Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Oldest running Mac?

stridey said:
I'm just curious as to what everybody's a)oldest running mac is and b)oldest running mac that they use at all regularly.
Click to expand...

Power Mac G5 Dual 1.8 GHz, 2 x 20" AL ACDs is the oldest here. We also have an iMac G5 1.6 GHz and a PowerBook G4 1.67 GHz 15".

I like reasonably new hardware.
 
check the sig powermac G4 Yikes from 1999....Used daily on all the time still works great but soon to be replaced...

SHADow ;)
 
RacerX said:
They chose neither.

IBM already had a UNIX operating system that was designed to run on POWER and PowerPC processors called AIX. Apple bought logic boards from IBM with PowerPC 604 or 604e processors on them that would work with AIX (4.x) and sold them as Apple Workgroup Servers.

Apple did experiment for a while with other options, but once AppleShare IP had reached a level of ability that Apple (and their clients) could deal with, they dropped AIX altogether.
Click to expand...
C'mon RacerX, the AIX Network Server was based off the Mac 9500 architecture (Tsunami) it's supposed to boot the Mac OS if a Mac ROM was used along with a video card from that era, but a lot of the motherboard features died.

Though it didn't exactly map to the Mac it came from, alot like the differences between the XServe and PowerMacs.

Basically the forerunner of today's XServe.

Edit: since it's clonewars era, it doesn't really matter where the board came from -- since they were all based off the Apple designs.
 
Sun Baked said:
C'mon RacerX, the AIX Network Server was based off the Mac 9500 architecture (Tsunami) it's supposed to boot the Mac OS if a Mac ROM was used along with a video card from that era, but a lot of the motherboard features died.
Click to expand...
Where did you get that idea?

They were based on IBM's RS/6000 series systems. The 500 and 700 never had a Mac ROM... these were not Apple (or Apple design) based logic boards. The design of these were straight from IBM so that AIX could be run on them. Even the overall layout of the system is from the RS/6000.

And they never could run a Mac OS... and for that matter, Macs could never run AIX. Just because they used the same components doesn't make them compatible systems.

More info...
 
I've got a Mac Plus I use to read email and spod from.

I'd like to see a PC from 1986 get on the internet.
 
Apple LISA

I've got a running Lisa in the attick. it runs MACos under some sort of SUN enabler. It has 1 Mb RAM and 10 MB HD.

My server (in the closet in the hall) is an old Starmax 4000 dt. I currently work on an G3 iBook 600 Mhz and started on an Mac IIsi. (oh, and I've got a SE/30 that my mother uses for email, on a 2400 baud moden...) ah, and I've got the original Mac Portable (luggable), but that battery is as dead as the one in my iBook now... :(

quite a Mac-junkjard
 
I've got two Mac Pluses, one has a 16 Mhz accelerator. Yeah it's a screamer. Also have a Mac II. All work, but are sitting in the closet right now. Also have a working Atari ST, which uses the same 68000 processor as the original Mac. Pretty cool computer (I actually think it was a better computer than the Mac at the time), released in '84 or '85 I believe.
 
RacerX said:
Where did you get that idea?
Click to expand...
RacerX,

Thank for proving my point, from the link you provided...

http://www.erik.co.uk/ans/

Rumor had it that any of the Apple Network Servers can be made to run MacOS by installing a ROM SIMM from a powermac 9500. The 9500 is the most similar mac to the Apple Network Server however the device trees still have many differences. I have had several people try differing ROMS in their Apple Network Servers with varying results. From what i can gather an ans with said rom swap will boot to a certain extent but since the video is different from the 9500 it dies at that point. I have had other reports that fitting the ati card from the 9500 will then add video to the ans but only the external scsi is supported. This really removes the motivation from running mac os on the ans. My advice would be to wait for the Linux PPC port of Sheep Shaver, the excellent mac os emulator.
Click to expand...

Look at the first page...

http://www.erik.co.uk/ans/HardwareDevNotes.pdf (Read page 1 paragraph 1)

But you also have to remember that the clone-style architecture did make it into the RS/6000 and sold for several years. Heck there are still a lot of them on the market today from that period -- ie, the entire Linux PPC white box market.

