OS 9 no longer shipping?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by macstudent, May 6, 2002.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. macstudent macrumors 6502

    macstudent

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2002
    Location:
    Milwaukee, WI
    #1
    Now that Steve Job has announced the official death of OS 9, does this mean that the next batch of macs will no longer be shipping with OS 9 installed? I think it would be premature for this since people still might have to boot into classic ocassionaly.
     
  2. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #2
    Without actually being at the WWDC, and hearing all of what Jobs said about OS 9, it looks to me like there will not be any additional updates to it. I would wager that it will continue to ship (probably installed as well) for at least a good part of this year (if not longer). There are still too many applications that are not running native under OS X to kill OS 9 completely. Once everything (that is needed) is converted to OS X native, then they might stop shipping OS 9 as well as X on systems (or in the cd pack).

    Personally, I use OS X most of the time on my home system, only going into 9 when I must (for software that won't run, or run properly under OS X). I hope to get a copy os PS7 soon, and that Quark updates to run under OS X soon too. The only other thing I will want, is for UT and all the games that I have on the Mac, and want to continue to use, to be made OS X native. Then we can give OS 9 the final kiss goodbye and let it take a dirt nap.
     
  3. j763 macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2001
    Location:
    Champaign, IL, USA
    #3
    Reading between the lines, I doubt that Jobs was planning on no longer shipping OS 9... I wish he WOULD say that as OS 9 is an embarrasment for apple and should not be used by _anyone_ (excluding people who want an unstable OS which crashes every 5 minutes...)
     
  4. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #4
    I have run OS 9 on a multitude of systems (from pre-G3 systems all the way up to the latest G4's) and I have NEVER had it crash even close to that often. Most of the time, it is m$ software that brings it down. OS 9 is many times better then any of the previous versions (anyone remember how bad the 8.x systems were?? I do). The only thing better then 9 is OS X.

    IF you maintained your computer, at least moderatley well, you wouldn't have crashing issues. Unless you are running software that is listed as NOT being compatible (which puts the blame squarely on you). Who would run software versions that stop at OS 8.x, with a newer version addressing compatibility with 9.x?? Most of the time, you want the upgrade anyway, so why not do it?? Unless you are that cheap.
     
  5. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #5
    AlphaTech, Steve Jobs could take a dump in a blue-translucent ziploc bag and you would call it compact and innovative, and then when critics complained about its leaks and stench, you would pass the blame onto Microsoft (sorry - M$). Talk about Apple zealots! Good Christ.
     
  6. jelloshotsrule macrumors G3

    jelloshotsrule

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2002
    Location:
    serendipity
    #6
    2 things:

    1. jobs said that 9 is dead for developers but not for customers. he'd be dumb to think that everyone could just drop 9 right now totally. there's still plenty of reasons to use 9 for one thing or another. i use os x 99% of the time. but there always seems to be that one something... so yes, it will keep shipping. probably won't be updated and developers won't be encouraged to develop for 9, though i think that's been the case for some time now.

    2. i've had some crashing issues with 9, but usually found a problem with the drive and/or a file or app. it usually is some type of conflict of some sort. i know at some point (on my old computer - g3 beige) toast cd reader extension would cause me to crash constantly, so i just didn't enable it.... never missed it. but 9 is not super crash prone on its own.
     
  7. 3rdpath macrumors 68000

    3rdpath

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    Location:
    2nd star on the right and straight till morning
    #7
    i agree, theres just too many apps ( especially in my audio world) that won't run on X. 9 will be in a holding pattern until everyone is X'able. so 9 isn't dead, merely dormant.
     
  8. TiMacLover macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2001
    Location:
    Clovis, CA USA
    #8
    Jobs told us "The Offical Death Of The CRT" Then we saw eMac, so I don't believe it, I would say OS 9 will be dead at MacWorld NY 2003


    [​IMG]
     
  9. mac15 macrumors 68040

    mac15

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2001
    Location:
    Sydney
    #9
    I don't know why everybody is putting crap on OS 9
    I served me well from 9.0.4 to 9.2.2
    And like most people I found it a pleasure to use
    Sure it crashed occasionaly but OS 9 was good for its time
     
  10. iGav macrumors G3

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2002
    #10
    I still use OS9 an awful lot.... and it doesn't crash every 5 minutes for me..... it's not a bad OS at all...... although not as stable or as advanced as OSX, it still has it's uses.... particularly for Director, or snappy rendering on a none dual machine......

