mac classic lcd screen factory

I have mixed opinions about this "Color Classic". For me, the heart of a Mac, that which makes it a particular Mac, is the motherboard. Replace it with another motherboard and you have, at heart, another Mac.

To be sure, the case and, especially in this case, the monitor are a part of what make it a Colour Classic. It looks good, it is practical but it is neither fish nor flesh. But then, I also am happy to use CF cards to boot my PM G3 MT and I am happy to use accelerators to make the Mac much faster. Hmmmm.

This fellow (gal?) has put a lot of work into renovating old Macs. I do like what he has done with his other Macs but he is not aiming at us. I don"t really know whom his target sellers are. Investors want something as mint as possible. Those who used them in years gone by probably already have one by now and, while these people could afford one of his macs, I"m not sure as to whether you"d spend a couple of thousand on upgraded nostalgia.

The Macintosh Classic is a personal computer designed, manufactured and sold by Apple Computer from October 1990 to September 1992. It was the first Macintosh to sell for less than US$1,000.

Production of the Classic was prompted by the success of the original Macintosh 128K, then the Macintosh Plus, and finally the Macintosh SE. The system specifications of the Classic are very similar to those of its predecessors, with the same 9-inch (23 cm) monochrome CRT display, 512 × 342pixel resolution, and 4megabyte (MB) memory limit of the older Macintosh computers.percent faster than the PlusApple SuperDrive 3.5-inch (9 cm) floppy disk drive as standard. Unlike the Macintosh SE/30 and other compact Macs before it, the Classic did not have an internal Processor Direct Slot, making it the first non-expandable desktop Macintosh since the Macintosh Plus. Instead, it had a memory expansion/FPU slot.

The Classic is an adaptation of Jerry Manock"s and Terry Oyama"s 1984 Macintosh 128K industrial design, as had been the earlier Macintosh SE. Apple released two versions. The price and the availability of education software led to the Classic"s popularity in education. It was sold alongside the more powerful Macintosh Classic II in 1991 until its discontinuation the next year.

After Apple co-founder Steve Jobs left Apple in 1985, product development was handed to Jean-Louis Gassée, formerly the manager of Apple France. Gassée consistently pushed the Apple product line in two directions, towards more "openness" in terms of expandability and interoperability, and towards higher price. Gassée long argued that Apple should not aim for the low end of the computer market, where profits were thin, but instead concentrate on the high end and higher profit margins. He illustrated the concept using a graph showing the price/performance ratio of computers with low-power, low-cost machines in the lower left and high-power high-cost machines in the upper right. The "high-right" goal became a mantra among the upper management, who said "fifty-five or die", referring to Gassée"s goal of a 55 percent profit margin.

The high-right policy led to a series of machines with ever-increasing prices. The original Macintosh plans called for a system around $1,000, but by the time it had morphed from Jef Raskin"s original vision of an easy-to-use machine for composing text documents to Jobs" concept incorporating ideas gleaned during a trip to Xerox PARC, the Mac"s list price had ballooned to $2,495.

$1 million to Modular Computer Systems Inc., a subsidiary of Daimler-Benz AG, for the right to use the "Classic" name as part of a five-year contract.MacWEEK speculated the Macintosh Classic would use the same Motorola 68000 microprocessor and 9-inch (23 cm) display as its predecessors and that the Classic would be priced from $1,500 to 2,150.

On October 15, 1990, John Sculley (then Apple CEO) introduced the Classic at a press conference, announcing that pricing would start at $1,000profit margins.[...] The plan is to get as aggressive on price as we need to be."share price closed at $27.75 per share, down $0.50 from October 12, 1990, and far below its previous 12-month high of $50.37.

The Classic was released in Europe and Japan concurrently with the United States release. In Japan, the Classic retailed for ¥198,000 ($1,523),Toshiba Dynabook laptop computer.

The low-end model was sold with 1 MB of memory, a 1.44 MB floppy drive, no hard disk, and included a keyboard for $999.Macintosh Plus, which it replaced as Apple"s low-end Mac computer: it is up to 25 percent faster than the Plus,Apple SuperDrive 3.5" floppy disk drive as standard.MS-DOS, OS/2, and ProDOS disks.

The Classic uses the System 6.0.7 operating system with support for all versions up to System 7.5.5. A hidden Hierarchical File System (HFS) disk volume contained in the read-only memory (ROM) includes System 6.0.3.⌘ Command+⌥ Option+X+O keys during boot.

Some dealers included a software bundle called Smartbundle with the Classic.T/Maker"s WriteNow word processor, Ashton-Tate"s Full Impact spreadsheet program, RecordHolderPlus database, and Silicon Beach Software"s SuperPaint 2.0 paint and draw program.

