![[F]](/Images/i7/site.gif) TidBITS  TidBITS TidBITS Talk
Classic OS and later OS X versions![[Carson, Rowland & Wilma]](/webx/?30@@1) Rowland & Wilma Carson - 05:43am Sep 19, 2007 PSTGuest UserThe discussion of keeping older documents in a form that allows them
to be accessed by current combinations of hardware and software
promtps me to ask a couple of questions about my own particular
situation.
I'm using OS X 10.3.9 on a 15" Ti PowerBook G4 1GHz, 1GB RAM, 60GB
disc (very happily as my only computer, BTW) and have no plans to
change the hardware anytime soon. (I expect my machines to work for
quite a long time - the PB took over from a 7100/66.)
I've had no pressing reason to upgrade to OS X 10.4, until recently
when FMP 9 came out. In general, I've made OS upgrades only in order
to use the extra facilities of newer versions of applications, not
because of any inherent value perceived in the OS itself. However, it
feels daft to buy 10.4 with 10.5 just about to be released.
From what several posters to this forum have said, it appears that
10.5 will run OK on a G4 processor, despite some rumours that it
wouldn't. I can't find anything on the Apple OS 10.5 website pages to
say what the hardware requirements are for 10.5 - I'm sure that ought
be be _somewhere_ in there.
Another question unanswered for me on the Apple website is - will
10.5 allow the Classic environment to run? Does anyone here know?
I believe that no Mac with an Intel processor will run Classic, and
so I will have a _lot_ of housekeeping to do when I eventually decide
to retire the G4. I am doing it piecemeal for now (see my other
posting about AppleWorks documents), and would rather not be forced
into it sooner than I really need to. (Yes, I know my backups of the
documents accessible only from Classic applications will become
inaccessible if the PowerBook dies and I can't, at least temporarily,
access them from a G4 or G5 machine in order to convert them to newer
formats. I hope my rolling conversion programme will be completed
during the working life of the PowerBook!)
I guess another consideration is whether 10.5 will impose too much of
a load on the G4 to make it comfortable in use, but that is probably
a question only I can answer after I've used it - unless it is
_really_ obviously slow as seen by a significant number of
users/reveiwers. Probably my local Apple service place will be able
to tell me after a few months whether people have been happy with
10.5 installations on similar haardware.
If 10.5 proves to be too heavy for the G4 PowerBook, I suppose that
10.4 will still be sold for a while, so I don't have to make up my
mind in advance - but any advice would be welcome.
regards
Rowland
[posted using Eudora 6.0.2 - I'm following that thread with interest too!]
--
| Wilma & Rowland Carson http://home.clara.net/rowil/
| <rowil  clara.net> ... that's Rowland with a 'w' ...
apple349 (apparently)
-
Sep 20, 2007 12:08 pm
(#1 Total: 9)
|
 |
|
|
|
| Posts: 5 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
On Sep 19, 2007, at 14:43 , Rowland & Wilma Carson wrote:
> From what several posters to this forum have said, it appears that
> 10.5 will run OK on a G4 processor, despite some rumours that it
> wouldn't. I can't find anything on the Apple OS 10.5 website pages to
> say what the hardware requirements are for 10.5 - I'm sure that ought
> be be _somewhere_ in there.
Hi Rowland,
well, Apple really don't currently seem to say anything about the
Leopard system requirements on their website, but according to
Wikipedia, the documentation accompanying the current pre-release
builds of Leopard details the following minimum system requirements
as follows:
- Intel processor or a PowerPC G4 (867 MHz or faster) or G5 processor
- DVD drive
- Built-in FireWire
- At least 512 MB of RAM (additional RAM is recommended for
development purposes)
- A built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied
video card supported by your computer
- At least 7 GB of disk space available, or 12 GB of disk space if
you install the developer tools
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_v10.5)
As you can see, if these requirements remain the same for the final
released version (pretty likely, I guess), then 10.5 should run just
fine on your PowerBook. How fine it will actually run is a thing that
remains to be seen, but I would expect it to be actually very usable,
especially since you have 1 GB of RAM in your machine (which would
probably give you more benefit than a faster processor for most
normal purposes).
Concerning Classic, well, I'm currently unaware if 10.5 will support
the Classic environment on PowerPC-based Macintoshes, but I can't
remember to have heard otherwise. However, like you already said,
Intel Macs won't be able to run any form of Classic MacOS under 10.5
either, just like they weren't able to under 10.4. The good thing is
that a piece of software called "SheepShaver" (http://
gwenole.beauchesne.info/en/projects/sheepshaver) will actually allow
you to run classic MacOS on Intel-based Macintoshes. The last time I
tried it, it didn't run 100% as good as I would have wished, but it's
probably been improving since then. So all in all, Classic is not
entirely lost on Intel either.
