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


20 posts / 0 new
Last post
SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11
a Mac Mystery : "Mac OS ROM" files.

Looking for "Mac OS ROM" v1.6 which I don't see on site. OS 8.5 came with v1.1.2 , OS 8.6 came with v1.4 , and I found v1.6 as an update package (with only this one file in it) for OS 8.6 , i don't remember where i got it. I throw away a lot of ReadMe's and original wrappers, so all I have is the file "Mac OS ROM" dated May 14 1999 it says "Version: Mac OS ROM Update 1.0" size 1,949,186 bytes. Is this file already here in or around the 8.6 sections, or is it mia?

-----

I found the weirdest bug in Tiger OSX, concerning any Classic "Mac OS ROM" file version. Earlier OSX versions like Panther and Jaguar and the later OSX version Leopard aren't doing this, but Tiger is my fav and OSX 10.4 Tiger is doing this on both my PowerPC Macs and my Intel Macs :

Conflict between "Mac OS ROM" files and DVD on-disc. I can reboot, then 'show' any "Mac OS ROM" file to the computer, show means I mount an image and then immediately eject it, the ROM file is not supposed to execute. This causes UDF-1 DVD discs (e.g. Hollywood movies) to become ignored, they no longer mount via any drive hardware nor any drive connection method. I must reboot to access movies again. If I mount a UDF DVD disc prior to "showing" a Mac OS ROM file to my Tiger Mac, then the disc works of course but the first image I try containing a "Mac OS ROM" file will no longer mount! Over and over it won't mount (so this is a bidirectional conflict!), but then a 2nd image file with a ROM will mount+eject and it once again disables DVDs. In some cases the ROM might not be doing what i want it to, more testing is required. **HFS Data discs remain operational throughout this whole sorry tale, this could be a bug in the UDF file system of Tiger. We-eird!

I just ran another test. It's not the mounting part of 'showing' an image with a "Mac OS ROM" file inside it, it is the Ejecting step which causes Tiger UDF DVDs to become ignored. Monkeying with ejecting images having Mac OS ROM can also stop the Classic Preferences Pane from launching, when there's also a broken pointer to its Classic System Folder, rebooting fixes this too. Definitely just bugs in Tiger, this one's more neato because it can be demonstrated a Classic-era "Mac OS ROM" file causes a negative impact on Intel-Macs. I know a bunch of other bugs which Apple never fixes until Leopard.

Comments

bertyboy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009 Jun 14

Does this start to help:

https://support.apple.com/kb/TA22055

And then this:

https://support.apple.com/kb/DL1264

Searches in Apple Support are hopelessly targeted at recent content, you need to click on the Filter option (under the search bar) and make sure it has a check in "Include content no longer maintained ..."

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

xlent. I hoped to verify the one-file update package was officially Apple, that clears that up. Doubt the download is still available via Apple, tho.

It's a long story... I also use "Mac OS ROM" files to accelerate performance on my MDD-2003 PowerPC, & Intel Macs. ROM 1.6 is one of the nicest i've come across, I didn't know there are so many other revisions.

bertyboy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009 Jun 14

Doubt the download is still available via Apple, tho

The second link ?

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

The download link within the second link, simply points to the title page for support downloads on apple.com

bertyboy's picture
Offline
Joined: 2009 Jun 14

The blue download button near the top of the page in the second link ?

Gives me the download in a .smi.bin format, 2.1MB

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

oh, it says "Email Download Link" and my mind skipped over it after seeing the word Email. They make us supply email address now, to get this file? iyiyi.

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

Does anybody got the ROM # of the "Mac OS ROM" file which comes with the Mac OS 8.7 "Sarah" (unreleased) download? I can't read the number with HexEdit because it's compressed at that point I believe, and I don't have hardware or an emulator setup that can boot OS 8.7 in order to profile it.

MikeTomTom's picture
Online
Joined: 2009 Dec 7

You can do this yourself pretty easily. You just need TomeViewer and run it from a classic Mac OS 9.2.2 & earlier (or from "Classic" on Mac OS X). Mount the "Sarah" .img and extract the ROM to your HD with TomeViewer.

