Thread

my vision for 68k/ early ppc macs

my vision for 68k/ early ppc macs 68k 88 posts Aug 9, 2007 — Nov 5, 2009

#1 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 01:14

The vison has changed to a new OS. Read through the topic to understand.

Original Vison:

I believe that we should create a website that is pure text with some small images, that will serve as a hub of the 68k macs on the web. i noticed that even these forums are slightly bloated for a 68k. it would feature-

Abandon ware Downloads Via HTML

Information on older systems

World news

Apple news

and a development team dedicated to writing new apps for a 68k and early ppc mac! i have a vision that we will port many modern apps to the 68k! And provide a portal for older computers to thrive on! i noticed even the forum is alot for a 68k to process, and it would be mostly text, with limited java.

this is a wondrous vision, that old macs can run apps like Firefox,abiword, and much more. What do you think? Should we revive OS9,8, and 7?

-macintoshman

i know the idea is crazy

But if it works we will be using old quadras more! :beige:

#2 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 02:25

http://www.68kmla.org/projects/ anyone? People here who really love some things here could have their own little pet projects there to maintain or something. If we could implement something like that, I'd totally be on board.

/me starts longingly at ~tl

I'd do a little thing on 68k *nix

#3 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 02:41

...this is a wondrous vision, that old macs can run apps like Firefox...

Hahaha! _Not_ going to happen. someone already tried to whip up an OS 9 build but it was extremely slow, crashy and all around extremely nasty. On a 68k Mac it would run like someone paralysed from the neck down.

#4 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 09:46

The plan is for there eventually to be some nice, 68k friendly text only themes for the Forums and the Wiki (as well as some nice looking Mac OS inspired ones). However, that'll only happen when I have time to make up some new themes. Which I promise I will do soon. Really.

The projects idea is interesting, I'll look to see what the hurdles in implementing it would be. I'm guessing my (fairly) limited server space is going to be the main one if everyone decides to jump on board and start their own sites.

As for the Abandonware downloads via HTML -- it's not going to happen. The legality is questionable at best, and the last thing we want is the 68kMLA getting or having to defend a cease and desist suit.

#5 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 16:06

I think it is extremely unrealistic to think anyone is going to jump onto a Classic development project at this point - even a "simple port" of something existing. Heck, few enough people did it when Classic was still viable. If you want to, by all means go ahead.

#6 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 17:29

Well, Ok So Here Is The Idea Now:

No Downloads

Text Site Hub For 68k macs

Posibley new apps- I am not a programmer, but I do Know how a good project should be done. Well, How about a new Modern browser for 68k? I am sure it would be popular too.

I am making project plans in mac plan!

#7 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 17:42

I am making the prototype site! On my Powermac G3!

Wish me luck!

#8 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 18:32

It is up:

http://68kmac.bravehost.com/default.htm

Tell me what you think, and here is something i have to say:

Look beyond what cant be done, and and look at what can.

we should revive Mac OS classic as a usable platform! Heck, Be os still gets new apps!

#9 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 18:51

Heck, Be os still gets new apps!

Yes, but Zeta/YellowTab/whatever is still being (somewhat) actively developed. It's (IIRC) OSS, so it's got that going for it. Apple has put the nail in the coffin of Classic. Trying to get modern-ish Unix software to build in A/UX (like I do) is kinda silly - and I'll admit it - but it's fairly trivial to give it a try. Developing Mac OS apps, or porting them, is decidedly non-trivial.

#10 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 18:57

As of earlier this year, ZETA (YellowTab) is as dead as BeOS itself. They didn't actually have permission to be using the BeOS source code (surprise surprise) and hence had to stop distributing it. The BeOS legacy isn't completely over though, as Haiku still seems to be going:

http://haiku-os.org/

It's a complete, ground up, rewrite that aims to be binary compatible with BeOS...

#11 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 18:59

I think this is a really special idea.

This is something that I wanted to look at not just another 1000 pages of blurb from people I don't know!

It's a really great idea & I love the link from macintoshman

[

] ]'>

#12 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 19:22

Well, Mac OS can be modernized. Anything can. And apple put A nail in OS9s coffin. A nail cannot stop us! The binary of classic is in use today! Many people love the mac but cant afford osx! Anyone who knows C++ and knowledge on how classic works, can write a program. A At least the modern web browser can be done. Or adding protected memory to the kernel. I'm sure others have some ideas too. Woudnt you like to have a modern browser on a quadra? Yes.They will be usable by more people than collectors if this project is successful.

