I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
old G3 mini-tower.

On 10/29/03 6:29 PM, in article 291020031929499390%dsample@synapse.net, "Don
Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:

> I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> old G3 mini-tower.


I haven't tried this on one, but I took it to mean it HAD to have built-in
USB, and not just a USB card.

This would indicate only "New World" Macs (Lombard PowerBook, iMac, B&W G3
and later) may run it.

Brian

"Don Sample" <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message
news:291020031929499390%dsample@synapse.net...
> I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> old G3 mini-tower.

This works on Jaguar... may work for Panther as well...
http://eshop.macsales.com/OSXCenter/XPostFacto/

Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:

> I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> old G3 mini-tower.

Unfortunately, Apple now seem to be trying to emulate M$ - talking
b*?ll!!ck@ and going for the $$$.

Although, I think the move to UNIX and open source is the best thing
Apple have done since the first Mac, but the final consequences are
going to be fairly long term.

I don't have an answer to your specifc problem but I am currently
running OS 10.2.8 on a 7600. It took some work and expenditure but
signifcantly less than a new Mac.

I've stayed with Apple for years because the backward compatibility has
been amazingly good compared with M$. I'm still successfully running
applications >10 years old in Classic.

My one big gripe is external DVD drives and their non-compatibility with
playing video DVDs.
--
Larry Stoter

In article <291020031929499390%dsample@synapse.net>,
Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:

> I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> old G3 mini-tower.

The "built-in USB" is not the problem. That's just a handy way of
distinguishing the ROM needed. The machines that had USB built-in had
"New World" ROM in em; those that didn't, don't.

I have no idea if X Post Facto, a shareware program that USED to be able
to allow OS X to be installed on machines that otherwise couldn't use it
(up to a point, obviously) can get around this problem or not.
--
Cheers,
_Chas_
http://www.apple.com/switch
non-spammers can write to chasm at mac (dot com)

In article <1g3nuj8.1o1gova1bx2njcN%larry@cymru.freewire.co.u k>,
larry@cymru.freewire.co.uk (Larry Stoter) wrote:

> Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:
>
> > I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> > USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> > old G3 mini-tower.
>
> Unfortunately, Apple now seem to be trying to emulate M$ - talking
> b*?ll!!ck@ and going for the $$$.

How so exactly? They had an INCREDIBLE run of backwards-compatibility
through to OS 9, which can run on machines ten years older than itself.

OS X, being a *completely different OS that bears some superficial
resemblance to previous Mac OSs* had to be definition draw a line in the
sand, and that line was most models of G3. Given that the G3 line had
first appeared some FOUR YEARS EARLIER, that seemed pretty reasonable to
me.

So now we arrive in 2003 (nearly 2004) with a new version of OS X that
-- boo hoo -- can't be run on machines older than SIX YEARS OLD. If
you're not upgrading your Mac at least every SIX YEARS, you sir are one
spoiled crybaby. The PCs I have to keep around go obsolete in half that
time, and that's pushing it with user-installed upgrades. If I primarily
used them for games or anything the required serious processing power,
I'd have had to upgrade them every TWO years.

I hate to break this to you, but I guess I'd better warn you now --
Apple will someday come out with an all-64-bit version of OS X, and --
brace yourself -- it flat-out WON'T RUN on any 32-bit machines. That
includes EVERYTHING sold by Apple EVER except the G5s.

What's worse (hold on tight), this could happen in as little as THREE
YEARS.

> Although, I think the move to UNIX and open source is the best thing
> Apple have done since the first Mac, but the final consequences are
> going to be fairly long term.
>
> I don't have an answer to your specifc problem but I am currently
> running OS 10.2.8 on a 7600. It took some work and expenditure but
> signifcantly less than a new Mac.

For heaven's sake man BUY YOURSELF A NEW COMPUTER. You deserve it,
you've earned it! At least something a BIT more modern, like say ...
FROM THIS CENTURY. I mean, hurrah for you getting OS X on a 7600, but
that's the end of the line -- and you're complaining?!

If you find 10.2.8 sufficiently fast as to be workable on a 7600, I
can't even imagine what it would be like to plop down a new dual-G5 on
your desk. Modern software! Modern hardware! Your head would probably
explode.

> My one big gripe is external DVD drives and their non-compatibility with
> playing video DVDs.

