Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


About Cory5412

  • Rank
    Daring Pioneer of the Future

Contact Methods

  • AIM
  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Location
    Arizona, USA

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. One more thought: OmniWeb might still has a version that will run on 10.4, but if I remember correctly, its SSL certificates and rendering engine are tied to the host OS version, so it won't really be any better than Safari, except for any potential quality of life improvements you like, pertaining to things like side-tabs, page preview, multiple rows of bookmarks, etc.
  2. The built-in version of Safari might work, but probably only on basic mode, presuming it accepts Google's SSL certificates at this point. After that, really the only viable game in town is tenfourfox. I don't know what performance of tenfourfox will be like on a G4.
  3. Cory5412

    Cheap IDE on scsi bus solution?

    Video is the only use case I can think of where it would be particularly compelling to go with a faster IDE drive over a SCSI2SD. That said, if you're looking into 68/80/SCA adapters anyway, and spending money on that, and you don't need or want the zero-seek advantages of a SCSI2SD, then, it'll probably cost less to just use one of those newer/faster SCSI disks rather than even bothering to find an IDE adapter. But, again, this discussion is largely only relevant to the slim group of Macs fast enough to be doing work that benefits from higher sequential write performance and not have a PCI slot or reasonable onboard IDE controller. Basically: the X100 power Macs and perhaps the IIfx/950/800/840 depending on what stuff you've got put into them. And, as Gorgonops says, only if you're actually doing that work. I've got the SCSI2SD in my 8600 because I happened to have the SCSI2SD laying around, but truthfully if I was capturing video with my 8600, I'd pop in a SATA or IDE card, not bother with an adapter to one of its onboard SCSI buses. EDIT: yeah, I just looked, if you're buying cabling for under $20, another $20 and you can get a reasonably good hard disk for day-to-day stuff, a couple more dollars and you can get disks that were probably part of late SCSI era workstations and servers. That's admittedly cheaper than a SCSI2SD. It'll be faster than what was stock. I think it'll fall down to either a preference to save a few bucks now versus having to deal with that supply of disks dwindling in the future, and aesthetic issues like whether or not you care in particular about "feeling" things such as hard disk sound.
  4. Cory5412

    Couldn't help myself...

    Mac OS X is criminally bad at handling itself without an SSD. I put a 2TB hard disk in my Mac mini, because I had a need to have that much space and didn't want to use or buy another external, and it's making the particular task I wanted to do (torrenting) much worse than it would be, even if I was just torrenting to a spinning disk and booting to an SSD. One more issue that may or may not be hurting, the SATA Cables inside some of the MacBook Pros is known to bed. If the SSD itself doesn't help, replacing the SATA cable should.
  5. Cory5412

    Cheap IDE on scsi bus solution?

