Jump to content

Cory5412

Administrators
  • Content Count

    8614
  • Joined

  • Last visited

6 Followers

About Cory5412

  • Rank
    Daring Pioneer of the Future

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    Cory5412
  • Website URL
    http://www.stenoweb.net/

Profile Information

  • Location
    Arizona, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Cory5412

    Solid State Drive for G3?

    Ah, wow! And that was on the G3 side? ANd if I remember correctly you had like a 500 gigabyte data volume? I mentioned the idea of running an AppleShare server in the other thread, I'm doing so for more public use, and that should show up in chooser on an appletalk machine, but the bummer would absolutely be that the maximum disk size on Classic Mac OS is 2TB. The next best way around is to run linux with old netatalk or Windows 2003, which can speak old appletalk, where you can tweak some NTFS settings to get more than 2TB volumes formatted so you can have everything on a single share. You can put more than one volume in a machine but as far as I happen to know at the moment this doesn't include things like partitioning bigger disks (or else vtools would just be just a pair of 14TB disks partitioned up.)
  2. Cory5412

    Regressing to an earlier OS?

    Hm. You shouldn't need to do that if iMacs are on Ethernet - or at least, the same ethernet segment your LT/ET bridge is on. In terms of emulating: What you might consider is setting up a machine as a file server. You will want to test this, but it's probably fine for your file server to be running OS 9. I believe AppleShare IP 5 on Mac OS 8 on beige hardware can also do multi-homing, so you can join it directly to a serial localtalk LAN and a tcp/ip+appletalk ethernet LAN. With this all set up, you can run 8.6 in a qemu or sheepshaver emulation and use TCP appleshare to talk to the file server and then get files you need form that onto your 68ks that run the fabrication machines. As far as I happen to remember QEMU doesn't support appletalk, but I need to try it again at some point. Granted, this all adds a couple layers to everything and so it might be easier to just keep looking for G3s/G4s or beige PPC Macs. Incidentally, I did macbench 4 on QEMU running OS 9.2.1 on my PC at home, which has an i5-2300 in it. It benches about what a Beige G3/300 does - so this isn't super high performance, but that's still "fine."
  3. Administrative side-note: Uniserver is no longer on this site.
  4. Cory5412

    Regressing to an earlier OS?

    There was a super brief discussion thread about the emulators at the launch of 10.15 - most if not all at this point of the emulators have been updated to 64-bit for OSX 10.15 functionality.
  5. Cory5412

    Regressing to an earlier OS?

    There was someone doing some work on getting 8.6 running on later G4s, claiming it was a more stable OS release even on hardware where it won't officially run, but I'll be perfectly honest: I have a super hard time believing that and I recommend against doing it in a scenario like this one. The person doing the work didn't really seem to have a strong understanding of what it is they were doing or why they might want it or what might cause or fix some of the problems they were having. There are a few scenarios where "wink wink" it just kind of works to run an earlier OS than what something shipped with. Most Sandy Bridge Macs should hypothetically be able to have 10.6 installed on them, any other Mac that shipped through a long run of different OS releases (MacPro 5,1 and 6,1 and the MD101LL/A), and so on. It might be possible that if the Gig-Ethernet is the same hardware as a Sawtooth except for the Ethernet controller that you can run 8.6 on it and use a PCI network card 8.6 supports with it. The QS'02 will "run" OS releases from before its OEM version (in theory anything supported by the dA or QS), but will be unstable and networking won't work correctly. QEMU/Sheepshaver isn't a bad idea. At the very least, I'd say to give it a go.
  6. Cory5412

    Regressing to an earlier OS?

    The 9600 isn't by any means a bad machine. The 8600 is the same, but short three slots and with a/v and the 7300 or an upgraded 7500/7600/8500 will do the same. There's also lots of clones from that generation. If there's speed concerns that made the firm upgrade to G3s back in the day, going back to 7/8/9-series machines might not be a good idea, even if they're perfectly fine for the "I need a high end machine to make me feel better about playing clarisworks, hypercard, and myst" crowd. To be honest, depending on the complexity of the program and files and how much speed is really needed, a 6400/6500 or 7200 might be fine, as well. (Hell: a 6200 should be fine.) If these are sideboards doing a single specific task and that task runs fine on almost anything, you've got a lot of latitude to kind of just buy whatever and probably have it work fine.
  7. Cory5412

    Solid State Drive for G3?

