[HN Gopher] Finding a 27-year-old easter egg in the Power Mac G3...
___________________________________________________________________
Finding a 27-year-old easter egg in the Power Mac G3 ROM
Author : zdw
Score : 285 points
Date : 2025-06-24 13:06 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.downtowndougbrown.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.downtowndougbrown.com)
| ryeguy_24 wrote:
| How in the world did someone find this? The fact that things like
| this are found is a really an interesting revelation about the
| collective productivity of the humans race on the planet - all
| pushing the boundaries of knowledge in everything that we know.
| There is a scientist in the basement somewhere spending his/her
| whole life on researching a very small part of the world and
| maybe it will result in a spectacular finding. Go human race.
| Cthulhu_ wrote:
| Poring over the raw files, basically, looking for patterns /
| strings / etc that might be interesting; I'd argue that it's a
| bit easier for older operating systems as the modern ones are
| much, much bigger (MacOS 8 which was on the PowerMac G3 used in
| the article was 120 MB, MacOS 11 requires something like 35 GB.
|
| But I suppose also there's less fun allowed, the article
| mentions this easter egg was removed in 1997 when Jobs
| returned.
| classichasclass wrote:
| A few megabytes, in this case, because Doug was actually
| going through the machine's Toolbox ROM, not the operating
| system.
| grishka wrote:
| A lot of the size of the modern operating systems comes from
| two things:
|
| - modern screens are higher resolution, and so require much
| larger image resources.
|
| - modern OSes contain all translations in them. In the 90s it
| was common to have language-specific versions that only
| contain that language and maybe English.
|
| In the specific case of macOS, it also contains double the
| code it needs because it runs on both x86 and ARM.
| BenjiWiebe wrote:
| I think I disagree with you on both of those points.
|
| On Windows, you typically have to install language packs to
| get more languages.
|
| Also, how many image resources does Windows-the-OS have,
| and how large are they? There are some, but the largest I
| can think of right off are the device icons in the hardware
| & printers screen. And most of those get installed later
| since they are part of the driver.
| philistine wrote:
| macOS contains all languages at boot. You do not need to
| download anything to switch from English to Japanese.
| What makes macOS so big these days are the large language
| models of Apple Intelligence.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| Add a third thing: AI models. That's going to get more and
| more obnoxious over the next years.
|
| I just did a "ncdu -x --exclude Volumes --exclude Users /"
| on my 15.5 (side rant: why the hell is the exclusion
| necessary to prevent ncdu going into an infinite recursion
| loop? -x should keep it on the same filesystem, no crossing
| mountpoints)... and well.
|
| 800 MB in printer drivers (/Library/Printers), 425 MB in
| audio loops (/Library/Audio/Apple Loops), probably 500 MB
| in various AI models in /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks
| (/MediaAnalysis.framework,
| /CoreSceneUnderstanding.framework, /CVNLP.framework,
| /TextRecognition.framework, /CoreHandwriting.framework),
| around 2 GB of other AI models in /System/Library/AssetsV2
| (/com_apple_MobileAsset_LinguisticData,
| /com_apple_MobileAsset_UAF_Siri_Understanding,
| /com_apple_MobileAsset_Trial_Siri_SiriTextToSpeech), 800 MB
| in /System/Library/LinguisticData, a whopping 550 MB in
| fonts in /System/Library/Fonts (of which Apple Color
| Emoji.ttc alone consumes 180 MB of data?!).
|
| So it's at least 2.5 GB of AI models _alone_. Crazy. I
| mean, props to Apple for offering local models that work
| without internet, that 's far from a given these days (sad
| enough). But the lowest-spec MBA clocks in at 256 GB disk
| space... having to waste 1% on AI alone and more on all the
| other stuff? That's ridiculous.