If you still think that Apple didn't help design the clones and their own Prep boards ... then you probably think that the Motorola, Daystar, Umax, etc. clones were all designed by those companies and not based on Apple reference designs either.

The Prep boards died when Windows NT for PPC was killed, but the CHRP boards live on.

Edit: I'll say this the ANS was based on a server variant of the clone architecture, and it really doesn't matter who produced the boards for the servers -- since Motorola/IBM/Apple all shipped products based on the revised board.
 
PC, too

up until late last year, i used a 1999 compaq presario 366 mhz k6-2, 160 mb ram, 4.3 gb hard drive, 2 mb video card laptop...it's basically between a similarly configured 366 mhz celeron and a 366 mhz pentium II

my friend, an assembly language/machine language military programmer (proprietary code) of 23 years, now uses a pentium, 220 mhz pc tower for his work 50+ hours a week from home...he doesn't utilize gui so there is no need for anything stronger

for many years before that, until last year, he used a 486 for his extremely extensive low level programming and experimentation

it all depends what one uses a computer for and for many professional people in the computer science world, many computers made in the 1990s suit their needs just fine
 
I have a Mac Colour Classic 4 Mb RAM 40 MB HD. I have dropped a 160Mb HD in if from a IIFX I found. It runs 7.1P. Amazing machine - I still have all my university assignments on it written with ClarisWorks.


aussie_geek
 
Sun Baked said:
RacerX,

Thank for proving my point, from the link you provided...

http://www.erik.co.uk/ans/
Click to expand...
I never said that I agreed with his view points. From the documentation given to me by Apple, these systems are very different from the 9500.

Look at the first page...

http://www.erik.co.uk/ans/HardwareDevNotes.pdf (Read page 1 paragraph 1)
Click to expand...
Systems from Apple using PowerPC 604 and a PCI bus are the same... except where they are different (as stated in the document). If they were the same... then that document would not be needed, it would have been rolled into the developer notes on the 9500 series systems.

But you also have to remember that the clone-style architecture did make it into the RS/6000 and sold for several years. Heck there are still a lot of them on the market today from that period -- ie, the entire Linux PPC white box market.
Click to expand...
I remember that IBM use CHRP which had absolutely nothing to do with Apple's specification to the clone market... and was a specification which Apple didn't subscribe to (one of the reason you can't install Windows NT 4.0 for PowerPC on a Power Macintosh).

If you still think that Apple didn't help design the clones and their own Prep boards ... then you probably think that the Motorola, Daystar, Umax, etc. clones were all designed by those companies and not based on Apple reference designs either.
Click to expand...
Odd, I didn't say that.

Well, I would normally be willing to continue a discussion like this. But when the person on the other side starts adding things that I didn't say I feel it is best to leave that person to discuss this on their own... which is basically what you are doing by trying to link comments to me which I never made.

I don't know if this is a reading comprehension problem or an attitude problem on your part... and frankly I don't care, you're on your own.

:D
 
RacerX said:
Odd, I didn't say that.

Well, I would normally be willing to continue a discussion like this. But when the person on the other side starts adding things that I didn't say I feel it is best to leave that person to discuss this on their own... which is basically what you are doing by trying to link comments to me which I never made.

I don't know if this is a reading comprehension problem or an attitude problem on your part... and frankly I don't care, you're on your own.

:D
Click to expand...
Attitude problem... ;)

So which RS/6000 Prep-machine did the board come out of?

You have me stumped, especially if they came "straight" from IBM and the "overall layout of the system is from the RS/6000."

Edit: I still think Apple designed the monster (or had it designed to their spec) but didn't have an OS to run on it ... even if you don't agree with Eric or I. But I'm also curious to know which IBM machine this is supposed to be at the same time, if it is one. Especially since it was such a nicely designed machine for the time. :confused:
 
i used to have an old performa i dun no what the exact specs were but i THINK it was somewhere around 133 mhz? i KNOW it had 64mb of ram, dunno HD. and some old stylewriter printer. them my mom gave it to F***ing GOOD WILL!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY WOULD SOMEONE GIVE AWAY A COMPUTER!!!!!! FOR FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!! :mad:
 
biohazard_6969 said:
i used to have an old performa i dun no what the exact specs were but i THINK it was somewhere around 133 mhz? i KNOW it had 64mb of ram, dunno HD. and some old stylewriter printer. them my mom gave it to F***ing GOOD WILL!!!!!!!!!!!! WHY WOULD SOMEONE GIVE AWAY A COMPUTER!!!!!! FOR FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!! :mad:
Click to expand...


