Mac PPC Support Forum

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by G4PPC, Jun 22, 2015.

  1. MysticCow macrumors 6502a

    May 27, 2013
    It's as easy as installing a file from the Boot Camp drivers, but that only reads HFS. If you want to write to it, I think you need Paragon HFS+ or similar.
  2. G4PPC, Jul 1, 2015
    Last edited: Jul 1, 2015

    G4PPC thread starter macrumors newbie


    Jun 22, 2015
    I think I had read something about that before while working with some virtual machines a long time ago.

    I was wondering if OSX could read NTFS partitions because on windows I found out after awhile "On Windows XP" that NTFS is a lot better than Fat32 although when it first came out I hated NTFS for a long time until I started using it exculsively and learned to prefer NTFS for the Boot or "C:\Drive" partition at least.

    Looks like the reading of them is okay but writing takes some hacking or something but I don't want use any hacks for My Own Computer and that is not something I would recommend.

    as a drive to copy files back and forth Fat32 works well enough, one the limitations of it is that a single folder can only house like 16,000,000 or something files I don't remember exactly in the same directory where NTFS as far as I know is unlimited for a single directory. Not that you often have need of such a number of files going into a single folder but I had encountered some zip archives under Fat32 that I couldn't fully extract because of said limitation where on a NTFS drive the same archives can be extracted with no problem at all.

    edit I had forgot another problem I often encountered with Fat32 was whenever trying to back up a DVD on to your computer as a ISO it won't allow you to save any DVD that is over 2gb as an ISO. I tried it on several different computers and setups, Fat32 just wouldn't allow me to save them but NTFS doesn't have any trouble backing up DVDs of any size. It Is strange because Fat32 has no trouble downloading any size DVDs that already exist.
  3. MagicBoy macrumors 68040


    May 28, 2006
    Manchester, UK
    USB 2.0 is host-client, so the CPU supervises all data transfer between devices. You'll never get near the headline 480MBit bus speed as the overheads reduce efficiency. Communicate between two USB client devices and efficiency drops even further as everything is sent via the host controller. USB is fine for input and output peripherals like keyboards, mice, printers and scanners for which the original 12MBit USB was envisaged and for slow speed removable storage like ZIP/LS120 drives. Hard drives that were intended for a mass storage bus .... not so much. Then again it was convenient and about every PC from 1998 came with at least a couple of ports courtesy of Intel Chipsets.

    Firewire was a serial replacement for SCSI. It's designed for fast sustained transfers like storage and video data. It's peer to peer and the devices have an intelligent controller that transfers data between devices directly without involving the CPU. It's other advantage was the ability to supply about 15W of power to a host device, vs the 2.4W from USB. It should have done better, but Apple wanted a licensing fee.
  4. Cox Orange macrumors 68000

    Jan 1, 2010

    there are several things I want to comment on, but I keep to forget, so just a view things.

    FAT32 has a limit of 4GB for every file.
    You can't boot OS X from FAT32.
    FAT32 is very slow on HDDs connected to Macs (like 3,5MB/s) -> use a USB stick (with a cheap 16GB stick I get 8MB/s, the stick is even faster though with HFS+, but that is not what it is about here).
    For sharing (readANDwrite) stuff between PC and Mac, use either a bigger USB-stick with FAT32 (despite files bigger than 4GB).

    I installed NTFS drivers under Mac OS X once and I wrote 2TB of (*DV movie files of 2-20GB each, DV is not DVD it is a file format btw.) files to a HDD and always got problems, that the disk wouldn't be readable or certain files were "dead" after reaching bigger amounts. -> corruption.
    In the same forum where I was recommended the driver, I later was told, that a lot of other people in the forum had huge problems with the drivers.

    A side effect of having a Mac without NTFS capability:
    everytime my fathers Win-PC crashed and he couldn't even get his data off from the crashed system drive after putting it into an external case back to his new installed windows machine, I was his saviour. :D
    I put the NTFS HDD in my PowerMac or connected it externally to my ibook and I could save all the date for my father and he had them again. -> Macs can read NTFS, but not naturally write to it.

    ! After having the NTFS driver installed my Mac wouldn't be allowed to read those files from a HDD, when my fatehrs PC crashed again. This happens not under XP, but appeared since Win7 (Vista not tested). After deinstalling the NTFS drives from my Mac I had full access to the Win7 files again.
    Also under Tiger you can only use 8 letters for filenames, if you put them on NTFS under OS X. No problem for 10.5.

    So far, so nice.

    But what, if you have bigger files than 4Gb that you want to share between PC and Mac? USB-Fat32 is not working.
    Without installing drivers (that could do weird things).
    - establish network connection
    - others will probably have additional ideas.
    - never used Windows, but wikipedia mentions 2 freeware HFS+ drivers for win.

    Using Classic and OS 9:
    - Classic is the name of the sandbox/virtualison feature under Mac OS X until 10.4 (10.5 doesn't have it). You need an OS 9 systemfolder on the HDD, it can sit just along with all your OS X folders.
    - using OS 9 in classic is hit or miss. simple strategy games like Master of Orion have problems moving the mouse cursor and will crash after some turns. However I think I was able to use Photoshop 5 in classic.
    - OS 9 as a boot system without Classic-virtualisation does not work on all G4s and G5s. There is a hack though that you can find on macos9lives forums.
  5. ApolloBoy macrumors 6502a


    Apr 16, 2015
    San Jose, CA
    Why not just use exFAT? Both Macs and Windows PCs can read and write to exFAT-formatted drives just fine and you don't have that silly 4 GB limit to worry about.
  6. val1984 macrumors member

    Jan 26, 2015
    Because exFAT is only supported by 10.6.5+ and 10.6 does not run on PowerPC Macs.
  7. ApolloBoy macrumors 6502a


    Apr 16, 2015
    San Jose, CA
    Ah, my mistake.
  8. Cox Orange macrumors 68000

    Jan 1, 2010
    Re exFAT

    I want to add, I have a PVR that can format to exFAT and when I connect any external drive formatted with the PVR to my PowerPC Mac it takes quiet long till OS X 10.4 shows up the volume. 10.9 "loads" the volume faster. I did however, never try, if Tiger would recognize a exFAT drive faster, when I would format it under 10.9.
  9. G4PPC thread starter macrumors newbie


    Jun 22, 2015
    I've used Fat64 before under windows as my slave partition and it was not much better than Fat32, and Windows XP only recognizes exfat with a update driver fix from Microsoft. Never tried it with Windows 7 I hated Fat64 "exfat".

    I wanted to post that I found all the Service manuals for the G4 iBooks and uploaded them now you can download them from my website, they detail how to take them apart step by step.

    Happy Fourth July..

Share This Page