While it lasts...OS X 10.0.3(Clamshell Content)

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by bunnspecial, Mar 2, 2015.

  1. bunnspecial macrumors 603

    bunnspecial

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #1
    As I mentioned elsewhere, I recently bought a Clamshell(M6411, 366mhz, Indigo).

    When I received the computer and booted it, I was quite surprised to find it booting into OS X 10.0.3. It booted to set-up assist and has no record of previous owners. It also doesn't have OS 9 installed, so I'm not exactly sure where this came from. I think this is the first computer I've had with OS X 10.0 installed(except maybe my iMac G3 for a short time).

    In any case, I formatted the drive and am currently running the restore disks(mostly to get OS 9) but thought I'd take a few photos of 10.0 while it was on there. It will shortly be dual boot Tiger and OS 9.2.2.

    Incidentally, I'm really happy with this purchase. It cost me about $70 including shipping, but was in the box and included the restore disks, literature, cables(including a perfect "hockey puck" charger)-some still sealed-and overall is just in solid condition. It also has an Airport card and has the RAM maxed(512mb+64mb onboard for 578mb). The only issue is that it's missing the Apple on the lid. If anyone has a lead on where I might find one, I'd appreciate it.

    I'll add photos of the whole thing later-I just wanted to get 10.0 before I wiped it. I've seen folks complain about the "overdone" pinstriping in Tiger, but I suspect anyone who says that has ever used an older version OS X :). For all the failings of early versions of OS X, I do really like the System Profiler layout and the easy access to commonly used settings like Startup Disk.
     

    Attached Files:

  2. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #2
    I have multiple copies of 10.0.1 because my mother was a teacher and her district got new iBook G3s around the time OS X was initially being developed and released.

    I got them passed along to me because my mother has never been very aware of the differences between versions (let alone PowerPC/Intel) and just passed them along whenever I said I needed a copy of OS X.

    I hate them because I could never do a damn thing on them. Apps were either OS9 only or required a minimum of 10.1.5 or so.
     
  3. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #3
    I had installed 10.0 on one of my Mac G3s before the hard drive died. Yes, the pinstriping was everywhere, think they started removing it in Panther.

    By the way, Command-Shift-3 works to take screenshots even in that version of Mac OS X.
     
  4. bunnspecial thread starter macrumors 603

    bunnspecial

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #4
    Command-Shift-3 works in every version of Mac OS I've used(I think even back to System 7.5). I just didn't do it this time since I was being lazy and didn't want to transfer screen shots off over USB and was itching to start running the restore disk.
     
  5. bunnspecial thread starter macrumors 603

    bunnspecial

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #5
    I've said this before, but as far as I'm concerned if I can't comfortably use 10.4 or later on a computer, I will stick to OS 9. Even 13 years after the public OS 9 "funeral", OS 9 is still largely much better supported than versions of OS X prior to 10.4.

    Fortunately, folks like Cameron Kaiser keep 10.4 a viable OS as there's an up-to-date browser for it(the same is true of OS 9), not to mention things like Dropbox(at least for two more months) and other laundry list of other programs.

    Of course, 10.5 is even better, but not an option on G3s.
     
  6. poiihy macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #6
    You should've made a disk image copy of it! D:


    What is the difference between 10.0, 10.1, and 10.2? I've never used 10.1 or 10.0 so to me they all look the same.
     
  7. eyoungren macrumors P6

    eyoungren

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2011
    Location:
    Phoenix • 85037
    #7
    I'm actually good with Panther. Used it for years and it handled all the apps I needed to use. Rock stable. Boring as hell, but stable.

    I hated Jaguar and anything below that and Tiger is a train wreck in mixed network environments (including Windows servers). It's fairly stable on it's own though so I only step down if I have to and a G3 would be one reason for that.

    That said, I try to avoid OS9 at all costs unless it's a Mac that only runs OS9. And if I have to use it I tend to apply Kaleidoscope themes.

    So, in general we seem to think along the same lines, just with a few differences.
     
  8. iamMacPerson macrumors 68030

    iamMacPerson

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Location:
    AZ/10.0.1.1
    #8
    Wow prices of clamshells have skyrocketed. :eek: I only got to use 10.0 for a short time on my PBG3. It's neat to use the first version of OS X. What I would really like to try is copy of Rhapsody with the platinum interface. I don't know if I have a machine that will support it though.
     
  9. ctmpkmlec4 macrumors 6502

    ctmpkmlec4

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2014
    Location:
    Lyons, KS
    #9
    I think the biggest difference among these versions was stability. I wasn't a Mac user back in 2001 (parents wouldn't buy one), but I think the biggest issue is that early versions of OS X were pretty buggy. Some have said that OS X didn't really become usable until 10.2 (Jaguar).