Now on this I hear ya. I partially understand the reasoning (Apple
doesn't want to take on the expense/effort required for compatibility
testing), but if the DVD manufacturers of this world have agreed upon a
set of communications protocols (as they appear to have done), Apple
should consider adding this -- after all, they allow third-party
cameras, MP3 players and printers to work "out of the box" with their
apps, don't they?
--
Cheers,
_Chas_
http://www.apple.com/switch
non-spammers can write to chasm at mac (dot com)

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 19:29:49 -0500, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:

>I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
>USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
>old G3 mini-tower.
No, it isn't. I have tried.

Mac OS X 10.3 Cannot be installed on this machine.

Beige 300 MHz G3, 320MB. 10.2.8 runs just fine on it.

It's kind of...a bummer

Xpostfacto is working on it, no results yet.

--
Ir. E.E. van Andel, Fine Wire Heat Exchangers, Fiwihex B.V. www.fiwihex.com
Wierdensestraat 74, NL-7604 BK Almelo, The Netherlands eur@fiwihex.nl
phone +31-546-491106 fax +31-546-491107 mobile +31-653-286573

Eur van Andel <eur@fiwihex.nl> wrote in message news:<rnmcqv817ttnd3cdntlo72a139odml3tjl@4ax.com>. ..
> On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 19:29:49 -0500, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:
>
> >I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> >USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> >old G3 mini-tower.

[...]
The various versions of OS X -- beta, 10.0, 10.1.... -- have each been significatnly
faster on Apple's current machines. My G4 tower, powerbooks, ibook, have all
seen markedly improved performance. But I suspect that's because of the system
being rewritten to make optimized use of the particular hardware in Apple's
current machines, because my old 8600 with 800Mhz Sonnet board doesn't seem
to be getting better. 10.0 was faster than the beta, certainly, but maybe it's just
my own perception, but the older machine seemed to get LESS stable or fast
with 10.2.8.

Anyone have any experience? Unsubstantiatied rumors or conjecture :-) ?

Mark

In article <f4d03077.0311110906.781edaef@posting.google.com >, G. Mark
Stewart <gmark@svs.com> wrote:

> Eur van Andel <eur@fiwihex.nl> wrote in message
> news:<rnmcqv817ttnd3cdntlo72a139odml3tjl@4ax.com>. ..
> > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 19:29:49 -0500, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:
> >
> > >I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> > >USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> > >old G3 mini-tower.
>
> [...]
> The various versions of OS X -- beta, 10.0, 10.1.... -- have each been
> significatnly
> faster on Apple's current machines. My G4 tower, powerbooks, ibook, have all
> seen markedly improved performance. But I suspect that's because of the system
> being rewritten to make optimized use of the particular hardware in Apple's
> current machines, because my old 8600 with 800Mhz Sonnet board doesn't seem
> to be getting better. 10.0 was faster than the beta, certainly, but maybe
> it's just
> my own perception, but the older machine seemed to get LESS stable or fast
> with 10.2.8.
>
> Anyone have any experience? Unsubstantiatied rumors or conjecture :-) ?
>
> Mark

My old G3 minitower has also been behaving badly since I put 10.2.8 on
it, with frequent lockups.

Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote in message news:<111120032015031004%dsample@synapse.net>...
> In article <f4d03077.0311110906.781edaef@posting.google.com >, G. Mark
> Stewart <gmark@svs.com> wrote:
>
> > Eur van Andel <eur@fiwihex.nl> wrote in message
> > news:<rnmcqv817ttnd3cdntlo72a139odml3tjl@4ax.com>. ..
> > > On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 19:29:49 -0500, Don Sample <dsample@synapse.net> wrote:
> > >
> > > >I know they say that the minimum requirement is a system with built in
> > > >USB ports, but I was wondering if it was possible to install it on my
> > > >old G3 mini-tower.
> >
> > [...]
> > The various versions of OS X -- beta, 10.0, 10.1.... -- have each been
> > significatnly
> > faster on Apple's current machines. My G4 tower, powerbooks, ibook, have all
> > seen markedly improved performance. But I suspect that's because of the system
> > being rewritten to make optimized use of the particular hardware in Apple's
> > current machines, because my old 8600 with 800Mhz Sonnet board doesn't seem
> > to be getting better. 10.0 was faster than the beta, certainly, but maybe
> > it's just
> > my own perception, but the older machine seemed to get LESS stable or fast
> > with 10.2.8.
> >
> > Anyone have any experience? Unsubstantiatied rumors or conjecture :-) ?
> >
> > Mark
>
> My old G3 minitower has also been behaving badly since I put 10.2.8 on
> it, with frequent lockups.

Have you tried downgrading it to 10.2 or 10.1? I think I may try that next, but
I'm suspecting it may be a real pain.

Mark