| Someone wrote:
| > So it's at least 2.5 GB of AI models alone. Crazy
|
| I don't think 2.5 GB is a lot nowadays. Xcode is over 12
| GB, iMovie over 4 GB, MS Word 2 over GB
|
| > having to waste 1% on AI alone
|
| Is that 'having to'? I thought those models only get
| downloaded after you give permission to do so.
|
| Same for some other stuff, I think. /Library/Printers is
| 12 MB on my system, for example and /Library/Audio 584
| kB.
| mschuster91 wrote:
| > I don't think 2.5 GB is a lot nowadays. Xcode is over
| 12 GB, iMovie over 4 GB, MS Word 2 over GB
|
| Word is ridiculous, agreed. Xcode isn't mandatory
| (although I'd LOVE to have it ship without tons of
| mandatory SDKs, emulators and god knows what else makes
| up the 12 GB) and I'm not sure if iMovie is.
|
| > Is that 'having to'? I thought those models only get
| downloaded after you give permission to do so.
|
| I can't remember having ever given macOS the permission
| to install Siri and the likes.
|
| > /Library/Printers is 12 MB on my system, for example
| and /Library/Audio 584 kB.
|
| Indeed, tried on another machine, no printer drivers
| there. Probably the culprit is HP, their drivers suck
| balls. /Library/Audio however, that's just the same size
| on my M2 MBA as it is on my 2019 MBP.
| noisy_boy wrote:
| > How in the world did someone find this?
|
| These people are Computing Archeologists - I don't know if that
| is a formal category but that is how I think of them. They go
| deeper into software and hardware of the past and bring back
| such gems before those are lost forever to the tides of
| e-waste.
| johnklos wrote:
| Have you ever played with ResEdit? It's a wonderful tool that
| shows you all sorts of parts of programs and files that you'd
| need tools like ghidra to show you today. ResEdit came from
| Apple, though, and is incredibly easy to use.
| iosjunkie wrote:
| This would have been perfect fodder for Stump the Experts...
| c'est la vie.
| RomanPushkin wrote:
| It's kinda cool and shows that there are real people behind
| corporations. Some folks with lots of $$$ say "I build this"
| (Zuck often says that), stealing the credit of accomplishment
| from small little people. While real small little people leave
| the note in history - "nope, it's us who put our souls into
| making this happen". Of course, Steve Jobs would ban this.
| dcminter wrote:
| You know I'm not a huge fan of Jobs, but I do think he was a
| lot more complicated than the pantomime villain he sometimes
| gets characterised as. On this particular topic he was, on the
| contrary, the progenitor of this:
|
| https://www.folklore.org/Signing_Party.html
|
| So no "of course" about it.
|
| Note also that Microsoft had a "no easter eggs" policy starting
| in the early 2000s. It's not really a Jobs thing.
| thomassmith65 wrote:
| I posted the same link and then realized you already had.
|
| There's a grain of truth to the grandparent comment but it is
| distorted by _Occupy Wall Street_ ideology.
| pm215 wrote:
| Yeah. I think the "signed case" also has some distinctions
| compared to a typical software easter egg:
|
| - the effects of it are clear
|
| - there's basically no chance of unexpected side effects (I
| suppose in theory it could structurally weaken the case if
| the signatures were carved too deeply...)
|
| - if a user stumbles upon it the intention is pretty clear
| and obviously harmless
|
| - it's not something that might get snuck in without approval
| of senior management, because it's not hidden in that sense,
| so there is a limiter on how many of them accumulate and how
| complicated they might get
|
| which help to explain why you might by policy forbid software
| easter eggs while still being an advocate for "signing your
| work".
| dcminter wrote:
| It's also, I think, worth bearing in mind the extraordinary
| growth that the computer industry has had. To be CEO of a
| major computer company in the mid 80s versus the late 90s
| was a very different level of responsibility.
|
| What people will put up with in a hobbyist and small
| business environment is very different to what's acceptable
| in enterprise and beyond. It's all fun and games until
| someone has to sell to the US government...
