Mac OS 9 Support until June?

[MacRumors]

Macintouch reports (http://www.macintouch.com/newsrecent.shtml) on user information that OS 9 support will be maintained until June 2003:


According to Quark, Steve Jobs agreed to delay the policy of all new Macs only booting in OS X (after January 1st) until June of 2003. This is to accommodate the much delayed release of the OS X native version of Quark XPress 6.0. The purpose of Quark's call was to reassure the attendees that they will be able to run Xpress in Mac OS 9 on new machines until June of 2003.
* I don't know if this is an attempt by Quark to say whatever they can to get sales and the confidence of their customers. I do however, find it difficult to believe that Apple would reverse their stance on Mac OS 9 booting after the first of the year.

[sfoalex]

I don't see what difference this makes to anyone. Quark will not be ready in 6 months anyway. They are famous for saying 6 months and then releasing in 18 to 24 months. So if this is true, it only delays Apple intentions of going all primary OS X for 6 months. What will Quark do then? Ask for another 6 months? In my opinion, it would be easier to work with Quark and make sure you can ensure quality running Quark's applications in the classic mode on these new systems. How many new Macs are going to be sold in the next 6 months specifically for the use of Quark? It can't be that huge of a number...

[jayscheuerle]

This is more important to Apple than to Quark. Shops that NEED Quark running in 9 will not buy any new machines if they don't boot. That's bad for Apple.

Skip the ID2 praises, this isn't about Adobe. Apple needs the publishing industries' financial support which is still overwhelmingly Quark bound.

Apple would just appear to respect their customers if they did a flip-flop, something they admittedly haven't done lately (respect or flip-flop that is).

I hope it's true. - j

[peterjhill]

Screw Quark. I can't stand their product. It is a nightmare to support. I would not be sad if they went out of business. I used to love Pagemaker. Framemaker is an excellent product. Quark is ancient history, so is OS 9.

[Sun Baked]

If true ...

It would mean that people would only be getting minor revision/speed bumped machines through June 03.

And that the earliest people can expect all new motherboards on machines is next summer.

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by Sun Baked
If true ...

It would mean that people would only be getting minor revision/speed bumped machines through June 03.

And that the earliest people can expect all new motherboards on machines is next summer.

From what I understand, we're a long way from significant speed boosts regardless of the outcome of what I had believed to be purely a heavy-handed marketing decision on Apple's part.

[QuiteSure]

The transition to an all OSX box is important for Apple, but it may not be ready yet. No real harm pushing that off for 6 more months from the viewpoint of long term planning.

Probably no big speed boosts until the end of next year, if all the talk about the IBM 970 chips is true. If this delay gives Apple one more sales cycle with overclocked G4s, that may not be a bad thing.

When can I finally shed my "newbie" moniker? I've been using Macs since 1988!:mad:

[e-coli]

I find it difficult to believe that Apple would delay products and services because of one company that makes one piece of software.

I call bullspit on this one.

[peterjhill]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle


From what I understand, we're a long way from significant speed boosts regardless of the outcome of what I had believed to be purely a heavy-handed marketing decision on Apple's part.

I don't believe that it is a marketing decison at all. For every new piece of hardware some development work must be done on OS 9 to make it all work. drivers need to be written, the system software might need patches. I think that the development cycle for Apple on software is amazing now that all of the programmers are working hard on OS X. Bury OS 9, it is starting to smell.

[Falleron]

I dont buy that for a moment! Apple is not going to go back on what it said!

[GPTurismo]

Yay! Lets keep holding on tight to that legacy hardware and very legacy program :D

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by peterjhill

Bury OS 9, it is starting to smell.

I agree, but unfortunately, Quark's holding the biggest shovel.

Originally posted by e-coli
I find it difficult to believe that Apple would delay products and services because of one company that makes one piece of software.


I think you're underestimating the market-share of Apple that the Quark-bound publishing industry represents.

[johnsteed]

It's as good an excuse as Apple can find for not being ready with their new motherboards.

