Apple power mac g4 free download - Apple Power Mac G4 SuperDrive Update, Power Mac G4 ROM Update, Apple PowerBook G4 Firmware, and many more programs. Apple powerpc mac free download - Apple Mac OS X Snow Leopard, Apple Mac OS X Mavericks, Apple Mac OS Update 8.6, and many more programs.
(Redirected from Macintosh clones)
The StarMax 3000/160MT, a Macintosh clone manufactured by Motorola
A Macintosh clone is a computer running the Mac OS operating system that was not produced by Apple Inc. The earliest Mac clones were based on emulators and reverse-engineered Macintosh ROMs. During Apple's short lived Mac OS 7 licensing program authorized Mac clone makers were able to either purchase 100% compatible motherboards or build their own hardware using licensed Mac reference designs.
Since Apple's switch to the Intel Platform many non-Apple Wintel/PC computers are technologically so similar to Mac computers that they are able to boot the Mac operating system using a varying combination of community-developed patches and hacks. Such a Wintel/PC computer running macOS is more commonly referred to as a Hackintosh and the most popular community effort developing and sharing the requisite software patches is known as OSx86.[citation needed]
Background[edit]
The Apple II and IBM PC computer lines were 'cloned' by other manufacturers who had reverse-engineered the minimal amount of firmware in the computers' ROM chips and subsequently legally produced computers that could run the same software.[1] These clones were seen by Apple as a threat, as Apple II sales had presumably suffered from the competition provided by Franklin Computer Corporation and other clone manufacturers,[1] both legal and illegal. At IBM, the threat proved to be real: most of the market eventually went to clone-makers, including Compaq, Leading Edge, Tandy, Kaypro, Packard Bell, Amstrad in Europe, and dozens of smaller companies, and in short order IBM found it had lost control over its own platform.[citation needed]
Apple eventually licensed the Apple II ROMs to other companies, primarily to educational toy manufacturer Tiger Electronics in order to produce an inexpensive laptop with educational games and the AppleWorks software suite: the Tiger Learning Computer (TLC). Embrilliance essentials embroidery machine software mac. The TLC lacked a built-in display.[2] Its lid acted as a holster for the cartridges that stored the bundled software, as it had no floppy drive.[2]
Emulators[edit]
Long before true clones were available, the Atari ST could emulate a Mac by adding the third-party Magic Sac emulator, released in 1985, and, later, the Spectre, Spectre GCR, and Aladin emulators. The first three of those emulators required that the user purchase a set of Mac ROMs sold as system upgrades to Macintosh users. Later, multiple emulators were released for the Amiga.[3]
Starting with the sales of PowerPC Macs, a CPU emulator to run 68000 applications was built into the Mac OS. By the time 68060 processors were available, PowerPC Macs became so powerful that they ran 68000 applications faster than any 68000-based computer, including any Amiga, Atari ST or Sharp X68000, making it unnecessary for Apple to release a 68060-equipped Mac. This means even a 68060-upgraded Atari ST clone or Amiga, which avoid CPU emulation, were always slower, on top of causing some programs not to work thanks to imperfect virtualization of the Mac system and remaining machine components.[4]
Connectix also released another 68k emulator for Macs, replacing the original, called Speed Doubler, supposedly reported to be even faster than Apple's. As the years went by, the emulator wasn't updated to work with later versions of the original Mac OS, however, supposedly because Apple's own 68k emulator eventually surpassed it in performance, and the OS itself relied further on native PowerPC code with each new Mac OS update.
There was also a software emulator for x86 platforms running DOS/Windows and Linux called Executor, from ARDI. ARDI reverse-engineered the Mac ROM and built a 68000 CPU emulator, enabling Executor to run most (but not all) Macintosh software, from System 5 to System 7, with good speed. The migration from 68000 to PowerPC, and the added difficulties of emulating a PowerPC on x86 platforms, made targeting the later Mac OS versions impractical.
Early Macintosh, ROM-based clones[edit]
Wary of repeating history and wanting to retain tight control of its product, Apple's Macintosh strategy included technical and legal measures that rendered production of Mac clones problematic. The original Macintosh system software contained a very large amount of complex code, which embodied the Mac's entire set of APIs, including the use of the GUI and file system. Through the 1980s and into the 1990s, much of the system software was included in the Macintosh's physical ROM chips. Therefore, any competitor attempting to create a Macintosh clone without infringing copyright would have to reverse-engineer the ROMs, which would have been an enormous and costly process without certainty of success. Only one company, Nutek, managed to produce 'semi-Mac-compatible' computers in the early 1990s by partially re-implementing System 7 ROMs.[5]
Mac ROM was used in the Outbound Notebook. The Mac ROM stick is shown removed, revealing the RAM slots.