| BeFlatXIII wrote:
| > Microsoft had a "no easter eggs" policy starting in the
| early 2000s
|
| Note that this was in the aftermath of a summer with multiple
| major XP security issues.
| baq wrote:
| came here to say that, too.
|
| imagine your easter egg introduced a vulnerability. a
| blanket policy like that is literally the first document
| leadership signs and sends out.
| codys wrote:
| Were there any Microsoft XP security issues caused by
| "Easter eggs" prior to that policy change? Or was this just
| put in place as a policy because it was easy to put in
| place?
| Analemma_ wrote:
| I don't think there were any specific security issues
| caused by Easter eggs but the policy was announced as one
| of the many changes in their "Trustworthy Computing"
| initiative.
|
| It seems kinda harsh but it's important to remember the
| context: at the time, the security situation in Windows
| and Office was dire and it was (probably correctly)
| perceived as an existential threat to the company. I
| think "no Easter eggs" was as much for optics as for its
| actual effect on the codebase, a way to signal "we know
| about and stand behind every line of code that gets
| written; nothing is unaccounted for".
| PhasmaFelis wrote:
| Wasn't it also something to do with supplying government
| contracts, which require all behavior to be documented?
| reconnecting wrote:
| Microsoft best ever easter eggs was C:\CON\CON
| amelius wrote:
| Article says:
|
| "... Steve Jobs reportedly banning them in 1997 when he
| returned to Apple ..."
| dcminter wrote:
| Yes I know, I read it. I was responding to the parent "of
| course" insinuation that it was motivated by jealousy of
| the credit for the Mac. His established promotion of the
| identity of the contributors gives the lie to this view.
|
| It was probably driven by the same kind of pragmatic
| business drivers as the later Microsoft ban, i.e. the
| perception by the market of how "serious" Apple was as a
| company.
|
| ---
|
| Edit: According to Gizmodo in 2012:
|
| > _He justified the credits ban as a way to avoid
| headhunters and other companies trying to poach Apple
| engineering talent. At a time when Apple was sinking
| rapidly, he said that it made no sense to make the life of
| the competition easier. He also argued that they were all
| responsible of the stuff they created in Cupertino. This
| was a complete change from the 1980s._
| schlauerfox wrote:
| That makes more sense in light of what came about, a
| massive industry wage suppression scheme.
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-
| Tech_Employee_Antitrust_L...
| amelius wrote:
| Are Apple employees even allowed to build a resume and
| keep an updated version on LinkedIn?
| hinkley wrote:
| Jobs was driven. Driven means a lot of things good or bad. It
| means some people get their feet stepped on because they're
| milling about instead of moving. People don't understand that
| doing nothing when there is Shit to Get Done isn't neutral,
| it's obstructive, and that makes you the Enemy of the Driven.
| mrcwinn wrote:
| Oh please.
|
| It's unlikely Jobs, having returned to an Apple in crisis,
| personally knew about some obscure ROM image, its location
| buried in secret assembly code. More likely, one of those "real
| people" removed it doing some cleanup.
|
| Jobs routinely and publicly spoke about the amazing people who
| work for Apple. He spoke with Walt Mossberg about how important
| it is to build a great team and foster creativity.
| mrpippy wrote:
| Note that this was the last "OldWorld" Mac (at least desktop
| Mac, the WallStreet PowerBook G3 was probably a bit later)
| where the traditional Mac ROM was in an actual hardware ROM.
|
| "NewWorld" started with the iMac: only Open Firmware was in
| ROM and the classic Mac OS ROM was just a file on disk.
|
| When a HW/SW team is shipping a new Mac and burning a ROM,
| that feels like an occasion to put in a picture of the team.
| When you're not burning a ROM and the picture would take up
| space on everyone's disk...not so much.
| dylan604 wrote:
| how is taking up space on someone's HDD worse than taking
| up space in the very constrained ROM?
