Slashdot Mirror

I would get a set of mid- to endnineties Macs (pre G3). Why? Networking is dead sinple via appletalk, there is an absolute myriad on scientific software out there for Classic, and the hardware is dead cheap.

Sites like Lowendmac are teeming with examples how to put older Macs into good use in the classroom.

Don't end up getting tangled up in Linux, please.

Dirk

Oh yes, and if you really, really want to use a free *nix, use OpenBSD.

OS X still runs a lot of old 68k software very well under Classic -- surprising, even runs some stuff my old trusty 604 refused to. Unfortunately, a lot of old 68k stuff is hard to find anymore. My mother wishes they'd carbonize Gunshy one of these days, the Classic launch is a bit of a pain.

1) unless the macs are relatively recent, they can't run os x.

Well... considering that the original iMac is from 1998, and can run OS X with only a $17 ram upgrade, I'd say that's not too bad. It's nowhere near the cost of getting PC hardware up to running the latest version of MS Windows.

2) unless they already have a mac with os x, they won't want to learn it.

Unlike many other OS's, there's not a lot to learn. The apps pretty much run as-is, and the OS itself is simpler if anything. And this comes, among other things, from first-hand experience with upgrading grandparents from OS 9.

plus, it will require upgrading/changing the servers, etc. PITA.

Have you actually looked into this? Jaguar has support for "old-school" services, plus all the newer ones like nice Windows networking. Rendezvous simplifies things, and Jaguar includes other nic such as USB printer sharing.

I hate to break it to you, but OS X is so slow on the G3 that you might as well not bother.

Not at all. Time to drop your FUD. I just recently aquired a used 400 Mhz G3 PowerBook with 256MB RAM, and things are running on it quite well. iTunes, iCal, Mozilla, AOL, etc all at once. I've even been doing a lot of remote work with OroborOSX running apps from my Linux box remotely, including Mozilla and full-bore developer stuff.

(I'm quite interested in looking into Rendezvous also, given that it's a Zeroconf implementation.)

No, he's correct. The Mac you're referring to was known as a Mac 128K (it had 128K of RAM). The Mac Classic was introduced in October 1990. Although the only difference between the two (besides six years) was the Classic's ADB keyboard ports, 1MB of RAM, hard drive, and $1000; the CPU was the same 8Mhz 68000.

No, he's correct. The Mac you're referring to was known as a Mac 128K (it had 128K of RAM). The Mac Classic was introduced in October 1990. Although the only difference between the two (besides six years) was the Classic's ADB keyboard ports, 1MB of RAM, hard drive, and $1000; the CPU was the same 8Mhz 68000.

He was talking about the Mac Classic. Some seem to think that the original Mac was the Mac Classic, but it wasn't. The original Mac, often called the 128k Mac came out in 1984, yes. But the Mac Classic was a "revival" of sorts and came out in October 1990. The original poster may have actually been thinking of the 128k Mac, which did come out in 1984.

He was talking about the Mac Classic. Some seem to think that the original Mac was the Mac Classic, but it wasn't. The original Mac, often called the 128k Mac came out in 1984, yes. But the Mac Classic was a "revival" of sorts and came out in October 1990. The original poster may have actually been thinking of the 128k Mac, which did come out in 1984.

Did you mean Power Mac? Apple stopped selling Quadras in 1995.

So, with apologies to Sergeant Hulka, "Uh, son... there ain't no Quadras no more." :-)

Example?

Not-quite-Unix

BeOS had a powerful command line and Unix-like underpinnings that could compile and run POSIX compliant software. Every Unix-like operating system has failed in the marketplace except Linux (which is free, and for all intents and purposes it is Unix). The Amiga Operating System was developed with similar goals in mind, and that particular operating system withered and died as well. Being able to compile POSIX compliant software is not a marketable advantage (even Windows NT can do it).

It's an interesting article, and I think it sums up why BeOS really failed. I truely liked BeOS, but not for my main desktop.