    ----------

    OS X Server 1.2v3 (Rhapsody 5.6) supports up to the Gigabit Ethernet generation of Power Mac G4s. I have it running on a dual 450 MHz machine. It's pretty picky about the hardware, so any deviation from stock specs, aside from RAM, will confuse the installer.

    Maybe I should sell you this one; after installing Rhapsody, I have no clue what to do with it. Suggestions?
     
  10. redheeler macrumors 603

    redheeler

    Joined:
    Oct 17, 2014
    #10
    Fair enough, here are some screenshots of my 450 MHz Sawtooth running 10.2.8 as I got it. I had to boot my iBook G4 into Target Disk Mode to transfer these. The one on the right was taken for comparison while booted in Tiger through Target Disk Mode, notice how they hugely toned down the pinstripes.

    It's more than capable of running Tiger, especially with that 1 GB of RAM, but for the sake of being retro I think I'll leave it on 10.2.8. It does also have OS 9.2.1 installed.
     

    Attached Files:

  11. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #11
    I think that it wasn't until like Panther that OS X truly started to morph into the stable beautiful cat that we know today.
     
  12. bunnspecial, Mar 2, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 2, 2015

    bunnspecial thread starter macrumors 603

    bunnspecial

    Joined:
    May 3, 2014
    Location:
    Kentucky
    #12
    I know that you really, really don't like OS 9, and have a lot of good reasons for feeling that way.

    I hated it too "back in the day." As I've related here before, my first real exposure to Macs was in my schools "Mac Lab" that was full of tray loading iMac G3s. I hated pretty much everything about the whole experience, from the mushy iMac keyboards, to the Hockey Puck mice, and the fact that they would seemingly crash when running Office 98 about every 10 minutes. I'm not sure what OS they were running, but given most public schools' reluctance to upgrade I'd guess it was probably OS 8.5(which is what the tray loaders shipped with). I later used a B&W G3 and Adobe Pagemaker pretty extensively to work on layouts for the school newspaper, and that was a much more pleasureable experience although admittedly still at times frustrating since I still had a "Windows" mindset about things.

    As my interests have been increasingly drawn to older and older Macs, I have gained a new appreciation for OS 9. Even with its faults, it's still much lighter weight than any version of OS X(or at least any I would use-see above) and makes using borderline hardware a lot more enjoyable. Most of my G3s are set up to dual boot OS 9 and the most recent version of OS X they willl support(although I tend to skip OS X all together if the computer won't support 10.4), but the G3s primarily get booted to OS 9. Between Word Perfect, Office 2001, Photoshop 7, and Chemdraw 2002 I have everything I need to get work done. Most of the games I like to play are OS 9 native, and I much prefer running them in OS 9 to running in classic mode(even if I'm using classic mode on a G5 or high-spec G4). Now that I've gotten used to "thinking" in OS 9, I can pretty much use it as comfortably as I can OS X. After 3 years of constant Mac use, I find myself having to think to use Windows now, despite the fact that I spent probably 20 years using every version of Windows from 3.1 to Windows 7.

    This post is being typed from Classilla on my new 366mhz Clamshell-a computer that feels very responsive under OS 9. I'm even using OS 9.0.4, since I was feeling too lazy tonight to get on the OS 9 upgrade treadmill(going from 9.0 to 9.2.2 requires installing 9.1, 9.2.1, and then 9.2.2 in that order. Each install takes 15-20 minutes) I'm not sure how it will do with Tiger installed.

    By the way, it's funny how those of us using(relatively) modern hardware think of OS 9 as being "lightweight." I mentioned something to a professor at school(a Mac guy) a few weeks ago about how I was planning on installing System 7.5 on my SE, and I though he was going to have a heart attack at the thought. He suggested that I install System 6, which frankly drives me nuts since there's effectively no multi-tasking. He also couldn't believe that I was-happilly-running 7.5 on my Quadra. At least for me, if a computer won't run at least System 7 or System 7.5(preferably the latter) I lose a lot of interest in it(although that still doesn't mean I wouldn't buy a 128K or 512K for the right price.
     
  13. iamMacPerson macrumors 68030

    iamMacPerson

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2011
    Location:
    AZ/10.0.1.1
    #13
    Naw it's fine. I'm currently trying to shrink my collection into just the machines I really like. I'm up to my ears in Macs, from '85 to '06. 4 are heading to the recyclers here this coming weekend. 2 were beige boxes (both needed multiple repairs) and the other 2 later G4 towers that I couldn't get rid of and couldn't keep. I still have a long way to go. Then I'll probably focus on PPC laptops.
     
  14. poiihy macrumors 68020

    poiihy

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2014
    #14
    Platinum Rhapsody? So some early version of OS X looked like OS 9? :eek: I wanna see!!!
     
