This page is a wiki. Please login or create an account to begin editing.

ICQ 3.4

Game screenshot
Your rating: None Average: 4.1 (7 votes)
Year released:
[www].se [ftp].se [mirror].us
icq_mac_3.4.23.sit (3.74 MB)
MD5: b91b3b92bda524f036b7e284a9c9cfdb
For Mac OS 9 - Mac OS X
[www].se [ftp].se [mirror].us
NCQ_1.0.sit_.hqx (245.27 KB)
MD5: 080f963b1a0941211794d267cc8dd43c
For Mac OS 9 - Mac OS X
[www].se [ftp].se [mirror].us
ICQ_68K_Installer.hqx (1.56 MB)
MD5: 8b9d60660067d1002011e31177a5035d
For Mac OS 9 - Mac OS X
This app works with: SheepShaver, Basilisk II, QEMU

ICQ is one of the world's largest cross-platform online communities. Version 3.4 of ICQ for Mac was the last version to be released for OS 9, though it supports Mac OS X (from 10.1 and up) as well. It comes in it's classic interface and still works fine (tested 31/10/2009).

Attention: To registred a new user go to:

A note about the downloads available from above:
First download:
Last legacy version (3.4.23) for PowerPC.

Second download:
NCQ 1.0 is ICQ for Newton PDA.

Third download:
ICQ 1.7.2 for 68K.

ICQ 1.7.2 (1.63 Mb)
Last install version for 68k (same as 3rd DL, above).


Architecture: 68k PPC

This version runs on Mac OS X and Mac OS 9.x using CarbonLib 1.3 or higher. The recommended system versions are Mac OS 9.1 or higher, or Mac OS X 10.1 or higher.


Jatoba's picture
by Jatoba - 2019, December 14 - 8:10pm

Thanks, that whole post was incredibly helpful and just what I needed.

I was able to confirm both DL #1 and #4 produce the exact same binary, as far as MD5 and file size are concerned. I have removed #1 and moved #4 to be #1, since #4 states the full version number that gets installed and because the installer file itself wasn't renamed (the renamed installer has a ".1" at the end of the file name).

MikeTomTom's picture
by MikeTomTom - 2019, December 14 - 12:54pm

checksum/hash of the installers ... what tools would allow that under OS 9, or even PPC OS X

Use Checksum 1.3 for MD5 hashes (and others) in classic Mac OS's 6 - 9.2.2

Use Terminal in OS X for MD5 & Sha1 (and others) cd into directory holding files to check and type
For MD5:
md5 -r <filename to checksum>

For Sha1:
openssl sha1 <filename to checksum>

Using filenames in Terminal are case sensitive. The wildcard * is also useful

e.g.; getting an MD5 sum on a file named "ComicBookLover-12-build-653.dmg", use: md5 -r *.dmg
If there are multiple .dmg files in the same folder then use a combination of a few of the letters in the file-name + the wildcard.

You don't need to use "-r" in MD5 checksumming in OS X. But it is much nicer than without.

Jatoba's picture
by Jatoba - 2019, December 14 - 8:06am

Is there any difference between DL #1 and #4? Both are extracted into an installer of exact same size, both version 3.4.23. Am I missing something here or are both the same? (Note: I didn't verify the checksum/hash of the installers, simply because I'm not sure what tools would allow that under OS 9, or even PPC OS X.)

IIGS_User's picture
by IIGS_User - 2017, April 28 - 5:35pm

Thank you very much, MTT!

MikeTomTom's picture
by MikeTomTom - 2017, April 28 - 12:08am

Is the external 3.4.23 link already dead?

Yes, the link 404's (page missing error). I removed it from the description. It appears to be included with internal DL'd list, above anyway.

IIGS_User's picture
by IIGS_User - 2017, April 27 - 4:22pm

Is the external 3.4.23 link already dead?

Bob Kiwi's picture
by Bob Kiwi - 2017, April 16 - 7:39pm

Still working in 2017! Tested with an ancient account against a brand new account chatting from the webpage down to the application.

ataricrypt's picture
by ataricrypt - 2015, June 6 - 4:31pm

No complaints, works a treat!

Bolkonskij's picture
by Bolkonskij - 2012, November 9 - 8:17pm

Couldnt get the 68k version to work either. But PPC works fine to this day.

mrdav's picture
by mrdav - 2012, November 9 - 1:14pm

Thank you, TataMisia. Thank you, MikeTomTom.

