PDA

View Full Version : October 23, 1999: Mac OS 9 Released


MacBytes
Oct 23, 2006, 08:23 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: History
Link: October 23, 1999: Mac OS 9 Released (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20061023092334)
Description:: none

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

Warbrain
Oct 23, 2006, 08:35 AM
The good ol' days...

MacsRgr8
Oct 23, 2006, 03:03 PM
The good ol' days...

Do you really mean that?

I must admit, I was pretty new to Macs back then, but seeing Mac OS 8.5 evolve into Mac OS 9 was not very impressive IMHO.
Back then Mac OS X Server 1.0 (Rhapsody) was looking pretty cool, but Mac OS 9 was more of the same. Same bad memory management, no SMP support (apart from some plug-ins for apps like Photoshop) etc.
Apple was in need of a completely new OS, and was getting it in the form of Mac OS X. No 10.0 yet... no Aqua yet... more importantly: no Carbon yet.

But it came... oh boy.. did it come!!! :cool: :p

iGav
Oct 23, 2006, 03:06 PM
Do you really mean that?

I must admit, I was pretty new to Macs back then, but seeing Mac OS 8.5 evolve into Mac OS 9 was not very impressive IMHO.
Back then Mac OS X Server 1.0 (Rhapsody) was looking pretty cool, but Mac OS 9 was more of the same. Same bad memory management, no SMP support (apart from some plug-ins for apps like Photoshop) etc.
Apple was in need of a completely new OS, and was getting it in the form of Mac OS X. No 10.0 yet... no Aqua yet... more importantly: no Carbon yet.

But it came... oh boy.. did it come!!! :cool: :p

It was still better than Windows though. ;)

MacsRgr8
Oct 23, 2006, 03:10 PM
It was still better than Windows though. ;)

Ooh yes.
That it be, that it be....

Windows ME. Anyone remember that ghastly OS?

impierced
Oct 23, 2006, 03:49 PM
Apple was in need of a completely new OS...

Though Rhapsody was hardly a new OS. :)

NextStep (68k) -> OpenStep (Intel) -> Rhapsody (PPC) ... Mac OS X

bartelby
Oct 23, 2006, 03:54 PM
Do you really mean that?

I must admit, I was pretty new to Macs back then, but seeing Mac OS 8.5 evolve into Mac OS 9 was not very impressive IMHO.
Back then Mac OS X Server 1.0 (Rhapsody) was looking pretty cool, but Mac OS 9 was more of the same. Same bad memory management, no SMP support (apart from some plug-ins for apps like Photoshop) etc.
Apple was in need of a completely new OS, and was getting it in the form of Mac OS X. No 10.0 yet... no Aqua yet... more importantly: no Carbon yet.

But it came... oh boy.. did it come!!! :cool: :p

I started with OS 7.5. I just remember it was pretty crap. 8.5 wasn't much better. 9 was nice. I didn't migrate to OS X until 10.2 and I hated it for about 4 months:o

MacsRgr8
Oct 23, 2006, 04:03 PM
Though Rhapsody was hardly a new OS. :)

NextStep (68k) -> OpenStep (Intel) -> Rhapsody (PPC) ... Mac OS X

True. Rhapsody is not the real new part (except for a "platinum theme", making it look like Mac OS 9).....
But Carbon did make it a bit new. It made it "accessible" for developers. Only with carbonisation was it possible for the developers to make some "enhancements" to their software to make it run natively on new Mac OS X 10.x.
In the Rhapsody environment the developers had to re-write their apps from scratch to make it run natively.
Carbon made Mac OS X big. It delivered (amongst others) Office v X and many of Adobe's apps. Without these giants, Mac OS X wouldn't have made it.
So, Mac OS X 10.x is a bit new, and you're right: Rhapsody wasn't really :o

mainstreetmark
Oct 24, 2006, 07:44 AM
I always felt that OS9 was just an appetizer for OSX. Apple didn't want an OS9, but they had to have SOMETHING out there. They chucked in a few useless features, and suddenly it was a "major revision".

Nothing close to the massive update between system 6, and system 7, when OS# really came of age.

(OS#? I guess I'm using that to mean "not OS X")