    That's totally wild. That's the card my friend used and their initial results for big writes were reasonably good, even on the old firmware, and got better with updated firmware and a better card. Anecdotally, my results with the LaCie formatter and leaving the properties for the card itself were way better than when I tried to make it pretend it was a "supported" Apple or Seagate drive and then use Apple's own formatter. That may or may not make a difference, I don't have time to test right now, but if you have some time, I'd consider picking up Silverlining 6.1 or an appropriate version and trying that. One more note: My friend was testing in, of course, DOS and Windows 98, as pictured. My 8600 is running 9.1 (and of course I'm using HFS+ as the file system, and I made a 31gb partition) and my Beige G3 was running 9.2.2. As of my testing the other day, the 8600 has a couple gigs on its disk so it's not like I was testing the very beginning or end of the card. I'll have to see about putting my v6 in the 840, 6100, or another older Mac and see what kinds of results I get. I don't happen to have any NuBus or PCI SCSI cards, so I can't speak to whether that's causing different results. Because, like... your are all half or less what mine are, and I am using one of the onboard buses in the 8600 (I forgot which one though, to be perfectly honest.) I'll see when I have time to back up all the data on the 8600 and move it away and put the device in a different Mac and do some more benchmarking. The 840av is likely to be the "best" comparison to both a IIfx+Jackhammer and a 475. For completeness, what OS were you running at the time? I can and likely will try the original 7.1, 7.6.1, and 8.1 on my 840av. I have a 6100/60, on that system I'll likely try 7.6.1 and 8.1, and perhaps 9.1.
  6. They're "ok" - it's slower than a real G4, on my i5-2400 it's probably comparable to a g3/300. In MB4, with 6100 scores set at 100: 8600/300: CPU: 411 FP: 750 G3/300: CPU: 999 FP: 748 QEMU i5-2400 CPU: 1053 FP: 325 I also can't get sound to work, but I'm less worried about that. I was looking at it as a possible supplement to vtools and testing location, plus admin and monitoring from work where I can't very reasonably keep an os9/ppc mac. I also thought about building a set-up qemu disk image for vtools access. The main thing that has me annoyed is mouse access is so weird. Plus I can't get command or modifier keys to work, so it's very cumbersome to use compared to the way I'd use a real Mac, and I'm not even really a Finder power user by any means.
  7. In any specific case, if someone has such a disc that works, yay! For my part, the reason I'm recommending the eMac CD specifically is because if you are going to go on ebay and pay money for a 20-year-old CD, it may as well be the best possible version of that CD, and the eMac 2003 is that one. Similarly, if you're going to go through the trouble of dealing with all the shenanigans involving burning a bootable Mac OS 9 CD (and, I have confirmed the one on MG is the correct disc, which is annoying because they are labeled with both 691- numbers and 693- numbers, which relates to something I was discussing with @defor at some point) but I haven't gotten it to burn-and-boot yet. I'll get out a CD-RW and have at it at some point this coming week but my weekend time and energy is rapidly drawing to a close.
  8. Cory5412

    Cheap IDE on scsi bus solution?