Anyway, the ROM from Sarah (Mac OS 8.7a6c2) is not the 1.6 version you're seeking:

Mac OS ROM
Created:  Wed, 09 Jun 1999, 12:00pm
Modified: Wed, 09 Jun 1999, 12:00pm
Version:  2.0d26c2, Copyright Apple Computer, Inc. 1983-99

Note: you don't need to save files from the archive to your HD if you don't need to, you can get info on items from within TomeViewer (highlight item[s] and select Archive > Show Info... from the menu bar).

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

"2.0d26c2"
I have this file extracted already, but there isn't this version number in File Info (OSX). I wasn't aware TomeViewer showed this particular version number.

MikeTomTom's picture
Online
Joined: 2009 Dec 7

Actually, TomeViewer didn't give the version number either. I had DL'd it to HD, then viewed it's "Get info" dialog in the Finder (Mac OS 9.x).

Sarah's ROM
Sarah's Mac OS ROM

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

I must not have checked OS9 File Info. But, OSX File Info vs. OS9 File Info can say 2 different things about Version of one file. There's even an Apple file which buggily reports 3 different version numbers, depending if queried from OSX, from OS9, and from "About" when using it. Nasty stuff, such as 3-point version numbers to begin with. Why can't "x.y" be good enough 99% of the time, and "x.y.z" numbers be assigned only on rare occassions. Some graphics card drivers have longer version numbers such as "a.b.c.d" yucky.

scott Praed's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010 Oct 30

SkyCapt That Mac OS ROM 1.6 from Mac OS 8.6 is not compatibility with MDD 2003. You need to reinstall the classic from Mirror door 2003 DVD. That will fix the the classic. The only ROMs are compatibility is from Mirror door 2003 DVD and running Mac OS 9.2.2. This version is 10.2.1 Mac OS CPU Software 5.9 in my Mirror door 2003. Mirror door 2003 cannot run Mac OS 9.2.1 or lower. I have no problems with ROMS.

scott Praed's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010 Oct 30

SkyCapt What emulator are using ? Sheepshaver use Mac OS ROM or new world ROM.

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

I haven't used SS ever, yet. I just wanted the vn for Sarah, got it now, because it is a file I use and it needed perspective.

The ROM files 1.6 and 2.0 (2.0d26c2) aren't for me booting, I can accelerate performance on my MDD2003 (and Intel Macs) by mounting then ejecting them, sorry about the confusion, and *it is a long story.

But now that you mention it, I do boot OS 9.2.1 on MDD2003, keeping the 9.2.1 original ROM v8.4 because I find v8.4 governs the computer faster than all higher versions of ROM file. 8.4 and v8.7 can't operate the ATA-100 bus (they predate the invention of ATA-100), I haven't noticed anything else different. If you tried to boot MDD with OS9 ROM 8 from the ATA-100 bus, then it won't work at all which must be your experience. Try a bootable device connected differently, I use a SATA-PCI card. Any ROM version less than 8.4 does not boot my MDD2003 from any device. I can also use ROM v8.4 to boot OS 9.2.2, but I prefer OS 9.2.1

The OS 9.2.1 Install Disc, is itself a form of bootable OS9. Disc boots on MDD, refuses to run installer due to permission, but while using the disc desktop, I can insert other discs (with a 2nd tray) and play them. If you can load the OS 9.2.1 disc to its desktop, then you can also boot 9.2.1 real deal. The OS 9.2.1 Install Disc can be run inside OSX Classic. The full install will crash during boot because it adds incompatible extensions. Select the Recommended install. Then when booting, it still looks like it locks up but it is an illusion of a failed GPU driver. I can unlock this crash by pressing Force Quit (cmd+option+escape), it will ask if I wish to force quit "ATI Video Accelerator" : yes. Updated or removal of ATI drivers fixes this. Then OS 9.2.1 still needs more updates (for MDD models) but it's worth it.