    One option for Beige G3s might be to look at the SCSI2SD v6. They are newer and much faster. The other thing is for either of these, you want to run the fastest possible SD card you can get. It makes a difference and it should hopefully resolve the hanging or slowness you're having. If you're looking at SanDisk, you want at least an Extreme. They aren't much more and we've seen them making meaningful differences, along with making sure the scsi2sd v6 (in particular) formware is up to date. On the storage issues front, are you looking at "not enough storage space" or something else? I almost wonder if getting an AppleShare server of some sort is really a better plan than loading all of your desktops with really big SD cards. The unfortunate thing is that if you need lots of storage space, OS9-based server solutions start to be unfeasible rather quickly, because Mac OS 9 has a maximum volume limit of 2TB.
  8. Cory5412

    Regressing to an earlier OS?

    9600s are fine. Unless you are using lots of PCI cards, any of the other machines from that era is also more or less fine. In my experience, PowerMac G4 "Yikes" (PCI Graphics) and PowerMac G3 Blue-and-white Rev2 are stable with 9.2.2 once you find some RAM that works well with them and if you're not using too many or too wild cards. Any blue-and-white with just one SATA card should be fine, for example, and let you avoid the controller issue. To add about the disk controller issue, LEM and Wikipedia both report that it happens both with two hard disks and with hard disks meaningfully newer and faster than what the original blue-and-white G3 shipped with. If you have such a disk and it works fine, it's good to go, but if you need to upgrade it, consider just doing so via an expansion card. Notably, the YIkes! G4 is mostly the same computer as the powermac G3, just, with a G4 processor installed instead of a G3. I have a blue G3 case with a 450MHz G3 processor and a Yikes motherboard and it performs great for me, but I'm not putting lots of different cards in it. Mine has had its fair share of foibles, but to be honest, I don't think I've owned a single Mac without some kind of weird foible or behavior so it doesn't strike me as weird beyond what Apple has ever done. Most 9600s will be approximately as fast as most of the 7000 series machines. To be honest, 9600s are highly sought after by people who are in essence looking to build a bad replica of a later Power Mac G4 system, but with a beige case, so I wouldn't waste time and money buying one if something else will do what you need fine. There are G3 upgrades available for the 7/8/9 series, and the 8600 is available in a version with the same go-fast 604ev/mach5 stripes the 9600 had. (Though, if you intend to G3-upgrade, I recommend against bothering to find a Mach5 /250, /300, or /350 version of the 8600 or 9600, both because from a collection and interstingness standpoint I think those should be run as-original, and because the extra CPU speed up front doesn't help a lot with the upgrades.) You are absolutely right though, a G3 totally smokes even an 8600/300, in terms of compute performance. How much that matters will depend a lot on the particular applications and workflow a machine is using.
  9. Cory5412

    Bernoulli Box on-board termination?

    I need to look at mine. I've been using mine with a terminator attached and now I wonder if I need to either turn off its built-in terminator or take that terminator off to get it to play a little more nicely. Perhaps it's time to pull out my 840av and install 7.1 or 7.6.1 and the iomega tools that mention bernoulli and try it out again.
  10. Cory5412

    Regressing to an earlier OS?