Greetings,
Nils
|
|
 | |
johnbaxterlists (apparently)
-
Sep 20, 2007 12:08 pm
(#2 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
|
| Posts: 601 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
On Sep 19, 2007, at 5:43 AM, Rowland & Wilma Carson wrote:
> From what several posters to this forum have said, it appears that
> 10.5 will run OK on a G4 processor, despite some rumours that it
> wouldn't. I can't find anything on the Apple OS 10.5 website pages to
> say what the hardware requirements are for 10.5 - I'm sure that ought
> be be _somewhere_ in there.
I'm not concerned about 10.5 and G4. I would be concerned about 10.6.
> If 10.5 proves to be too heavy for the G4 PowerBook, I suppose that
> 10.4 will still be sold for a while, so I don't have to make up my
> mind in advance - but any advice would be welcome.
If it is needed to support California machines, 10.4 will be
available for 7 years after the last California sale of those. But
probably not generally available after 5 years, and likely not one
day longer than California requires. If it is needed for 5 year old
models, it will likely be available from Apple. And "needed" here
would be "won't run without it" not "it would be nice".
SmallDog may turn out to be your friend, or they may sell out and you
would be reduced to possibly-legal and possibly-complete buys on
eBay. (Here Apple's full price every time model is an advantage,
since the person who "upgrades" from 10.4 to 10.5 isn't upgrading in
the legal sense, and isn't precluded from transferring off the older
version.) Hint: look around for Panther in places you trust.
--John (who has 2 G4 machines (and a Macbook), including one
bought in 2001--which will be the last to get Leopard)
|
|
| |
Lewis Butler (apparently)
-
Sep 20, 2007 12:14 pm
(#3 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
|
| Posts: 989 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
On 19-Sep-2007, at 06:43, Rowland & Wilma Carson wrote:
> From what several posters to this forum have said, it appears that
> 10.5 will run OK on a G4 processor, despite some rumours that it
> wouldn't. I can't find anything on the Apple OS 10.5 website pages to
> say what the hardware requirements are for 10.5 - I'm sure that ought
> be be _somewhere_ in there.
Hmm... I can't find it now either, but I know I posted the
information once before, straight off Apple's website. I found the
text in a previous email, but not the link:
You must have a Macintosh computer with:
* an Intel processor or a PowerPC G4 or G5 processor
* a DVD drive
* built-in FireWire
* at least 256 MB of RAM for a Power-PC based Mac and 512 MB for an
Intel-based Mac (additional RAM is recommended for development purposes)
* a built-in display or a display connected to an Apple-supplied
video card supported by your computer
* at least 6 GB of disk space available, or 8 GB if you install the
developer tools
The only real change from the requirements for 10.4 is that 10.5 will
not run on a FireWire G3 machine, and that the minimum space has gone
from 3.0GB/4.0GB to 6GB/8GB.
> Another question unanswered for me on the Apple website is - will
> 10.5 allow the Classic environment to run? Does anyone here know?
I don't think so.
> I believe that no Mac with an Intel processor will run Classic
That is correct. However, there is Sheepshaver, which works at least
well enough for people to run WordPerfect Mac on intel machines, so
all is not lost necessarily. I would try very hard to avoid that
route, however.
> I guess another consideration is whether 10.5 will impose too much of
> a load on the G4 to make it comfortable in use, but that is probably
> a question only I can answer after I've used it
I would expect so. I am planning on running Leoaprd on my G4 tower,
my iBook G4, and my MacPro. The old iMac DV will have to limp along
on 10.4
|
|
| |
Adam Engst
-
Sep 20, 2007 12:21 pm
(#4 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
 |
| Posts: 7820 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
At 5:43 AM -0700 9/19/07, Rowland & Wilma Carson wrote:
>From what several posters to this forum have said, it appears that
>10.5 will run OK on a G4 processor, despite some rumours that it
>wouldn't. I can't find anything on the Apple OS 10.5 website pages to
>say what the hardware requirements are for 10.5 - I'm sure that ought
>be be _somewhere_ in there.
Certainly my impression is that it should run on G4s.
>Another question unanswered for me on the Apple website is - will
>10.5 allow the Classic environment to run? Does anyone here know?
No, it won't. Classic is dead, both on all Intel-based Macs running
Tiger, and on all Macs running Leopard.
>I guess another consideration is whether 10.5 will impose too much of
>a load on the G4 to make it comfortable in use, but that is probably
>a question only I can answer after I've used it - unless it is
>_really_ obviously slow as seen by a significant number of
>users/reveiwers.
Yeah, there's no way to know that until it's out.
>If 10.5 proves to be too heavy for the G4 PowerBook, I suppose that
>10.4 will still be sold for a while, so I don't have to make up my
>mind in advance - but any advice would be welcome.