Apple has tried this several times, and Compaq has as well (tellingly, Compaq doesn't off this product / capability any more).

I'm not sure folks - and by that I mean the mass market, not geeks - are ready for this. I understand the HP product can record, unlike the MacTV (I own one, btw, as well as one of their 5500's which has a TV tuner card) or the Compaq machine but it seems like most people park their PC in one room and the TV in the other.

PC / TV convergence? Well, your toaster has been next to your refrigerator for 50+ years, and they haven't converged yet. I don't see a mass market for this now, and there clearly hasn't been in the past.

Nice box though.

>You're such an idiot. apple is the only profitable computer company.

That's a gas.

>Yes, actually, the iBook beats your celeron and costs less.

It isn't a celeron (I screwed up -- it is actually a mobile PIII). Either way, though... let's see those iBooks, and pretend my laptop only has a celeron for fairness...

Here's a link that shows the price at $1,300 for the iBook, and its features, at about the time I purchased my laptop. Now, $1,300 would be the price you need to be at to be correct, if I were talking US$, but I'm talking $CDN. But $2000 CDN is still somewhat less than what I paid.

So, I'm assuming this is what you are talking about.

What it lacks:

- Memory (a paltry 128 MB is only 50% of the memory standard in my laptop)
- Video (my latop has an ATI Radeon, so I can do 3D well enough to most all play games released at the time of the laptop)
- Space (10 GB is 33% of what my laptop can store).
- Video (1024x768? Give me a break. Not even close to 1400x1050)
- Media Drive (beats me what's standard for $1,300 -- but I bet it isn't the cream of the crop CD-RW/DVD drive)
- Floppy Drive (none? Even as an option for the media bay? Now that's stupid)
- Expandability (ZERO PC-Card slots? What is this, 1990?)
- Software (I don't see a big list of software there, so I think I would be safe to assume it doesn't come with much other than the OS)

Extra features:

- Less weight (4.9 lbs is a little bit nicer than 5.2, but nothing to write home about).

Tell me again why this unit compares with mine? I just don't see it.

Apple computers are a rip-off, and will continue to be as long as Apple has no competition in their market sector.

>Like I said, you're a bigot, you don't care about the facts, you're just going to rant and rave.

Like I said, you're a zealot, you don't care about the facts, you're just going to rant and rave.

>You probably think Microsoft bougth a big chunk of apple with that "investment" of $150Million...

Since we're putting words into each other's mouths, you probably think that laptop could do everything mine could, and that the list price is way off.

>I understand why slashdot readers are linux fans, but do they have to be so stupid?

I understand why you are a Mac Zealot, but why do you have to ignore the facts when I present them to clearly?

>Where are the programmer,s the people who can recompile their kernel?

I recompile my own kernels. You're talking to a slack user since well before the 3.0 series.

>The people with basic computer architecture knowledge?

I could run circles around you on computer architecture. Just ask.

>Buying a machine with a celeron is like buying a PowerPC 603-- EG: A Mac laptop of about 1996 vintage would beat your celeron in a laptop.

Tis true (not all of it though). My mistake. I meant to say PIII. Here's my actual unit, for your reference (although mine only had 256 MB RAM).

>PC laptops (non-transmeta anyway) are particularly hobbled due to the x86 really high power draw.

HUH? I get 3 1/2 hours from my battery, and my laptop is virtually the identical weight to that iBook, but carries far more features.

You're WAY in left field now. x86 technology has used the same technology as Mac (RISC) since, oh, 1995 or so. Get into this millenium, will you?

>You talk about truth and zeolotry? Get a fucking education first, man.

Got a better one than you it appears.

>When you understand the words I'm using, then you can talk about truth

When you aren't blinded by zealotry, maybe I'll be better able to understand you.

>Why is it people think they can just make up whatever crap they want about apple and people will believe it?

I didn't author any of those links. Sorry you seem to think the entire world is against you (including PBS).

>The G4 Cube had no quality problems that I've ever heard of

Please search the web a little, and/or read more magazines, or talk to more people. Your choice.

