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

What version of OS X Does your Mac run?

Volkstaia

Volkstaia

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jul 5, 2012
133
2
East Coast of the US
Are you going to update it? Downgrade? Go back to OS 9? Tell us! I don't have a PowerPC Mac yet, although when I do I'm going to do 10.4 because of dat classic mode. (Still looking for a deal on a G4 MDD, and I'm not made of money which makes it a bit worse) And I might try to experiment with older versions, just to see what they were like.
 
My iMac G4 and Powerbook G4 all run 10.5.8 and these are the only PowerPC Macs I own, I plan to install Linux on the Powerbook though for coding and messing around.
Then my Intel iMac runs 10.8.4 and Windows 8.
 
Last edited:
I left Classic behind for good in January of 2012. It only stayed around for so long because our Classifieds workflow made it necessary for QuarkXPress 4.11. Now that I get the file in .docx I was able to transition that Mac to a G4 running 10.4 (but only because of ram, otherwise it'd be on Leopard).

At home I abandoned OS9 some time around 2003.

All of my Macs run 10.5.8. Except for the work Mac which is Intel and runs 10.8.4.

OS9 was great for it's time and I actually have a few Macs at home running it and System 7.5.6 as well. But sad to say, it's irrelevant to my workflow now and usually does more harm than good.

Windows Small Business Server 2003 is one of the few versions of Windows Server that still has FSM (File Services for Macintosh). It uses the OS9 version of Appletalk. Which means I can't use it at all because OS9 only supports 32.3 filenames. That is 32 characters plus three extension characters. No way running OS X Macs can you use that protocol to store files on.

It's the same on my OS9 Macs at home. I gave up using it at all as file storage as my OS X Macs just have oodles of filenames longer than 32 characters.

Oh yeah. I've said it here before, but I will repeat it again. At least for me, OS X 10.4.x was very unstable in a PC/Mac networked environment with a Windows server. Finder was always crashing, especially when you had three or more copy threads running and it always hanged whenever a server connection dropped. I hated it!

At least with Leopard we have been very stable and it's much appreciated. If a server drops Leopard simply tells you that it's been forcibly disconnected and allows to either try and stay connected or disconnect. No hanging, no Finder quitting.
 
Last edited:
My 12 inch iBook had Tiger when I got it, but the compatibility was terrible and I had no need for Classic, so I bought Leopard, which now runs on my G4 MDD and iMac G5. I'v thought about downgrading to Tiger for performance gains, but some people say more powerful Macs run better with Leopard. I'll probably stick to 10.5 on my MDD and G5, and maybe try 10.4 again on the iBook, which doesn't get as much use.
 
I think I found a good deal on a Quicksilver, fully able to run Leopard! I realized I will have to do Leopard, I don't think universal binaries re supported under tiger, so probably dual booting between Leopard and OS 9 for ***** and giggles.
 
ConfusedBatman said:
I don't think universal binaries re supported under tiger,…
Click to expand...
I'd have to disagree with that. QuarkXPress 7.31 is a universal binary and it ran just fine on Tiger when I was using it. It's the only one offhand I can name but I know I ran other universal apps on Tiger.
 
Sorry, that I cannot tell you. My area of experience is in print so most video apps are foreign to me.
 
My eMac is running Tiger and is running the oldest version of iTunes available. It's only used as a jukebox now & I really don't need the features Leopard & iTunes 10 introduced. My iBook G3 is also running Tiger, not because I want to (talk about sluggish) but because my home network simply doesn't talk with my AirPort card under Jaguar AT ALL. The iBook is used as a web surfer & a word processor, as when it comes to typing up a document - touch screens don't even come close to a terrible physical keyboard, let alone the awesome one found in the iBook.

My bondi-blue iMac was running OS 8 but it's still sitting there unsued & collecting dust at the moment (suspect PSU failure).
 
All on Tiger. Leopard frustrates me, on any Mac, for an Intel Snow Leopard and Up are the way forward. I don't rate Leopard at all.
 
