Request: Mac Performa Restore CD (6360/6400, OS 7.5.3)

edited March 2013 in Offers & Requests
I'm wondering if you have a copy of Macintosh Performa Restore CD for the Performa 6360-6400 series? If you do, then can you make a disk image and put it up on mediafire/4shared/uploading.com/rapidshare.com, etc.? BTW, can you also post it on one of the WinWorldPC Mirrors? Or, you could download it from the BetaArchive download server and post it on either mediafire/4shared/uploading.com/rapidshare.com, etc.? or post it on the winworld software library mirrors.

If you don't, then try this link...

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Macintosh-Perfo ... 53f593c456

Or you can also get the Performa 6360-6400 restore CD by visiting this website,

http://www.oldapplestuff.com/InstallSoftware.html

And if you want to purchase it, visit this website.

http://www.oldapplestuff.com/instructions.html

After you disk image it, and before you put it on mediafire/4shared/uploading.com/rapidshare.com, etc and/or the winworld software library mirrors, the file should be named, "Apple Mac OS 7.5.3 [Performa 6360-6400].7z"
«1

Comments

  • BetaArchive has a 10 post minimum to gain access to the FTP servers so why haven't you just done that yet? That is by far not at all an unreasonable request from an educated person. I personally have no desire to be a part of that cesspool of drama so please enlighten me.
  • stitch wrote:
    BetaArchive has a 10 post minimum to gain access to the FTP servers so why haven't you just done that yet? That is by far not at all an unreasonable request from an educated person. I personally have no desire to be a part of that cesspool of drama so please enlighten me.

    I've already done that, but overtime, my local firewall started to have issues, and I couldn't connect to the BetaArchive FTP server. That's exactly why I'm requesting this CD-ROM in disk image form.
  • Not to be funny, but if you require the CD that badly why not buy it form one of the sources you list. But in reality why have you not checekd the configuration of your firewall and remedied the issuses, to allow you access again?
  • Not to be funny, but if you require the CD that badly why not buy it form one of the sources you list. But in reality why have you not checekd the configuration of your firewall and remedied the issuses, to allow you access again?

    I need that disk image of Apple Mac OS 7.5.3 [Performa 6360-6400] so that I can make more Mac OS PC project on Virtual PC 2007, but I can't access the BetaArchive FTP server, although i'm an advanced member there. And I can't buy that stuff, because I don't have that right yet. My firewall is configured to run filezilla at any port, but i can't access BetaArchive's FTP server.
  • anabate wrote:
    .... so that I can make more Mac OS PC project on Virtual PC 2007...

    Uh, what?
  • stitch wrote:
    anabate wrote:
    .... so that I can make more Mac OS PC project on Virtual PC 2007...

    Uh, what?

    I need the disk image of the Mac OS 7.5.3 Restore CD for Performa 6360-6400, so that I can make more Mac OS Projects on Virtual PC 2007, VPC 2007, is an emulator that lets you emulate OS/2, DOS or Windows operating systems, and you can also emulate Mac OS emulators on Virtual PC 2007.
  • You're adding on an unnecessary layer of virtualization there. Since you're not targeitng a specific Preforma 6x00 model I don't see why a standard 7.5 install disc won't work.
  • stitch wrote:
    You're adding on an unnecessary layer of virtualization there. Since you're not targeitng a specific Preforma 6x00 model I don't see why a standard 7.5 install disc won't work.

    The specific models i'm targeting is the Performa 6360 AND the Performa 6400. They both require Mac OS 7.5.3, and it comes on a Performa Restore CD.
  • anabate wrote:
    stitch wrote:
    You're adding on an unnecessary layer of virtualization there. Since you're not targeitng a specific Preforma 6x00 model I don't see why a standard 7.5 install disc won't work.

    The specific models i'm targeting is the Performa 6360 AND the Performa 6400. They both require Mac OS 7.5.3, and it comes on a Performa Restore CD.

