PDA

View Full Version : Can you develop os 9 apps on the intel macs?




Wellander
Mar 25, 2006, 10:02 PM
Hi,
I am just wondering if you can develop os 9 apps on the new intel macs?
Thanks.



Counterfit
Mar 25, 2006, 10:39 PM
OS 9 is dead.

Agent Smith
Mar 25, 2006, 10:54 PM
OS 9 is dead.

R.I.P.

How would you test what you have compiled? It would be a bit awkward/inconvenient to compile on a Macintel and transfer it to an OS 9 box...

Wellander
Mar 25, 2006, 11:10 PM
Hi,
I take it not?

virus1
Mar 25, 2006, 11:27 PM
umm.. why?

Nermal
Mar 26, 2006, 12:13 AM
You can't run OS 9-only apps on Intel systems (and therefore it's very unlikely that you'd be able to develop them), but it *may* be possible to develop apps that can run in both 9 and X (I think these are called Carbon apps).

Wellander
Mar 26, 2006, 12:27 AM
Hi,
Thanks for the replies.

MacRumoron
Mar 26, 2006, 02:12 AM
i just realized my MBP doesn't have os 9 on it :o

Nermal
Mar 26, 2006, 03:38 AM
You're living up to your sig ;)

iMeowbot
Mar 26, 2006, 04:00 AM
You could use PearPC (probably under Linux or Windows for now) if you really need to build software for older machines. It would be less hassle to instead pick up a nice (perhaps used) PowerPC Mac for that.

Nermal
Mar 26, 2006, 04:01 AM
I believe PearPC can only run OS X. SheepShaver can run OS 9, but I don't know whether it works on an Intel system.

iMeowbot
Mar 26, 2006, 04:06 AM
I believe PearPC can only run OS X.
Right, and people even have trouble with Classic. It still has what's needed to build the Carbon applications.

Nermal
Mar 26, 2006, 04:09 AM
Yes, you could build the Carbon apps, but you wouldn't be able to test them in OS 9, and testing is quite important when developing apps :)

iMeowbot
Mar 26, 2006, 04:12 AM
That might still be acceptable. A machine that will run OS 9 but not X and Xcode can be found for dirt cheap.

ahunter3
Mar 26, 2006, 05:33 AM
SheepShaver certainly exists for Intel PCs, the Mac build was a port of it. (The first platform SheepShaver ran on was Intel Unix, then ported to OS X, then Windows if I recall correctly)

I'd be astonished if an Intel-Mac version didn't make an appearance soon.

Nermal
Mar 26, 2006, 01:43 PM
SheepShaver was originally for PowerPC BeOS.

Soulstorm
Mar 26, 2006, 01:52 PM
Hi,
I am just wondering if you can develop os 9 apps on the new intel macs?
Thanks.
Why would you want to do that? OS 9 development will offer you NOTHING in terms of OS-Specific application development.

ahunter3
Mar 28, 2006, 04:14 PM
SheepShaver for Intel-based Macs (http://www.gibix.net/dokuwiki/en:projects:sheepshaver)

Nermal: You can't run OS 9-only apps on Intel systems

You can now.

tag
Mar 28, 2006, 04:20 PM
SheepShaver for Intel-based Macs (http://www.gibix.net/dokuwiki/en:projects:sheepshaver)

Nermal:

You can now.

Oh that's neat, can even run OS 7-9 apps in linux & BSD w/o PPC too, but ouch, at 1/8th speed.

cubist
Mar 28, 2006, 04:51 PM
OS 9 is dead.

I think this is a terrible attitude. Apple's refusal to provide backward-compatibility has cost them a lot of goodwill. They forced a lot of people to buy the same programs again when they went to Mac OS X, and they apparently intend to force people to buy them all over again.

There's no technical reason Mac OS X, on Intel or PPC, can't run Classic apps. Why, Microsoft's XP will still run DOS programs. Apple's just being lazy.

In many cases you can't buy updated apps because the vendor won't port them to Mac OS X. For example: Apple's own HyperCard.