The Macintosh Classic is the final adaptation of Jerry Manock"s and Terry Oyama"s Macintosh 128K industrial design, bringing back some elements of the original while retaining little of the Snow White design language used in the Macintosh SE"s design.Macintosh LC and Macintosh IIsi.

The logic board, the central circuit board of the computer, is based on the Macintosh SE design.surface mount technologydesktop publishing, led to such oddities as video displays that connected through the SCSI port by users seeking to connect a larger full- or dual-page display to their Mac. The Classic design was used once more in 1991 for the Classic II, which succeeded the Classic.

Some reviewers of the Macintosh Classic focused on the processor performance and lack of expansion slots. Liza Schafer of Home Office Computing praised the Classic"s ease of use and price, but criticized the 9-inch (230 mm) display because a full US letter page (8.5 by 11 inches (220 mm × 280 mm)) would not fit at full size, and warned those who required high-end graphics and desktop publishing capabilities against buying the Classic.MHz speed is adequate for text applications and limited graphics work, but it is not suitable for power users. As such, the Classic is appropriate as a home computer or for limited computing on the road."MacWEEK described it as a "fine, inexpensive replacement for the Macintosh Plus that best embodies the original Macintosh vision six and a half years later".

In the February 1991 edition of Electronic Learning, Robert McCarthy wrote: "Teachers, educational administrators, and software developers are enthusiastic about the new, lower-cost Apple Macintosh computers". Steve Taffe, manager of instructional strategy at MECC, a developer and publisher of educational software, explained his excitement about the Classic: "[it] is terrific – both because it"s a Mac and because of that low price. Everyone can now afford a Macintosh." Scholastic, an educational software developer, was also confident of Apple"s ability to compete with MS-DOS machines, stating: "They are just as cost-effective and as powerful as MS-DOS computers, but the Apples will have a superior comfort level." Sue Talley, Apple"s manager of strategic planning in education, said of the Classic: "we see it going into applications where you need a fair number of powerful stations, but where color is not a big issue." Talley mentioned that it was most suited for writing labs and other basic productivity uses. Many schools decided not to buy the Macintosh Classic because of the lack of a color monitor, an option that the higher-priced Macintosh LC had.Apple IIe Card also increased the LC"s appeal to schools. Although the Classic was more popular at first, by May 1992 the LC (560,000 sold) was outselling the Classic (1.2 million sold).

"Macintosh Classic: Technical Specifications". support.apple.com. July 26, 2017. Archived from the original on June 12, 2013. Retrieved September 13, 2022.

Levy, Steven (1994). Insanely Great: The life and times of Macintosh, the computer that changed everything. New York: Viking. p. 111. ISBN 0-670-85244-9.

"Apple Computer: lower cost Mac PCs target new customers. 50 percent less for entry-level system". EDGE: Work-Group Computing Report. October 22, 1990. p. 3.

"Macintosh Classic Computer Developer Note" (PDF). Developer Technical Publications. Apple Computer. 1990. Archived from the original (PDF) on July 24, 2008. Retrieved May 6, 2008.

There are only 4 screws on the back of the Classic II that hold the case together. Two on the bottom near the ports, and two on the top near the built in handle. Removal of the two near the handle require a longer tool to reach in the deep sockets. Once the screws are removed, it was a little difficult prying the front panel from the rear. I am not sure if it is designed that way or if it was the age of the plastic. Essentially the internals are mounted on a frame and screwed to the front panel, so the back is just a cover.

I searched around and found others who have done a similar mod. There are really no high definition panels out there in this small of a size. I suppose an iPad mini with retina display at 7.9 inches would be high resolution, but good luck finding a driver for it. The best I could find was 8.0 inches at 1024x768. There are plenty of 800x600, but I wanted the best I could find. I could not find anything between 8 and 9, as 8.7 would have been optimal. The 1994 Color Classic had a 10" CRT with 512x384 resolution. The Classic II had 9" monochrome CRT 512x342. My mod has a smaller screen and 4x the pixels.

The screen I chose was off eBay, a kit with LVDS driver board. When I received it, initially it worked great, then it fizzled out. I think it was a bad driver board, so I ordered a separate replacement, and it failed to work as well. I then thought it was possibly the screen so I ordered a 2nd screen. The 2nd one was dim, so I ordered a 3rd screen. Still dim, so ordered a 3rd board, different design. Screen one was confirmed dead, screen 2 and 3 worked fine with board 3. Lots of waste on this project, SMH.