[OS 9.2.1 System file might also ignore the ATA-100 bus which if true means 9.2.1 can't be booted on ATA-100 even with a later ROM file. Anyway, if u can get away from using ATA-100 then i know the 9.2.1 and 9.2.2 System files can be swapped at will, I've found no ill effect (other than System file 9.2.2 performs slower than System file 9 2.1) - naw, just tested OS 9.2.1 with ROM v10 is operating my ATA-100 bus]

If ROM v8.4 (comes with OS 9.2.1) still won't boot after getting away from ATA-100 (the default hard drive bus on MDD models) then maybe it requires a "blessing" like USB booting does. I've gotten into the habit of "blessing" every bootable volume I set up, except for genuine OSX from disc they autobless themselves.

scott Praed's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010 Oct 30

Skycapt Is hard drive connect to SATA-PCI card on ATA 100 bus ? What kind of SATA PCI card are in your computer ?

I have Sonnet SATA PCI Card from OWC. It work on ATA 100 bus. I connected my MDD 2003 and hard drives on ATA 100 with Sonnet SATA PCI Card. I am sorry your having problems. That Sonnet SATA PCI Card from Sonnet is no longer sale. I have OWC hard drive on the ATA 100. I have SATA hard drive connected by Sonnet SATA PCI Card on ATA 100. I have two hard drives connect on ATA 100 bus.

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

An individual drive will land data on the motherboard via ATA or via SATA-PCI, never both at once. I suspect you scott are saying your drive is physically mounted in the ATA-100 "cage" at the MDD rear, but then (narrow <1 centimeter) cable connects to your SATA card. Can you boot from a drive on your SATA card? or are you using ATA (almost 5 centimeter wide) ribbon cable for one or more drives for booting?

I have a pair of SATA cards installed, twins, and I boot all OS including AHT from them, and do so without adding ANY driver software - drivers are all built in. Mine are brand "FirmTek" model "SeriTek" 4-port cards, 2 internal 2 external. Add up both these cards and I got 8 SATA ports, 4 internal 4 external. I'm prepared for (almost) anything.

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

*it's a long story. Let me try to summarize. I've got model MDD2003, and I've found I can greatly speed up the computer by disabling (via software!) the various data ports found at the back edge of the motherboard. I can independently disable Ethernet, FireWire, and USB-1 (using the USB2-PCI card in place of native USB1) to see acceleration due to each. All 3 disabled at once = massive acceleration. There is also a 4th type of drag i can eliminate. This works in all OS for this model, OS 9.2 and OSX 10.2 thru 10.5.8 - except in OS9 I cannot get USB-1 to disable. OS9 is the easiest for me to describe how to replicate this. Unfortunately I don't know of any good benchmark software yet, other than watching the screen to judge which looks better/faster/smoother/crisper less dilute colors are shown (mine is 1920x1200 resolution). After disabling ports by means of disabling their Extensions, I may see a speed increase which won't last long. By mounting then ejecting various (old!) "Mac OS ROM" files after booting, i've found I can "lock in" the speed increase, and also get that 4th component of acceleration. The mount+eject sequence is highly specific, any input error won't accelerate correctly. Would I like a better way, of course, but my way does work. I can effortlessly recheck any issues by rebooting into unmodified OS 9.2.2 etc, and have yet over the course of many years to find I'm corrupting anything. When Hollywood Movies stop being recognized, it is a bug found in Tiger OSX 10.4 only. I just tested an unmodified fresh install of 10.4.0 and the DVD failure exists there too, no other OS botches DVD after ejecting any "Mac OS ROM", only Tiger 10.4.0 thru 10.4.11 is in conflict - a conflict I choose to live with, I accelerate my Tiger volumes and reboot if ever to play DVD movies on disc or to use FireWire.

Anybody interested? This trick of acceleration via disabling external data ports is I believe only going to have an effect on MDD-2003 and later models including PowerMac G5 and Intel Macs. Possibly zero effect on models older than MDD2003. For a hint at how it accelerates, see the wikipedia.org page "IEEE 1394" (FireWire) and expand their header tab for "Security Issues" near the page bottom, then find their reference to "PowerMac G5".