[pgwalsh]

It would be sad if Apple had to delay the OS X only launch for one software manufacturer. Does Quark have the user base to say we'll stop supporting Mac if you don't postpone the OS X move? That would be funny and sad if they had that kind of power. They've had long enough to develop for OS X. Adobe and Macromedia have moved their main products over, why can't Quark.

[InstantCool]

Stinkin' Quark is screwing up our Macs. I want OS 9 to go away! Dang it.

[Mr Jobs]

i think this is a load of crap, i'm more likely to believe end of 'classic' in June 2003 then end of 'OS 9' in June 2003. no way is apple delaying for one company, quark or no quark, imagine the costs of apples part on supporting two platforms.

[ddtlm]

Mr Jobs:

imagine the costs of apples part on supporting two platforms
Seeing as how Apple's hardware changes so rarely, I think this will be a non-issue until the "G5" shows up. I'm sure that delaying the death of OS9 for 6 months is not a big deal to Apple, probably will be few major hardware changes in those 6 months anyway. The biggest thing I can see happening is the arrival of a new video card for top-end towers.

InstantCool:

Stinkin' Quark is screwing up our Macs. I want OS 9 to go away! Dang it.
I am very amused that now-adays a good Mac-lover must hate OS9 and insult it at every turn, and likewise for the G4. My my, how quickly rabid defense of these cornerstones of Mac-ness evaporates once a real alternative starts to show. People don't seem to remember the day when every good Mac lover was expected to argue that the G4 was a supercomputer and that OS9 has no drawbacks whatsoever.

[ultrafiel]

Oh I can imagine it, Steve Jobs will get up at MWSF and say:

"Oh we made a mistake about OS 9's funeral last summer. It wasn't dead, it was mostly dead. Since we love Quark more than my own black turtlenecks, we are going to prolong OS 9 for the rest of eternity. Now I will step down and hand over Apple to your new CEO and President of Quark ..... Also we have now merged with Disney and Microsoft; Motorola will also supply our processor chips for the end of this world, because who doesn't want a computer that runs as fast as your phone? Thank you. Oh and by the way, we're filing for bankrupcy. Free iPods for everyone!"

Or if I recall Steve Jobs also made quite direct remarks about how Adobe hadn't ported Photoshop to X last January. Hmmmm... If Adobe doesn't get favored, why would Quark considering all of Adobe's products? Sure Quark may be the king of publishing, but I'm sure there are a lot more copies of Photoshop out there. And who cares if the new computers don't boot in 9, users still have plenty to choose from that will do so.

[gopher]

I hope this is true unless Apple can successfully convince everyone that the Classic environment is 100% Mac OS 9 hardware compatible. As it is the official word from Apple hasn't changed, and we only have third hand reports through Macintouch saying it is true. We shall soon see if Apple updates their press release:

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/sep/10macosx.html

Until that's updated, we should assume the third hand report is untrue.

[hobie]

Fine, those Quark crapheads are too lazy to program and Apple has to stick with!
I'd say finish off OS 9 off in Jan and shoot Quark to Jupiter or whatever :D
They don't deserve any more patience, or are 3 or what years of OS X not enough?!

[Thirteenva]

I just don't see this happening. Quark had more than enough time to build an OS X version.. OS X has been out for how long now???? 3 years if you count the beta....

Did quark think apple was gonna change its mind and trash OS X...
Quark has never been a forward thinking company and never will be, i say leave them behind. Its not like there are no other alternatives that are OS X native (indesign). And quark does work quite well in classic.

The Quark user base gets smaller ever month as more people switch to OS X and are exposed to indesign.... I made the switch and i hope more people will..

[peterjhill]

