Solved: G4/400 - can I upgrade to OS X?

Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

snorkytheweasel

Thread Starter
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
215
G4/400 - can I upgrade to OS X? If not, what's the best OS for an upgrade?

What is the cost and difficulty of such an upgrade? What are the chances of success?

While an Apple OS is preference, what about BSD or *nix?

The memory on this puppy go up to 1GB, and that's no problem. I have plenty of PC133 memory.

On PCs I've done so much with so little for so long, that now I can do anything with nothing. However, these closed architecture fruit machines strain my genius. They are awfully cute, though.

THX in advance.
Snorky T.W.
 
Joined
Oct 24, 2006
Messages
58
Yes, you can run OS X on that machine. I run server 10.4.8 on a G4 400MHz machine and it runs just fine.
 
Joined
May 27, 2005
Messages
1,064
snorkytheweasel said:
However, these closed architecture fruit machines strain my genius. They are awfully cute, though.

THX in advance.
Snorky T.W.
Notice how we still help you in spite of your little derogations.

Here is all the info you'll ever need on a G4 400 (M7631LL/A) machine.
 

snorkytheweasel

Thread Starter
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
215
Thanks for the help. I'll probably camp out on the everymac site for a while.

Derogations?

Macs ARE closed architecture machines. Add in Apple controlling the hardware, o/s, most of the software -- and you have a solid, stable computer. That's what made the mainframes and minis so reliable.

They ARE fruity From the everymac site re: this berry-colored iMac, I quote: " Like the previous "fruit" iMac series..."

They ARE cute. Especially when compared to a butt-ugly PC.

My genius is in fighting through the barely compatible hardware-o/s-software trifecta, and figuring out causes and solutions; because of my high prices, I'm the techie of last resort. People call me when none of the cut-rate techs can fix the problem. Apples are too simple.... I'd never make any money servicing them.

Anyway, thanks again. I'll be back, no doubt.

Snorkster
YOUR Computer Guy
Registered Linux User #247891
Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer (MCSE) #1228500
Microsoft Certified Internet Professional (MCP + I)
Microsoft Certified Professional (MCP)
Microsoft Windows Crash Test Dummy (MWCTD)
 
Joined
Feb 9, 2005
Messages
2,609
Yes, but your implications was your old PC can run anything still.

Run Vista on it with the 3D effects enabled and tell us if that is still true. ;-)
(If it will let you install!)

Make sure you're comparing Apples and ..... Apples I guess. :lol:


P.S. I hear he ya. If it weren't for Windows I would be looking for a new job!
 

snorkytheweasel

Thread Starter
Joined
May 3, 2006
Messages
215
Headrush said:
Yes, but your implications was your old PC can run anything still.

Run Vista on it with the 3D effects enabled and tell us if that is still true. ;-)
(If it will let you install!)

Make sure you're comparing Apples and ..... Apples I guess. :lol:


P.S. I hear he ya. If it weren't for Windows I would be looking for a new job!
I have three that 'can' run Vista. Now I just need a reason why I should. My favorite setup is XP on top with Kubuntu or Mepis in a virtual machine. I might try reversing that the next time I have to re-install XP.

For my office PC my boss generously gave me another 256MB RAM. That will give me 768MB... He wants me to test Vista on that, without upgrading the video. :D :D

I said I'd do it when Vista will run in a virtual machine (MS issued a warning about that). I'm not sure why we should try Vista. Our budget for next year was cut; we can't add any new desktops until Sept 2008 at the earliest. If...if...if that were to happen, we couldn't actually deploy Vista until Jan 2009. The world will look much different by then.

That means we have 2200 desktop PCs (and and a dozen MACs for the artists who refuse to give up their fruit machines) with 256 MB RAM. To make those even close to Vista-ready we'd have to spend $250,000 on RAM, and at least that much on video cards. Even then, in an ideal world I doubt it would work.

By 2009 I expect to have most, if not all, of those desktops setup as terminals in a terminal services environment. Hardware cost - almost $0 In that case, Vista would be useless.

So - to answer your challenge - when Hell freezes over or Iraq is peaceful - whichever comes first.

Snorky
"Peace is SO gay."
 
Joined
Feb 10, 2007
Messages
3
Yes, I have not had any problems whatsoever with loading OSX on my G4/400 +
I decided to keep the 'classic' 09 on there, as well - no problem with that. But this
model was not built with a CD burner and I'm going to have to 'build' some
firewire and xtrnl onto it... I thnk.
 
Status
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Members online

Top