    And judging by what the Audio guys are saying...... OS 9 will be around for a while yet...... but what's peoples problems with that??? :rolleyes:
     
  11. aafuss1 macrumors 68000

    aafuss1

    Joined:
    May 5, 2002
    Location:
    Gold Coast, Australia
    #11
    It's a lot like PC makers only shipping XP installed on their computers- no 98/ME. So does this mean Apple previously dropped OS 8?
     
  12. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #12
    i forget the actual quote but it was something along the lines "It isn't dead for our customers yet but it's dead for you, the developers"
     
  13. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #13
    No, the ONLY time Apple shipped two operating systems on comptuers is when OS X was officially released. Since then, they have been shipping BOTH OS 9.x and OS X pre-installed on systems. Until recently, OS 9 was the OS set to boot when you first started up the computer. Apple switched that recently (believe it was MWSF, but not 100% on that) so that OS X is the default OS for when you initially start your computer (after unpacking it). You STILL have the choice of booting into either OS X or OS 9, depending on your needs.

    I am debating trying to put my 60GB Travelstar into my new TiBook, and re-installing OS X onto it. Seems that it didn't like the version that was installed for my rev. a TiBook. Before I do that though, I need to pull everything off that drive. The ONLY thing that I need from it, is my old email though. Anyone happen to have any suggestions on pulling the old stuff into the new setup??? I have already moved the previous items into the appropriate library folders, as well as where it all was before. It still doesn't pull the extra folders that I had created, nor does it bring all the email I have saved. Had I known it was going to be like this, I would have saved all the email seperately onto the drive, not to folders. I wonder if there is another email application that will allow me to import the other email folders, and then allow me to export them again back to the Mail app.

    Hey alex_ant, what crawled up your a$$ and died??? As shown in posts since your's, people still use OS 9, and it's not all that bad. I count the time between crashes in OS 9 on my computer at work in weeks, if not months. I don't run the utilities on it more then a few times a year, and then only after doing a lot of copying of files and deletions.
     
  14. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #14
    Well, I would normally read a thread like this and move on due to my lack of experience with real world usage of macs, but I can't resist.

    I was on my buddies TiBook, and my other buddy had his iBook there. They were both trying to convince me that I was wrong in my opinion that macs sucked (they did a good job, by the way. I never realized before how my computer at home always got in the way of what I was trying to do) So, they were showing me the new OSX, and were talking about how it couldn't crash and was so stable.

    Anyway, I needed to check my wife's email on a secure encrypted online service. So, I load it up in M$ IE, and immediately the TiBook crashed. Not just a little crash where you can forcequit or whatever, he had to completely restart the computer.

    My other buddy gets freaked out, loads the page into his computer to show me it was just a freak occurance, and boom, whammo, his computer goes down.

    A couple of months later, I saw one of them again, and he had installed an upgrade to OSX. The mailserver worked that time.

    I only point that out because I really doubt anyone at Apple had any clue they were having problems with a very small mail server here, yet tweaked OSX enough to get it to work anyway.

    That's a mighty fine OS you Apple people have, and I can not wait to get my hands on it full time.

    Oh... From my experience with Alphatech, I can say this. He is sometimes a bit harsh or brash, but he knows the systems he works on, and has a good deal of experience troubleshooting problems on different machines. He also is an avid Mac and HD fan, but if a mac has a problem, I'm pretty sure he won't sugar coat it. Maybe not to the point of being an anti-zealot, but he seems pretty level headed. That being said, he explicitely said that in his experience, the crashes resulted from an incompatibility between the mac and M$ software. That's not unplausible, nor does it rise to the level of Apple brown-nosing. I mean, it isn't like he said that Apples were perfect and everything steve jobs makes (including his sh*t) was compact and novel.