The Dead Collector: Bring out yer dead!
[A man puts a body on the cart.]
Large Man with Dead Body: Here's one.
The Dead Collector: That'll be ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead!
The Dead Collector: What?
Large Man with Dead Body: Nothing. There's your ninepence.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not dead!
The Dead Collector: 'Ere, he says he's not dead.
Large Man with Dead Body: Yes he is.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm not!
The Dead Collector: He isn't.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, he will be soon, he's very ill.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I'm getting better!
Large Man with Dead Body: No you're not, you'll be stone dead in a moment.
The Dead Collector: Well, I can't take him like that. It's against regulations.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I don't want to go on the cart!
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, don't be such a baby.
The Dead Collector: I can't take him.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel fine!
Large Man with Dead Body: Oh, do me a favor.
The Dead Collector: I can't!
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, can you hang around for a couple of minutes? He won't be long.
The Dead Collector: I promised I'd be at the Robinsons'. They've lost nine today.
Large Man with Dead Body: Well, when's your next round?
The Dead Collector: Thursday.
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I think I'll go for a walk!
Large Man with Dead Body: You're not fooling anyone, you know. Isn't there anything you could do?
The Dead Body That Claims It Isn't: I feel happy! I feel happy!
[The Dead Collector glances up and down the street furtively, then silences the Body with his a whack of his club.]
Large Man with Dead Body: Ah, thank you very much.
The Dead Collector: Not at all. See you on Thursday.
Large Man with Dead Body: Right.

[Choppaface]

yay! OS9 on new hardware...now I might actually buy a new machine :D

[Thirteenva]

Another point i'd like to add.


wasn't apple giving away a free copy of indesign with a power mac purchase....

Now that doesnt sound to me like a company that is waiting for quark......;) :D

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by Thirteenva
OS X has been out for how long now???? 3 years if you count the beta....


Never count the beta..

10.0 was barely useable.

10.1 had lots of problems (the Apple discussion boards were rolling during those days)

10.2 is a good, solid starting point for an OS.

I'm waiting to buy my next mac until the hardware can handle the OS's overhead. The top end dualies still aren't cutting it. If you say they are, then you're more tolerant than I am (and have lower expectations)..

Quark should have had something out by now, but their programmer works nights as a waiter at TGI Fridays & is struggling for time.

[.a]

i was wondering why quark still exists - adobe has the better software and is doing very aggressive marketing - quark MUST have a lot of loyal customers and Jobs' job will be to confince them to move over to osX and not buying xp-boxes. so delay to june03 is not really a big deal. if apple can provide new fast machines by june03 a lot of people will do the switch, switching from mac to mac ...

.a

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by Thirteenva
Another point i'd like to add.


wasn't apple giving away a free copy of indesign with a power mac purchase....

Now that doesnt sound to me like a company that is waiting for quark......;) :D

Not waiting- pressuring.

Or at least trying to.....

[JupiterZen]

I don't understand the problem really.

I've seen Quark 5 work very nicely in the Classic Environment.

:confused:

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by JupiterZen
I don't understand the problem really.

I've seen Quark 5 work very nicely in the Classic Environment.

:confused:

The redraw problem (even with ClassicDrawXT and no rulers) is terribly annoying. I miss my "step and repeat" key command AND I like my measurements palette at the bottom but the DOCK keeps popping up. I use it every day and wish I didn't have to. At least it works.

The best thing about leaving Classic behind is getting all that RAM back...

[gopher]

Originally posted by JupiterZen
I don't understand the problem really.

I've seen Quark 5 work very nicely in the Classic Environment.

:confused:

A lot of people still don't have the right
printer drivers for Classic to work well with Quark 5.
Until they do, they are stuck either booting into 9, or
waiting till Quark is updated. Same with importing Quark
projects to InDesign. It doesn't always work the way it is
expected to work. It should be smooth as glass.

[gbojim]

Originally posted by pgwalsh
It would be sad if Apple had to delay the OS X only launch for one software manufacturer. Does Quark have the user base to say we'll stop supporting Mac if you don't postpone the OS X move? That would be funny and sad if they had that kind of power. They've had long enough to develop for OS X. Adobe and Macromedia have moved their main products over, why can't Quark.

Unfortunately, Quark does have that kind of power. You will find very few designers who prefer Quark over ID from a creative perspective. However, it is the workflow management infrastructure established at the large volume users (who outnumber the little guys by a ton) that keeps Quark in the game.

The high volume folks spent a ton of money on a Quark infrastructure over the years and they are not about to spend a ton of money to replace it with an inferior workflow management product from Adobe.

Then of course there are the high volume printing houses, many of which refuse to accept ID files because they do not RIP cleanly.

[peterjhill]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle
I like my measurements palette at the bottom but the DOCK keeps popping up. I use it every day and wish I didn't have to. At least it works.