| pavlov wrote:
| The physical ROM chip is a certain size. If you have 50kB
| left over, it doesn't matter if those bits are zeros or
| an easter egg.
| dylan604 wrote:
| and using 50K on someone's harddrive is a mortal sin?
| it's 50K. nobody will ever notice
| pavlov wrote:
| This was back when people still used 1.44M floppies to
| boot in an emergency.
| duskwuff wrote:
| Not on a G3. These systems shipped with Mac OS 8; the
| System suitcase was over 6 MB alone. Apple stopped
| shipping systems with internal floppy drives altogether a
| few years later, with the iMac and blue-and-white G3.
| dylan604 wrote:
| didn't OS 8 come on a CD? I installed it from disc in my
| DVD drive. not sure how old you think the G3 is, but it's
| not as old as installing from floppy. just barely
| philistine wrote:
| If you need 32K of ROM because your code is 26K, then
| that means you have 6K just available that no one will
| ever be able to access otherwise. Why not use it for an
| easter egg?
| ThrowawayR2 wrote:
| That's meaningless, even coming out of Steve Jobs mouth.
| Every corporate executive publicly speaks about the "amazing
| people who work for them" and the "importance of building
| great teams and fostering creativity". Talk is cheap and
| projecting a corporate image is a core part of their job.
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| while i firmly believe that profit is the theft of unpaid
| labor...
|
| when it comes to meta salaries, the old Mad Men scene about
| getting personal recognition for work comes to mind: "that's
| what the money is for!"
| miles wrote:
| > i firmly believe that profit is the theft of unpaid labor
|
| If I sell a cake for $3 that cost me $2 in
| ingredients/electricity/etc. to make, how is my $1 profit the
| theft of unpaid labor?
| GuinansEyebrows wrote:
| labor is entitled to an equal share of the profit. if
| you're the only one who made the cake, your equal share of
| the profit is $1.
| ryandrake wrote:
| > This is probably one of the last easter eggs that existed in
| the Mac prior to Steve Jobs reportedly banning them in 1997 when
| he returned to Apple.
|
| Probably a good call. Whenever I see an Easter Egg in software,
| part of me thinks "cool! That's fun and harmless!" And the other
| part of me, the professional part who is responsible for
| releasing working software on time and _minimizing risks_ , gasps
| and thinks "what if it wasn't harmless? What if it triggered a
| subtle bug that had to be patched and put an entire device's
| shipping timeline at risk!" What are you going to write in that
| postmortem that justifies adding unnecessary code (risk) to the
| product, just so you could be cool and fun?
|
| I know this is an unpopular opinion here, but there are great,
| appropriate places for fun and whimsy, like personal hobby
| projects, not your company's multimillion dollar product.
| sybercecurity wrote:
| Probably correct - and looking to stop the inevitable one
| upmanship that would happen. If one team has an encoded image,
| then the next wants to do a little game, then a more complex
| easter egg, etc. until something breaks or causes a PR issue.
| robin_reala wrote:
| Culminating in the Excel 97 flight simulator:
| https://eeggs.com/items/29841.html
| wk_end wrote:
| > This is probably one of the last easter eggs that existed in
| the Mac prior to Steve Jobs reportedly banning them in 1997 when
| he returned to Apple.
|
| People often really deify Steve Jobs, but I dunno. I really like
| the years the Mac spent wandering the desert. I read things like
| this and feel like - even if it was a _net_ win - Apple 's
| culture and identity really ended up losing something with his
| return.
| linguae wrote:
| I'm a big Steve Jobs fan, but I'm also a fan of what I call the
| "interregnum" years at Apple from 1985 through 1996. Yes,
| Sculley, Spindler, and Amelio were not the greatest leaders,
| and Apple fumbled hard with Pink/Taligent, Copland, and
| hardware debacles such as the PowerBook 5300 and the Performa
| 5200/6200/5300/6300 series (1995 in particular was a disastrous
| year for Apple).