    And the entire point of this is................? There's no difference in the actual OS from the stock retail disc VS. a machine-dependent disc.
  • stitch wrote:
    anabate wrote:
    stitch wrote:
    You're adding on an unnecessary layer of virtualization there. Since you're not targeitng a specific Preforma 6x00 model I don't see why a standard 7.5 install disc won't work.

    The specific models i'm targeting is the Performa 6360 AND the Performa 6400. They both require Mac OS 7.5.3, and it comes on a Performa Restore CD.

    And the entire point of this is................? There's no difference in the actual OS from the stock retail disc VS. a machine-dependent disc.

    Here are the contents on the Performa Restore CD for the 6360 and 6400 series..

    Performa CD items: About this CD, Disk First Aid 7.2.2, Drive Setup 1.1, Disk Copy 4.2, Disk Tools disk image, Restore All Software, Restore System Software, bootable System 7.5.3, and Launcher.

    System Software version: 7.5.3 with QuickTime 2.1, System Enabler 410, basic and optional extensions, control panels, pre-configured preferences, At Ease 3.0 and shortcuts, and also the Launcher Items.

    Apple Extras Folder: About Apple Extras 1.5, Network Software Selector 1.0, Apple Video Player 1.4.1, AppleCD Audio Player 2.1, AppleScript 1.1.1, At Ease 3.0 Setup, HyperCard Player 2.3.5, Performa Extras, Printing Tools, QuickTime Extras, SimpleText 1.3.1, PowerTalk 1.2.3 installer, PowerTalk Extras, QuickDraw 3D 1.0.3 installer, QuickDraw 3D Extras, Sound control panel, Text-to-Speech 1.4.1 installers (English and Mexican), and Universal Access.

    Applications Folder: Adobe Acrobat Reader 2.1, Adobe PhotoDeluxe 1.0.1, Adobe Type Manager 3.9, America Online 2.7, American Heritage Dictionary 3.0.1, Apple Internet Connection Kit 1.1.5, Apple Internet Dialer 1.1.3, Claris Emailer Lite 1.0v3, ClarisWorks 4.0v4, Eric's Solitaire Sampler 1.0.2, Fetch 3.0.1, Apple Internet Status 1.1.1, Config PPP 2.1.4, DropStuff 4.0, Internet Config 1.2, MacPing 3.0.3, QTVRPlayer 1.0, RealAudio Player 1.0.1, Sparkle 2.4.5, StuffIt Expander 4.0.1, MacLinkPlus Performa 8.0, Magic Dogz 1.0, MegaPhone 2.0.5P, MegaPhone 2.0 Tour, NCSA Telnet 2.6, Netscape Navigator 2.0, NewsWatcher 2.1.2, Now DateBook Pro 4.2, Now TouchBase Pro 4.2.2, Quicken SE 96, SurfWatch 1.4AP, and Web Workshop 1.0.

    Telecom Applications Folder: Apple Telecom 3.0, Apple Address Book 1.0.1, Apple Fax 1.0.1, and empty Documents folder.

    Documents Folder: MacGallery Clip Art, Performa ClickArt, GeoPort/Express Modem Read Me, Telecom Applications Read Me, Performa User Address Book, Performa User Calendar, System Software Information, and some aliases.
  • And? That still doesn't explain your pointless desires.

    ADD: http://wdl1.winworldpc.com/Abandonware% ... 207.5.3.7z there is a 7.5.3 install image. It's not machine specific, but that does not matter.
  • stitch wrote:
    And? That still doesn't explain your pointless desires.

    I'll tell you why I want the disk image, is because I can't access sheepmyshaver123's mediafire account, because it got suspended, and I can't access the BetaArchive FTP server, and I am an advanced member of BetaArchive, with almost 100 posts. I checked my firewall, it was fine, my router was fine, and my ISP didn't block port 50000. But I couldn't connect to BetaArchive's FTP server.
  • edited February 2013
    ADD: http://wdl1.winworldpc.com/Abandonware% ... 207.5.3.7z there is a 7.5.3 install image. It's not machine specific, but that does not matter.

