Booting in OS 9

Well, they would probably still be here, but without the glimmer of hope that OSX (and now the G5) gave them. Apple has needed a substantially new OS since the release of the PowerMacs back in 1994(?).

Intelligent and reasonable response, as always... I'd expect no less.



The first system I had ran 6.0.4, so yes, I was present for that. Yes, System 7 screwed up a lot of ****. Yes, I'm probably too young to really remember the effect it had on things, but as far as I'm aware, MOST things were updated very swiftly, as opposed to the 9 -> X change, whereby most things have not been at all. Why, I don't know, but the point remains.



Seven, actually.

An interesting thing that Apple could do is to make their excellent Classic environment "retroactive": i.e., to also include previous systems support - as in Basilisk II (68k support), for example.

Why would they want to do that? Not certainly for utilitarian, "economic" reasons, but just for the ideal (and the fun!) of giving users a full support of almost all past, Classic Mac OS implementations (Steve, are you listening?).

OK, maybe an odd idea - but anyway...

I try to respond in kind with the original.
Five reasons I see:

1. *very* few things actually b0rked to the point where they didn't work in Classic (this doesn't include games)

2. For those that did break even in Classic, re-booting into OS9 has remained an option on every single Mac sold before January 2003

3. Rewriting something for OS X is probably quite a bit more work than rewriting something for System 6 --> System 7

4. Apple has a smaller marketshare these days.

5. Free alternatives being ported over from other *nixes reducing pressure and incentive on commercial developers to port.

As it is, I believe the number of applications now being ported to OS X from *other* OSen is probably quite a bit higher than the number of applications *not* being (or not yet) ported from Mac OS 9.

-s*

The difference being I had a point...




Depends on how you define usable. Classic is terrible, IMO... I don't use it for even the most basic things, because it's just a mess. And games can't just be discounted, they're a big part of it all.

Either way, the lack of support for hardware under Classic is another killer that has yet to be addressed.



That doesn't help those who need to upgrade, but still need (or desire) Classic compatibility on a usable scale.



Even with Carbon? I have no idea, I'm not a developer. You're probably right. That's not our problem, though. Nor should it be.



So angering it probably isn't the best idea.



No doubt... but that's no good when I want to play Descent 3, for example.

I know this is kind of a null point, as I guess my oppinion is not as revered here as many of the more 'regulars' on the board, but here is my quids worth...

OS 9 was good. I agree. But it can't come close to the foundations and features OS X can offer. I upgraded to OS X almost as soon as it was released, coming in at the 10.0.4 days. I loved it from the start. Sure, back then I heavily relied on Classic to help me out when some things didn't work under X, and yes, occasionally I even booted back into 9. This changed when 10.1 came out. I have not booted back into OS 9 since I upgraded, and since 10.2 I have not even used Classic under X.

It was nice to know my Mac could still boot into 9 if I needed it to though, something of a fail safe. However, this September I bought a Power Mac G4 (FW800), and so with that came the worry that I could no longer boot into 9. However, this has not been a problem. Infact, I have deleted most of the OS 9 apps that classic installed on the comp, booted classic once to make sure it was still working, and never seen it since.

Why should Apple have to continue to support an outdated standard? As one poster suggested, if you need OS 9 get one of the 1.25Ghz Power Mac G4s from the Apple Store that still support it. OS 9 will never need more powerful hardware, because there are never going to be any new hardware intensive features added to the OS. It will last forever. And for those of us happy living in the 21st century, then everything is good by us as it stands.

Col

Use an old machine for an old OS. You're not going to buy a new mac to run OS 9 on, it wouldn't make sense.

I have a couple of games that only run well in native OS 9. One of them is being ported to OS X, but the other will likely not be . I'd like to have (and with an original FP iMac, still have) the ability to boot to OS 9, but I can understand why Apple is dropping it on new machines (too much extra work for legacy stuff).

I'm selling my old machine.

Oh yeah, "just buy another machine!" for OS9.

You're paying, are you?

Forgive me - I misspoke. I will listen to what you have to say, but I meant that no one can convince me that I don't want to run my OS 9 software on my new computer. I do.

Rather: just keep the one you're using.

You've paid, haven't you?

If it still does things you need it to do, isn't that rather stupid? And if your new machine can't do anything your old one can't, why buy a new machine?

You're wrong, it was taken away. know why I know this?
The G4s that are not "dual boot" can boot into OS 9 with a little hacking. they also came with a boot disk to boot into OS 9. they copied a file on the OS 9 boot disk to the system folder on the hdd, to get it to work, forgot which one it was...




So, devoting development dollars and manpower to disable OS 9 was a better idea? this was done.


agreed.
however, the only reason why you can't run system 7 on a new world mac(iMac and everything after that) is because of the new world ROM. The ROM in the older macs not only had instructions to boot the computer but also, had some of the MacToolbox. which also had some instructions that were used after the comp booted up. But the new world Macs did not have. if it wasn't for changing over to the new world ROM, you could run System 7, if you really wanted to, on an iMac. But because they split the ROM and put most of it in a ROM file in the system folder, you can't. which BTW, is the reason you claim thats why you cant boot into OS 9 on the G4s(new hardware, have to update system to get it to work) as I have proven is un-true.



Can you come up with a dollar-value case as to how much profit they gaind by paying developers to NOT make it work on the newer G4s? it did take time and effort.

OS X is the fastest OS switchover in history, everything was going good. why spend money on something that would make people mad? we were doing what they wanted usyou could not really make the switchover any faster then it was.

that being the case, its over with now. its all in the past. I cant remember the last time I booted into 9, not even to play UT...

Well, you yourself just said above that they can.... Apple just chose not to make it obviously possible. And yes, there is a possible reason - being able to EOL OS9 a few months earlier, saving on support costs (plus any extra savings from not taking the QA time to ensure that OS9 worked).

Link please.

Your manpower point is moot without it.

-s*

Most OS 9 apps work in X regardless; it's called Classic.

It's doubtful that "users" that would care would be bothered. Not to mention, OS 9 contains substantial amounts of IP, both Apple's and others', so it may not be possible.

No, they didn't.

Really... try running System 7.1.2 on a beige G3 (Old World) and let me know how well it works.

Or for that matter, try System 6 on a Quadra. Or 10.1.5 on a G5. Or System 2.0/Finder 4.1 on a IIci. Have fun, because the only one that even has a chance of even booting is the System 2.0/Finder 4.1 on the IIci, and it will be so unstable that you won't be using it for long! Apple has always done this, because the classic OS has always been very dependent on hardware, and if it's not updated for new systems, it doesn't work very well at all.

Ever noticed how with the classic OS, especially in the System 7.x days, the System Folder usually has a few files named "System Enabler XYZ" where XYZ is replaced by some three-digit number? Those files were to update the OS to accommodate hardware that was released after the OS. I used to have it memorized which enablers were needed for which Mac models (I still remember one - The Quadra 605 needed System Enabler 065 in order to work with 7.1). In order to get the classic OS to work with new hardware, they either have to update the OS or develop a new System Enabler. You can try hacking things to get OS 9 to run on a new machine, but I wouldn't want to be using that system...

I'm willing to bet that OS11 will be Apples first true 64bit clean OS, but I'd also bet it's a long ways off....