Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

jimjamyaha-uk · Sep 27, 2008, 05:27 AM

Hi,

I've managed to get Leopard running on a G4-upgraded PowerMac 8500 and 9600.

See link for more information:

http://www.macmod.com/content/view/1571

James.

jmiddel · Sep 27, 2008, 04:23 PM

Now that is impressive, WOW! I am amazed that this works, it goes to show you how darn well both the software and hardware were designed. I doubt that the age-equivalent Intel chips could run Vista

PwrMac.com · Oct 8, 2008, 01:54 PM

very nice man

QuadG5Man · Oct 9, 2008, 02:45 AM

Congratulations. Amazing work.

JellyBeen · Oct 9, 2008, 06:55 AM

You da man!

Big Mac · Oct 10, 2008, 12:55 AM

Wow, congrats! Maybe I can do the same with my 8600. You guys don't know how much anger I expended complaining about Apple's decision not to extend G2 support to the initial releases of OS X, as originally promised when the OS was codenamed Rhapsody.

stevebez · Oct 11, 2008, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by Big Mac

Wow, congrats! Maybe I can do the same with my 8600. You guys don't know how much anger I expended complaining about Apple's decision not to extend G2 support to the initial releases of OS X, as originally promised when the OS was codenamed Rhapsody.

I'm 100% with you on this one. Of course Apple would say "Rhapsody does run on the 8600", which is true, but it is a huge cop out. Personally I think that the G3 requirement was put in place purely to sell more computers. I also think the same is true of the arbitrary 867 MHz requirement in 10.5, but I might be wrong on that one.

Big Mac · Oct 13, 2008, 01:56 AM

Totally right, steve. I'm strolling down memory lane right now. I drove my friend crazy over G2 support. On the other hand, OS X (at least 10.0) ran like crap on even the beige G3s, so there's an argument that we weren't missing much. As for Leopard and lower-end G4s, Apple's original preview literature on Leopard promised support ranging from G3 to Intel. I guess they decided they didn't want to be so generous. And now the company's poised to screw me over again by cutting G5 support in Snow Leopard. By now I've come to expect as much, but it still hurts.

dimmer · Oct 13, 2008, 02:09 AM

Yeah, I wish Apple would go back to the install system they had for 10.1 (10.0?) where you'd be warned that your system wasn't quite up to snuff, but you could install the software at your own risk. For instance I can't install 10.5 on my dual CPU 800 MHz G4 box, put I can on a single CPU 867MHz box.

Sure, it's all down to gestalt and all, but you know, it's my system: if it can't (really honestly truly) run, that's one thing (Installing Snow Leopard on a PPC machine, for example), but if it's a "won't be great and we may not support you" that's very different.

Gavin · 04:13 AM

Actually, I think it had to do with the graphics - some of the goodies need a better card. My guess is the CPU cut-off was easier than having someone dig into the system profiler - and it amounts to the same thing; if the CPU is faster than X, then the box has the right card.

Remember - Apple is motivated by quality of experience. They would rather have someone pissed off because they can't run the upgrade than pissed off because the upgrade runs badly.