    Any blue-and-white will 8.6 and also run 9.2.2 perfectly. In my experience there's no performance difference between 9.0 and 9.2.2. There are a couple reliability and performance fixes going from 9.1 and 9.2.2 to 9.2.2, so it's nice to go all the way when you can. (G3s and G4s.) Some early G4s also shipped with 8.6 but I don't really recommend bothering with 8.6 on any G4. As far as I'm aware, any blue-and-white G3 should run 8.6 fine though. I forget: Does your application run on 9.x? If it does, your options for slightly newer hardware do open up a lot - because a lot more Power Mac G4s were built than blue-and-white G3s. Depending on your physical environment, some eMacs and iMac G4/G5 might also work.
  11. My IIgs keyboard works perfectly on my 6100, 8600, and beige g3. It works perfectly fine on all of those machines as well as all the 68ks I've used. Everything on the IIgs ADB keyboard is labeled the same as it is on later Apple ADB keyboards and all functionality works exactly as labeled.
  12. Yeah, it's absolutely not something I'd have the money to back right now, even though I have an 840 and a 7300 and a beige G3 desktop that I think getting replacement cases for would be great and fun. Thinking about different options and considering what all features the community needs and what can be eliminated to save cost is important. If a pre-fabbed mounting plate to run a Mac motherboard in a stock ATX case is possible, that might be the most economical option and we can just let people choose what kind of ATX case they want. Another example of something that might be avoidable complexity is the physical power switch. What's the need for people rebuilding these systems to run them without a keyboard? Are there literally any ADB keyboards that don't have power buttons that work on these systems? COuld we save time and money by excluding it or making it a part people can print or build on their own later if they want? And, there's also the fact that this is a really big group of systems, logically speaking. Is it going to be a problem for 7000-series owners to have a minitower on the other side of this conversion? Should two seprate enclosures be planned or something convertible in the vein of a Compaq DeskPro? These motherboards also mostly have a lot of potential that's more or less impossible to use with the original power supply and cases. Is it important to build something where making more full use of the dual onboard SCSI buses some of these have? Is there anyone interested in dropping a 7500 board into a case that'll run dual 5.25-inch full height drives? That kind of thing is of course not why anyone bought a 7000 series when they were new, but.
  13. So after looking at some photos, it appears that the Power Macintosh 7200/7300/7500/7600 share a motherboard form factor almost exactly with the 840-8500. The 8600 and 9600 have boards that are very similar, but which re-orient some of the connectors. (At least the 9600's does. I don't have the 8600 out front at the moment or else I'd pop it open and look.) I'd say that this is largely A Good Thing because it means efforts to build a replacement case can, at worst, target: Quadra 800 Quadra 840av Power Macintosh 7200 Power Macintosh 7300 Power Macintosh 7500 Power Macintosh 7600 Power Macintosh 8100 Power Macintosh 8200 Power Macintosh 8500 This is pretty much all of the systems that have plastics that are known for failing catastrophically and also being super inconvenient to take apart. Depending, this case might also be able to target. Each of these has some unique needs, and I don't know for sure whether they can all be included in one replacement chassis. Power Macintosh G3 (Beige) (Looks to be same shape and size as 7000/8000, but connectors are perpendicular to rather than parallel to the board.) Power Macintosh 8600 (I suspect the same is true of the 8600 as is true of the beige) Power Macintosh 9600 (really tall and also the connector orientation difference.) Power Macintosh 9500 (Haven't seen pictures yet, I suspect it shares connector orientation with the 7x00 and 800-8500, but is a much larger board.)
  14. To add, from a personal and functional perspective: I don't think this should be a re-implementation or re-production of an existing case, such as Radius' 81/ case or the PowerComputing Power 601 series case. At some point along the way I picked up the idea that it would likely be possible for a single replacement case to accomodate a large number of models, most of which have some kind of need for a replacement enclosure. Most of the members of the 7, 8, and 9 series PowerMacs, along with the Quadras 800 and 840 each need it in varying degrees, but for mostly the same reasons. Looking super briefly at some pictures on line of a Power Macintosh 8500 motherboard, I think that I may have been fairly wrong in my guesses about how these systems were built. This probably won't surprise anyone else, it's just been literally a decade since I've pulled open my 840 and I've never had an 8100 or 8500. If what I'm seeing is accurate, there is going to be a need for the 800-8500 (and possibly 9500) to have their own case and the 8600-9600 and the rest of the 7000 series to share their own case. If that's the case, my guess is that given the titling and urgency people show for getting rid of the 8-series case, this thread should continue with that goal in mind. Depending on the way the boards are built, it might be possible that one case could accommodate both types of boards and systems. I think it would be up to someone with a little more technical skill in conceiving of where everything can go and what would be needed to rebuild a system in such a new case to decide whether that's feasible and what would be needed to do it, given things like different scsi and floppy ribbon cable routing for, say, a 7300 or 8600 board vs an 8100 or 8500 board. Adding: Power Macintosh 7600 photos: https://computers.popcorn.cx/apple/powermac/7600/ Power Macintosh 8500: https://computers.popcorn.cx/apple/powermac/8500/ Power Macintosh 9600 (8600 is the same, but the board is shorter) https://computers.popcorn.cx/apple/powermac/9600/
  15. THIS IS THE FIRST POST OF THE NEW THREAD (everything before this comes from the ebay links thread.) This came up in the eBay finds thread. I'm going to merge those posts into those threads. I don't have the time or energy or skill to do this, but the proposal is, essentially: Replacement case for the Power Macintosh 8000 series and Quadra 800/840. Given the board commonalities, allowing the 7200+ and 9500/9600 to use this case as well increases its value at the expense, of course, of physical size. In this thread we should gather thoughts, and perhaps ultimately make a wiki page or a single reference post with an agreed-upon wishlist for the case. To the extent that this could be used as a starting point for someone to build such a case or kickstart one, as with the SE/30 case, there needs to be a good starting point.
×