I'll provide you with some G4 Cube problem links:

One
Two
Three - Admittance from Steve Jobs himself that G4 Cubes don't have the quality users expect from Apple
Four
Five

And so on. It doesn't matter if they were cracks or mold lines -- either way they show a lack of quality assurance. If this were my car and Apple said "Oh, those ripples on the bodywork are just caused by the type of paint we used" I'd still say it stinks.

>ARe you really so stupid you believe what you're shovelling?

Are you so blinded by your mac fanatacism that you can't admit Apple could have made mistakes in its engineering of the G4 Cube?

>You cant even remember the show, and what steve said was "Mcirosoft, just doesn't have a sense of style"

You can't remember the part where he ignores Woz, his partner, for the company. A total lack of sympathy is an emotional problem, IMHO.

Not to mention the Newton thing -- what's your excuse for that? Or did you skip over it because you have no answer and are again blinded by Mac zealotry?

And it transfers with USB 2.0, which is both faster than the iPod's FireWire, and is also more commonly available on the PC platform.

Neither are particularly common, except on the newest machines. FWIW, I had a FireWire hard drive and a FireWire webcam before I had anything USB...and the newest Mac I own (the only Mac I own, actually) is a Quadra 610, so that can't be the reason. As for the assertion that USB 2.0 is faster than FireWire, do you have any proof? On paper, USB 2.0 is supposed to be faster. Given the way USB works (CPU controls everything) vs. the way FireWire works (more intelligence in the controller), though, I doubt that USB 2.0 ever comes close to its stated maximum transfer speed.

The also have lots of the exact same informaiton your are rattling off, along with lots of Mac specs, etc.

Then again, I imagine that nearly everybody reading this thread already knows about them, as well as most of the sites you mentioned.

is the best time to buy a Mac Plus. They originally sold for $2600, and you can get them for $10 or less now. That's 99.61538% off! show me a better deal than that!

wrong.

That was the 5300, the first PowerPC PB.

..that's what it's been called here on Lowendmac by some bloke.

Remember folks, it *does* run on older hardware, and very nicely I might add. I'm on a Umax S-900, a machine that first hit the market six years ago this month. I've got a bunch RAM in it, a big, fast SCSI drive, a dual head Radeon, and a 400mhz G3. Counting the initial purchase price of the machine, I'm still under $500 total.

And flame away, but this thing's as smooth and responsive (in most ways, but not all) as Win98SE on my P3/733 at work.

That logo looks familiar, doesn't it?

I like the old LC, and the Centris 610-style cases....

PC cases were SO ugly back then. Macs are just -cool-, from the keyboard mouse, to the case.

Too bad they don't make them like that any more. Maybe when the 90's are considered 'retro' they'll do it.

No, you haven't.

G4/450 introduced 8/31/1999

a Steve "Borg" Jobs icon.

Excuse me, but I believe that PPCLinux and other PPC Linux distributions will ONLY RUN ON A PPC!!!!

Is that clear? Trying to get an OS designed for the PPC architecture to run on an 860xx CPU is just ingnorance on your part. That's like trying to get OS 9 to run on x86 architecture!

The only reason nubus is still relevant for the 601 PPC is because it was supported by the first year's production units. All the later CPU's supported PCI. It was a pretty big deal at the time cause there were lots of video and audio cards that only came as nubus.

So to summarize. To my knowledge there is no Linux for 860xx motorola CPU's and only a certain selection of PPC 601s, the first generation, required nubus support.

"The 7200 was the entry level second-generation Power Mac, the first group of Apple computers to use the PCI bus." -- courtesy of www.lowendmac.com

Dirk

but not to the HURD. Remember, OSX is supposed to send other Unix Boxes to /dev/null. Apple is still in the process of trying to boot-strap themselves into another period of growth. OSX is as much a commercial endevor as anything SUN (but not M$) is involved in. Maybe if they start making more money than Microsoft, they will start to help others like GNU out.

