For this I wouldn't suggest linux. Unless you like the kernel or work with it directly, you can easily live with NetBSD. NetBSD's strongest support for some time existed for Mac 68k machines. The IIsi is a supported machine with a longer history of support than you'll find with any other unix. While linux is cool, I doubt you'd be able to get it to run well on such a machine, particularly by comparison to NetBSD.
Why not just immerse them in a tub of water - liquid cooled G4 cubes - ice cubes! Think about it...
Perhaps because water is electrically conductive. There's noting to stop you from using liquid cooling though, just try not to dump good hardware in a tub of water please... send it to me, it'll cost you the same [I'm not implying that you'd get it back].
one button two buttons optical moving parts meta-clicking wheels gaming USB logitech Microsoft HP...
Who cares? Everyone has their preference, Apple isn't dictating the way life should be in 2020 any more than Microsoft and other companies are. I think the real problem here is that a lot of people who arn't mac-users (and hence were not even considered in the design of this mouse) are a bit cross because they love the mouse secretly, but can't use it with its single button. That may be your loss and Apple's, but its no need to berate people who could conceive of coping in preference to the other features they like.
Personally however, I want a multi-buttoned mouse, lets say 3 for now... maybe 4... and so this mouse is not for me; its a shame really because it looks like tasty candy.
I really like my sun 3 butotn mouse thats all slim with a ball (came with the ultra 10) too bad I'm not going to get it to work on any other machine.
Which reminds me... I have a terminal keyboard from wise (I think) that has a really nice feel... it has a 4 cable phone connector (RJ45?); does anyone know how I could map this to a DIN for an old IBM compatable machine (486DX-33)?
Does this mean that the PPC specs are also going to be open to Be Inc.? Does this mean that Be can stop whining about Apple not giving them the specs? Or does it simply expose Be as just another Intel suck-up?
No I don't think so. CHRP is open, and has been for some time. Be has been supporting CHRP hardware, the problem has been that none of the clones (but the StarMax 4000) nor the new Apple designs were CHRP. Be had access to the clone style designs and supported them, but it does not have similar info for Apple's new designs.
Be wants to have a market; if that means sucking up to intel since apple user's ignore Be by-and-large, then so be it.
This could be the smartest business decision ever made in the history of IBM.
If they can "force" manufactures to build the somewhat updated CHRP design that no-one's built before, and if they can "force" end-users to buy the things, then you're right. It helps to have a CHRP design using the latest CPU, but the trick remains marketing it.
Of course, if it costs half of what a CHRP board cost a friend ($800 m'thinks) I'll probably get it, even though it's not strictly a dollar.
Why... it could run BeOS DR4.0 [probably 4.5 too], or MacOS 8.5... with the ROM from my PMAC8500. There is an Apple ROM Slot in this design isn't there? There probably isn't; I'll live. Most importantly it could run Linux/PPC. Well.
If it had a ZIF socket (or 4) and was G4 ready, that'd be extra jolly nice of the people.
Q: Does anyone here dislike Intel at least half as much as they dislike Microsoft? I've vowed against supporting either... I've also vowed against snuff videos, but thats different. I mean that whole Intel/Digital thing was bad.
I'd keep my 604; even though its only 120 MHz. After all, FatBoySlim says: Everybody needs a 604.
Slashdot Mirror
For this I wouldn't suggest linux. Unless you like the kernel or work with it directly, you can easily live with NetBSD. NetBSD's strongest support for some time existed for Mac 68k machines. The IIsi is a supported machine with a longer history of support than you'll find with any other unix. While linux is cool, I doubt you'd be able to get it to run well on such a machine, particularly by comparison to NetBSD.
Perhaps because water is electrically conductive. There's noting to stop you from using liquid cooling though, just try not to dump good hardware in a tub of water please... send it to me, it'll cost you the same [I'm not implying that you'd get it back].
one button
two buttons
optical
moving parts
meta-clicking
wheels
gaming
USB
logitech
Microsoft
HP...
Who cares? Everyone has their preference, Apple isn't dictating the way life should be in 2020 any more than Microsoft and other companies are. I think the real problem here is that a lot of people who arn't mac-users (and hence were not even considered in the design of this mouse) are a bit cross because they love the mouse secretly, but can't use it with its single button. That may be your loss and Apple's, but its no need to berate people who could conceive of coping in preference to the other features they like.
Personally however, I want a multi-buttoned mouse, lets say 3 for now... maybe 4... and so this mouse is not for me; its a shame really because it looks like tasty candy.
I really like my sun 3 butotn mouse thats all slim with a ball (came with the ultra 10) too bad I'm not going to get it to work on any other machine.
Which reminds me... I have a terminal keyboard from wise (I think) that has a really nice feel... it has a 4 cable phone connector (RJ45?); does anyone know how I could map this to a DIN for an old IBM compatable machine (486DX-33)?
No I don't think so. CHRP is open, and has been for some time. Be has been supporting CHRP hardware, the problem has been that none of the clones (but the StarMax 4000) nor the new Apple designs were CHRP. Be had access to the clone style designs and supported them, but it does not have similar info for Apple's new designs.
Be wants to have a market; if that means sucking up to intel since apple user's ignore Be by-and-large, then so be it.
If they can "force" manufactures to build the somewhat updated CHRP design that no-one's built before, and if they can "force" end-users to buy the things, then you're right. It helps to have a CHRP design using the latest CPU, but the trick remains marketing it.
Big Money! Big Prizes! I love it!
Of course, if it costs half of what a CHRP board cost a friend ($800 m'thinks) I'll probably get it, even though it's not strictly a dollar.
Why... it could run BeOS DR4.0 [probably 4.5 too], or MacOS 8.5... with the ROM from my PMAC8500. There is an Apple ROM Slot in this design isn't there? There probably isn't; I'll live. Most importantly it could run Linux/PPC. Well.
If it had a ZIF socket (or 4) and was G4 ready, that'd be extra jolly nice of the people.
Q: Does anyone here dislike Intel at least half as much as they dislike Microsoft? I've vowed against supporting either... I've also vowed against snuff videos, but thats different. I mean that whole Intel/Digital thing was bad.
I'd keep my 604; even though its only 120 MHz.
After all, FatBoySlim says: Everybody needs a 604.