Trash Classic for good

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Nov 9, 2006.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors 68000

    SilvorX

    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    'Toba, Canada
    #2
    I don't think many people even have classic installed on their PPC Macs anymore.

    I would've liked to see a rosetta like technology (better than freaking Classic Mode) that would natively open up Classic apps instantly, the only thing stopping me from buying a Mac mini for my parents is the lack Classic support since they require an application that they pay for each month to work in order to connect to the net, and the company didn't ever introduce an OS X version of the application, mainly since my parents have dialup internet (28.8), and have absolutely no way to get highspeed net of any kind.
     
  3. macrumors G3

    bigandy

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2004
    Location:
    Murka
    #3
    sounds like they should switch providers, to one that allows you to just dial and enter a username and password in internet connect :rolleyes:
     
  4. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #4
    Ah, poop.

    The main impediment to me moving to Intel Macs is the lack of Classic support. Anyone who's been using a Mac for a long time is going to have potentially hundreds of documents created in applications that don't and will never run in OSX. To lose Classic is to lose access to these documents, forever. That's one heck of a big deal to some of us. So don't be telling me it's time to trash Classic.
     
  5. Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #5
    Some of us do -- and use it everyday for some older apps.
     
  6. macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Aug 2, 2006
    #6
    Am I the only one who thinks Classic is should unsupported? Mac OS 9 is DEAD. It will never come back, and it's been gone for what, 4-5 years now? Ditching classic is a smart move for Apple. While it may hurt some people, it will force them to stop using OS 9 which is what people shoud've done awhlie ago.
     
  7. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #7
    It should be dead because you don't use it. Nice. :rolleyes:
     
  8. macrumors 603

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #8
    Seriously. Mac OS 8.6 is still supported by many programs and such.
     
  9. macrumors 6502a

    xPismo

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2005
    Location:
    California.
    #9
    A third party solution may step in to bridge the gap. I know lots of OS9 users still. OTOH, most users wont need classic and I understand Apple's decision to move on. Very SJ.
     
  10. macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2004
    Location:
    ohio
    #10
    Wake up, many people use OS 9 and OS 8.6 to this day. Where I work, my boss still refuses to use OS X (installed it in Jan. 06), he "doesn't want to learn a new way of doing things". His arguement is software companies just what money for frivious upgrades that really he can do without. I just ran into a problem today with OS X and MS Office 98 PowerPoint. If one creates a PPT presentation in Classic, it doesn't work, it will clip all the sides of the slide when viewing in Slide Show mode. I ended up re-building it in OS 9 and works fine. If you want see my thread I started on this subject. http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=250731
    I still use a 8600/200 that runs OS 8.6 for the scanner we have. That statement of yours only applies to you, when you have worked with Macs as long as most of us, having backward compatibility is a must. Classic is O.K., but I want the ability to run OS 9.2.2.
     
  11. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #11
  12. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #12
    You could always use Sheepshaver or something. Not that that's a good solution. But it's there.
     
  13. macrumors 6502

    Graeme A

    Joined:
    Aug 6, 2003
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    #13
    A real life Mrs Burns. Does he say 'Ahoy hoy' when answering the telephone?

    Keeping an older machine running is great and good... productive use, keeps it out of landfills and all that but, backward compatibility is what has hobbled Windows for years. Some older guy has an XP Pro sitting on his desk but still wants to be able to run dBase III+, WordStar or something from that era. Apple moved on by saying that OS X was the way to go and kept classic supported for a while to help the migration, not to keep it on life support forever. I do hope that one day MS has the bright idea of making such a radical change to the OS, and not just make it look all pretty 'n' all.

    You all will no doubt be laughing in a year or two when people like me complain that PPC is no longer supported but, I will bite that bullet or sell the kit on to someone else before that becomes a major issue.
     
  14. Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #14
    What you fail to take into account, is that many people still have Macs that use System 9. The same is true for the Windows side in that there are many computers still using Windows 98. Most of these computers cannot use the latest version of Mac OS X or Window XP.

    Just because an operating system is old, does not mean that there are people who don't use it. No one is saying that they want System 9 or Windows 98 to come back, but they are still useful on older machines.

    Remember some of us have been using computers for many years and have legacy software that still works fine that we want to continue to use for whatever reason.
     
  15. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #15
    Yes, precisely. Sometimes these discussions have a way of making me feel very old. ;)
     
  16. Moderator emeritus

    sushi

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    Location:
    キャンプスワ&#
    #16
    Time flies when you are having fun! ;)
     
  17. macrumors 603

    SkyBell

    Joined:
    Sep 7, 2006
    Location:
    Texas, unfortunately.
    #17
    Not with today's airlines... ;)
     
  18. macrumors 6502a

    thewhitehart

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Location:
    The town without George Bailey
    #18
    Isn't the point of this thread moot? Isn't classic support dead already with the intel macs? Eventually, PPC computers won't be compatible with new versions of OS X.

    The fact that classic is on my ibook doesn't bother me; rather than removing it completely, it's nice that you have the option to install it. I could see it being a problem if an OS 9 System Folder were there in the first place, as the majority of mac users don't need it. Most people have no idea what classic mode is.

    I understand though that there comes a point when you have to move on. If you have a huge amount of classic apps that you need, perhaps you have a greater need for an older mac than you have for OS X 10.5. You can't have your cake and eat it too for too long. The cake gets stale.
     
  19. macrumors P6

    IJ Reilly

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    Location:
    Palookaville
    #19
    Oh, is that what I've been having?
     
  20. macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Dec 9, 2004
    #20
    Trashing Classic is pretty stupid...it's there if you need it, and if not, it doesn't hurt anything. I don't like it much either, but it's the only way to play Heroes of Might & Magic III. (Also, you can't have a "Rosetta-like technology" for Classic, because it's a entirely different operating system. It has nothing whatsoever to do with emulating a CPU, which is what Rosetta does. It's not hard to understand....)

    --Eric
     

Share This Page