|
| However, there were many wonderful things about this era. Jean
| Louis Gassee fought for expandable Macs, and his influence
| helped lead to the Macintosh II, which started a long series of
| expandable Macs that went unbroken until the "trash can" 2013
| Mac Pro was released. System 7 might not have been the most
| reliable OS, but it had a wonderful UI. Don Norman and Bruce
| Tognazzini promoted solid UI/UX principles and guidelines.
| HyperCard is from this time period. Apple's Advanced Technology
| Group with Larry Tesler, Alan Kay, and many others worked on
| very interesting projects such as the Dylan programming
| language and the SK8 environment. OpenDoc was an interesting
| attempt at making a component-based software platform.
|
| There was also this cozy, whimsical feeling of the classic Mac
| OS that got lost during the transition to Mac OS X, though I'm
| greatly appreciative of Mac OS X.
|
| I'm a fan of "interregnum" Apple and also 1997-2011 Apple when
| Steve Jobs returned, but I'm not much of a fan of Tim Cook's
| Apple. This is when I felt Apple has changed dramatically from
| its roots. Apple is financially the most successful it's ever
| been, but the Mac no longer has the same feeling it once had
| back in the 1990s or the 2000s. Apple has gone from the Mac
| company to the iPhone company now.
| Hilift wrote:
| 1985 Kinko's had a bank of Macs available for anyone to use.
| I used to go there late thinking it would be less busy but
| they were usually in use all the time.
| fnord77 wrote:
| Cook's apple is slowly turning into a services company.
| Services revenue is higher than mac + ipad revenue combined.
| ilamont wrote:
| Wasn't Jony Ive also hired during the interregnum period? I
| think I remember reading in the Isaacson bio that when Jobs
| came back in the late 90s he encountered Ive who was hired a
| year or two previously.
| linguae wrote:
| Yup, Jony Ive was hired before Steve Jobs returned to
| Apple. In fact, he worked on the 20th Anniversary
| Macintosh, though he wasn't the sole designer. If I
| remember correctly, Ive was considering leaving Apple
| around the time Jobs returned, but Jobs and Ive ended up
| hitting it off, and the rest became history, as Ive's
| designs and Jobs' encouragement helped revitalize Apple,
| beginning with the iMac.
| p_ing wrote:
| That's really neat. Sometimes the how is better than the result.
|
| ...now do the Black Monolith.
| burnt-resistor wrote:
| I miss Easter Eggs so much. Let's bring them back.
| reconnecting wrote:
| We have the small one in FILE_ID.DIZ
|
| https://raw.githubusercontent.com/tirrenotechnologies/tirren...
| gaudystead wrote:
| Agreed. They might only be found in smaller projects these
| days, but I'd love to see them in larger efforts as well. As a
| kid, discovering/hearing about Easter eggs in a product tended
| to cause me use it more, if for no other reason than to find
| the Easter egg. It saddens me that hidden nuggets of joy aren't
| as popular as they used to be, with even the latest Android
| versions having very boring "Easter eggs" that amount to a
| disappointingly sparse interaction for users who have to unlock
| the developer features. :/
| chrisbrandow wrote:
| Somebody once shared an Easter egg on an iPad, where they wrote a
| little code in the playground app and were able to pull up the
| next logo from the ROM, or something like that. I reproduced it
| at the time, but I've never been able to find a reference since.
| This was like 6 years ago or so
| postexitus wrote:
| Reminds me of the "We made the Amiga, they f----d it up!"
| message.
