Hack Classic to Run Under Rosetta

Discussion in 'macOS' started by dpaanlka, Apr 11, 2006.

  1. dpaanlka macrumors 601

    dpaanlka

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    Illinois
    #1
    What are the chances somebody out there will one day devise some sort of hack or something to run Classic mode under Rosetta?

    What are the challenges here? Difficulties?

    Is this entirely impossible? If so, why?
     
  2. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #2
    Not likely. Even if someone did do that, you'd be emulating emulation....that would be really darn slow
     
  3. Benjamindaines macrumors 68030

    Benjamindaines

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Location:
    A religiously oppressed state
    #3
    I agree that it is not likely, but I don't think the emulation in an emulation would be too bad for Classic.. after all you only need like 400MHz and you're starting out with 2000.
     
  4. dpaanlka thread starter macrumors 601

    dpaanlka

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    Illinois
    #4
    That wouldn't be emulating emulation. Mac OS 9 was PowerPC native so why would a PowerPC emulator have to re-emulate PowerPC
     
  5. Benjamindaines macrumors 68030

    Benjamindaines

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Location:
    A religiously oppressed state
    #5
    Because its on Intel. Classic hasn't been put into universal binary, and never will be, so you would have to go like this:

    x86 -> PPC -> Classic
    (Intel)
     
  6. topgunn macrumors 65816

    topgunn

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2004
    Location:
    Texas
    #6
    The point is PPC -> Classic is NOT emulation.
     
  7. Benjamindaines macrumors 68030

    Benjamindaines

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Location:
    A religiously oppressed state
    #7
    It is an emulation.... not necessarily a processor emulation but it is a hard ware emulation since OS 9 will NOT run on Apple's post 2003 hard ware.
     
  8. ahunter3 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Oct 15, 2003
    #8
    There is now an Intel build of SheepShaver for MacOS X. SheepShaver emulates a PPC Mac and will run MacOS 8.6 or 9.0.4. Unlike Classic, it doesn't "disappear" the Finder backdrop, so your classic app windows aren't interspersed with your OS X app windows, but rather the entirety of your OS 9 (or 8.6) environment is in a window, like the VirtualPC is.

    SheepShaver does not network on Macs yet (although it does in the PC build, so it could happen), but it's otherwise a decently acceptable solution to running apps you used to run in Classic.
     
  9. Benjamindaines macrumors 68030

    Benjamindaines

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Location:
    A religiously oppressed state
    #9
    Cool, the only issue I see with that is you will have to hunt down a copy of OS 9 on eBay
     
  10. dpaanlka thread starter macrumors 601

    dpaanlka

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    Illinois
    #10
    How is that an issue?
     
  11. Benjamindaines macrumors 68030

    Benjamindaines

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2005
    Location:
    A religiously oppressed state
    #11
    Classic = Free
    Hunting around on eBay = effort, having to deal with sellers, a little bit of money
     
  12. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    #12
    This is only partially true. You are correct that unlike the x86 and PPC, Classic is not a processor. Classic is MacOS 9 running on top of MacOS X. Whereas, MacOS 9 runs only on the PPC, it does not run PPC-code exclusively. MacOS 9 applications may access Macintosh APIs which date back to System 6 or earlier. These old APIs were written in 680x0 assembly language. With the advent of System 7, Apple began the process of replacing them with C++ equivalents which could be compiled to native PPC code. With each successive OS release--System 7.1 and 7.5, MacOS 8.x, and 9.x, a greater fraction of 680x0 APIs were ported to the PPC. However, not all were ported and some cannot be ported. The 680x0-emulator in the Mac ToolBox ROM file is still required to run Classic. This means that Benjamindaines is essentially correct. Running Classic on Intel Macs would indeed require three levels of emulation: x86 > PPC > 680x0.
     
  13. vniow macrumors G4

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2002
    Location:
    I accidentally my whole location.
    #13
  14. Thomas Harte macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 30, 2005
    #14
    But Classic requires a working install of OS 9 to work. Does anybody know how tightly the CDs that come with Apple hardware are tied to those specific machines? For example, could I use the OS 9 install CD that came with my Titanium Powerbook on an (otherwise compatible) iMac?
     
  15. dpaanlka thread starter macrumors 601

    dpaanlka

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    Illinois
    #15
    Is that really that difficult?
     
  16. dpaanlka thread starter macrumors 601

    dpaanlka

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2004
    Location:
    Illinois
    #16
    Maybe if they would put slightly more effort into making SheepShaver somewhat easy to use, I would consider using that.
     
  17. velocityg4 macrumors 68040

    velocityg4

    Joined:
    Dec 19, 2004
    Location:
    Georgia
    #17
    The problem with emulators like sheepshaver is that they are never as reliable as the native computer. It seems to me that the best way to run classic would be to use a classic era machine. You can just get a B/W or Beige G3 for really cheap a smoke through any OS 9 era application or game. Unless you need portability than you will need to use the emulator.
     

Share This Page