This strategy, making the development of competitive Mac clones prohibitively expensive, successfully shut out manufacturers looking to create computers that would directly compete with Apple's product lines. However, companies like Outbound Systems, Dynamac and Colby Systems, were able to sidestep the Mac cloning process by targeting high-end, high-profit market segments without suitable product offerings from Apple and offering Mac conversions instead.[6][7][8]
In the early 1980s, Brazil's military dictatorship instituted trade restrictions that prohibited the importation of computers from overseas manufacturers, and these restrictions were not lifted until 1993. A Brazilian company called Unitron (which had previously produced Apple II clones) developed a Macintosh clone with specifications similar to the Mac 512K, and proposed to put it on sale. Although Unitron claimed to have legitimately reverse-engineered the ROMs and hardware, and Apple did not hold patents covering the computer in Brazil, Apple claimed the ROMs had simply been copied.[9] Ultimately, under pressure from the US government and local manufacturers of PC clones the Brazilian Computer and Automation Council did not allow production to proceed.[10]
The following companies produced unlicensed Mac clones:
Licensed Macintosh clones[edit]
In 1992, Macworld published an editorial stating that Apple clones were coming, and that the company should license its technology to others so it would benefit as the overall Macintosh market grew.[11]
By 1995, Apple Macintosh computers accounted for around 7% of the worldwide desktop computer market. Apple executives decided to launch an official clone program in order to expand Macintosh market penetration. Apple's Mac OS 7 licensing program entailed the licensing of the Macintosh ROMs and system software to other manufacturers, each of which agreed to pay a flat fee for a license, and a royalty (initially US$50 (equivalent to $83.89 in 2019)) for each clone computer they sold. This generated quick revenues for Apple during a time of financial crisis.[12]
From early 1995 through mid-1997, it was possible to buy PowerPC-based clone computers running Mac OS, most notably from Power Computing. However, by 1996 Apple executives were worried that high-end clones were cannibalizing sales of their own high-end computers, where profit margins were highest.[12]
A total of 75 distinct Macintosh clone models are known to have been introduced during the licensee era.[13]
The following companies produced licensed Mac clones:
Jobs ends the official program[edit]
Soon after Steve Jobs returned to Apple in 1997, he personally tried to renegotiate licensing deals more favorable to Apple five times and in his words each time was 'basically told to pound sand'.[14] This response caused him to halt negotiations of upcoming licensing deals with OS licensees that Apple executives complained were still financially unfavorable.[15]
Because the clone makers' licenses were valid only for Apple's System 7 operating system, Apple's release of Mac OS 8 left the clone manufacturers without the ability to ship a current Mac OS version and effectively ended the cloning program.[16] Apple bought Power Computing's Mac clone business for US$100,000,000 (equivalent to $159,266,169 in 2019), ending the clone era.[17] Only UMAX ever obtained a license to ship Mac OS 8, which expired in July 1998.[12] Reportedly, a heated telephone conversation between Jobs and Motorola CEO Christopher Galvin resulted in the contentious termination of Motorola's clone contract, and the long-favored Apple being demoted to 'just another customer' mainly for PowerPC CPUs.[18]
In 1999, Jobs had discussions with Ben Rosen, Chairman and interim CEO of Compaq at the time, for the world's then-largest Wintel PC manufacturer to license Mac OS, which would have been a coup for Apple. However no agreement was reached, as Apple had second thoughts about licensing its 'crown jewel', while Compaq did not want to offend Microsoft, which it had partnered with since its founding in 1982. By 2007, five years after Compaq merged with HP, Rosen told Jobs he had switched to being a Mac user.[19]
In 2001, Jobs reportedly had a meeting with Sony executives, saying he was 'willing to make an exception' for Sony VAIO to run Mac OS X, although the negotiations later fell through.[20]
Unlicensed Macintosh clones[edit]
Since Apple transitioned the Macintosh to an Intel platform in 2006, and subsequent to a major increase in visibility and a gain in computer market share for Apple with the success of the iPod, large computer system manufacturers such as Dell have expressed renewed interest in creating Macintosh clones.[21] While various industry executives, notably Michael Dell, have stated publicly that they would like to sell Macintosh-compatible computers, Apple VP Phil Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. 'We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac,' he said.[22]
Hackintosh[edit]![]()
When Apple migrated to the PC-Intel platform in the mid 2000s, Apple hardware was more or less the same as generic PC hardware from a platform perspective. This theoretically allowed for installation of Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware. Hackintosh is the term appropriated by hobbyist programmers, who have collaborated on the Internet to install versions of Mac OS X v10.4 onwards â dubbed Mac OSx86 â to be used on generic PC hardware rather than on Apple's own hardware. Apple contends this is illegal under the DMCA, so in order to combat illegal usage of their operating system software, they continue to use methods to prevent Mac OS X from being installed on unofficial non-Apple hardware, with mixed success. At present, with proper knowledge and instruction, MacOS installation is more or less straightforward. Several online communities have sprung up to support end-users who wish to install OS X on non-Apple hardware. Some representative examples of these are TonyMacx86 and InsanelyMac.