There are rumours that Apple's next digital device will, in fact, be some sort of home theatre device:

http://www.macosrumors.com

You can choose to believe what you want (and these rumours sites are notoriously unreliable), but it has been pretty well documented that Apple is working on something along these lines.

This would not be the company's first foray into the market. Apple history buffs out there will remember the ill-fated MacTV:
http://www.lowendmac.com/500/mactv.shtml

It would also be nice to copy the way every app is self-contained within its own directory. Uninstall app? Simply delete directory - no dependency hell.

Yeah, it would sure be nice if someone had thought of that before - if they'd had that kind of ingenuity back in 1984, who knows what the world would be like now! We might even have a choice of operating systems with these features!

And I hate to disappoint you, but cooperative multitasking, while providing 'blazing speeds' when you're only doing one thing at once, it's right up there with unprotected memory as soon as you want to do more than one thing at once (like burn a CD and browse the web), and most people don't want to buy a separate computer just for CD burning.

--Dan

What is your source for this information? Here's a few folks who disagree with you:

• one of Apple's Java developers:"...Quartz is not (yet) hardware accelerated
• another task that is not currently off-loaded to the video card's GPU
• Apple inexplicably still isn't doing any hardware acceleration of the "Quartz" graphics engine
• UI slowness comes from no Quartz acceleration on current video cards
• haven't enabled hardware acceleration for some of the 2D acceleration capabilities

Actually... both the G3 All-in-one and original G3 were both fully supported in OS X by Apple, while the 7500-9600 series where able to use X thanks to XPostFacto

Actually... both the G3 All-in-one and original G3 were both fully supported in OS X by Apple, while the 7500-9600 series where able to use X thanks to XPostFacto

Or if you want to see the true low-end hardcore:
http://www.lowendmac.com/

I have nothing but admiration for people who keep old machines alive, particularly when they spread their technological wealth around. Which reminds me: I will be decommissioning one of my machines soon. It was built in 1997 and was a real science experiment, hence the name it's held on my network, "Dexter." In fact, I brought the case cover to a comic convention and Genndy Tartakovsky drew his mad scientist character on it and autographed it for good measure.

Dexter has been useful for all these years, and it's only because I have some new stuff coming in that I have to reluctantly decommission it. I'm keeping an eye out for a deserving new home for the thing. The scanner is going out the door too...it's an UMAX 600P and it is not supported in any OS beyond 98SE. SANE doesn't support it and UMAX doesn't make a 2K or XP driver for it either. It also barfs if connected to a computer with a processor that runs at or above 300MHz. Timing prob. Still works like a champ, too.

This machine will be going to the Pacoima Community Center or somewhere else deserving.

Sure, it's possible on machines even older than the '040.

True, and it is not a very good design at that. Optical drives can not run at full speed, and it is not the greatest layout for heat concerns.

All in all, I agree, It's been done before. Moreover, it been done -better- before. Heck remember this litle flop The 20th Anniversary Mac?

The Poway, Calif.-based PC maker got into the all-in-one business with its original Profile computer in June 1999 on the coattails of the first iMac. Gateway, however, did beat Apple to the punch with the first all-in-one computer to feature a flat panel.

The bright idea to take the LC motherboard design and graft a PPC 603e onto it was one of the main reasons why Apple was sucking so badly in '96 and '97. The 52xx, 62xx and 63xx Performas had a laundry list of things wrong with them because of this ill-conceived design decision. It would be like stuffing a Pentium II onto a 486 motherboard and expecting it to work.

Gil Amelio was on the road to fixing Apple, but he didn't have enough time to do it. Steve Jobs gets all the credit but Apple was on the uptick (modestly, true, but still on the rise) even before he got there. Jobs deserves a great deal of the credit...the iMac was Jobs' baby, so was the G3 Yosemite and the Cube.

The crappy Performas did more to push people away from Apple and towards Windoze than anything else. It certainly turned a lot of the educational market away from Apple. Remember, the 52xx all-in-one series were one of the crappy Macs and that was what the educational (K-12 in particular) market was buying. They got stung real bad by those stinkbombs and were then very receptive when Dell came calling.

