Just an FYI on the 2GB/512mb finder thing.
I stated that the finder was considered part of the system and was in the lower parts of ram.
I hadn't validated that yet, but the source I found that from is just wrong.
The actual apple documents relating to this do say the rom, toolbox and some extensions sit in the lower part of ram but mentions nothing of the finder.
The finder is sitting at the top part of ram. I will look into this more on the systems I have with 2 GB, but on a system with 320 MB the ram layout from the top down was Control Panels, Some extensions, Control Strip Modules then the Finder, so it's not even sitting right at the top.
The rom, toolbox and system extensions were in fact at the bottom of ram.
The process manager, which acts as the loader/linker/launcher occupies all remains ram and it allocates the ram to applications as they launch.
This is still interesting in that if the machine with 2 GB lays out the same it still means that the system can address the memory some what properly.
There are two places the wasted space could be allocated.
1. in the process manager when it launches the Finder
2. In the finder after it launches it grows it's heap (I think this is less likely but still possible).
If any one else has theories on this let me know.
Additionally the North bridge drivers in resource fork of the rom appear to be completely useless. I completely removed those resources and was still able to boot a system. I still need to test this on a few other systems as it's possible they are only needed on certain systems.
So I now know one place the north bridge drivers aren't.
Any light over the files missing on the wayback machine? You said you had something not covered yet. My sources are here http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=1931.0
I had found someone else had downloaded and mirrored the content as well but got it from an earlier point in time so the missing pages where on that site. I will go through my notes to find the site. I have the file on one of my drives here, I'll find it again if anyone is interested.
this is an oxymoron.. because. the usb technology itself would take away from the timing benefit of using serial...
while if it could work.. with a new driver.. it would enable it to work yes.. but not as well as a true serial connection..
the serial uart chip processing is superior for this type of data transmission!!!
Agreed. I have a usb to serial RS232 adapter that has drivers for OS 9 and the performance really isn't very good.
Anyway, my first request for an 9.3 will be to implement the IP - midi rendezvous thing present since tiger to have networked machines midi connected via lan instead of plain midi cables as I do today.
A stronger OMS 2.3.9 ? Or a better FreeMIDI?
I can only see things from my perspective as DAW user.
Maybe even a flash hacked to report as actual (like in OSX PPC) could help some users willing to run desktop sites instead of mobiles with classilla or IE.
Trying to add too many things to Classic OS were too much for ALL Apple Inc. See Copland https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland_%28operating_system%29 .It was the bed for Jobs return to Apple, as most of the new features were present on NeXT OS
I also do look at it from a DAW perspective, as well as can I do this sort of thing. The hack for flash could be interesting. I'm curious though if it's worth it as most flash content at this point is requiring a version of flash that is fairly new, and all though you can trick it into working, I've found the performance on to be terrible, but that is just the experience i have had.
Author
Topic: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3? (Read 188419 times)