for two pools before you start if there is even the faintest possibility that you will ever need two separate but similar pools. If one pool with a sloping floor will suit both children and adults, provide only one, but knowingly.

If you are the least bit like the rest of humanity, you will, unless you have many GB of OS 9-only applications to use, most probably seldom use OS 9 on this machine again if OS X is also available on it. As long as you format the drive and install OS 9 drivers, and you do need to format the drive as the most reliable way of removing the previous inhabitants, you have the future ability to access the drive from OS 9, for trouble-shooting, to perform firmware updates as needed, and to install OS 9 for performing those updates. What you need to be aware of is that you cannot boot into OS 9 from the internal HDD if OS 9 shares a partition with OS X. OS 9 must live in a separate partition of the drive to be bootable. However, if OS 9 drivers are present, OS 9 continues to be bootable from another (optical or magnetic) drive. The moral of all this is that you not burn your bridges behind you unless you know that the riverbed is dry.

de

 

[Apostrophe]

Oh no, don't worry, I knew that partitions weren't physical. I just wasn't sure what they did. But now, after doing a bit of research and looking at your posts, I now understand that they just create 'two' hard drives on your desktop from the same hard drive. In fact, I've even realized that the computer I'm on now is partitioned!

But it'll be a while until I get close to being ready for X, with those firmware requirements and all. That is why, since I'm only using 9, I've decided that I won't partition the hard drive. And I know that if I got X, I'd just install it over 9. About 5 minutes ago I shut off my iMac, telling myself that the next time I turn it on, I'll be installing the OS on it.

Thanks everyone, your suggestions have really been helpful.

-Apostrophe

 

[The Macster]

But it'll be a while until I get close to being ready for X, with those firmware requirements and all. That is why, since I'm only using 9, I've decided that I won't partition the hard drive. And I know that if I got X, I'd just install it over 9. About 5 minutes ago I shut off my iMac, telling myself that the next time I turn it on, I'll be installing the OS on it.

The firmware thing isn't at all difficult, you just download a small program from Apple, run it from OS 9, and it reboots and installs it in a few minutes Then you just pop in your Tiger CD, boot up off it, and in less than an hour you've gone from having an old Mac to having something that feels like a brand new machine

 

[MacJunky]

What you need to be aware of is that you cannot boot into OS 9 from the internal HDD if OS 9 shares a partition with OS X. OS 9 must live in a separate partition of the drive to be bootable.

Actually, I am going to contradict you here. For years I have been using single partitions with both OS X and OS 9(sometimes multiple OS 9 system folders with different names) and I have had exactly 0 problems with setups like this.
At the moment my Digital Audio has 3 partitions that are mounted on the desktop during normal use. Two on it's 250GB Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 and one on it's 80GB Western Digital drive. The partition that takes up the first 128GBish of the Seagate drive has my primary Tiger install and a minimal OS 9 install for classic mode. The Western Digital has another Tiger install for use as a backup incase my primary needs troubleshooting and for testing apps that should be working on my primary but are not as well as my primary OS 9 system folder that I use if I ever need to boot into OS 9.

[Edit]

Actually, when I boot into my minimal OS 9 system folder on my primary partition I can see and use the rest of the 250GB HD on my DA's ATA 66 bus. I have a screenshot of it somewhere as well.

[/Edit]

Everything works fine. However I must point out that in OS 9 you need the 9.1 or 9.2 or something version of the Startup Disk control panel to select different system folders (including OS X) if they are on the same partition. That should not be an issue though as the 9.1/9.2.1/9.2.2 updates for 9.0 are free.

As I said, I have been doing this for years with SL and TL iMacs, PDQ and Lombard PowerBooks, Rev 1 and Rev 2 B&W, Sawtooth, Digital Audio, etc.

 

[equill]

What you need to be aware of is that you cannot boot into OS 9 from the internal HDD if OS 9 shares a partition with OS X. OS 9 must live in a separate partition of the drive to be bootable.

Actually, I am going to contradict you here ...

Quite patently, our mileages vary. However, not content to rely on memory, I checked before I wrote, and I have no reason to resile from what I wrote.

This thread has been about a not-yet-specified Indigo iMac, OS 9 (as a cypher for 9.1/9.2.1/9.2.2), and OSs 10.3.x and 10.4.x. My post was derived from my experiences with five CRT iMacs (400 and 500MHz), an eMac 1GHz and an iBook/600 14-in., with and without OS 9.2.2 and either one of 10.3.9 or 10.4.11, leaving aside the versions between first installation from CD and now. However, I confined my post solely to two Indigo iMac/500s, Feb. 2002 and Aug. 2001, both 8582LL/A, but with serial numbers that CoconutIdentityCard cannot decode into countries of assembly or manufacture (VM209... and P1134...). The former supports Tiger and the latter supports Panther. The HDDs are partitioned 3 & 16GB and 4 & 25GB. There is a full installation of 9.2.2 on each smaller partition, but the 9.2.2 for use in Classic Mode under Panther shares the larger partition with Panther.

