Apple accidentally provided vehicle for C64 nostalgia?
in [Commodore]
|
From: David Murray on 25 Jan 2010 08:56 Why, specifically, are you interested in the eMac? What you describe pretty much applies to just about any Mac made in the last 10 or 15 years. many of those can be had much cheaper than an eMac.
From: commodorejohn on 25 Jan 2010 10:18 On Jan 25, 7:56 am, David Murray <adri...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Why, specifically, are you interested in the eMac? What you describe > pretty much applies to just about any Mac made in the last 10 or 15 > years. many of those can be had much cheaper than an eMac. Well, it does look like the eMac is one of the last PowerPC-based Macs, which makes assembler dabbling a lot easier (there's...what, four different modes of operation in modern Intel processors? Five?) But yeah, it looks like any PowerPC Mac from the iMac onwards has the Open Firmware interface, which, as well as allowing the low-level interface described here, makes it a lot easier to run a non-Apple OS (i.e. Linux.) Anyway, interesting stuff! I'll have to keep on the lookout for a PowerPC-based Mac. If you're not picky about the model, you can usually get them cheap as free from public schools, at least here in the US; they've accumulated huge numbers of Macs over the past couple of decades, and it's a lot cheaper to give them away than to pay to have them disposed of :)
From: Tinkerer Atlarge on 25 Jan 2010 21:20 David Murray <adric22(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > Why, specifically, are you interested in the eMac? What you describe > pretty much applies to just about any Mac made in the last 10 or 15 > years. many of those can be had much cheaper than an eMac. I was hoping to end up with a community of like-minded enthusiasts pooling their resources the way I remember with the C64. (Faint chance, I know). Anyone with a "New World" powerpc Macintosh would be welcome. But if anyone went to the trouble of acquiring a computer specifically for the purpose, it would be advantageous if we all had the same (and, even then, preferably with an ATI graphics chip like the majority of eMacs). The eMac is a physically closed computer in the sense that it has been deliberately designed to make adding extra hardware difficult. Some would say that is contrary to the whole point of Open Firmware. However I would prefer if we all focussed on identical hardware rather than inevitably disperse chasing butterflies of our own, each ending up with more in common with the users of other platforms than in what we were expecting to have in common. (Remember the C64's Programmers Reference Guide? the SID chip? the VIC chip? Macs appear to lack similar documentation. We will be writing our own.) Don't get me wrong. I am not against open architecture. One of the first things I did with my C64 was make a writable back-up cartridge, literally using a hacksaw. I used very dodgy glued copper strips to give it enough extra connections to make it compatible with the C64 expansion slot. (The chip with piggy-back battery was mounted in an exposed removable rom socket. At the time, saving things on computer chips rather than audio cassette tapes seemed more logial to me. For some reason it didn't catch on ;-). Similar to the C64, I feel there is enough hardware already packed inside an eMac to absorb a lot of peoples' interest for a long time to come. I seek the advantage of sharing knowledge among people who remain focussed on the same things - reducing rather than perpetually adding to our remaining stock of "unknown". Cheers Tink
From: Tinkerer Atlarge on 25 Jan 2010 21:56 commodorejohn <commodorejohn(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jan 25, 7:56 am, David Murray <adri...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Why, specifically, are you interested in the eMac? What you describe > > pretty much applies to just about any Mac made in the last 10 or 15 > > years. many of those can be had much cheaper than an eMac. > Well, it does look like the eMac is one of the last PowerPC-based > Macs, which makes assembler dabbling a lot easier (there's...what, > four different modes of operation in modern Intel processors? Five?) > But yeah, it looks like any PowerPC Mac from the iMac onwards has the > Open Firmware interface, which, as well as allowing the low-level > interface described here, makes it a lot easier to run a non-Apple OS > (i.e. Linux.) > > Anyway, interesting stuff! I'll have to keep on the lookout for a > PowerPC-based Mac. If you're not picky about the model, you can > usually get them cheap as free from public schools, at least here in > the US; they've accumulated huge numbers of Macs over the past couple > of decades, and it's a lot cheaper to give them away than to pay to > have them disposed of :) Hi :-) If you do get an eMac and have any choice in the model you get, the two things to watch out for are graphics chip and USB. The earlier ones have usb 1.1 which is fine for the sort of things you might want to do in Open Firmware, but can be sometimes restricting when using OS X with current apps. I think Apple were still trying to steer buyers into favouring FireWire at the time. Consequently if you do end up with usb 1.1 and plan using an external disk drive, getting a hd with dual FireWire/USB connectors could be the way to go. Some external drive manufactures (eg Seagate, WD) offer a FireWire connector as an optional extra on their external usb drive enclosures. I recommend ATI graphics over nVidia (installed on 700 MHz and some 800 MHz models). There were problems with nVidia which is why Apple replaced it in later models. I prefer OSX 10.4 ("Tiger") to 10.5 ("Leopard") which, in any case, only works on 1GHz+ Macs. However OS version or lack thereof is irrelevant to the internals of Open Firmware. Don't attempt to upgrade OSX without first checking that your Mac's specifications meet the requirements for a particular version of OS X. I have 2 eMacs, a 2003 vintage 1GHz model and 1.25 GHz 2006 model. Cheers, Tink
From: Mr. X on 26 Jan 2010 12:49
"Tinkerer Atlarge" <tinkerer(a)optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:1jcx6yj.1sjm4yd1158h9eN%tinkerer(a)optusnet.com.au... > Similar to the C64, I feel there is enough hardware already packed > inside an eMac to absorb a lot of peoples' interest for a long time to > come. I seek the advantage of sharing knowledge among people who remain > focussed on the same things - reducing rather than perpetually adding to > our remaining stock of "unknown". You may want to consider contributing to the BSD projects on PPC (includes eMacs) http://www.netbsd.org/ports/macppc/models.html Or Linux on PPC (also includes eMacs) http://www.penguinppc.org/ Both projects allow you to dig though the source code and share your findings. They also recycle old machines into something that can get on the net with a modern browser which is all most people need. It also saves them from the dumpster and provides net access to people that otherwise wouldn't have it. Of course, you should install VICE on every machine you set up! :D http://www.viceteam.org/ X |