Did you realize that you can move the dock to other parts of your screen, like the right or left side? Try it, it works, it is very nice.

[alset]

Originally posted by ddtlm


I am very amused that now-adays a good Mac-lover must hate OS9 and insult it at every turn, and likewise for the G4. My my, how quickly rabid defense of these cornerstones of Mac-ness evaporates once a real alternative starts to show. People don't seem to remember the day when every good Mac lover was expected to argue that the G4 was a supercomputer and that OS9 has no drawbacks whatsoever.

I could not have said it better if I tried. It's funny to me that so many Mac users now treat their former OS as archaic and nonfunctioning. Though OS X is the future of our platform (and a great one, at that) there are many institutions still using OS 9.

Until recently, most audio professionals have been left high and dry, regarding OS X. Still, much of the market waits for Pro Tools and DP3. Are sound engineers less valuable as customers for not demanding more of their companies, or switching platforms to tools that have already been ported? With this in mind I absolutely support the idea of doing favors for installed customer groups. That includes making changes to the OS 9 termination plan for Quark's users.

What is Apple's greatest asset? Customers that love them. This is a potentially great way to maintain the affections of an important group.

Dan

[gopher]

I admit, I booted into Mac OS 9 yesterday to play some Simcity 3000. I still use Mac OS X for most everything else.

[Monomni]

How many people REALLY still need to boot up in OS 9?

I admit, I occasionally had to boot in OS 9 when I was still using Quark - my computer had "issues" when running Classic... That still brought it's own share of Quark agonies.
But those days are long gone... I've dropped Quark, and even when they DO make an OS X version, I'm going to be one of probably many people who STILL avoid it like the plague.

Quark got such a stranglehold on publishing by being the only comparable layout program, and we were taken advantage of and ignored. But now there are others, and Quark is so deluded that they are ignoring the industry trends and changes... AND expecting us to go along with it! Uh, uh... stick a fork in Quark, it's done.

For those of you who haven't switched to InDesign, it is definitely worth it. It's really NOT hard to learn (especially if you've used Quirky Quark), and I have found significantly less agravation and missing features than in Quark...

It's probably not much of an issue to Apple whether they extend OS 9 bootability... they probably think it's a minor concession and a safer bet to keep Quark (and other OS 9-only apps) users from extending their app frustrations to their Macs. But I think it's a matter of principle. Apple shouldn't change it's plans for Quark - they don't deserve it anymore. And even if they did deserve any favor, it still shouldn't matter - it is the software companies' responsibility to keep up with technology at a reasonable pace. And that ALSO applies to Apple upgrading its products to meet tecnological advances.

:)

[Thirteenva]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle


Never count the beta..



You're right but the beta was still there for quark to start tinkering with as far as a new environment for there next release. Don't ya think. :D


10.0 was barely useable


It was useable, not the best experience but still useable, i switched over to OS X at 10.0.4. PLus whether it was 'useable' doesnt' excuse quark from using 10.0 to at least begin there development of a native version for future release. :)


10.1 had lots of problems (the Apple discussion boards were rolling during those days)

I used 10.1 daily with quark, photoshop, dreamweaver, flash, etc... all running in classic, i had very few problems and thought 10.1 was the first everyday useable and reliable version of OS X.

But again whether it was useable doesn't excuse quark of using 10.1(which came out over a year ago) to begin developing for OS X. :)


10.2 is a good, solid starting point for an OS.


Jaguar is great, feature filled and enjoyable to use.

At this point i feel quark should have been ready and only delayed there product to tweak it for jaguar, which would have been understandable and only taken a few months at the most.


I'm waiting to buy my next mac until the hardware can handle the OS's overhead. The top end dualies still aren't cutting it. If you say they are, then you're more tolerant than I am (and have lower expectations)..

Wow your standards must be high. :) :D.....
I do graphic design, web design and development, i'm a power user and a big time multitasker and i have no problems running 4 or 5 programs all at the same time while working on multiple projects (and two of those programs are always photoshop and dreamweaver) on my 500mhz tibook with 512mb.