    If I use that with Performa 6360-6400 and gestalt 58, it will bring up an error message saying..

    "This startup disk will not work on this Macintosh model. Use the latest installer to update this disk for this model."

    So I'm requesting a Performa Restore CD for the Performa 6360 & 6400 series.

    Here is the image of the disc.

    http://i.ebayimg.com/t/Macintosh-Perfor ... ~60_57.JPG
  • anabate wrote:
    stitch wrote:
    And? That still doesn't explain your pointless desires.

    I'll tell you why I want the disk image, is because I can't access sheepmyshaver123's mediafire account, because it got suspended, and I can't access the BetaArchive FTP server, and I am an advanced member of BetaArchive, with almost 100 posts. I checked my firewall, it was fine, my router was fine, and my ISP didn't block port 50000. But I couldn't connect to BetaArchive's FTP server.

    That still does not explain why http://wdl1.winworldpc.com/Abandonware% ... 207.5.3.7z won't work. That still does not explain any specific technical requirements for it being the machine branded disc. What I linked is the same exact operating system.
    anabate wrote:
    If I use that with Performa 6360-6400 and gestalt 58, it will bring up an error message saying..

    "This startup disk will not work on this Macintosh model. Use the latest installer to update this disk for this model."

    So just target a different model with your Mac emulator. It's emulation, it's not going to make any difference in what you experience out of it.
  • Other model machine Mac OS systems won't work on gestalt 58.

    I knew that the link that carried the files for the Performa 6360-6400 Restore CD is dead.

    http://www.mediafire.com/?vfco4kkhxs86f

    It's right here, sheepmyshaver123 previously uploaded it, until his mediafire account got suspended.
  • What in the flying fuck is getsalt58?

    Every time I see you BA kids roam over here I think you're all on drugs. Hard drugs. Like meth.
  • stitch wrote:
    What in the flying fuck is getsalt58?

    Every time I see you BA kids roam over here I think you're all on drugs. Hard drugs. Like meth.

    Gestalt 58 on Mac Systems is recognized as either a Macintosh Performa 6360 or 6400 system.

    And I'm not on drugs.
  • stitch wrote:
    What in the flying fuck is getsalt58?

    Every time I see you BA kids roam over here I think you're all on drugs. Hard drugs. Like meth.
    It looks like it's something to do with machine selector codes.
    And personally, I've never been to BA before, but seeing what comes over from there kinda makes me wonder about their userbase.
  • anabate wrote:
    stitch wrote:
    What in the flying fuck is getsalt58?

    Every time I see you BA kids roam over here I think you're all on drugs. Hard drugs. Like meth.

    Gestalt 58 on Mac Systems is recognized as either a Macintosh Performa 6360 or 6400 system.

    And I'm not on drugs.

    So change the machine ID to one that works with the linked 7.5.3? Again, you're emulating 68k (inside x86 virtualization, at that, which is ever so stupid) the machine ID you set this shit to makes no real difference in your end experience. Just set it to something compatible.

    Nobody's really into spending their own money on your projects so if a trivial machine ID difference is still the end of the world to you, get a job and buy it yourself.
  • Wait, this guy is emulating a 68k machine within an x86 emulator? I'd assume that extra layer of virtualization would make the performance unbearable to use.
  • noone wrote:
    Wait, this guy is emulating a 68k machine within an x86 emulator? I'd assume that extra layer of virtualization would make the performance unbearable to use.

    No, I'm emulating SheepShaver, its where you emulate a PPC machine within an x86 emulator.
  • anabate wrote:
    noone wrote:
    Wait, this guy is emulating a 68k machine within an x86 emulator? I'd assume that extra layer of virtualization would make the performance unbearable to use.

    No, I'm emulating SheepShaver, its where you emulate a PPC machine within an x86 emulator.