Here's the full story of these Road Apples:
http://www.lowendmac.com/tech/x200.shtml

Interface. Aqua...Luna...shades of blue...rounded corners...large icons...duck...

http://www.lowendmac.com/itc/010216.html
http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,41822, 00.html

< tofuhead >

I wish that I could go to the store, buy the components, and put one together myself, just like
I can with a PC. I know I can't as a result of
Apple owning much of the hardware.

I read this article and I agree with the author. It'd be nice if apple sold barebones G4s. That would make owning a Macintosh cheaper and more fun since you could easily customize by yourself.

My home network server is an SE/30. Built in 1993. Running software written in 1995. I'm still using a 7500 as my primary computer, purchased in 1996, with FireWire and USB and all manner of peripherals. I've got a Centris running 8.1 attached to my Cable router checking my e-mail and keeping track of my Slashdot headlines 24/7. This hardware and software is not obsolete in my "middle-America" home.

Apple's Tech Support is generally very good. Their computers last a long time (which has caused problems for them in the long run - no real forced upgrades), work consistently, and are very easy to use. Supporting them is cake. Look at any cross-platform manual: reams of paper for every little change in every version of Windows, three pages for Mac OS.

What this tells me is that what middle-America wants is cheap crap. C'mon, people, you get what you pay for. My inital investment in these computers was high, but over the course of 5 years . . . . Most of this "obsolete" hardware can be picked up for a song and used as I have used them for well under $500. Of course, I also buy used cars, and try to keep to brands with a proven standard of reliability. This is exactly why so many people are so deep in debt: unrealistic, myopic desires for the bigger, better deal (think SUV).

You will pay the price for your lack of vision.

Dude... you must be younger than me :)

The Mac Classic was quite a few years from the first all-in-one that Apple shipped (seven, to be exact)... the first was the Apple Lisa (shipped June 1983), and then released several months later, the Macintosh (January of 1984, note, no model designation). After they released the first revision, the Mac 512k, they started calling the first one the Macintosh 128k (the amount of memory it had :) ).

Following that, they released the 512ke, the Macintosh Plus (the first with external SCSI, and the one I owned), the Macintosh SE (the first Mac with internal expansion slots and an internal hard drive), then the SE/30 (the first to use the 68030 processor) and then in October of 1990, they released the Classic.

More info for the terminally curious is available at Lowendmac.com

As to the original issue, I now see what the question was. There would be a number of ways to handle this problem. Check out this LowEndMac article for a number of ways to connect LocalTalk and Ethernet physically. As far as converting MacIP to TCP/IP, IPNetRouter handles this itself.

The stats from LowEndMac claiming a higher %age of Linux users is probably bias, since it's a techy web site about low end Macs, probably the best techy thing to do with a low end Mac is to install Linux on it. (They even have a special Linux page.)

The stats from WebSideStory is based on the stats from 125000 sites, and so is arguably more realistic.

The stats from LowEndMac claiming a higher %age of Linux users is probably bias, since it's a techy web site about low end Macs, probably the best techy thing to do with a low end Mac is to install Linux on it. (They even have a special Linux page.)

The stats from WebSideStory is based on the stats from 125000 sites, and so is arguably more realistic.

Okay, it was 250Mhz and May 1997 :)

But it was a 603e :-P

anywho, here... pictures + facts about the twentieth anniversary mac

It evidently needs to be said again. The G4 is the G3 with Altivec and SMP. They're the same chip otherwise.

Er, no, that did not need to be said again. It didn't even need to be said in the first place, because it is completely false.

The G4 is not, in any way, shape or form, just a G3 with an AltiVec unit bolted on the side. Completely different math unit, radically different instruction pipeline, bigger caches, additional registers, SMP support (the G3 cannot be used in SMP systems), wider memory bus, more execution units... you name it, it changed -- even moreso in the 7450 and 7410 than in the 7400.

