> He makes no statement about its operation under load

True. But I suspect that he tested it under load to make the general statements he does make.

> most operations under MorphOS are not that CPU intensive

That depends on your usage pattern really. It's not the OS itself consuming much CPU time obviously but some applications and games that can really get it running hot. Mind you that there're people using MorphOS as their everyday system, only switching to another OS in case of real need.

> I could see a Mac Mini running under MorphOS at 1.83 exhitbiting fairly
> good stability and only crashing every once in awhile.

pampers has been running his Mac mini at 1.83 GHz from March through September at least, that's about half a year. Seems that during that time he had not one single crash that he'd contribute to the overclocking.

> if the Mac Minis do use a 7447B, then operating at this speed is
> only a little above what the best of those could do.

Rather: ...only a little above what Freescale rated them to do. And as mentioned by me in this very thread, 7447A is rated for the same maximum of 1.7 GHz. But in this context that's moot anyway because Mac mini G4 uses 7447B in fact.

> some third party upgrades used to run at 2.0GVhz

...which is 18% overclocking from 1.7 GHz vs. 22% from 1.5 to 1.83 GHz. Not that much of a difference, especially considering the possibility that Freescale underrated the 1.5 GHz parts (i.e. may possibly have as well been rated as 1.7 GHz).

> I have no reason to doubt that it can be done.

Alright. Sounds different now than just moments ago ;-)

> I frequently reply to the wrong message.
> Just following the entire content of the thread.

My message you replied to doesn't have anything to do with overclocking.