 |
 |
Thanks for the responses. We actually need to read media within it so Virtual Box would not work for us. Lynda Lynda Schmitz Fuhrig Electronic Records Archivist Digital Services Division Smithsonian Institution Archives Capital Gallery Building 600 Maryland Ave SW Suite 3000 MRC 507 Washington, DC 20024-2520 siarchives.si.edu | @SmithsonianArch | Facebook | e-newsletter A gift in support of the Archives will help make more of our collections accessible! -----Original Message----- From: Code for Libraries [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Francis Kayiwa Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2015 3:27 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] Mac OS 9 emulator On 4/22/15 3:19 PM, Bryan Baldus wrote: > On Wednesday, April 22, 2015 1:54 PM, Matt Sherman wrote: >> Why would you not just run an instance in Virtual Box? > > Does Virtual Box support Mac OS 9 now? I haven't kept up on developments recently, but in the first few results in Googling "virtualbox Mac os 9" (without the quotes), it doesn't appear to be so ([1], [2]), though they are from 2008-2012. > This was my first reaction but I am too lazy to dig into it. I do know Virtual Box et. al., by default think we all live in an x86 world and while I've used Power et. al., with the aforementioned tools I've always found them wanting in a way that qemu (another painful recommendation) and sheepshaver were not. Cheers, ./fxk > SheepShaver [3] would be my suggestion (though as I said, it's been a > few years since I've kept track of developments) > > [1] http://www.emaculation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=7528 > [2] https://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=9635 > [3] http://www.emaculation.com/doku.php/sheepshaver > > I hope this helps, -- You'll wish that you had done some of the hard things when they were easier to do.