So for me i could only dream of how fast a dual 1ghz must be if my powerbook runs jag great. :) and i'm heavily debating buying a new system for work(that ghz tibook sounds great, L3 cache, 64mb vram and 1gb ram upgrade......drooling), I wonder if my job will pay the extra 200 bucks for the superdrive. ;)

From the time i have spent on a dual 867 it seems to be every bit as fast as my girlfriends Pentium 4 running XP. Multitasking on that computer sucks. THere is a noticeable lag no matter what programs you use.


Quark should have had something out by now, but their programmer works nights as a waiter at TGI Fridays & is struggling for time.

LMFAO..... now thats funny:D

[JupiterZen]

Originally posted by gopher


A lot of people still don't have the right
printer drivers for Classic to work well with Quark 5.
Until they do, they are stuck either booting into 9, or
waiting till Quark is updated. Same with importing Quark
projects to InDesign. It doesn't always work the way it is
expected to work. It should be smooth as glass.

It's a computer ... never smooth as glass ;)

But seriously, if you use Quark from Classic you are using the same printer drivers and printing system as you would booting into OS 9, aren't you?

But I can imagine that Not All Printer Drivers Are Created Equal

[JupiterZen]

Originally posted by jayscheuerle


The redraw problem (even with ClassicDrawXT and no rulers) is terribly annoying. I miss my "step and repeat" key command AND I like my measurements palette at the bottom but the DOCK keeps popping up. I use it every day and wish I didn't have to. At least it works.

The best thing about leaving Classic behind is getting all that RAM back...


Okay, those redraw problems I understand, but the dock could be placed on the side to prevent it from popping up.

But besides these probems, does it technically do what you want? Can you print correctly and stuff like that?

[JupiterZen]

Originally posted by Monomni
How many people REALLY still need to boot up in OS 9?

All serious audio professionals.

I know that Logic and Cubase have finally arrived, but I can't make the switch until Sounddiver or Unisyn comes to OS X as well.

[jayscheuerle]

Originally posted by peterjhill


Did you realize that you can move the dock to other parts of your screen, like the right or left side? Try it, it works, it is very nice.

I used to love it on the right hand side, but I have a dual monitor set-up at work and it tosses the dock on the rightmost monitor, which does not work for me. My mouse NEVER goes over there. Like most people (I think), I use the left hand side for tool palettes....

[jayscheuerle]

I've been using OSX as well since 10.1 as a guinea pig for the print side of our agency (pub. beta @ home before that). I hate going back to 9 as much as the next OSX lover, BUT I also hate the fact that 9 is so much more responsive. OS9's Finder is so much snappier on a 300mHz G3 than OSX's is on a dual 1.25gHz machine. Those annoying little half-second pauses when renaming, changing views, just moving around..... you either notice them or you don't, and if you do, they interrupt your creative flow. But hey, this isn't another OSX disection discussion. This is a "God I hate Quark for hundreds of reasons" discussion. I digress..:D

What troubles me is that I haven't even heard of Quark seeding any beta releases yet. I've tried ID2, but my low-end G4 isn't fast enough to run it smoothly. Feature set is good, but it makes OSX's Finder seem like a speed demon.

Is Chimera the only OSX app that runs fast?:confused:

[alset]

Originally posted by Monomni
How many people REALLY still need to boot up in OS 9?

:)

Well, I gotta say I'm pretty offended that you would trivialize a major upgrade like this and treat it as if your experiences must be the norm. That your post subject reads "We care about this, why?" shows that you don't have any compassion for your fellow Mac-faithful.

Now, I'll tell you something: I won't change my tools for audio until something better comes along. There's no such thing as change because I have to. I'll use old technology if it let's me run better applications, which is often the case with OS 9 and audio. We will all be glad when this trend changes. Until then, you should stop pushing others to migrate to a platform that they don't want to use.

Finally, the larger account will almost always be media professionals who need lots of outboard hardware and specialized software to do their jobs. Apple isn't trying to alienate them, as your post has alienated me.

Dan

[Billy_ca]

That's all I have to say.