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2007/12/amiga-history-part-5...
| jan_Sate wrote:
| Impressive. Interesting how it took that long until someone found
| the triggering mechanism of this easter egg. Reverse engineering
| is tough.
|
| Now that I wonder where I could learn RE? Where do I even start?
| Got any recommendation of online tutorial or book or something?
| coldpie wrote:
| Video games are a good place to start, especially for old
| consoles like the NES. The impacts of your experimenting are
| immediately visible, and they're simple devices (though the
| hardware "APIs" can be pretty unintuitive to a modern
| programmer), and there's a lot of tooling already built for
| hacking and reversing them. Try loading up your favorite NES
| game in Mesen and poke around its debugging tools with
| nesdev.org open in a browser. If the game you're working with
| has already been reversed by someone else, you may find some
| useful info on https://datacrystal.tcrf.net , too.
|
| Reversing more modern software is tricky. I wrote a couple
| articles a while back about hacking a Gamecube game that you
| might enjoy:
|
| https://www.smokingonabike.com/2021/01/17/hacking-super-monk...
|
| https://www.smokingonabike.com/2021/02/28/hacking-super-monk...
|
| Accompanying HN discussion:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26315368
| bbayles wrote:
| Agree on video games! I recently found a "developer photo
| insert" Easter egg in an old 3DO game:
| https://32bits.substack.com/p/under-the-microscope-total-
| ecl...
| MortyWaves wrote:
| It's really bugging me that he somehow reads "The Team" but not
| the full string "The Team Break at Event Match - Native" whatever
| that means.
| pimlottc wrote:
| These are two separate strings. You can see in the hexdump that
| the character between them is not a space (0x20) but an
| unprintable control character (0x1D). The article refers to
| these as "Pascal strings". Unlike C-style strings, they are not
| null-terminated, but instead are length-prefixed [0]; the first
| byte of the string stores the length of the string.
|
| So you can see that "The Team" is indeed a single string,
| starting with the length of 8 (encoded as 0x08), followed by
| the string "Break at Event Match - Native" with length of 29
| (encoded as 0x1D)
|
| 0: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/25068903/what-are-
| pascal...
| butlike wrote:
| 'The Team' is the file that's exposed on the ROM disk when you
| successfully execute the easter egg.
| tambourine_man wrote:
| This is awesome. There's something about these old machines that
| inspire both the creation and discovery of Easter Eggs.
|
| I doubt there will be anyone digging through the EFI or whatever
| of a MacBook Air in 30 years. If there's even something there to
| be found.
| dylan604 wrote:
| > If there's even something there to be found.
|
| But that's the thing right there. We won't _know_ until someone
| does the search.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| These Easter eggs _really_ give an "early desktop PC era" vibe to
| it all. It's very human and connects you to the fact that you're
| using something that people with faces and names made. Back when
| these were passion projects by a bunch of hardcore nerds.
|
| But they'd rather you not really see through the product
| abstraction layer anymore. The Product People want to control the
| full image of the product and it's just safest to de-humanize it
| in case that list is too big or people on that list become
| undesirables or whatnot.
|
| I'm thinking about what this might look like today. Maybe a neat
| Easter egg in my iPhone that every time I activate it, it shows
| me a few people at random who played a role in development. I'd
| love it, but I imagine this would offend the high tastes of the
| Product People.
| ulfw wrote:
| I don't know what your odd issue with product people is but
| this has absolutely nothing to do with Product (management).
| Software used to be done by a handful of people. Now there are
| thousands involved across an organisation. For better or worth
| that's how it is. An Easter Egg highlighting just a few people
| just doesn't make sense for a large software project nowadays
| rusk wrote:
| It's more to do with Quality Control than Product Management
| ryandrake wrote:
| Yea, Quality Control and Risk Management. You really don't
| want even the slightest risk of messing up the build or the
| product just so that you can bury some secret treasure in
| the code! We've all at some point been responsible for a
| big goof-up in code that we believed to be harmless.
| hinkley wrote:
| Yeah but you write the easter egg in one product cycle
| and you put it in the code at the beginning of the next,
| so it has all the time in the world to 'bake'.
| mikepurvis wrote:
| Not that I don't also wish for a return of more whimsy to
| software development, but those risks are real-- there
| have been some pretty high profile embarrassments over
| the years in connection with pranks and easter eggs. The
| GMail "mic drop" is an obvious one, also the Spider-Man
| PS4 proposal was another, plus of course stuff like the
| GTA Hot Coffee minigame.