    But SheepShaver can also run natively on Windows so what's the point of Virtual PC 2007? You have too much stupid going on here, anabate.
  • stitch wrote:
    anabate wrote:
    noone wrote:
    Wait, this guy is emulating a 68k machine within an x86 emulator? I'd assume that extra layer of virtualization would make the performance unbearable to use.

    No, I'm emulating SheepShaver, its where you emulate a PPC machine within an x86 emulator.

    But SheepShaver can also run natively on Windows so what's the point of Virtual PC 2007? You have too much stupid going on here, anabate.

    Fullscreen mode doesn't even work with Windows 7.
  • anabate wrote:
    stitch wrote:
    anabate wrote:
    noone wrote:
    Wait, this guy is emulating a 68k machine within an x86 emulator? I'd assume that extra layer of virtualization would make the performance unbearable to use.

    No, I'm emulating SheepShaver, its where you emulate a PPC machine within an x86 emulator.

    But SheepShaver can also run natively on Windows so what's the point of Virtual PC 2007? You have too much stupid going on here, anabate.

    Fullscreen mode doesn't even work with Windows 7.

    So a huge performance hit is worth gaining full screen mode back? (Which just might work if you disable aero). That is probably the most cocaine influenced logic I've seen all month.
  • anabate wrote:
    stitch wrote:
    anabate wrote:
    noone wrote:
    Wait, this guy is emulating a 68k machine within an x86 emulator? I'd assume that extra layer of virtualization would make the performance unbearable to use.

    No, I'm emulating SheepShaver, its where you emulate a PPC machine within an x86 emulator.

    But SheepShaver can also run natively on Windows so what's the point of Virtual PC 2007? You have too much stupid going on here, anabate.

    Fullscreen mode doesn't even work with Windows 7.

    picardfacepalm3.gif
  • So you're saying you have no means of purchasing the disc from ebay, and understandably the other place is a rip off. If you're too young for an acoount on ebay, you're saying you have no one else who is of age to order it for you.

    If I remember Sheepshaver, you can run it in decent resolutions windowed, so why bother with full screen mode to begin with.

    Like everyone else has said your going to run an emulator in an emulator. Even if you have a decent machine your going to run into issues probably due to the emulation of hardware with VPC2007, although it's not that bad, it's not that great either.


    P.S thanks Cpt. Picard you express how most feel.
  • What the fucking fuck?

    The only reason you would ever, EVER need to run a machine specific Mac OS, is if you had that specific Mac OS. I'm sorry, but doing otherwise makes you a total moron. Just use 7.5.5 or 7.6 like anyone else.. And use the emulator native, for Eris' sake, running it in an out of date VM like VirtualPC 2007 would make for the most laggy pile of shit I've ever seen.
  • What the fucking fuck?

    The only reason you would ever, EVER need to run a machine specific Mac OS, is if you had that specific Mac OS. I'm sorry, but doing otherwise makes you a total moron. Just use 7.5.5 or 7.6 like anyone else.. And use the emulator native, for Eris' sake, running it in an out of date VM like VirtualPC 2007 would make for the most laggy pile of shit I've ever seen.
    I don't understand the whole logic behind him doing that to begin with, it makes zero sense and I didn't even have words to to use to describe how pointless that sounds.
    On a side note, I had a mental lapse on this topic and assumed that Mac OS version he was mentioning was the one for 68k machines. I don't quite remember which version was the cutoff for 68k to PPC machines, but I assume it was somewhere around this version. If he was emulating a 68k mac within his emulator setup, he'd have a bit more of an improvement in performance, but it would still be on-par with at most a 486 at that point.

