4 ms·

Nice! System 6 is faster btw.

by Sunspark 6y ago

anthk 6y ago
But Systen 7.5.3 is both lightweight and modern enough to even run QuickTime VR backed "multimedia" software and games; and 8.1 can do the rest of software unsupported by the former. Also, running 8.1 in SheepShaver grants another old Classic Mac software stack to be ran. An emulated 7.5.3 was lightning fast even under an AMD Athlon back in the day.
- Sunspark 6y ago
  I guess it is a different experience in the emulator. I had one of those System 6/7 Macs. Really great amazing machines. Lots of waiting with the 800k floppy drive waiting for it to finish grinding out. I don't miss floppy disks at all. Am I just remembering things through rose-colored glasses or am I really jaded? I just seem to remember those classic Macs as being an experience. Computers now are just meh and don't contain that same the world has changed magic.
  - msephton 6y ago
    System 6 is definitely faster. The apps I use run on System 7 and I enjoy the experience more as it's closer to macOS X in a lot of ways whilst System 6 isn't. I run System 6 on my Macintosh Classic for speed-critical apps but 7.1 is my daily driver on that. Using BasiliskII, for the benefits it provides, mean that System 6 isn't an option. But it runs System 7 plenty fast on the iPad Pro.
    - anthk 6y ago
      7.5.3 it's better as it's the minimum requiment for lots of software. For example, QuickTime VR based graphical adventures, and late publishing applications which ran on both 7.5.3 and 8.1 On speed, well. Today a machine based on System7 will run crazy fast as you can set max cycles on BasiliskII I think, as it shares the same core as UAE.
  - philistine 6y ago
    I recently tried system 7 and Mac OS 9 and it made me change my understanding of the current macOS file structure. The simplicity of the OS and the Finder windows that remembered their position really is a magical combination. By OS 9, I felt like the magic was already gone.

4 ms·

Nice! System 6 is faster btw.

by Sunspark 6y ago

Nice! System 6 is faster btw.

anthk 6y ago
But Systen 7.5.3 is both lightweight and modern enough to even run QuickTime VR backed "multimedia" software and games; and 8.1 can do the rest of software unsupported by the former. Also, running 8.1 in SheepShaver grants another old Classic Mac software stack to be ran. An emulated 7.5.3 was lightning fast even under an AMD Athlon back in the day.
- Sunspark 6y ago
  I guess it is a different experience in the emulator. I had one of those System 6/7 Macs. Really great amazing machines. Lots of waiting with the 800k floppy drive waiting for it to finish grinding out. I don't miss floppy disks at all. Am I just remembering things through rose-colored glasses or am I really jaded? I just seem to remember those classic Macs as being an experience. Computers now are just meh and don't contain that same the world has changed magic.
  - msephton 6y ago
    System 6 is definitely faster. The apps I use run on System 7 and I enjoy the experience more as it's closer to macOS X in a lot of ways whilst System 6 isn't. I run System 6 on my Macintosh Classic for speed-critical apps but 7.1 is my daily driver on that. Using BasiliskII, for the benefits it provides, mean that System 6 isn't an option. But it runs System 7 plenty fast on the iPad Pro.
    - anthk 6y ago
      7.5.3 it's better as it's the minimum requiment for lots of software. For example, QuickTime VR based graphical adventures, and late publishing applications which ran on both 7.5.3 and 8.1 On speed, well. Today a machine based on System7 will run crazy fast as you can set max cycles on BasiliskII I think, as it shares the same core as UAE.
  - philistine 6y ago
    I recently tried system 7 and Mac OS 9 and it made me change my understanding of the current macOS file structure. The simplicity of the OS and the Finder windows that remembered their position really is a magical combination. By OS 9, I felt like the magic was already gone.