Please do someresearch before spouting "facts" liek this.

Low End Mac has an article.

In case it is /.'ed

You've read the rumors. They've been around for a year or two. Apple will be replacing the iMac's big, heavy CRT with a flat panel display.

Sorry, it's not going to happen.

The iMac is Apple's lowest cost, entry level computer. Flat panel displays cost a heck of a lot more than CRTs. Sure, there's some saving from shipping a smaller lighter box, some from not having to dish out at much power to drive the display, and some from not having to worry about aligning the display and not damaging it in shipping, but between them they don't outweigh the simple fact that the iMac with a CRT may always cost less than an iMac with a flat panel display.

Besides, Apple already has a flat panel iMac -- it's called the iBook. For not too much more money than you'd pay for an iMac, you get a 1024x768 flat panel display, a small footprint, a light package, portability, and hours upon hours of battery life.

What would Apple gain from selling a flat panel iMac instead of an iBook? Nothing. The iBook is the more flexible computer.

What would users gain from a flat panel iMac instead of an iBook? A small footprint desktop computer more portable than the original Macintosh and an easier-on-the-eyes display.

What would Apple lose from selling a flat panel iMac? iBook sales. Power Mac G4 + flat panel display sales. Maybe even some PowerBook sales.

What would users lose with a flat panel iMac compared with an iBook? Battery power, a more fully integrated design (keyboard and trackpad built in, not plugged in), and high portability.

It Won't Be an iMac
For the near future, Apple will keep the CRT-based iMac going, hopefully reducing its price a bit more every six months or so. But Apple recognizes that the fastest growing segment of the personal computer market it portables. I'm one of many users who migrated from a desktop Mac to a PowerBook or iBook over the last year or so. Over time, that will become a more common pattern. When there's a small difference in price between a desktop and a display compared to a laptop, the laptop will generally be the logical choice.

Not to say that Apple won't try to fill the Cube's empty niche an release a worthy successor to the 20th Anniversary Mac. I half expect to see a new flat panel Macintosh at Macworld Expo in January, probably built around the same 15" flat panel display Apple now sells separately. It will be less costly than a Power Mac G4 and Apple's 15" display, but it will be more expensive than the top-end iMac.

As a fan of the old compact Macs and someone who adores the Color Classic's design (if not its performance), I'd love to see Apple do one of two things:

Release 12", 15", and 17" flat panel Macs using the iBook's display on the low end, the 15" display or TiBook display in the middle, and a 1280x1024 display at the top end.
Create a docking system that allows a computer module to couple with a 12", 15", 17", or even 22" display, essentially turning the duo into one computer.
Whether Apple will do different sizes, I don't know. Whether they will have a flat panel Mac to show in January, I don't know.

But you can count on one thing -- they won't call it an iMac.

So, with the price of LCD panels dropping, it's the obvious next step... but it just isn't a breakthrough (except getting it done at a price suitable for iMac).

WEll they wouldn't try to "crush" that site. MacFixIt is one of the largest and most-respected Mac sites on the Internet. It's also probably saved Apple tens of thousands of dollars in support costs due ot the help posted on that site everyday.

MacFixIt first was an web-update site for Ted Landau's Sad Macs, Bombs, and Other Disasters book. Since then, it has grown to be quite popular and well-known--#3 out of 56 sites on a recent survey.

This isn't Apple sending a harsh letter to some corporation in Asia ripping off its iMac or a letter seeking to shut down someone's domain that infringes on copyrights--it's Apple's lawyers politely, but firmly, explaining their problem with the update (the legalese is what makes it seem a bit...shall we say...stern?) to a website that is well known both inside and outside of Apple.

As usual, this HP P4 box is just a ripoff.

The Twentieth Anniversary Mac was introduced in 1997 and Apple built 12000 of them. It contained a Base unit with power, drives and subwoofer. Just cable one from the base unit to the LCD display which contained a cdrom and the connectors... or check the picture to see it yourself..