What I find, with and without attached and partioned LaCie d2 FireWire external drives (also with a first partition shared by 9.2.2 and one or other OS X version), is that under Tiger:

1) all nominally valid System folders show in either OS 9's Startup Disk CP or System Preferences/Startup Disk, but selection of OS 9 on a shared partition fails to boot the Macs into OS 9 (Quizzical Floppy icon). Further, selection of OS 9 or OS X on a shared partition prevents the other OS from showing in the window invoked by holding down Option during start or restart;

2) both Indigo iMacs boot into OS 9 from a CD or an external drive partition containing only OS 9, albeit that both OSs show in the window invoked by Option when they share a partition, but the preferred startup folder remains set for the internal hard drive. If OS X or OS 9 on an external shared partition is selected as preferred, again the iMac does not boot into OS 9, and whichever OS is selected, the other does not show in the window.

Inhibition of the other OS from appearing in the Option-invoked window also happens if Panther and OS 9 share a partition. However, both iMacs boot freely into OS 9 from a shared partition if it can be seen and clicked on, more or less as you reported above. All available valid folders continue to show and can be selected in the OS 9 CP and OS X Preferences. It seems clear enough that, whatever the OS 9 and System Preferences selection panels show, the reality at a given moment is shown better by the Option-invoked window.

However, in the context of the Indigo iMac question posed by the OP, I continue to believe that the still-supported OS 10.4.x is the better choice, given adequate RAM and CPU speed, and that the convenience of a separate OS 9 partition on an internal HDD, for troubleshooting purposes, is worthwhile.

de

PS As an aside, I should also add that OS 9.1 will no longer boot an iMac that has 9.2.x installed on its internal HDD.

 

[The Macster]

PS As an aside, I should also add that OS 9.1 will no longer boot an iMac that has 9.2.x installed on its internal HDD.

Why does this happen, is it something specific to the iMac? (my Mac has 9.2.2 and Tiger installed on it, but can still boot the 9.1 CD)

 

[equill]

... is it something specific to the iMac? (my Mac has 9.2.2 and Tiger installed on it, but can still boot the 9.1 CD)

I suspect, rather than know, yes: http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=75130

It may be 'collateral damage', as the military apologists have been known to put it, but it is real enough on the iMacs. Mildly ironic that the firmware update requires OS 9.1 to be installed, and then disables use of OS 9.1 if the software is updated.

de

PS This is all understandable in the light of 4.1.9f's purpose to support OS X on CRT iMacs. OS 9.2.2 is optimized for use in Classic Mode within OS X, so an attempt to use OS 9.1 instead of 9.2.2 is more than a little perverse. The loss of 9.1 bootability is therefore not crippling, but mildly disconcerting if the iMac has to be booted from a CD for troubleshooting or maintenance.

 

[MacJunky]

Curious, in this very room there is an earlyish Graphite 400Mhz iMac DV SE(I overclocked to 450Mhz though it is not mine) that I personally ran the 4.1.9f1 updater on and it still boots off the 9.0.4 CDs it came with as well as 9.0.4 and 9.1 installs on it's internal 120GB HD(and previous 80GB) that contains 9.2.2 and 10.4.x on the same partition. In the past it dual booted 10.2.x and later 10.3.x along side 9.2.2 on the same partition as well.

To further narrow down just what iMac this is, it's bottom housing is slightly frosted whereas with the slightly newer iMacs (like my grandmother's 400Mhz Indigo Summer 2000) it is much clearer and has no frosted look. This Graphite iMac DV SE shipped with a 13GB HD and has an 8MB Rage 128VR. It also came with the non-Pro Apple USB Keyboard and non-pro Apple USB Mouse. This iMac also has Graphite speakers whereas the newer iMacs(from what I have seen) have clear speakers.(not the exterior grille)

Unless I am mistaken my grandmother's 400Mhz Summer 2000 also has the 4.1.9 updater applied and last I checked was able to boot from 9.0.4 install CDs as well as the HD from this Graphite with 9.2.2 and at the time, 10.3. She currently does not use her iMac much and as such has not upgraded to OS X. Unless she secretly has a FireWire drive with OS X install somewhere I am seemingly the only person to have used OS X on it at all from bootable CD and other HDs.

If you were wondering about that, I had some iMac FireWire sex as well as some 5.25" Toshiba SD-R1312 testing going on. I should still have pictures if they are required. I will have a look for them sometime.