The driver board supports multiple inputs (VGA, HDMI, composite 1 and 2). There are on screen controls to adjust the typical LCD monitor and the original controller came with an IR remote as well as a control panel. The 3rd driver board did not have the IR sensor mounted, so I stole it from the first fried controller. Since the original Classic II had tube monitor adjustments hidden on the rear behind a detachable panel, I thought that was the ideal place to put this screen control panel as well. I had to design and 3D print an interface panel, and figure out how to mount it, and then cut out a hole for it in the back case. I could not see the button icons when printed in black, so I printed them in white for the contrast. The internal VGA out from the GT730 drives the LCD VGA input. The HDMI input is directed to the rear panel so this Classic II can be used as an external monitor (just a pure goofy effect). The HDMI from the GT730 goes to the rear panel so you can drive an external monitor with this Hackintosh (think HTPC in the living room, or large desktop monitor).

Every Mac Pro made (including the 2013 and 2019 Mac Pros) has sported multicore, interchangeable Xeon series CPUs. The Xeons are built on the same architecture as its desktop-grade siblings. The Xeon CPUs" main benefit has been more CPU cores, the ability to support multi-CPU motherboards, larger cache memory, more PCIe lanes, much higher maximum RAM, and Error-correcting code memory (ECC). These benefits come with a trade-off as the Xeon line had much higher price points, doesn"t have built-in support for overclocking, and generally operates at (slightly) lower-clock speeds.

As a computer is the sum of many parts (not just the CPU), CPUs are not interchangeable between Mac Pro versions. For example, a CPU from a Mac Pro 4.1/ 5,1 cannot be used with a Mac Pro 2.1, as the supporting chipsets and the CPU socket itself are different. The Mac Pro 1,1/2,1s used 65-nm (nanometer) CPUs, and 3,1/4,1/5,1 used 45-nm CPUs. The Mac Pro 6,1s that came after the classic Mac Pros used a 22-nm. In 9 years, the Mac Pro CPUs had shrunk to roughly 1/3 the size. Incidentally, seven years later, Intel will not ship its first 10-nm CPUs until 2021, let alone a 7-nm. A smaller CPU means more efficiency (see Denard Scaling). AMD"s Ryzen 4000 series are 7-nm. Apple"s A14 CPUs are 5-nm.

Apple has (so far) gone through three major CPU changes with the Macintosh lineup, going from 68k (Motorola), PowerPC (IBM/Motorola), and currently x86 (Intel, AMD) and ARM (Apple/TSMC). Each of these terms refers to the family of instruction set architecture that a CPU can execute (the compiled binary code it can run). Among each of these instruction set architectures are various improvements that often require code to be optimized by code compilers, and/or the software developers must (re)write code so they can be taken advantage of.

Both SSE 4,1 instruction set and SSE 4.2 first appeared in the Harpertown (SSE 4.1) and Nehalem CPUs (SSE 4.2) found in the Mac Pro 4.1+, as well as both VT-x/EPT. SSE4.2 generally is not required for Mac software to run, but the Radeon drivers for Mojave* do. SSE 4.2 can make a world of difference in some applications, such as the application Serato Djay. The application is barely usable on a Mac Pro 2x Quad Core 2.8 GHz 3,1, whereas a Mac Pro 4,1 2.4 GHz 4-Core will have no trouble with it.VT-x/EPT are both technologies used in virtualization. While all the Mac Pros can run virtual machines as they include HyperVisor support, the Mac Pro 4.1s+ are noticeably more performant when running virtual machines as popular software like VMware and Parallels have VT-x/EPT support.

There are some CPU instructions that the Mac Pros 4,1/5,1s do not support, such as Advanced Vector Extension (AVX). Not much software requires AVX, but Massive X does. AVX/AVX2 dependency is unlikely to ever be required for macOS x86. Apple"s own Rosetta 2 does not support AVX/AVX2/AVX 512. CPUs are unlikely to be the limiting factor for future macOSes.

*The AMD Drivers have been hacked to include SSE 4.2 emulation for Mac Pro 3.1s, enabling them to use modern AMD GPUs. See the GPU Upgrades section for more details.

The short answer is no one knows how long Apple intends to support Intel Macs. We have two statements from Apple, they will offer Intel Macs until 2022, and they pledged to support x86 for years.

Apple has transitioned its Mac lineup two times now, from 68k to PPC and from PPC to x86. To assist the previous transition, Apple offered Rosetta a real-time translation layer to run PPC binaries on x86, which included both PPC and x86 libraries for applications to access. This time Apple has Rosetta 2, which works similarly, translating x86 to ARM. In an ironic twist, ARM is the second time Apple has switched to a RISC-based CPU.

Apple transitioned to x86 quickly, starting with offering in late 2005 Intel iMacs and laptops using the Core Duo, which quickly jumped to the 64-bit Core 2 Duos mere months later and in 2006 refreshed its entire lineup with stark and drastic performance increases. Apple supported PPC Macs until 2009 when Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard dropped support. Apple supported PPC for roughly three years.