| iAMkenough wrote:
| Also from a Risk Management perspective, you might be
| embedding the name/photo of a future sociopath or someone
| who is litigious. The "human" aspect cuts both ways.
| Waterluvian wrote:
| A consequence of drawing the risk line that far to one
| end is that products end up having no soul. Perfectly
| valid for a business to decide that. But it just connects
| back to my main post and how 80s/90s apple had that vibe
| that today's apple lacks. They Risk Managed and/or
| Product Designed until they had a sterile, lifeless
| product.
|
| I think it's what I pick up on when I feel annoyed at the
| emulated soul they try to instil with their
| design/branding/commercials.
|
| I think another example, sibling to easter eggs, would be
| April Fools. Mind you I hate April Fools, but the soul
| was sterilized as they Risk Managed their way to
| jokes/pranks that were guaranteed to be safe.
| zzrrt wrote:
| > Now there are thousands involved across an organisation...
| An Easter Egg highlighting just a few people just doesn't
| make sense
|
| I don't know if the message was edited, but GP addressed this
| with "Maybe... it shows me a few people at random who played
| a role in development." Anyway, you could also show thousands
| of names/faces rapidly but still meaningfully, or let the
| user explore them slowly. Feels like the other responses are
| more accurate than it simply being about the quantity of
| people.
| hinkley wrote:
| I wonder too if there was more of this before Agile. With
| deadline driven development you can run into situations where
| part of the team is stuck waiting for their teammates to finish
| something so they can surpass a milestone. You can only poke at
| the backlog so much. Boredom and being able to rationalize that
| you aren't really affecting the roadmap by sneaking a little
| extra something in makes for a lot more 'motive and
| opportunity' situations.
| HenryBemis wrote:
| Today some auditor (like me) would fail your ITGCs because of
| the undocumented partition/file/change/etc (take your pick)
| and force you to submit a deviation to the SOC team, ask you
| to "review and update the Secure Design Document to reflect
| to the change", ask you to create a Jira and/or ServiceNow
| ticket, etc. etc. etc.
|
| Oh, and you would get a red mark on your "HR P&D record" for
| the 'Secure Software Policy' violation.
|
| (Shit.. I hated myself writing the above, but it's true)
|
| In 2001 though, we would all laugh if we would have 'caught'
| the devs doing something cool like this!
| perdomon wrote:
| I couldn't reproduce this using the Infinite Mac browser tool
| shared in the article on Firefox, but it's a really cool find
| regardless. I wonder if Apple today would dare to include
| anything remotely this fun.
| teejmya wrote:
| FWIW, I got it on the second try using Firefox.
| perdomon wrote:
| I get to the part where I type in the file name, but the
| 'computer' restarts when I get like 3 letters in. Maybe
| there's a shortcut key associated with the restart function?
| No idea. Really cool emulator, though!
| tasty_freeze wrote:
| I used to work with a guy who was at apple in the 80s into the
| mid 90s doing ASIC and board design. One time he mentioned being
| pissed that with all the blood, sweat, and tears the hardware
| team put into the design and debug of the hardware system, the
| software guys would blow 50K of ROM (or whatever) image
| glorifying the team that designed the computer ... completely
| leaving out the hardware team.
| spaceisballer wrote:
| I have memories of going to the library in the 90s to read
| MacWorld. Then learning that if I did a few clicks and maybe
| keystrokes you may unlock something with the processor. I can't
| totally recall what it would unlock but it was for the Apple IIci
| and it's 33mhz processor.
| amatecha wrote:
| My favorite was dragging a text clipping of "secret about box"
| to the desktop in System 7.5 and it would spawn a breakout game
| with the dev team's names as "bricks" :) fun times.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-06-24 23:00 UTC)