You will probably be able to pick up a copy of Tiger for a short
while as shelves empty, but not for long. I wouldn't count on it.
cheers... -Adam
--
Adam C. Engst, TidBITS Publisher < http://www.tidbits.com/adam/>
|
|
| |
Dave Scocca (apparently)
-
Sep 21, 2007 1:08 am
(#5 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
|
| Posts: 97 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
--On 9/20/2007 12:08 PM -0700 Nils Holland wrote:
> On Sep 19, 2007, at 14:43 , Rowland & Wilma Carson wrote:
>
>> From what several posters to this forum have said, it appears that
>> 10.5 will run OK on a G4 processor, despite some rumours that it
>> wouldn't.
[...]
> As you can see, if these requirements remain the same for the final
> released version (pretty likely, I guess), then 10.5 should run just
> fine on your PowerBook. How fine it will actually run is a thing that
> remains to be seen, but I would expect it to be actually very usable,
> especially since you have 1 GB of RAM in your machine (which would
> probably give you more benefit than a faster processor for most
> normal purposes).
For all releases of Mac OS X up to now, it has generally been the case
that--if the hardware is supported by a new release--each release is faster
than the previous release ON THE SAME MACHINE.
Unless there is reason to believe that Leopard will significantly break
this pattern, or that it will depend on a feature not included in your
hardware, I would not be concerned about the performance.
Dave
|
|
| |
jwbaxter (apparently)
-
Sep 22, 2007 3:06 am
(#6 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
|
| Posts: 70 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
> Unless there is reason to believe that Leopard will significantly
> break
> this pattern, or that it will depend on a feature not included in your
> hardware, I would not be concerned about the performance.
Except for some of those people who know what the current code does
on the particular machine that started this thread, it's impossible
to *know* at this stage. The people who know can't tell us (at least
not in so many words).
Leopard adds considerable eye candy. Does it turn enough of that off
on the machine in question (or give the user the option to)? News in
October (or November, or ...).
--John
|
|
| |
Lewis Butler (apparently)
-
Sep 23, 2007 4:19 am
(#7 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
|
| Posts: 989 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
On 22-Sep-2007, at 04:06, John W Baxter wrote:
> Leopard adds considerable eye candy. Does it turn enough of that off
> on the machine in question (or give the user the option to)? News in
> October (or November, or ...).
The eye candy it ads uses core video and core animation. older G4
machines don't support core video or, as I understand it, core
animation. So they won't get that eye candy.
But as Adam pointed out, 10.4 was faster than 10.3 was faster than
10.2 was faster than 10.1 was faster than 10.0 on identical hardware.
|
|
| |
dr (apparently)
-
Sep 23, 2007 11:35 pm
(#8 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
|
| Posts: 467 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
Google Kreme wrote:
> On 22-Sep-2007, at 04:06, John W Baxter wrote:
>> Leopard adds considerable eye candy. Does it turn enough of that off
>> on the machine in question (or give the user the option to)? News in
>> October (or November, or ...).
>
> The eye candy it ads uses core video and core animation. older G4
> machines don't support core video or, as I understand it, core
> animation. So they won't get that eye candy.
>
> But as Adam pointed out, 10.4 was faster than 10.3 was faster than
> 10.2 was faster than 10.1 was faster than 10.0 on identical hardware.
>
>
As long as REASONABLE memory was installed. I saw people say it wasn't for them as they went from X to Y and then find out they have 128mb or 256mb installed. Each major step WAS faster but each step did have a somewhat bigger minimal memory footprint. If you had less that this minimal footprint, you thrashed. Anyway a good note to add when telling someone this.
|
|
| |
Nik (apparently)
-
Sep 26, 2007 12:45 am
(#9 Total: 9)
|
|
|
|
 |
| Posts: 377 |
Re: Classic OS and later OS X versions
There's a couple solutions to handling legacy files and file formats:
One is emulation. SheepShaver seems to be the best product to handle
this. It emulates MacOS 9.0.4 quite well and can run most (but not
all) applications. It can also run earlier versions of MacOS which is
sometimes necessary to run newer systems.
< http://gwenole.beauchesne.info/en/projects/sheepshaver>
< http://www.macosxhints.com/article.php?story=20060509180914879&lsrc=osxh>
Another option is to just keep an old Mac around that can run OS 9. If
your G4 dies, you can usually pick up a beige G3 or earlier Mac for a
song on eBay. The bigger problem there is the possibility of file
corruption. Old hard drives, floppy disks, etc. will eventually fail,
so be sure to back up your documents AND applications somewhere
useful.
--Nik
|
|
|
TidBITS TidBITS TidBITS Talk Classic OS and later OS X versions
|
|