    So I ran MacBench full disk suite on my 8600 while booted to this card. It's actually doing better in my 8600 than it did in my Beige. I think I might still have something mis-configured, however, because they're lower than what my friend's PC98 returns. Sequential Read: (kilobytes/sec) 512: 164.60 1K: 288.36 32K: 4357.78 64K: 5588.96 128K: 6435.26 1024K: 7612.83 Random Read: 512: 147.98 1K: 245.02 32K: 4174.27 64K: 5443.16 128K: 6468.97 1024K: 7641.26 Sequential Write: 512: 1663.76 1K: 1957.88 32K: 1943.11 64K: 3197.33 128K: 3880.06 1024K: 4810.90 Random Write: 512: 131.72 1K: 255.96 32K: 2220.82 64K: 2952.06 128K: 3174.06 1024K: 3764.17 Here are my friend's PC98 results: in DOS: in Windows: Notably, neither of us have the drop-off you experienced. It's worth noting, Both my friend and I are running the latest available firmware and we both bought relatively high end SD cards. I'm using a Samsung Evo and my friend was using a Sandisk of at least mid-grade variety. I'll post an update if they let me know which specific card it was. EDIT: Friend's machine uses a SCSI card with an LSI53C875 chip. It's contemporary to Adaptec 2940/3940. EDIT 2: Friend is using 16GB Sandisk Ultra. (Mine is a 32gb card.) There are higher end cards, I'll update this thread if Friend clones the system or does some benching with a higher end card and sends me the result. EDIT 3: Friend put in a 32GB Sandisk Extreme. Note, his has been on firmware 6.1.3 (mine is on 6.2.1). This is with a fresh card, after imaging the entire setup over and restoring the configuration. In DOS: In Windows: Note the reasonably high write speed for a 50MB file in both situations. Exchanging the Sandisk "Ultra" card for a Sandisk "Extreme" helped take that from around 3000 kilobytes per second to around 3700 kilobytes per second. EDIT 4: Friend updated the SCSI2SD v6 firmware in PC98 to 6.2.1 and then re-ran the tests, still on the Sandisk "Extreme" card. DOS: Windows: Windows, but with 200MB write test (just to make sure the new write speed is consistent.) So, that's a meaningful boost! I don't know what data rates are needed for analog video capture setups, but suffice it to say this will be Fine(TM) for almost any other need, especially on any Mac where you have 10MB/sec SCSI but you don't have the ability to or room for something like a SATA or IDE card, as you might do in a PCI mac. EDIT 5: So my friend went back and put the old "ultra" card in with the updated firmware and got these results, this time I'm only going to post the Windows result because the most relevant number is the write speed. Windows: That's a fair improvement with a firmware update, but it's important to note that the higher grade "extreme" card does much better. Friend tested 50, 100, and 200MB writes and they're reasonably consistent. The larger writes are slightly faster, overall, but still slower than the Extreme card was. Notably, doing a single full-effort 200 megabyte file write is kind of a niche task on a vintage Mac. The number flashed on the "ultra" card is 80MB/sec and the number on the "Extreme" is 100MB/sec and we're not getting anywhere near either of these numbers, but depending on your workload, moving from 4 to 6 megabytes per second of sustained write speed. If you're going to spend a hundred bucks on a SCSI2SD v6 -- and they're very nice devices -- you should spend the extra couple bucks to get the best possible SD card. Right now, that accounts for a $5 difference. On Sandisk's own US web page, the 32GB "Ultra" card is $10 and the 32GB "extreme" card is $15. There is an "Extreme Plus" card for $30 as well, which might make further difference. Neither of us has the Extreme Plus card at the moment, for testing. @joethezombie I'm extremely interested in what card you have. I suspect that the issue is there, and not with your SCSI2SD in particular. @ChunkyPanda03 the SCSI2SD v6 is very good for day-to-day work. These bigger cards, with system 7.6.1 or newer, will be no problem at all. I formatted my card using LaCie's disk formatting utilities, "silverlining" version 6.1. which I had on a Zip disk while booted to my OS install media. This way, I didn't ahve to mess around with configuring the disk to prtend to be a "real" SCSI disk. I set my volume at 31GB. I'm using 9.1 so I formatted it HFS+/Extended, but HFS Standard in 7.6.1 would work fine too, even though it's slightly inefficient. If you use 8.1, that might be the best mix of "has HFS+" and "runs well on the oldest PowerMacs" If you don't have a Zip drive available, you should be able to do this using just a floppy diskette, the Zilverlining executable is a bit under 900kb. I'm not getting quite as much out of my SCSI2SD as my friend is, for a couple different reasons. Given all of this information, and at some point I intend to try this myself, for (again) everything short of video capture, a SCSI2SD v5 would probably also be fine in a PowerMac x100, even an 8100/110. Hopefully this helps!
  9. Unfortunately if that part is broken there probably isnt' much you can do. This is likely going to be an issue on, if not all B&W, then all of Apple's 4-handles/drawbridges cases from that whole era. (B&W G3 + every Power mac G4 model, minus the cube) If you pull the security latch at the back of the machine, you can use that to hold the machine closed. The security latch is meant for Kensington locks or a padlock, but you can just hang a cord through it or hang a padlock but dont' lock it to keep the door from falling open.
  10. I'm curious as to which machine this came with, because my TiBook@1000 did not come with a dedicated OS9 CD, instead on the "extras" DVD, along with faxstf and the screenshot program, there was an "install classic mode" package. I originally acquired the eMac CD I've been using just under 7 years ago in the previous attempt to get another TiBook running. The 867/1000 TiBooks are, to my experience (and: I had one close to brand new, it was a display model). The eMac 2003 installs directly onto that and everything works. The next most troublesome machine to put 9 on is the Quicksilver "2002" - which had some revised Ethernet hardware which required newer drivers. The eMac 2003 CD works on that machine as well. As far as I know, a TiBook install CD wouldn't have worked on that machine, but I don't have such a disc on hand. EDIT: if the CD you have is truly from a TiBook 867/1000, which was introduced in November 2002, it will probably run the QS'02's ethernet fine. It might even run the 2002 variant of the MDD. The QS'02 was introduced January 2002. I would love to see it tested whether the MDD'02 and "XPress Edition" MDD'03 (OS9/2002 reissue) will run with the eMac'03 CD. If anyone has one of those machines and the wherewithal to give it a go, please try and report back!
  11. Cory5412