However, the lay of the land is different today. In 2005 Apple sold 4.5 million Macs. Today, Apple sells roughly 20 million Macs. Roughly, Apple has 140-150 million still supported Intel Macs in Big Sur, vs. Apple the 15 million PowerPC Macs that were capable of running OS X when Apple switched to x86. Apple is also no longer the same company and now faces increased scrutiny as it finds itself the most valuable tech company and often the world"s most valuable company. At a minimum, we can safely assume Intel Macs will be supported until 2025, as Apple has supported PPC Macs for almost three years. My guess would be 2026-2027, as 4-5 years seems correct. It"s also worth noting only in May of 2020, Microsoft stopped distributing the 32-bit version of Windows 10 ( even owners of 20-year-old Pentium 4 desktops could run Windows 10 ). Windows will undoubtedly support old Intel macs for many years. For comparison, Apple dropped 32-bit CPUs in 2011, axing support for the first 2005 Macs featuring Core Duo CPUs.

The performance of M1 Macs is impressive, boasting Geekbench single-core 3x as fast as the best cMP and besting its multicore performance by roughly 8%-10%, but also faces some hard limitations that are unanswered. Currently, the M1 cannot support eGPUs (or may not support eGPUs yet), currently capped at 16 GB of RAM, cannot run unsigned code (I and others disproved this), and cannot boot Windows. The synthetic benchmarks are very impressive. That said, in some more real-world tests like Logic or clickbaity Intel And AMD x86 Mobility CPUs, Destroy Apple’s M1 In Cinebench R23 Benchmark Results (which isn"t the case seeing as the m1 has half the cores and less than half the power consumption as a Ryzen 9 4900H). In many other real-world tests, the M1 shines very brightly. It"s apparent that MacWorld has jumped the gun with With M1 Macs, memory isn"t what it used to be, as more real-world testing is needed to back up such a claim. Apple uses unified memory architecture, where both the GPU and CPU share the RAM, instead of having a separate buffer for the GPU (VRAM). Unified memory previously was most commonly found in videogame consoles (starting with the Playstation 2) and smartphones. Unified memory means that VRAM isn"t required as both the CPU and GPU have direct access to items stored in RAM, and thus there isn"t additional latency when items are moved from RAM to VRAM. However, this comes at the cost that VRAM doesn"t operate independently of RAM when large amounts of VRAM are required, such as high-end gaming, certain machine learning operations, video compositing, etc. Tasks that require/greatly benefit from large amounts of RAM or VRAM will undoubtedly continue to benefit from large amounts of RAM (or VRAM) on Apple Silicon.

On its tight thermal budgets and against integrated graphics chipsets, the M1 is a monster. Still, there is a reason why Apple has chosen to keep both the Intel MacBook Pro 13 inch and Intel Mac Mini on the market, which appears to be an admission that the memory limitations and GPU performance can"t contest the Intel offerings of dedicated eGPUs and large amounts of RAM.

Will Apple release any Apple Silicon with modular components? Will they be based on current standards? We can only hope that the ideal Mac Pro is capable of using common GPUs like AMD"s RX 6800 or the bigger AMD"s RX 6900 XT.

For the majority of the life of this guide I realized, I"ve never listed how to install guides. The Hex 3.2 update from 2010 quad 2.8 photos new! CPU to use! from 2011 has been a community standby, amassing well over 200k views since it was first posted. ifixit it also has "Mac Pro 2009-2012 CPU (8 core) Replacement" that demonstrates the process of replacing the CPUs. There"s also quite a bit of youtube content on the subject. The 4,1 dual trays use delidded CPUs.

I sourced the information from MacRumors, so all credit goes to the community there and forum member ActionableMango for compiling this list. This list is truncated to the most important bits of information. Also, 4,1/5,1 Mac Pro 1x to 2x CPU upgrades requires a CPU tray capable of housing two CPUs, which often cost as much as the computer itself.

Mac Pros maximum RAM depends on the CPU configuration in a Mac Pro. Dual CPUs enable more than 2x the maximum RAM. Not all Xeons sold are dual CPU compatible; thus cannot be pair with another CPU. i7 CPUs cannot be paired together. The CPUs must be the same, and installing a single CPU causes an error state. Also, go to the original thread to read up on 4.1 Mac Pro dual CPU upgrades. 56GB in a single-processor Mac Pro using a single-processor-compatible Xeon

✔️* = Requires Mac Pro 4,1 -> 5,1 firmware upgrade. 4,1 dual CPU Dual CPU upgrades require the process of delidding the CPUs to deal with the height difference. 5,1 Mac Pros use regular CPUs. The process of delidding can be performed manually or bought pre-delidded. Most users elect to delid the CPUs themselves based on forums.