PowerPC Emulator for PowerPC

in Mac Software edited January 2014
Is there a PowerPC emulator for a Power Macintosh?? It would be great to be able to run stuff like old software and old systems on it.


  • Reply 1 of 10
    wmfwmf Posts: 1,164member
    Why do you need an emulator?
  • Reply 2 of 10
    jeffyboyjeffyboy Posts: 1,055member
    Yeah, do you have applications that can't keep up with the newer processors?

    Underclocking, what a concept!


  • Reply 3 of 10
    solosolo Posts: 89member
    I remember civilization 1 could not run on some of these newer machines. I don't know if any of you remember this game from way back but it was called Art Of War. I got that and yes an emulators that allows you to play old games
  • Reply 4 of 10
    Nah, he's saying that buying a new system forces you to use a newer OS and breaks compatibility with some old Mac titles. For example, I don't think G3's can run System 7, and G4's can't run OS 8.

    I haven't heard of a PowerPC emulator, the only thing like this I've heard of is vMac, which emulates a compact Mac, 68000 CPU.
  • Reply 5 of 10
    sizzle chestsizzle chest Posts: 1,133member
    Somebody really ought to design a Mac OS 9.1 emulator for Mac OS 9.2.
  • Reply 6 of 10
    dartblazerdartblazer Posts: 149member
    mac on linux will let you do this, kind of. You do have to install linux though. Unless it gets ported to OSX.
  • Reply 7 of 10
    [quote]Originally posted by dartblazer:

    <strong>mac on linux will let you do this, kind of. You do have to install linux though. Unless it gets ported to OSX.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    I have Yellow Dog Linux on my iBook (triple boot OS 9, OS X, Linux), with MoL, but I don't know how to get it to boot Copland. Right now it goes straight into my OS 9.2.1.
  • Reply 8 of 10
    stimulistimuli Posts: 564member
    AFA Copland, and I'm talking out my *** here because I'm not a programmer, I never understood why it was so difficult to implement preemptive Multitasking and protected memory in Mac OS. AFAIK, these features have nothing to do with the apps themselves, but rather the OS. Why did Copland flop?
  • Reply 9 of 10
    dvddvd Posts: 45member
    dont forget uhh warcraft 2.....the mouse speed would fly. u need to buy bnet edition and it would be fixed..gee
  • Reply 10 of 10
    meme Posts: 5member

    It's not hard, and would have been done ages ago, IF, you don't mind losing compatibility with many (most) prior applications.

    Copland tried to do it all. Provide all the modern features, maintain backward compatibility, and operate at acceptable speeds without compatibility environments, or dual booting. Further, there were many new features they were tring to implement. It was too much at once.

    This was an especially hard task when you consider that some applications directly patched (altered) the OS, and/or directly addressed data structures and locations beneath the API.

    I'm sure it was known that some apps that would'nt make the transition. Still, look at how much time was necessary to release OSX. This was (in part) due to carbon. A strait port of BSD or NeXT Step would have been fairly quick.

    Lest I make the wrong impression, I singled out Carbon because it was not part of the original plan.

    Memory protection, PMT, SMP, and the rest could have been done, perhaps, more quickly than creating OS X. However, it would not have had the features of OS X, nor would it have gained the mind share and abilities added by it's Unix heritage.

    I can't judge, but today's classic may have better compatibility than Copland would have with traditional Mac Applications.

Sign In or Register to comment.