    Ok, got distracted. I have no idea what I was typing now or why, so if the above makes no sense, I apologize (a little).
     
  15. eyelikeart Moderator emeritus

    eyelikeart

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2001
    Location:
    Metairie, LA
    #15
    re: AlphaTech

    I agree with mcrain...

    Alpha is more rough with the newbies than anything else...sort of a rite of passage...just sit back and let him open his cans of whoop-ass...mind u don't get sprayed a little bit...he he he... :p

    but he does know his sh*t...that's certain...I called upon him for a few problems I've had and he's helped me out each time...

    but I will say this....he's not a complete zealot....he does gave fair props to PCs when they deserve it ;)
     
  16. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #16
    eyelikeart and mcrain

    thank you, thank you....

    I will have my game peecee back up and running tomorrow evening. I am having the vendor that both myself, and the company I work for, hand deliver the two components I need (new chip and power supply). Once I have the AMD xp 2100+ installed (I refuse to buy any intel chip), let the fragging begin.... muahahahahahahahaaa.

    I know that I am a bit harsh at times (yeah, yeah, I know, but I am good at being evil :D ), but I do all I can to assist people as well. I'll admit that I don't know everything... yet at least (never said I was modest). If I don't have the info, chances are I can call upon the resources to obtain it.
     
  17. Hemingray macrumors 68030

    Hemingray

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Location:
    Ha ha haaa!
    #17
    Sounds like you need to take a dump... :rolleyes:

    I must say I haven't had Microsoft products crash OS 9. Sure, I had to force quit IE 5 once in awhile, but those days are gone now. What AlphaTech said wasn't that far from the truth. Hardly the words of a zealot... especially coming from a member of the ANTI-Zealot campaign. :D
     
  18. GeeYouEye macrumors 68000

    GeeYouEye

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2001
    Location:
    State of Denial
    #18
    Apple won't be abandoning OS 9 for consumers any time soon. There just aren't enough programs (especially in the Quicken/MYOB/Timeslips/MYM) area to drop it completely, unless they get certain companies *cough*Timeslips*cough*Ituit (did it get bought?)*cough* to release an X version of their software. Timeslips, for example, hasn't had a Mac update since summer '99, while the Windows version has had updates by almost 4 versions in that time (ver. 6 vs. ver. 9.?). Anyway, until just about EVERYONE updates their software, OS 9 will be around. Now, they might stop shipping the 9 CDs with the computers, but it will be preloaded, and be on the ASR CD. The one thing I hope they don't do is make the file format UFS anytime soon (10.2??). But when they do that, it really will be the death of OS 9, since even classic can't run on a UFS disk.
     
  19. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #19
    And you don't do much requiring state-of-the-art software technology like... erm... multitasking, do you?
     
  20. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #20
    My whole point was that no software should be able to take down an OS, whether from Microsoft or from anyone else. To defend Apple and attack Microsoft here is ridiculous. OS 9 used to represent good technology... in the 1980s. It's Apple's Windows 98.

    Alex
     
  21. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #21
    And you have never had windblows brought down by any applications??? Bullsh*t.

    Windblows 98 is 100x more buggy and crash prone then OS 9 (well, maybe not 100x, but at least 10x). Especially if you don't remove software EXACTLY right (through uninstallers either from the win control panels, or ones provided by the software makers). Try deleting even one part of the application, and then try and run the uninstaller, it won't go all the way through. I have seen that happen. On the other hand, with the Mac OS, you can delete items that are part of an application and all that happens is that program might not work (especially if that is your desired effect).
     
  22. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #22

    So the fact that Windows sucks arse gives OS 9 an excuse to as well? It's funny, because Windows 95's multitasking is actually *better* than OS 9's. Which is scary.

    I was in OS 9 the other day because of OS X sleep problems. I had three apps open: iTunes, AppleWorks, and Mozilla. iTunes was in the foreground, playing MP3s. I had the computer plugged into the stereo and was listening to music from the other side of the room, and then, after nothing doing on my part, boom! The music stopped, and I got the White Dialog Box of Death. I clicked "restart" and the whole system froze solid.