    Cheap IDE on scsi bus solution?

    Inertial sells them, they are probably out of stock right now. Query: What SD card are you using in your V6? Even though they "can't make use of the speed" it's better to get the fastest card you can. I'm using a Samsung Evo something-or-other in mine. I need to check with my friend who has one in a PC98 because he's gotten relatively good performance out of it, much better than mine. The other thing I need to do, he and I did a little experiment and bought two different SD cards for my v6 and v5, I need to try the Sandisk card at some point. The one he recommended I use is a Sandisk Extreme card with A1 rating, which states "Speed up to 100MB/sec, 667X" Of course, SCSI2SD won't actually go that fast, but the faster cards can clear their caches better, if I remember correctly. EDIT: I've noted somewhere that I was disappointed with the throughput of the scsi2sd, I believe mine is misconfigured, not faulty, but it's still 1) better than no storage at all 2) reasonably sprightly even on 604ev/300 and g3/300 running OS 9+. It's just, not suitable for video capture, at least how I have mine configured now. I'm running the MacBench 4 disk bench on it to get some more idea, numerically, what mine is currently performing like.
  12. By "pressed" what I mean is, original apple-logo disc, not a CD-r made from an ISO image downloaded off the Internet. There are two senses of legit Apple CDs. One is that a CD can be an actual verifiable copy of a real CD that Apple actually made (*the eMac CD, as compared with some of the other "universal" 9.2.2 installers) or one can be an actual pressed retail or OEM CD. The latter type would, of course, generally meet both criteria, because nobody's gonna get a pressed run of an unofficial CD made. Though, hypothetically, that's possible, it's just, difficult.
  13. By "Apple branded" - do you mean pressed? if so, I still recommend finding the eMac 2003 CD. If by "Apple Branded" you mean that Apple officially made it, then, the eMac 2003 CD also fits that bill. Unfortunately, in about five minutes of casually searching, I can't find an eMac 2003 CD on eBay, but if you're looking, that's the one I would get.
  14. This SATA card is not compatible with Mac OS 9. To my knowledge, no 3114-based cards are. The auction said right on it that Mac OS 9 is not supported.
  15. Cory5412

    Cheap IDE on scsi bus solution?

    I work IT help desk, so I am writing technical >40h/week. I (intermittently, admittedly) have had a tech-focused personal blog for the past ~15 years. The main purpose of The Book is to be a checklist and to explain the system for anyone interested in running one themselves. I could get away with less, but it seemed like it would be neat to do. I actually wish I spent more time on fiction writing (and reading) than I do. Given that much of my writing here ends up being factual/technical style writing, (perhaps not to an explicit styleguide, but) I spend a couple magnitudes more time doing nonfiction than fiction. EDIT: Generic note, ASIP6 is fun but it's wildly overkill for most needs. I need to write or find-and-endorse some good documentation on different file sharing technologies. The configuration VTools is in is just where I landed when I looked at a variety of potential solutions and selected for: fun for me authenticity potentially easy to hand off to another person to run it reasonable to expand capacity security The next best option was gonna be the terminating version of Windows SBS 2003-2005, or Windows Server 2003R2 with Sharepoint and Exchange. I also briefly considered Mac OS X Server, but elected to go the way I did for ease and security.