[Monomni]

Originally posted by alset
Well, I gotta say I'm pretty offended that you would trivialize a major upgrade like this and treat it as if your experience's must be the norm. That your post subject reads "We care about this, why?" shows that you don't have any compassion for your fellow Mac-faithful.

<dropping and rolling to put out the flames>

OK, whoa, whoa... I apologize if you took offense to my post, but I'm certainly not blasting Mac users. I'm a macaholic since 1985, so I definitely have compassion for my "fellow Mac-faithful."

My "who really boots in OS 9" question, was just that - a question. I haven't seen any useful polls/data about the number of users that this really does impact.

My post's criticism was directed at Quark (presumably the primary company up for discussion about OS 9-bootability). - and I know there are also still some OS X audio app shortcomings...

Stay light-hearted and enjoyed the Mac COMMUNITY - we're all buddies, here.
*i hope*

:D

[springscansing]

Originally posted by JupiterZen


All serious audio professionals.

I know that Logic and Cubase have finally arrived, but I can't make the switch until Sounddiver or Unisyn comes to OS X as well.

EXACTLY. Don't forget Reaktor and Absynth and about a million VSTis.

[Thirteenva]

jayscheuerle, I hear ya, if i really pay attention i do notice the half second pauses, i haven't been in 9 for so long now that i really haven't noticed a difference. Its been over a year since i've booted into 9 so with each os upgrade to OS X i've noticed it getting faster and it just seems "normal" for it to work how it does.

What hardware are you running , you said "low end g4". I used ID2 on my tibook and its not that bad. Not gonna set any speed records but really quite useable. Maybe i'm just used to my tibook. I'm still quite happy with it for now and hopefully will be until work decides to upgrade my laptop sometime next year :D. here's to hoping it will be a 970 ibm.....;)

[bpatterson]

I was just on campus at Apple for some training with OS X Server, and while we were there, we got to ask some questions. The engineers clarified Job's statement to be the following:

Only NEW hardware after the first of the year will lose the ability to boot to 9. All existing hardware models advertised until the first of the year will retain the ability to boot into 9 as long as they are in production.

According to the Apple engineers and software reps, this had less to do with Quark than it had to do with the education sector throwing a fit about being forced to migrate systems to maintain uniformity for support. Take Stanford University for example. The campus libraries upgrade 1/3 of their machines per year, meaning that they are still running machines made 3 years ago, some of which aren't exactly the most optized for X. In order to keep things uniform, they would need to migrate all these machines to X along with completing the developement of a netboot system by the beginning of January. With the 6 month delay, they are now able to wait until Summer when most students are off campus.

The other reason the education sector began to scream loudly was that X does not have a solid and fast networked backup system out on the market yet (Retrospect still has some work to do.)

Anyways, this is what the Apple engineers and software reps were telling us. Take it for what it's worth....

[bpatterson]

Oh yeah... I guess I should say that I run X on all my machines in my office, but at home I use ProTools and until Digidesign gets on it, I'm screwed into 9. Doh....

[gopher]

Originally posted by bpatterson
Oh yeah... I guess I should say that I run X on all my machines in my office, but at home I use ProTools and until Digidesign gets on it, I'm screwed into 9. Doh....

There are lots nice new Mac OS X audio applications:
Versiontracker (http://www.versiontracker.com/mp/new_search.m?s=2&s=2&productDB=mac&mode=Category&OS_Filter=MacOSX&category=Audio&order_d=D&order=DateMod)
has quite a few. I've heard lots of good things about
PeakDV. Mind you, if you aren't using Mac OS X 10.2 and are trying to do audio in Mac OS X you aren't going to see anywhere near as much support since Mac OS X 10.2 has much better MIDI integration in the system than earlier versions of Mac OS X.

[bpatterson]

The issue for me isn't the quality of the other audio apps coming out for X, it's that I work closely with a stack of producers in LA and they are all using ProTools, so while I am up for using new options, I've got to be able to hand files back and forth with these guys. And frankly, ProTools does kick ass, so I wish they would get their programming hineys in gear and give us a version for X! They got it out for XP, so what's the lag?

[gopher]

All indications are that Pro Tools will be coming out next month for X. And really why are you using proprietary music formats when transfering data between people? Can't you use MP3 or AIFF? At least that way you can use any music program you want.