    There is simply no excuse for such utter ****e software. Mac users have been conditioned to avoid multitasking out of fear of crashes for 15 years. That's nuts. And it's just as nuts coming from Microsoft's crap OSes as well. What's your point?

    Alex
     
  23. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #23
    Hey alex_ant, when was the last time you optimized your friggin computer??? Let me guess, between a year and never. Go get some bloody utilities, run them and then get back after you are done.

    Running utilites on a Mac, is like maintaining a car. You change your oil every x miles, get the tires rotated and balanced, etc. If you didn't, would you blame the car maker if you blew your engine (after never changing the oil and going 50,000+ miles)? I don't think so. Try and take the auto maker to court and you will get laughed out of it.

    After I get any system (even right from Apple) one of the first things I do (after installing the software I need right away) is run utilities. ALL Mac tech's do the same. If not, then they shouldn't wonder why they are having issues with system stability. I ran the full set on my TiBook on Friday evening after installing some software. The drive had 'severe' fragmentation (according to speed disk, and I almost NEVER see it say that bad, most of the time it says 'light'). I cleaned everything up and the computer got a performance boost (and OS X didn't even blink after running the utilities, EVERYTHING works just as it did before).
     
  24. alex_ant macrumors 68020

    alex_ant

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2002
    Location:
    All up in your bidness
    #24

    You don't understand, do you? OS 9 is one of the only operating systems in existence that is so crappy it actually REQUIRES you to run "utilities" to keep it in good working order. Welcome to the 1990s - you're not supposed to need to do that anymore.

    Great - another awful computer/car analogy. You can "drive" a Unix machine for 500,000 friggin' miles and not even have to clean the windshield. Why does OS 9 require all this regular maintenance when no other decent OS does? Answer: Because it sucks.

    Utility makers are like leeches, attaching themselves to crap products to make up for those products' deficiencies. One reason there are few third-party utilities for, say, Unix SVR4, is because SVR4 doesn't NEED them, because it doesn't suck. I've asserted that OS 9 is poor, tired technology, and I'm still waiting for a proper rebuttal.

    As opposed to any halfway decent modern OS like BeFS, XFS, or ReiserFS, where fragmentation is a virtual nonissue.

    You didn't get a performance boost. Your performance was restored to what it SHOULD have been the whole while, had HFS+ not sucked monkey nuts.

    Alex
     
  25. AlphaTech macrumors 601

    AlphaTech

    Joined:
    Oct 4, 2001
    Location:
    Natick, MA
    #25
    So I gather you have yet to run any utilities on your computer. You are the reason the system is so crash prone. As for not needing to run utilities, what the f*ck gave you THAT idea???

    As for OS 9 being the "only operating systems in existence that is so crappy it actually REQUIRES you to run "utilities"", I guess you forgot how buggy the previous OS's were.

    Just because you are either too damned lazy, or stubborn, to run utilities on your computer, doesn't mean the OS is crap.

    One of the reasons you don't see utilities for unix systems, is because of how few there are out there. They have even less market share then Apple does. Linux is starting to become popular, mostly in niche markets. IBM is advertising that SOME of their servers come with it installed, which I am sure it does well on. But for systems that need to run all the popular applications, and NOT worry about the hardware drivers being out there (a problem that continues to plague Linux), it's still not there.

    Contact your local Apple store (or authorized service provider) and see what they tell you about running utilities on OS 9. I never give time frames for how often to run them, it all depends on what kind of work you are doing, and what they symptoms are. Someone doing a lot of Photoshop (or any other application that uses the drive often, or as a scratch disk) work, will need to run the utilities more often then someone simply checking email and surfin the net. If you have virtual memory active under OS 9, and your drive gets fragemented, you will see even more issues cropping up. Run the utilities, and surprise, surprise, they go away.

    Do what you want, but don't b*tch about OS 9 being crap and then refuse to run utilities to restore the system health. Oh, and documents DO go corrupt (all over the place, on all operating systems), and font damage can bring your system down pretty damn fast.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page