  15. comda macrumors 6502a

    comda

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2011
    #15
    Was 10.2.8 Really that bad? When i ran it i had absolutely no issues with it other then the fact it seemed sluggish on my imac G3. My G3 is a 400Mhz Tangerine model with 1gb of Ram (recent upgrade-had 384 when running Jaguar) and a 80 GB drive (20gb when running Jaguar) I had this machine running Jag until christmas 2014 when i FINALLY got to it. I recieved the imac in 2009 and used it as my secondary mac for garageband, itunes, DVD player (DVD rom drive in mine) and some os9 gaming (mainly Titanic, Adventure out of time and doom)

    But as ive said with all the updates other then being a little sluggish compared to it now running tiger i had no issues with Jaguar.
     
  16. weckart macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    #16
    A common issue with Clamshells and I have never seen spares for sale anywhere. Someone, somewhere did mention fashioning one with something like silly putty or something similar that hardens. You can apparently get a good colour match, too.

    Yup. Cheetah is often disparaged as OSX Beta 2 because it really was only there to showcase what OS X would deliver later. It had no real practical use outside of supporting Classic apps, which is pretty much all that buyers would have at the time. Even Apple's own OS X apps required Puma as a minimum.

    I didn't bother installing OS X until Jagwahr came out for that reason. Reviews of OS X at the time were pretty scathing.

    If anyone has a boxed set of OS X Server 1.2 or 1.2v3 they want to offload, I would be most interested.

    http://toastytech.com/guis/osxsv.html

    That website has screenshots of all sorts of ancient OSes including Developer releases of Rhapsody/OS X. You can waste hours there.

    http://toastytech.com/guis/rhap.html
     
  17. Altemose macrumors G3

    Altemose

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2013
    Location:
    Elkton, Maryland
    #17

    It wasn't a bad OS and it gave us a lot over 10.0 and 10.1. That being said, it was a stepping stone for Panther's improvement.
     
  18. weckart macrumors 68040

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2004
    #18
    It also had a humdinger of a bug. Lucky for me that I wasn't affected.
     
  19. asiga macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2012
    #19
    I'd rewrite the above as:
    Because, man, the end of the OS X show started with Lion. We use Yosemite because we need to (you need to install it if you're a developer), but the difference is that we used Tiger and Snow Leopard because we needed it and loved it. Now we just need it (and only because of the market... maybe we even won't need it anymore 5 years from now).
     
  20. mikiotty macrumors 6502

    mikiotty

    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2014
    Location:
    Rome, Italy
    #20
    I tried Yosemite on my MacBook Pro... And I reverted back to Mavericks 3 weeks later. Utter *****.
    Actually my MacBook Pro is my least used Mac, with my MDD being my main machine, my iMac G5 being my FTP/web server with Debian 7.8 hosting my local website and my test pages, and my PowerBook being my main laptop in school, and Leopard is my main OS. It's fast, stable and functional. All I use my MacBook Pro for is video editing and I hate FCPX.
     
  21. fuchsdh macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Jun 19, 2014
    #21
    Aesthetically I think 10.3-10.4 had some of the most interesting visuals for me. They toned down the pinstripes to a very pleasant light texture in Panther, and "recessed" the close/minimize/maximize buttons whereas before they were always awkwardly floating. 10.4 brought the more attractive "pill" pane switchers versus the old style tabs, which I always preferred, and of course 10.4 used unified windows and got rid of a lot of the brushed metal, which was good.

    I think the one thing I miss most with current versions of OS X is the old style aqua traffic lights on the windows. 10.5-10.6's were just plain ugly, and then they returned in 10.7 but smaller for some reason (even though the hit targets were the same).

    At some point I do want to get a nostalgia machine for early OS X and OS 9.
     
  22. A.Goldberg macrumors 68000

    A.Goldberg

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2015
    Location:
    Boston
    #22
    That's what I did- just ordered myself a TiBook.

    I vaguely remember using 10.0 on iBooks my middle school had back in the day... back in the year 2001? They ran OS 9 normally but I could get sneakily get around some security blocks if I started in OS X by holding down the X button.

    I forgot about the extensive pin striping. Maybe Steve Jobs was a Yankees fans.
     
  23. MatthewLTL macrumors 68000

    MatthewLTL

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2015
    Location:
    Rochester, MN
    #23
    Technically speaking, wouldn't it be capable of running Leopard?
     
  24. tevion5 macrumors 68000

    tevion5

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2011
    Location:
    Ireland
    #24
    Works on my Macintosh 512K running System 6, 5, 4...and even 2 I think! Saves them as a MacPaint file. Have there is a few steps involved in getting them to something like JPEG. AppleTalk them over to an OS9 machine, use and use graphic converter.
     
  25. MatthewLTL macrumors 68000

    MatthewLTL

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2015
    Location:
    Rochester, MN
    #25
    what are the G4 towers? if they work i might be interested probably cheaper to ship than junk (if you're in the US)
     

Share This Page