Psystar Corporation[edit]
In April 2008, Psystar Corporation based in Miami, Florida, announced the first commercially available OSx86, a Wintel/PC computer with Mac OS X Leopard pre-installed[23] partially with software from the OSx86 community project.[24]Apple immediately sued in July 2008[25] and a protracted legal battle followed, ending in November 2009 with a summary judgement against Psystar.[26][27] In May 2012, the U.S. Supreme Court denied Psystar's appeal, closing the case for good.[28]
Powerpc Mac DownloadMacintosh conversion[edit]Powerpc For Mac Os X
Unlike Mac clones that contain little or no original Applehardware, a Mac conversion is an aftermarket enclosure kit that requires the core components of a previously purchased, genuine Apple Mac computer, such as the Macintosh ROM or the motherboard, in order to become a functional computer system. This business model is most commonly used in the car industry, with one of the most famous examples being the Shelby Mustang, a high performance variant of the Ford Mustang, and is protected[29] in the U.S. by the First-sale doctrine and similar legal concepts in most other countries.
While Mac clones traditionally aim to compete directly with Apple's solutions through lower prices,[30] Mac conversions target market segments that lack dedicated solutions from Apple, and where the need for a Mac solution is high enough to justify the combined cost of the full price of the Mac donor computer plus the price of the conversion kit & labor.[31][32]
The following companies produced Mac conversions:
As of September 2017, Modbook Inc. is the only company offering Mac conversions.
References[edit]
External links[edit]
Retrieved from 'https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Macintosh_clone&oldid=967632627'
In my past couple articles (BeOS or NeXT: Did Apple make the wrong choice? and User Interface: Mac vs. BeOS), Iâve described parts of BeOS. Itâs a technically impressive OS that lacks some of the finesse that the Mac OS has.
All the advertising about Mac OS X may convince low-end Mac users that they want to have a modern operating system. It seems like it would be nice to have preemptive multitasking, protected memory, and symmetric multiprocessing.
Letâs make an important distinction. Just because BeOS has a better foundation for stability doesnât mean that it will be more stable. Mac OS X also has a much better foundation than the traditional Mac OS, but many users today are experiencing crashes and kernel panics. When I tried BeOS on my main computer, I was able to crash programs and effectively crash the hardware where I would have to reset the computer with the hardware switch. But over time, modern systems like BeOS or Mac OS X should tend toward reliability.
Besides BeOS, your other option for a modern OS is GNU/Linux. LinuxPPC, for example, supports a wide variety of Macs and has a lot of power and good performance. But Linux is more difficult to administer. When things go wrong, it can take a lot of time to figure out how to fix it. Itâs definitely more complex than the Mac OS or BeOS.
Letâs dispatch two common questions first.
Where do I download the PPC version of BeOS?
With version 5.0, Be created two versions of BeOS. The personal version is free for download, but it only works with x86-based computers. This version has some special software that allows it install without repartitioning a Windows PCâs hard drive. In a way, itâs like a Trojan horse virus. Once the file is installed, it can run BeOS on a Windows computer.
Be could have done the same thing on the PPC version but decided to focus its efforts on the x86 platform. To use BeOS on a Power Mac, you need to get the professional version. Itâs called professional because it includes some additional licensed software (like RealPlayer G2) and codecs (like the one needed to encode MP3s). Itâs available for about $35 from gobesoftware.
