Older Mac OS versions and older Macs

Discussion in 'Apple' started by maron, Jul 21, 2003.

  1. maron

    maron Guest

    Is there any advantage to using older versions of Mac OS
    with older Macs? Obviously you can't use OSX with an old
    8500/120, but (for example) would OS7 run noticeably
    faster on it than OS9?
     
    maron, Jul 21, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. maron

    Bill Guest

    Crucifyself03 wrote:
    >
    > >Is there any advantage to using older versions of Mac OS
    > >with older Macs? Obviously you can't use OSX with an old
    > >8500/120, but (for example) would OS7 run noticeably
    > >faster on it than OS9?

    >
    > Yes, but much software will not run in 7.x thee days. Good luck finding all
    > the 7.x software on the net.
    >
    > 7.x is also quite buggy and outdated.


    Remember 7.5.2 which shipped with the first PCI Macs? You want to talk
    about buggy; that OS and the subsequent updates until they got to 7.5.5
    makes OS 10.2x look like heaven. I was ready to throw my 7200
    (literally) out the window when an Apple update (7.5.3.867539 or
    something like that) wiped out my ability to print to my Stylewriter
    2400. My son had to actually stop me from tossing it.

    Bill
     
    Bill, Jul 21, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. maron

    Peter KERR Guest

    maron asked:
    > Is there any advantage to using older versions of Mac OS
    > with older Macs? Obviously you can't use OSX with an old
    > 8500/120, but (for example) would OS7 run noticeably
    > faster on it than OS9?


    Simple rule of thumb (wait for the thousand contras...)

    68k Mac - OS 7.1
    NuBus Mac - OS 8.1
    PCI Mac - OS 9.1

    Note that there are min & max hardware limits for each OS,
    and min & max OS limits for each machine.
    The arguments on these should keep this thread going
    far longer than it deserves...
     
    Peter KERR, Jul 21, 2003
    #3
  4. maron

    maron Guest

    Bill wrote:
    > Crucifyself03 wrote:
    >
    >>>Is there any advantage to using older versions of Mac OS
    >>>with older Macs? Obviously you can't use OSX with an old
    >>>8500/120, but (for example) would OS7 run noticeably
    >>>faster on it than OS9?

    >>
    >>Yes, but much software will not run in 7.x thee days. Good luck finding all
    >>the 7.x software on the net.
    >>
    >>7.x is also quite buggy and outdated.

    >
    >
    > Remember 7.5.2 which shipped with the first PCI Macs? You want to talk
    > about buggy; that OS and the subsequent updates until they got to 7.5.5
    > makes OS 10.2x look like heaven. I was ready to throw my 7200
    > (literally) out the window when an Apple update (7.5.3.867539 or
    > something like that) wiped out my ability to print to my Stylewriter
    > 2400. My son had to actually stop me from tossing it.
    >
    > Bill


    What about OS 8.1 then? Was that stable enough to use?
    What I have now is OS9.1 and it seems sluggish on
    this old computer.

    The alternative would be to upgrade to a faster processor,
    but I have no idea how to do that on a Mac.
     
    maron, Jul 21, 2003
    #4
  5. maron

    Brian Carlin Guest

    maron <> wrote in message news:<>...
    > Is there any advantage to using older versions of Mac OS
    > with older Macs?


    Yes. Usually an older Mac works best with the OS that it came with,
    originally. They were designed to work together. Of course I would
    be tempted to upgrade to the latest OS that will work, because I'd
    want certain features, such as AppleScript.

    A database of old Macs, production dates, and the range of OS releases
    that can be used with them are available at:
    http://lowendmac.com/

    Scroll down and see the links on the right side to get to the Mac
    models that interest you.
     
    Brian Carlin, Jul 21, 2003
    #5
  6. maron <> wrote:

    > What about OS 8.1 then? Was that stable enough to use?


    yes, it's rather stable; probably less stable than a UNIX system like OS
    X though.

    --
    Georg Schwarz http://home.pages.de/~schwarz/
    +49 177 8811442
     
    Georg Schwarz, Jul 21, 2003
    #6
  7. In <> Georg Schwarz wrote:
    > Peter KERR <> wrote:
    >
    >> 68k Mac - OS 7.1

    >
    > or 7.5.5 for the faster ones with adequate RAM.
    >
    >> NuBus Mac - OS 8.1

    >
    > I would ad the 601 PCI Macs here. With adequate RAM 8.6 might also be
    > an option.
    >
    >> PCI Mac - OS 9.1

    >
    >


    I would like to add that I ran OS 7.6.1 on a Performa 631CD with
    20 MB RAM and was quite stable for me. A friend still has that old
    beast of ours up and running.

    Ron Bardo <>
     
    Ron or Midgie Bardo, Jul 22, 2003
    #7
  8. maron

    maron Guest

    Phil Lefebvre wrote:
    > In article <250720031240529071%>,
    > Michael Allbritton <> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>What about OS 8.1 then? Was that stable enough to use?
    >>>What I have now is OS9.1 and it seems sluggish on
    >>>this old computer.

    >>

    >
    > I keep a copy of OS 8.1 on my 8500 and it screams compared to OS 9.1.
    > Really, it is sooo much faster it is like twice the processor speed.


    Interesting.
    Do you know what OS 9.1 added that made it so much slower?

    >
    >>>The alternative would be to upgrade to a faster processor,
    >>>but I have no idea how to do that on a Mac.

    >>

    >
    > My 8500 has a G4/450 upgrade. To install, remove the 4 screws on the
    > back of the 8500, slide off the cover, flip up the little support, grasp
    > and pull the CPU (the thing with the heat sink), install CPU upgrade,
    > press CUDA switch, reverse. The upgrade will come with good
    > instructions. It is pretty easy, and you can get a nice boost for around
    > $100.
    >
    > Adding RAM is also a good idea, but is much more complicated.
    >


    Thanks for the information.
    I'm saving your message for future reference.
     
    maron, Jul 26, 2003
    #8
  9. In article <>, maron <>
    wrote:

    > Phil Lefebvre wrote:
    > > I keep a copy of OS 8.1 on my 8500 and it screams compared to OS 9.1.
    > > Really, it is sooo much faster it is like twice the processor speed.

    >
    > Interesting.
    > Do you know what OS 9.1 added that made it so much slower?


    Not really. Just that OS 9.x is much more resource-intensive. As an
    example, OS 8 was written with 16 MB as the minimum required, and 32
    recommended, while OS 9 doubles that.

    > Thanks for the information.
    > I'm saving your message for future reference.


    Glad to help.

    --
    Chicago, IL
    Remove "GO" to reply.
     
    Phil Lefebvre, Jul 29, 2003
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Henry Bemis
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    340
    Henry Bemis
    Jan 29, 2007
  2. Terry McDanel
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    268
  3. Jef Atkinson
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    198
    Jef Atkinson
    Jun 30, 2004
  4. G. A. Edgar
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    198
    G. A. Edgar
    Jul 28, 2005
  5. Replies:
    6
    Views:
    252
Loading...

Share This Page