PowerMac G3 B&W - OS9.2.2
PowerMac G4 PCI gfx - now on Tiger, working to get OS9 there
PowerMac G4 FW800 1.42DP - Leopard
PowerMac G4 FW800 1.42DP - Tiger (awesomeness, doesn't blink)
iMac G5 17" 2.0 ALS - Leopard
iMac G5 20" 1.8 - Leopard
PowerMac G5 1.8DP - Leopard
2xPowerMac G5 2.3DC - Leopard
PowerMac G5 Quad - Leopard
iBook 12" 1.33 - Leopard
PowerBook 15" 1.67 DLSD/HR - Leopard
'08 BlackBook - Lion
'09 MacMini - Mountain Lion

That is all folks. (for now) :)
 
Last edited:
I deal....

with a fair share of PowerPC machines and my mantra is stay between 10.4 (Tiger) and 10.5 (Leopard). Going down from Tiger is worthless for me. And Leopard is the last Mac OS designed with PowerPC chips in mind....


:):apple:
 
OS 8 on iMac G3
10.2 on PowerBook G3
10.4.11 on iBook G3
10.5.6 on iBook G4
10.5.8 on Mac Mini G4
10.5.8 on MacBook
10.7 on other MacBook
10.8.4 and 10.9 on MacBook Pro
 
Last edited:
Os9 & Leopard on dual G4
Os9 & Tiger on iMac G3, PowerMac G3 b&w and iBook G3.
Mountain Lion on 20" and 27" iMacs (intel)
Still haven't had the time to check the Macintosh Classic II... But this one is far from ever being able to run osx.
 
PowerMac G5 Quad: 10.5.8 Leopard Server (wonder if I'm the only person on here using that), 10.4.11 Tiger to play older PPC games and OS9 games via Classic, WinXP SP2 via Virtual PC 7 for very old PC games

MacBook Pro Early 08: 10.8.4 Mountain Lion, Win7 SP1

PowerBook G4 Titanium 1 GHz: 10.4.11 Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2

PowerMac G4 Digital Audio: 10.4.11 Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2

PowerBook G3 Wallstreet: 10.2.8 Jaguar, Mac OS 9.2.2

SuperMac S900: Mac OS 9.2.1

Mac SE: System 6... I think? :)
 
Frost7 said:
PowerMac G5 Quad: 10.5.8 Leopard Server (wonder if I'm the only person on here using that), 10.4.11 Tiger to play older PPC games and OS9 games via Classic, WinXP SP2 via Virtual PC 7 for very old PC games

MacBook Pro Early 08: 10.8.4 Mountain Lion, Win7 SP1

PowerBook G4 Titanium 1 GHz: 10.4.11 Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2

PowerMac G4 Digital Audio: 10.4.11 Tiger, Mac OS 9.2.2

PowerBook G3 Wallstreet: 10.2.8 Jaguar, Mac OS 9.2.2

SuperMac S900: Mac OS 9.2.1

Mac SE: System 6... I think? :)
Click to expand...

How well does VPC7 perform?
 
Macintosh Classic: System 6
iMac G3 Rev. A: Mac OS 8.6
iMac G3 Rev. C: OS X 10.3.9
iBook G3 Clamshell: Mac OS 9.2.1
iBook G3 (White): OS X 10.4.11
iBook G4: OS X 10.4.11
eMac: OS X 10.4.11
MacBook: OS X 10.6.8

I've also got an external HDD with a 10.5 partition, and another with a 10.7 partition, but I really dislike both of these OS X versions; I keep them around for the rare occasion when I need a more "modern" OS for a specific task.
 
ihuman:D said:
How well does VPC7 perform?
Click to expand...
It does decently well, although I don't use it very much anymore since I've got Boot Camp on the MacBook Pro and that can run Windows 7 at native speeds.

Its main limitation is the emulated GPU is a god-awful ancient POS with practically no VRAM. Could have been much improved if they'd just updated that part of it.
 
Frost7 said:
It does decently well, although I don't use it very much anymore since I've got Boot Camp on the MacBook Pro and that can run Windows 7 at native speeds.

Its main limitation is the emulated GPU is a god-awful ancient POS with practically no VRAM. Could have been much improved if they'd just updated that part of it.
Click to expand...

It runs awful on my PB and iMac with standard non-tweaked XP. But I think that has to do with the emulated GPU because it's mostly the UI but I haven't tried any serious apps on it mainly because of that.
 
Having previously used it on a PowerMac G4 Digital Audio, a PowerMac G5 will do a lot better than a PowerBook or an iMac, I'll say that. But it's still a tad slow at times. Again, though, I believe that's emulated GPU-related more than CPU... CPU intensive tasks actually tend to go reasonably quickly.

I noticed going to a single color or low res background for the desktop tends to give a noticeable boost to UI performance, for one.
 
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