scott Praed's picture
Offline
Joined: 2010 Oct 30

SkyCart I have OWC Mercury 480 MB connected by ATA 100. I have 2nd drive call TOSHIBA 4.5 TB SATA connected by Sonnet SATA PCI Card. OWC Mercury drive I Partition the drive in 2 parts. 1st part of drive is 80GB named drive OWC. I called rest of drive OWC Mercury is size 367 GB. I installed Mac OS X 10.4.11 and MAC OS 9.2.2 on OWC. Then I installed Mac OS X 10.5.8 on OWC Mercury.I found a problem partition dive in MAC OS X 10.4.11 When I partition TOSHIBA in MAC OS X 10.4.11 it unmounted drive. The drive was two big Mac OS X 10.4.11 and Mac OS 9.2.2 to used. First unmounted TOSHIBA 4.5TB Then booted in MAC OS 9.2.2 Then I use drive setup to partition. I found a problem when partition drive in Mac OS 9.2.2. MAC OS 9.2.2 only read 2TB. 2.5 TB is rest of drive cannot use. TOSHIBA 2TB is mounted in Mac OS 9.2.2 and Mac OS X 10.5.8 only. In Mac OS X 10.4.11 the drive show in disk Utility as unmounted. It cannot mounted Mac OS X 10.4.11. My Sonnet SATA PCI card and TOSHIBA is bootable Mac OS 9.2.2 and Mac OS X 10.5.8 but not Mac OS X 10.4.11. OWC is bootable in Mac OS 9.2.2 and Mac OS X 10.4.11 and also works classic environment of Mac OS X 10.4.11. OWC Mercury is bootable in Mac OS 9.2.2 and Mac OS X 10.4.11 and Mac OS X 10.5.8 and Classic Environment of Mac OS X 10.4.11.
All Drive are Bootable in Mac OS 9.2.2 and Mac OS X 10.5.8. In MAC OS X 10.4.11 drive OWC and OWC Mercury is only bootable volumes. In MAC OS X 10.5.8 All drives are mounted on desktop. You can can connected both ATA 100 and SATA PCI card in MAC OS 9.2.2 or MAC OS X 10.5.8 on same time. Sonnet SATA PCI Card is no longer for sale at OWC or Sonnet. But can buy internal hard drive OWC Mercury 480GB from OWC at price $199.99 That Drive will connected by ATA 100. Your SATA PCI Cards might not be bootable. Can you boot from a drive on your SATA card? or are you using ATA (almost 5 centimeter wide) ribbon cable for one or more drives for booting? Yes you can in 2 systems not third.

SkyCapt's picture
Offline
Joined: 2017 Jan 11

On G4, drives larger than 2TB connected to SATA should be partitioned no matter what OS you use. OSX 10.5.8 can handle SATA partitions and drives greater than 2TB (10.5.7 & less cannot) but you're courting danger booting from unpartitioned drive larger than 2TB because the MDD firmware responsible for booting can only see the 1st 2TB, it boots now because the critical info was written within the 1st 2TB but any drive operation which ends up moving that info beyond the 2TB spot will then stop booting instantly. You should use OSX 10.5.8 to partition a 5TB drive with at least 3 partitions in which #1 is about 2TB, #2 is small (about 2GB?) barrier which overlaps useable and non-useable space, and #3 is the remaining 3TB. The exact procedure should be in a document somewhere online. After doing this, Tiger (all OS less than 10.5.8) will mount partitions 1 and 2 but #3 will stay offline. You know the #2 barrier partition is doing its job when it mounts but you can't write to the whole 2GB in Tiger without generating an error, and when partition #2 fails disk first aid in Tiger then it's right not wrong. Partition #1 will actually be nearer to 2.2TB big, 10% bigger than an actual 2TB drive. All booting must take place under the 2.2TB waterline. You're better off using a big 5TB drive for data-only, no booting. When bridged to USB2, Tiger can use drives and partitions greater than 2TB, but it's a little slow, at least it works. It's safest and easiest to just use 2TB drives maximum, on SATA and/or with OS less than 10.5.8 .

You should have another or 2 or 3 more SATA ports free. A good hard drive will be faster on SATA rather than ATA, and making your next SATA drive be SSD will be even faster and not be affected by fragmentation. I'd get a 480GB SATA SSD and partition it into like 5 or 8 volumes each for booting. Have space ready for whipping up a test boot volume any time u like, such as OS 9.2.1 and OSX 10.2.8 . OSX 10.4.8 is my favorite, and I must have 2 of them. I use one of my 10.4.8 to perform maintenance upon the other 10.4.8 .