#13 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 19:54

As of earlier this year, ZETA (YellowTab) is as dead as BeOS itself. They didn't actually have permission to be using the BeOS source code (surprise surprise) and hence had to stop distributing it. The BeOS legacy isn't completely over though, as Haiku still seems to be going:
http://haiku-os.org/

It's a complete, ground up, rewrite that aims to be binary compatible with BeOS...

Why can't we get someone to write a ground-up implementation of something cool ... like A/UX???

#14 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 20:55

Do you mean modernising A/UX, or making a new A/UX ompatible with all 68k macs?

#15 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 21:23

I know I would like to see a linux/unix more specially tuned for blazing speed on Mac hardware.. kinda like DSL but 68k.

#16 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 22:05

A never liked linux. I prefer Mac OS. A/Ux might be a good base for the project. we just need to extend support.

#17 Thu, 9 Aug 2007 - 22:36

Do you mean modernising A/UX, or making a new A/UX ompatible with all 68k macs?

Something Unix-like (i.e. solid "modern" OS) compatible with classic MacOS apps and such, with our beloved GUI. Kind of like what OS X would have been if they'd gotten started 10 years earlier, or what A/UX nearly was, or what Copland might have been if it hadn't drifted aimlessly into oblivion.

The idea was discussed several years ago in the A/UX newsgroup, and got a name (NouveAUX) but no farther than that.

#18 Fri, 10 Aug 2007 - 13:39

Ok, I have a name. ClassicOS V 1. Anyone else have a sugestion for a name for a new os?

#19 Fri, 10 Aug 2007 - 21:23

MachTEN is very close to what you're describing, but it's not open source. You could probably put something together with NetBSD and the JIT build of Basilisk II

#20 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 - 18:55

Something Unix-like (i.e. solid "modern" OS) ... Kind of like what OS X would have been if they'd gotten started 10 years earlier ...

Port NextSTEP/OpenStep/GNUstep?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nextstep

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNUstep

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenStep

http://www.nextarchive.net/

Ok, so not exactly "classic Mac app compatible", but with Objective C onboard, you could code apps that can be compiled to run on either 68k machines or under OS X

#21 Sun, 12 Aug 2007 - 03:04

A UNIX with a Mac-like GUI?

What a novel idea!

#22 Sun, 12 Aug 2007 - 03:35

Nah, it'll never happen.

#23 Sun, 12 Aug 2007 - 18:36

HA! Next thing you know Macs will be running on Intel chips...

Speaking of A/UX I should pull out the IIci I have it installed on and play with it a bit. Installed it years ago and never really messed with it.

Seriously though, a modern *nix that is easy to setup and use on a 68k would be pretty nice.

#24 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 00:16

Okay, a stupid question here:

Unix/Linux with a GUI crawls on even the fastest 68k machine

BUT...

NeXT machines used 68030's and 68040's, were based on a Unix microkernel, and had a gorgeous GUI and very good performance.

SO...

Why can't *nix distros have a resonsive GUI on 68k machines? Is it a lack f optimization for 68k in the kernel? Lack of optimization in the video drivers for X-Windows? Or is it just that NeXT's implementation of Display Postscript was intrinsically more resource-efficient than an X-Window server ever could be?

Matt

#25 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 00:27

I'm on board for the website project. Can offer my documentation-writing skills to it if you want.

#26 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 04:15

Unix/Linux with a GUI crawls on even the fastest 68k machine / Why can't *nix distros have a resonsive GUI on 68k machines?

A/UX was quite responsive in the GUI. But its display wasn't X11 either.

#27 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 08:14

I would think X11 is the main bottleneck on older machines, along with not so efficient window managers...

#28 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 09:38

So what you'd need would be say a window manager that just calls the Toolbox routines ... ?

#29 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 15:35

Or you could port Kdrive, and, say, mlvwm(Macintosh Like Virtual Window Manager.)

I don't know what the efficiency of mlvwm is, but kdrive is great, I've personally used it with twm on a 486 with 4mb of RAM and it was quite responsive.

#30 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 - 15:58

Ack...mlvwm hasn't been updated in ages, and I don't think it was all that great to begin with. If you want a fast/light wm, look no further than Blackbox.