    On the topic of emulators, last year for an April fools joke, some friends and I ran Windows 7 in VMware, then within that, ran XP in Virtualbox, and within that attempted older versions of windows within that. On an i7, the performance of the XP VM was on par with what we could assume was a Pentium 2 or so, and the emulation within that was worse than a 486, which was intolerable with anything but a stripped down version of 95 or 3.11. That was though using a top of the line machine and the newest software of that time to do that, I'd guess that using VPC 2007 and normal off the shelf hardware would be a major performance hit on its own.
    (Also, you cannot run VMware within VMWare nor virtualbox within virtualbox, you'd have to use QEMU or Bochs for the 3rd layer of emulation. I'm glad they had anti-idiot procedures installed already.)
  • noone wrote:
    What the fucking fuck?

    The only reason you would ever, EVER need to run a machine specific Mac OS, is if you had that specific Mac OS. I'm sorry, but doing otherwise makes you a total moron. Just use 7.5.5 or 7.6 like anyone else.. And use the emulator native, for Eris' sake, running it in an out of date VM like VirtualPC 2007 would make for the most laggy pile of shit I've ever seen.
    I don't understand the whole logic behind him doing that to begin with, it makes zero sense and I didn't even have words to to use to describe how pointless that sounds.
    On a side note, I had a mental lapse on this topic and assumed that Mac OS version he was mentioning was the one for 68k machines. I don't quite remember which version was the cutoff for 68k to PPC machines, but I assume it was somewhere around this version. If he was emulating a 68k mac within his emulator setup, he'd have a bit more of an improvement in performance, but it would still be on-par with at most a 486 at that point.

    On the topic of emulators, last year for an April fools joke, some friends and I ran Windows 7 in VMware, then within that, ran XP in Virtualbox, and within that attempted older versions of windows within that. On an i7, the performance of the XP VM was on par with what we could assume was a Pentium 2 or so, and the emulation within that was worse than a 486, which was intolerable with anything but a stripped down version of 95 or 3.11. That was though using a top of the line machine and the newest software of that time to do that, I'd guess that using VPC 2007 and normal off the shelf hardware would be a major performance hit on its own.
    (Also, you cannot run VMware within VMWare nor virtualbox within virtualbox, you'd have to use QEMU or Bochs for the 3rd layer of emulation. I'm glad they had anti-idiot procedures installed already.)

    I was emulating a PPC machine callled SheepShaver, and the version of SheepShaver is the May 5, 2010 revision.
  • anabate wrote:
    noone wrote:
    What the fucking fuck?

    The only reason you would ever, EVER need to run a machine specific Mac OS, is if you had that specific Mac OS. I'm sorry, but doing otherwise makes you a total moron. Just use 7.5.5 or 7.6 like anyone else.. And use the emulator native, for Eris' sake, running it in an out of date VM like VirtualPC 2007 would make for the most laggy pile of shit I've ever seen.
    I don't understand the whole logic behind him doing that to begin with, it makes zero sense and I didn't even have words to to use to describe how pointless that sounds.
    On a side note, I had a mental lapse on this topic and assumed that Mac OS version he was mentioning was the one for 68k machines. I don't quite remember which version was the cutoff for 68k to PPC machines, but I assume it was somewhere around this version. If he was emulating a 68k mac within his emulator setup, he'd have a bit more of an improvement in performance, but it would still be on-par with at most a 486 at that point.

    On the topic of emulators, last year for an April fools joke, some friends and I ran Windows 7 in VMware, then within that, ran XP in Virtualbox, and within that attempted older versions of windows within that. On an i7, the performance of the XP VM was on par with what we could assume was a Pentium 2 or so, and the emulation within that was worse than a 486, which was intolerable with anything but a stripped down version of 95 or 3.11. That was though using a top of the line machine and the newest software of that time to do that, I'd guess that using VPC 2007 and normal off the shelf hardware would be a major performance hit on its own.
    (Also, you cannot run VMware within VMWare nor virtualbox within virtualbox, you'd have to use QEMU or Bochs for the 3rd layer of emulation. I'm glad they had anti-idiot procedures installed already.)

    I was emulating a PPC machine callled SheepShaver, and the version of SheepShaver is the May 5, 2010 revision.

    Inside Virtual PC 2007. You are a silly, silly, silly boy.
This discussion has been closed.