Saying "OS 9 is dead" is a really stupid, insulting, condescending attitude. It may be true, but that doesn't make it good.

geese
Mar 28, 2006, 05:21 PM
There's no technical reason Mac OS X, on Intel or PPC, can't run Classic apps. Why, Microsoft's XP will still run DOS programs. Apple's just being lazy.


Well, no but it would require Apple to enable classic to run atop of Rosetta as well. Do-able, but would take alot of development time, time that could be used to make the intel transition smoother.

cubist
Mar 28, 2006, 09:07 PM
Well, no but it would require Apple to enable classic to run atop of Rosetta as well. Do-able, but would take alot of development time, time that could be used to make the intel transition smoother.

Yes, it will make the Intel transition much smoother for anyone with Classic apps to run - by making it never happen at all. Thanks, Apple. Now I know which companies care about their long-term customers -- and one that doesn't.

tdhurst
Mar 28, 2006, 10:09 PM
I think this is a terrible attitude. Apple's refusal to provide backward-compatibility has cost them a lot of goodwill. They forced a lot of people to buy the same programs again when they went to Mac OS X, and they apparently intend to force people to buy them all over again.

There's no technical reason Mac OS X, on Intel or PPC, can't run Classic apps. Why, Microsoft's XP will still run DOS programs. Apple's just being lazy.

In many cases you can't buy updated apps because the vendor won't port them to Mac OS X. For example: Apple's own HyperCard.

Saying "OS 9 is dead" is a really stupid, insulting, condescending attitude. It may be true, but that doesn't make it good.

Learn to accept it. You don't HAVE to upgrade your hardware or software and if killing OS 9 means nearly all of the rest of us will have a better user experience, I am ALL for it. Those that upgrade on a somewhat regular cycle should be rewarded for doing so by not having to deal with older software and all its glitches.

caveman_uk
Mar 29, 2006, 02:11 AM
I think this is a terrible attitude. Apple's refusal to provide backward-compatibility has cost them a lot of goodwill. They forced a lot of people to buy the same programs again when they went to Mac OS X, and they apparently intend to force people to buy them all over again.

There's no technical reason Mac OS X, on Intel or PPC, can't run Classic apps. Why, Microsoft's XP will still run DOS programs. Apple's just being lazy.

In many cases you can't buy updated apps because the vendor won't port them to Mac OS X. For example: Apple's own HyperCard.

Saying "OS 9 is dead" is a really stupid, insulting, condescending attitude. It may be true, but that doesn't make it good.
OK, don't buy an Intel mac. Buy a kick-ass G5 now and you'll be able to run OS9 apps at least until the end of the decade. The OS9 apps will then be at least ten years old. I think getting 10 years of use out of your applications is a pretty good deal

Oh, condescending it may be but OS 9 is dead. Which is a good thing IMO. Ensuring that classic apps run means spending a lot of time and money on something that only affects a small proportion of users.

trogdor!
Mar 29, 2006, 02:43 AM
I would say developing for os 9 is dead, but not the user base yet, but hopefuly soon that will change. For some, thier os 9 box will serve them well for many years to come. Thats great, but you prob wont see any revolutionary software being developed for os 9 anymore. It hard enough sometime to get developers to even develop on the mac platform, let alone for an old OS.

Mu0n
Apr 4, 2006, 08:37 PM
Today, I sucessfully made a small app for System 7 that sends a signal of controllable length to the modem serial port. I need it for a precise (millisecond or lower range) usage as a switch of another circuit involving a capacitor. I used a Mac Classic and I can produce very consistent peaks of signal that I watch with an electronic oscilloscope.

Doing the same thing, say, in visual basic 6 in windows 2000 produces really inconsistent results that vary widely (changes the length of the peak to a factor of 10 less or more).

Using THINK C, I produced something fairly quickly even though I never programmed with serial ports in mind.

Doing the same thing in OSX would have involved having a modern mac, which I don't have, and digging deep in tons of very technical manuals to get what I needed.