Was it an all-in-one job, or a pizza case + moniter combo dealy?
 
Sun Baked said:
Attitude problem... ;)
Click to expand...
Or poor reading comprehension... for example:
"So which RS/6000 Prep-machine did the board come out of?​
I didn't say that it came out of a system IBM was using... it was based on the RS/6000 design... much like the Mac clones were based on the 9500.

For lack of a better term the 500/700s were IBM clones.

You have me stumped, especially if they came "straight" from IBM and the "overall layout of the system is from the RS/6000."
Click to expand...
That is not that hard to believe...

I've worked with a 700/150 and have had the opportunity to watch (IBM's aren't my area of consulting) someone take apart and repair an RS/6000 deskside system (about the same configuration as the 700) and the logic board layout was pretty close to that of the 700 (actually the entire system was laid out pretty much the same, but the design of the logic board is why I think that the 500/700 logic board design came from IBM).

I still think Apple designed the monster (or had it designed to their spec) but didn't have an OS to run on it ...
Click to expand...
As I said earlier, A/UX was too much trouble to port and I think Apple had had their fill of paying for the System V license.

For Apple's part, they developed MAE for running Mac apps on the 500/700s in AIX.

But I'm also curious to know which IBM machine this is supposed to be at the same time, if it is one. Especially since it was such a nicely designed machine for the time. :confused:
Click to expand...
All of IBM's systems from that period were nice systems. They still are. And IBM continued to sell 604e based workstations until 2002.

If you are talking about the exteriors... :rolleyes: well, that was never high on IBM's priorities.
 
I have a Mac Plus that is used continuously, all day, as a Maquarium, does that count? The oldest functioning mac I use on a daily basis is my Powerbook 3400c. All the others get use occasionally but not for anything productive.
 
RacerX said:
Or poor reading comprehension... for example:
"So which RS/6000 Prep-machine did the board come out of?​
I didn't say that it came out of a system IBM was using... it was based on the RS/6000 design... much like the Mac clones were based on the 9500.

For lack of a better term the 500/700s were IBM clones.
Click to expand...
Yep, poor reading comprehension... I looked at both the 9500 architecture and the ANS and couldn't fail not to find similarities in architecture much like the PowerMac G4s are similar to the XServe G4.

Your link showed that the ANS 500/700s used the chipset components Hammerhead, Cuda, Grand Central, and Bandit, AWAC + a Symbios Logic SCSI controller...

The 9500 chipset was based around Hammerhead, Cuda, Grand Central, Bandit, AWAC, Curio, and Mesh (for fast SCSI).

Still strange for me to see absolutely zero relationship between the two designs, since these are major chipset components Apple put together for the Tsunami Motherboard. Heck even the Curio chip is probably in the ANS since MACE/SCC are in the ANS's device tree -- making Mesh a swap out for a SCSI upgrade.

The chipset components still look like they are a modified 9500 to me, but of course I'm looking at the chipset components and not comparing the physical layout of the RS/6000 to the ANS 500/700.

But I also think the original eMac was an all-in-one PowerMac G4 ... :rolleyes:
 
From my macs (See sig) the Bondi iMac 233 would be the oldest.. i use it for internet and as a gloryfied alarm clock (auto switch on at 7:15 am on school days, runs an applescript which plays itunes and 75% volume (in case i've changed it through the day)).
 
I still boot up my 8MHz System4 512k FatMac occasionally, (I have the GCC 10MByte internal Hard Disk "Hyperdrive" which clips on to the 68000 and made the FatMac cost about the same as a Dual 2.7GHz G5 when it was released!). My 'oldest CPU' in regular use is a PMac 7500 100MHz running 8.6. I use this mostly for repairing other SCSI Macs that I come across. Maybe I should try its Apple 1710AV display on my Mac mini 1.25 and see if it works! (without the ADB feedback)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back