Jump to content
Welcome to InsanelyMac Forum

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more! This message will be removed once you have signed in.


Just Joined
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Arterion

  • Rank
    InsanelyMac Protégé
  1. Can OSX run from a dvd?

    You can use transmac to open the ISO image and change the files. There is a free trial. http://www.acutesystems.com/
  2. 8F1099 vs 8F1111

    8f1111a adds full G4 altivec support to rosetta. 8f1099 is rumored to be faster, as is indicated at EDIT: Removed content violating DMCA but I can't really confirm or deny that fact.
  3. I am confused as to why the predecessor to OS X wasn't OS IX. But it wasn't, it was OS 9. And before that, it was OS 8, and not OS VIII. While people may say the X is a roman numeral, I see no evidence of that, based on the fact that none of the other versions have used roman numerals. In other words, it most certainly is OS ten (you can see the actual version NUMBER), but it's named OS X. If all the previous versions had used roman numerals, then it would make some sense to correct people saying "os 'ex'", but since none of them did, it seems like a rather normal assumption to think, "gee, if they wanted me saying 10, they'd put a one and a zero, and follow the paradigm set by all their previous versions. hmm, I guess version 10 is called os 'ex'." So, no, it's not "stupid" of people to call it os "ex", it's stupid of apple to, for no apparent reason, switch to roman numerals.