[bpatterson]

I work with these producers by Fed-Ex. They ship me a ProTools session on CD which usually has 20+ tracks, plugin settings, etc., and then I handle some overdubs and conceptual tweaking and ship it back to them. The files are usually too big to dump back and forth over DSL and converting them to AIFF files doesn't retain plugin settings, means then need to import stuff all over, etc. Time is money, and it's faster just to keep things in ProTools than to swap them between formats.

[gopher]

i.c...thank you for the good and non-angry reply. For those not involved in the business it is important we understand what is involved.

[bpatterson]

I'm saving all my anger for my flaming replies on Slashdot... ha hah.

[Mr. Dibbs]

ok, I've seen a lot, and I will refuse to take sides. I will say however, that a good many things don't work on X because apple's architecture changes have made several issues apparent in anything that can require low-level access to hardware, and the system. this, I think, is the biggest reason so many drivers for any peripheral, internal or external, has been so problematic. many applications suffer because of the lack of ability for low level access to hardware. take VPC for instance. in 9, connectix was able to custom make a very optimized Virtual Machine & Virtual Machine Monitor for the OS, and that is why it ran so well. with X, however, apple is very reluctant to allow third, or even second party developers of hardware or software to have the ability to manipulate data and the machine at very low levels, to the point of controlling system rescources like the processors and chipsets; and rightly so.

Apple's biggest marketing point for X, is and always has been it's stability. having something that "does not break" is what apple is legendary for, and they have made breakthroughs in ease of use. the only problem is that you trade things off.

In order to protect their trade secrets, as well as their ability to keep their significant edge over other systems in stability, apple has to be like a dictator, instead of a democracy of developers with the company as their government.

they have to oversee everything that goes on which can possibly harm their system's stability and their engineering advancements. this rings very true for the development of quark and the drivers/Xtentions that run on nine. because quark is not able to have near the freedom to control system rescources, and talk directly to the hardware, this can be problematic at best.

now, I am about to say something radical that may piss a lot of people off, but so be it. I think for myself and if that rubs your fur the wrong way, then know that I will never go along with any group until I have fully understood why and how they do what they do.

It is truly much more the fault of APPLE than of any developer, and bumping back the X only launch is, IMHO, something apple can do to save face in their vintage developer community. The developers cannot reverse engineer the innerworkings of the OS that is not open standards based without suffering a hefty lawsuit and legal actions, and Apple has only so many employees, and having to work with every major developer of hardware, and anything that talks directly to hardware is not realistic. especially in an economy slump. Apple has bit off more than it can chew, and has put hardware developers between a rock and a hard place. bumping back the OS 9 kill date is the least they can do to ease tensions.

Secondly, the vintage development community, took years of working with extentions in every system before X, and built up an extensive mastery of working with both the system, and understanding from experience how to fix problems without apple's asistance. with the release of X, all of that decade and then some years of experience is lost in the blink of an eye and developers have to re-learn how to produce things for a system that is still being born. expecting anyone to get a decade and a half worth of experience and knowledge in a matter of three years is ridiculous. even if X has been out for three years, it is still very young. we got spoiled on the performance and ease of use with 9 and previous operating systems because it had evolved and been perfected over a long period of time. in retrospect, what apple has done, is essentially go back to system 1.0 of the mac OS, and they are doing amazing things in shorter times, but three years cannot bridge the gap of 15 years that apple has had with the classic OS.

and finally, there is things which interact with the system at the core level, like colorsync, which have been radically redesigned. the way the code for a CMM for colorsync in X is written is different enough that porting every CMM in a short amount of time is proposterous. so there is a generation gap. we have on one end, the vintage developers which have market experience and know what customers want and how things need to work, but are unable to apply that knowledge to a new operating system; and on the other end, we have the brand spankin' new Mac OS X code writers who are savvy as anything at writing code and knowing the system's innards, but don't have a damn clue about how the market works compared to the vintage developers.

I hope this gives you guys a new respect for what true change really means. -Dibbs

[Talon1138]

I say screw the Quark and switch to inDesign. Better app (although needs more some xtensions of its own).