TataMisia's picture
by TataMisia - 2012, November 9 - 12:22pm

New upload of 68k version. In HQX archive. Sorry for troubles.
ICQ not work for me. After register at homepage I cant connect by new number...

MikeTomTom's picture
by MikeTomTom - 2012, November 9 - 10:19am

@mrdav: If you mean that 68k ICQ version 1.7.2 (880 kb), then yes it doesn't appear to extract on systems you'd like it to.

I was able to extract it OK using the Unarchiver for Windows (CLI ), then move the extracted contents with HFVExplorer to Basilisk II OK. From there it was usable (only some custom folder icons failed to transfer) and it runs as it should.

The latest CLI version of the Unarchiver, unar.exe, extracts .sit files in a form that can have Mac resource forks re-constituted successfully by HFVExplorer during transfer to a Mac drive container. Its quite cool.

The CL command to use (if unar.exe is not in your path) is:
unar -k hfv [path to, including archive name] - for example:

unar -k hfv "c:\downloads\ICQ 68K 1.7.2.sit"

One extracted, transfer the extracted contents using HFVExplorer; Move the entire extracted folder in one go over to an ".hfv" drive file, using the settings "Automatic, let the program decide", with checkbox "Check for AppleDouble", checked.

However as is, this 1.7.2 copy needs to be re-uploaded in a more 68k user friendly, simplified format.

mrdav's picture
by mrdav - 2012, November 9 - 8:31am

OK, I can unpack the file with The Unarchiver in OS 10.6 but that is no good to me. I need to be able to unpack it in a Classic-compatible environment...either OS X 3.9 or below or MAC OS 9 or below, to retain the resource forks of the contents. A legacy version of The Unarchiver running in OS X 3.9 does not work with this file either. Stuffit of any version does not work with this file for me either.

mrdav's picture
by mrdav - 2012, November 9 - 7:43am


Thank you for the reupload of version 68k 1.7.2. However, no version of Stuffit that I have tried and no other methods of uncompressing can recognise the file. Can you please check the integrity of the file and try uploading again?

Bolkonskij's picture
by Bolkonskij - 2012, November 3 - 9:46am

Reuploaded the PPC version. On a side note: It still works very fine to this day. I frequently use it.

TataMisia's picture
by TataMisia - 2011, July 3 - 9:25pm

Its is Classic Mode?
At real OS 9.2.2 "Checking connection..." still hang.
Maybe not recognize new ID numbers (new users recommended use e-mail address not ID #).
Maybe because Im behind firewall...
I dont know.
"it doesn't work FOR ME"

Bolkonskij's picture
by Bolkonskij - 2011, July 3 - 10:53am

TataMisia, please say "it doesn't work FOR ME". Because it does work in general. Since you doubt my words, I have made screenshot of ICQ 3.4 running under OS 9.


Do you believe me now? Smile

TataMisia's picture
by TataMisia - 2011, July 2 - 5:50pm

Maybe work in Mac OS X or in Classic Mode at Mac OS X... at ShapeShaver and real Mac (9.2.2) not work

Bolkonskij's picture
by Bolkonskij - 2011, July 1 - 6:02pm

It does work. You don't seem to believe me? Smile Here, I made a screenshot. I was on 10.4 at the time, but it works fine on OS 9.2 for me too. Also note that I blackened out some info to protect my privacy:

look --->

TataMisia's picture
by TataMisia - 2011, July 1 - 4:20pm

Not work now Sad Sorry
First problem is: ICQ Mac application not registred new users. I know this from 2006 year and start registred by WWW.
Next problem is: Old ICQ login is in format: #12345678 newest users receive login in format Solution is: Logon by WWW, login like, go to your user profile and serch somethere your login in old format #12345678
Write this old login and pass in logon windows ICQ 3.4 for PPC and...

Not work now Sad Sorry

Bolkonskij's picture
by Bolkonskij - 2011, June 27 - 5:15pm

What? They run perfectly! I am running the PPC version every day since Adium started making trouble with ICQ...

TataMisia's picture
by TataMisia - 2011, June 27 - 3:05pm

Both ICQ clients for Mac Classic not work. I very long try to run it : NOTHING.
So sorry Sad
Over 10 years ago ICQ was my favorite IM. Bye...

IIGS_User's picture
by IIGS_User - 2011, June 26 - 6:24pm


The mixing of the version mentioned in the title plus offering some older versions on the same page
looks fine, I think. Probably better than creating a new page for the other one. But I know, this is only fine for some titles, if it is not too much information on a page.