Will BeOS work with my Mac?
I wonât repeat Beâs own compatibility page, but my general rule of thumb is that if your Mac is upgradeable to a G3 through itâs processor card or L2 slot, itâs probably compatible with BeOS. No 7200s, first generation NuBus Power Macs, and no PowerBooks are compatible.
BeOS doesnât support Macs that shipped with a G3 or G4, like the iMac or G4 Cube. Lack of support is probably the all-time question. Thereâs a lot of history to it.
The short story is that Apple refused to provide information about the motherboards. Be decided that it was too risky to build a business by reverse engineering Appleâs motherboards, so they put their efforts behind porting BeOS to x86 processors. But BeOS can support the G3 processor. I used BeOS on a PowerCenter Pro/G3 and had no problems. And talk about fast!
BeOS Compatible Macs
These are the only 8 Mac models that are compatible with BeOS. Compatible models all have a PCI bus and a PowerPC 603/603e or 604/604e CPU. Macs not on this list are not supported by BeOS.
All 603- and 604-based Power Computing models are supported. All Motorola StarMax models are supported. All Umax SuperMac models are supported. All DayStar Genesis MP models are supported, but some quad-processor models have a different logic board that is not supported.
Installing and Using BeOS
If you are considering using BeOS on Macintosh hardware, you need to realize that software is not binary compatible. That means that software that works on the x86 platform doesnât work on the PPC platform unless it was designed to be compatible. The reverse is true as well. Since BeOS was available on the PPC before x86, it used to mean that Mac users had more options.
Now the x86 platform has more momentum, because Be doesnât support newer Macs. This can be a problem. For instance, the best BeOS browser, Opera, is only available for x86 processors. If you feel like Macs are treated like second class citizens, wait until you switch to BeOS â you might soon get the feeling of a fourth class citizen. Page plus software for mac.
Installing BeOS is as simple as installing the Mac OS. The installation CD loads up quickly and gives you a few options of software to install. I canât mention any of the problems of installation, because Iâve only done it three or four times â and every time I tried it, it worked flawlessly.
In contrast, Linux has eluded me. I bought my first LinuxPPC in 1999, but I couldnât get it to install from the CD, since I had a third party CD-RW that it couldnât understand. Then I tried installing from the hard drive and could almost get things to work, but it wouldnât actually install the files. I have used Unix before and probably could get it to work if I worked on it long enough. It just never seemed worth all the effort.
Using Mac Software with BeOSPowerpc Applications
If you are going to use BeOS on your Mac, Basilisk II is the most important piece of software you can have. Basilisk II is a Mac emulator that allows you to emulate up to a Quadra and run your Mac software within BeOS. (Another option is SheepShaver, but I think thatâs been discontinued.) When I first tried Basilisk II, it wasnât too reliable, but it is an open source program and has been steadily improving. When I last tried it on Windows 98, it was stable and useful.
Basilisk II has a lot of options that let you tune the performance to make the emulated Mac work well. It is not well suited for games, but it works fine with text-oriented programs like Quicken, WordPerfect, or a school grade keeping program. Because it is software that emulates a hardware Mac, it has different performance bottlenecks. Some things seem slow, but others are quite snappy. On a 200 MHz Pentium II, it performed about like a 20 MHz Centris 610. Thatâs a little slower than Apple gets with itâs 68k emulator, but itâs usable for a lot of software.
Worth Trying?
Should you try BeOS? For $35, BeOS offers a lot of things to try out and play with. Now that Mac OS X is out, you might want to play with that instead â it seems to have a much better chance at becoming a major desktop contender. If your one goal was to increase your productivity, BeOS would be a poor bet. Chances are that the time you spend on BeOS are not going to give you a big return on your investment.
But BeOS is only $35. If you have a compatible Mac that is just sitting around, this is $35 that will let you do some amazing things with the hardware. You could use the included routing software to make a BeOS router for less than the cost of IPNetRouter on the Mac. BeOS also has some cool audio software that could let you do things that would cost a lot on the Mac.
You might even want to try it just to give another point of reference for how things could work. The better informed we are, the more we can push Apple to realize the potential of Mac OS X.
Further Reading
Keywords: #beos
Short link: http://goo.gl/BBvvTQ
searchword: beosonpowermac
Comments are closed.
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |