Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Boot OS 9 on new PowerMacs?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Don't forget to mention that some of the reasons the economy is in a slump is the whole September 11th deal, and all the corporate scandals, which I might add occured during the Clinton administration but are now being brought to light. Also consider the new Home Land Security and the budget to that and you will see where a lot of money has gone. I'm sure Al Gore wouldn't have done better then Bush is doing. Actually I think he would have done worse but that is personal opinion.
So you bought a new power mac and you have to boot into OS 9? I just want to be able to run Apple II games on my iBook, anyone know how to effect that? I miss Hard Hat Mack, Conan the Barbarian, Rescue Raiders and Top Fuel Eliminator!
Originally posted by PeteyKohut
Could it be that I simply like the interface better. Perhaps I like running a leaner OS that doesn't suck up so much, in terms of resources. There shouldn't even be a need for something like Quartz Extreme.
uhoh, you just lost some credibility to your
arugument.....quartz extreme allows programs
like photoshop to use the 3d graphics card to
speed up performance in screen redraws.
something that os9 doesnt offer. in os9 photo
shop screen redraws were painful if you were
working on a huge gig file. in osx you dont have
this issue as much. its a major perk when
working in photoshop.
Could it be that I simply like the interface better. Perhaps I like running a leaner OS that doesn't suck up so much, in terms of resources. There shouldn't even be a need for something like Quartz Extreme.
uhoh, you just lost some credibility to your
arugument.....quartz extreme allows programs
like photoshop to use the 3d graphics card to
speed up performance in screen redraws.
something that os9 doesnt offer. in os9 photo
shop screen redraws were painful if you were
working on a huge gig file. in osx you dont have
this issue as much. its a major perk when
working in photoshop.
Get over it!
Hi all,
I think the OS9 crowd should get over it...
or stick with it.
I always hated the fact that aliases where
italic...
And in Mac OS X... never noticed that BIG
arrow on the left of the icon?
The finder of OSX?
A lot more st(r)eamlined.. try to get 25
levels down in OS 9 in a single window...
Columnview rules!
As for the interface... Mac OS X is a NEW
Operating System, you dont go around
giving it the old interface of a 'dying' OS.
If someone wants that look so badly, download
a theme and install that haxie that'll
take the shadows away.
Want to switch to XP becoz of OS X?
I can't see why, if anythin looks horrible
its XP... but be my guest.
Just try to see Mac OS X for what it is...
Mac OS X, NOT Mac OS 9.
What u get these days with Mac OSX..
iPhoto, iMovie, iCal, iTunes (etc, etc, etc)
a browser , an email program, etc, etc
pretty soon an Office suite, etc etc
I think its wonderful!!
I would never go back!
Anyway, anyhow, thats my view.
Hi all,
I think the OS9 crowd should get over it...
or stick with it.
I always hated the fact that aliases where
italic...
And in Mac OS X... never noticed that BIG
arrow on the left of the icon?
The finder of OSX?
A lot more st(r)eamlined.. try to get 25
levels down in OS 9 in a single window...
Columnview rules!
As for the interface... Mac OS X is a NEW
Operating System, you dont go around
giving it the old interface of a 'dying' OS.
If someone wants that look so badly, download
a theme and install that haxie that'll
take the shadows away.
Want to switch to XP becoz of OS X?
I can't see why, if anythin looks horrible
its XP... but be my guest.
Just try to see Mac OS X for what it is...
Mac OS X, NOT Mac OS 9.
What u get these days with Mac OSX..
iPhoto, iMovie, iCal, iTunes (etc, etc, etc)
a browser , an email program, etc, etc
pretty soon an Office suite, etc etc
I think its wonderful!!
I would never go back!
Anyway, anyhow, thats my view.
excuse me, but i have an older ti and its fine
in ten...and a dual 867 feels slower then your
500mhz g3 imac?
um so dont you think that you might need to
do a reinstall on that 867? you stated above
that osx is slow on any ti book 667 AND on
a dual 867 which actually feels slower then your
500 mhz G3? hahahahahaha jeeze
thats a boat load of bs right there. im here to
tell you that the 867 that you experienced must
of had software issues, a good install of X
on that machine will toast your g3 imac.
Let's see, that's about 6 people who say OS X is fast. 6 for OS X is slow. 6 people say OS X crashes less. 6 for OS 9 doesn't crash either. 6 people who say it's fast on my TiBook 667, and 6 who say it's slow on my TiBook 667. 6 for OS 9 is more productive, and 6 for OS X is more productive. And there's 6 people who realize that individual people have vastly different experiences.
In my opinion, scorpion had the right idea with the 30 year-old cameras. The only thing that isn't productive is this argument. Use whatever works for you, and whatever provides all the features you need and few of the ones you don't.
In other news, did anyone else try booting OS 9 on a new machine?
In my opinion, scorpion had the right idea with the 30 year-old cameras. The only thing that isn't productive is this argument. Use whatever works for you, and whatever provides all the features you need and few of the ones you don't.
In other news, did anyone else try booting OS 9 on a new machine?
Actually back in the earlier days they did have an Apple II emulator for the Macs, but I think that was years ago.
Your point is taken, sometimes you just have to move on. I sometimes hate it when certain products get replaced by new things, but that is the way it works. Just as Apple could not market the Apple IIe forever, even though it still had a lot of fans when it was finally pulled from the market.
OSX is very usable on anything with at least a 400Mhz G3 and plenty of RAM. There are not a lot of machines left out there still in service with specs less then that. Sure there are a few and for those they have a good solid OS9 to stay with until they buy a new computer.
Typically government spending especially on things liek HOme Land security is good for the economy. Also the US was not in the best of postiions pre-terror; terrorism jsut made it worse. IMO i think Al gore would be doing as well or better than Bush but he he would face mroe opposition in Washington with things like a Patriot Act or all the allegations that the administration had distinct warnings signs before 9/11. This would either cause Gore to lose points with the public or to lose power.
nonsense
been there -done that
one week new 2003 g4 1.25 mdd
same trick as described on macosxhints - going back to october 2002 for then new mdd g4 that didnt come with os9 install disk
without tinkertool -
using terminal command line- "does same thing" this procedure works to copy 9 system folder to hard drive - but it doesnt boot in 9
been there -done that
one week new 2003 g4 1.25 mdd
same trick as described on macosxhints - going back to october 2002 for then new mdd g4 that didnt come with os9 install disk
without tinkertool -
using terminal command line- "does same thing" this procedure works to copy 9 system folder to hard drive - but it doesnt boot in 9
Originally posted by beatle888
thats where i stopped reading
horrifically slow
Having a closed mind is a leading cause of illiteracy.
Re: Re: just had to chime in
You're right, I have a couple anecdotes, but are you going to tell me it's a coincidence when you combine those anecdotes with Apple's own stats (which show a pretty good percentage of their sales are going to PC users - I don't remember the exact number) and with other scattered evidence that is around out there?
For example, I'm not the only one who has seen the percentage of Mac visitors increase significantly in their website visitor logs over the last year or two. Some people I know in webdev have been reporting moves from 2% of hits to upwards of 5% over that time (though, admittedly, my personal site is probably not as good an example since myself and several of my close friends have made the switch).
But regardless I wasn't writing a research paper or conducting any formal investigation, and I have no intention to, I was simply just making a point based on my personal experiences and observations. There is evidence to support that market share is moving up, there is evidence to the contrary as well, but I'm not in the business of searching it out and parsing it for a detractor or two on the boards.
I'm in the business of stating my INDIVIDUAL OBSERVATIONS and thoughts and opinions about Apple news and rumors ... at least when I'm hanging out here at Mac Rumors ;-)
Sheesh, no need to come down on me like that man.
You're right, I have a couple anecdotes, but are you going to tell me it's a coincidence when you combine those anecdotes with Apple's own stats (which show a pretty good percentage of their sales are going to PC users - I don't remember the exact number) and with other scattered evidence that is around out there?
For example, I'm not the only one who has seen the percentage of Mac visitors increase significantly in their website visitor logs over the last year or two. Some people I know in webdev have been reporting moves from 2% of hits to upwards of 5% over that time (though, admittedly, my personal site is probably not as good an example since myself and several of my close friends have made the switch).
But regardless I wasn't writing a research paper or conducting any formal investigation, and I have no intention to, I was simply just making a point based on my personal experiences and observations. There is evidence to support that market share is moving up, there is evidence to the contrary as well, but I'm not in the business of searching it out and parsing it for a detractor or two on the boards.
I'm in the business of stating my INDIVIDUAL OBSERVATIONS and thoughts and opinions about Apple news and rumors ... at least when I'm hanging out here at Mac Rumors ;-)
Originally posted by Jon the Heretic
Having a closed mind is a leading cause of illiteracy.
your an asole, why should i continue reading
something that isnt true? and since when has
being able to spot misinformation being closed
minded? quartz extreme is a plus for photoshop.
and osx
Haha, why oh why do I suspect that if the economy were grooving along nicely you'd be crediting it to Bush.
We saw Clinton's work throughout the 1990s...enterprize and empowerment zones cropped up, and economic growth, employment, and wages shot through the roof. What we see now is poor management hindering the economy, and perceptions of that management creating a self-fulfilling prophecy that hinders the market as well.
Here's a crazy, but dooable proposition for Apple;
Let new hardware boot MacOS9.2.2 by creating an app to modify/Install the Firmware/Enablers reqired to boot 9 on the new machines, and feel free to charge us OS9'ers a fee for this app. Call it "iBoot9"!
Apple wins completely (they sell more new Hardware, allow users to boot into 9 as they should always be able to, cover their costs of producing the BootOS9 app, and make some extra profit in the process)...
This is dooable. A new logic board is not needed. The Airport Extreme port can be coupled with a new BootRom (obviously, you will lose wireless capability), or just a new Flash image for the BootRom allowing OS9 to boot again.
If Apple implements this, all will be well. If not, .....well, just look at the Quarterly sales figures, and losses as we go from Quarter to quarter. That ought to sober you up.
Let new hardware boot MacOS9.2.2 by creating an app to modify/Install the Firmware/Enablers reqired to boot 9 on the new machines, and feel free to charge us OS9'ers a fee for this app. Call it "iBoot9"!
Apple wins completely (they sell more new Hardware, allow users to boot into 9 as they should always be able to, cover their costs of producing the BootOS9 app, and make some extra profit in the process)...
This is dooable. A new logic board is not needed. The Airport Extreme port can be coupled with a new BootRom (obviously, you will lose wireless capability), or just a new Flash image for the BootRom allowing OS9 to boot again.
If Apple implements this, all will be well. If not, .....well, just look at the Quarterly sales figures, and losses as we go from Quarter to quarter. That ought to sober you up.
Nobody Mentioned this - very surprised
I got bored around page 5 of this post, but am very surprised no one mentioned one of the few reasons i boot into OS9:
Alsoft Disk Warrior!!
The OSX version is still not here with no scheduled release date. OS9 version is over 2 years old but is THE repair tool and i would not be without it. Has fixed hard drives too many times, even if the last time it took 4 hours to repair my OSX partition!
Bring on the OSX version, THEN i'd have few reasons to use OS9. Other uses are - when OSX screws up it permissions and leaves files scattered around, OS9 can clean it up, also some theme mods are easier in OS9 cos the packages are just folders.
Ok, here is my current stance on the OSX/OS9 thingy:
I use OSX because of Rendezvous, SMB, Seti Units can be processed twice as fast, and there's more software for it these days.
Why i dont like OSX: Menus are too slow - somebody please get rid of the fade away effect. My machine is too slow for it to look nice. Have removed shadows with shadow killer now all i need is those darn effects removed - if that happened most would think OSX was of similar speed to OS9. I generally like aqua and have not found a theme i like more yet. Yes, it feels slow, has a lot of eye candy but the general feel has grown on me over the past year.
Comparing OSX with pre OSX OS's (or as i'll call them classic OS's):
I think u CANNOT compare OS9 to 10.2 - why? cos 10.2 is the best implementation of OSX so far OS9 is not the best implementation of Classic OS's. That honour remains with OS8.6 which i have genuinely had running for two days without a crash - seriously! OS9 is a bit of a mish mash OS - has some nice features but is mostly there as a foil for OSX - i wished my G4 would boot into 8.6 but it cant (except for the custom made mac test pro cd).
However, having said that, i still say OSX has more going for it than the classic OS does. I couldnt live without rendezvous now - my PC users find it hilarious that i can see their machines on the network while they spend half an hour installing protocols etc. to see each other or my machine. The dock has grown on me though it has to be done my way - modded. I still say i need an application menu in addition in the top right - am gonna try ASM again to see if it feels right this time. Fruit menu customisation is essential - apple menu is useless otherwise.
What do i miss? Being able to simply move a system folder from one partition to another and boot off it. Knowing what almost every extension and control panel did and getting the speed boosts through well done extension sets. Having to think in a windows mentality - every time u install something restart, even if it doesnt tell u to - i crashed 10.2 after installing Shockwave and not restarting. Pop up folders though the dock has kinda taken over that role but still i liked the folder 90% hidden at the bottom of the screen. The dock is too big when visible and invisible when hidden. So i hide it.
That's all i can think of for the moment on this topic.
I got bored around page 5 of this post, but am very surprised no one mentioned one of the few reasons i boot into OS9:
Alsoft Disk Warrior!!
The OSX version is still not here with no scheduled release date. OS9 version is over 2 years old but is THE repair tool and i would not be without it. Has fixed hard drives too many times, even if the last time it took 4 hours to repair my OSX partition!
Bring on the OSX version, THEN i'd have few reasons to use OS9. Other uses are - when OSX screws up it permissions and leaves files scattered around, OS9 can clean it up, also some theme mods are easier in OS9 cos the packages are just folders.
Ok, here is my current stance on the OSX/OS9 thingy:
I use OSX because of Rendezvous, SMB, Seti Units can be processed twice as fast, and there's more software for it these days.
Why i dont like OSX: Menus are too slow - somebody please get rid of the fade away effect. My machine is too slow for it to look nice. Have removed shadows with shadow killer now all i need is those darn effects removed - if that happened most would think OSX was of similar speed to OS9. I generally like aqua and have not found a theme i like more yet. Yes, it feels slow, has a lot of eye candy but the general feel has grown on me over the past year.
Comparing OSX with pre OSX OS's (or as i'll call them classic OS's):
I think u CANNOT compare OS9 to 10.2 - why? cos 10.2 is the best implementation of OSX so far OS9 is not the best implementation of Classic OS's. That honour remains with OS8.6 which i have genuinely had running for two days without a crash - seriously! OS9 is a bit of a mish mash OS - has some nice features but is mostly there as a foil for OSX - i wished my G4 would boot into 8.6 but it cant (except for the custom made mac test pro cd).
However, having said that, i still say OSX has more going for it than the classic OS does. I couldnt live without rendezvous now - my PC users find it hilarious that i can see their machines on the network while they spend half an hour installing protocols etc. to see each other or my machine. The dock has grown on me though it has to be done my way - modded. I still say i need an application menu in addition in the top right - am gonna try ASM again to see if it feels right this time. Fruit menu customisation is essential - apple menu is useless otherwise.
What do i miss? Being able to simply move a system folder from one partition to another and boot off it. Knowing what almost every extension and control panel did and getting the speed boosts through well done extension sets. Having to think in a windows mentality - every time u install something restart, even if it doesnt tell u to - i crashed 10.2 after installing Shockwave and not restarting. Pop up folders though the dock has kinda taken over that role but still i liked the folder 90% hidden at the bottom of the screen. The dock is too big when visible and invisible when hidden. So i hide it.
That's all i can think of for the moment on this topic.
diskwarrior 3 beta is available at many holine and carracho servers{use your diskwarrior 2 sn]
installed on both my HD
try- 'xassist" for os 9 style right sidemenu or "fruit menu" os 9 style apple menu and finder pop style contextual menu
yes x still not as snappy as 9 but thats about it really no contest besides its over- finished get used to it.
apple has dug itself into a hardware hole over the past couple of years
thats the major problem with x
installed on both my HD
try- 'xassist" for os 9 style right sidemenu or "fruit menu" os 9 style apple menu and finder pop style contextual menu
yes x still not as snappy as 9 but thats about it really no contest besides its over- finished get used to it.
apple has dug itself into a hardware hole over the past couple of years
thats the major problem with x
For those that want an OS X Pro. What! Are you nuts?
I see this as one of the distinct advantages of OS X over Windows. One OS that allows for the most basic user, a mac power user or the terminally efficient to explore at their hearts content. Advanced features are always there as you want to learn but hidden from obvious view if you don't want to go there yet.
Look at the arguments/discussions that the powermac/imac features bring about. Crippling firmware, Apple catering too much to the home consumer and not enough to the professional and vice versa.
No, no, no. Develop a powerful OS. Stay focused on improving it and adding what we ask for and need. Fracturing OS X into consumer/pro level product lines would be a disaster.
I see this as one of the distinct advantages of OS X over Windows. One OS that allows for the most basic user, a mac power user or the terminally efficient to explore at their hearts content. Advanced features are always there as you want to learn but hidden from obvious view if you don't want to go there yet.
Look at the arguments/discussions that the powermac/imac features bring about. Crippling firmware, Apple catering too much to the home consumer and not enough to the professional and vice versa.
No, no, no. Develop a powerful OS. Stay focused on improving it and adding what we ask for and need. Fracturing OS X into consumer/pro level product lines would be a disaster.
OS9 vs OSX
I have mixed feelings about both of them. I think OS 9's core is a 20 year old technology that I'm very happy to live without. I don't consider managing memory to be "user-friendly". Most people don't know the difference between RAM and HD. I've seen people emptying their trash after receiving an "out of memory message". And I simply can't stand the crashes, something that I used to consider unavoidable.
On the other hand Aqua is inexcusably slow. And Apple's recent policy to prevent us from customizing our mac is very annoying. I think Aqua was not meant to attract Pro customers, but the ones that buy a computer just for its look. A shame
That being said, I find Quartz a wonderful technology, it does 10 times the amount of work that QuickDraw did and the result is only a little slower.If QuickDraw was the one doing the drawing in OSX, it would be unusable.
I'll tell you what I miss. I miss the desktop in the root of the system, and not a folder deep inside the hard disk. I miss the application menu, apple menu, Labels, the speed of menus, and most of all, the simplicity of the system.I could make my iBook boot from a RAM disk to get maximum battery life out of it , or just copy my system folder to a zip disk to make it bootable. And that is truly gone.
The problem is that after you get used to force quit anything that is not responding for more then 10 seg and still have the OS up and running for days, or listen itunes playing your songs perfectly while checking your email and rendering a filter in Photoshop, there is no turning back. All OSX flaws are highly compensated by its stability. I used to work on a PC with NT and combustion made me restart it many times in front of my clients. I can trust that won't happen with OSX, and that is a huge adventage.
I think OSX will leave beta stage when it gets to 10.5, but until then it's the best OS there is.
I have mixed feelings about both of them. I think OS 9's core is a 20 year old technology that I'm very happy to live without. I don't consider managing memory to be "user-friendly". Most people don't know the difference between RAM and HD. I've seen people emptying their trash after receiving an "out of memory message". And I simply can't stand the crashes, something that I used to consider unavoidable.
On the other hand Aqua is inexcusably slow. And Apple's recent policy to prevent us from customizing our mac is very annoying. I think Aqua was not meant to attract Pro customers, but the ones that buy a computer just for its look. A shame
That being said, I find Quartz a wonderful technology, it does 10 times the amount of work that QuickDraw did and the result is only a little slower.If QuickDraw was the one doing the drawing in OSX, it would be unusable.
I'll tell you what I miss. I miss the desktop in the root of the system, and not a folder deep inside the hard disk. I miss the application menu, apple menu, Labels, the speed of menus, and most of all, the simplicity of the system.I could make my iBook boot from a RAM disk to get maximum battery life out of it , or just copy my system folder to a zip disk to make it bootable. And that is truly gone.
The problem is that after you get used to force quit anything that is not responding for more then 10 seg and still have the OS up and running for days, or listen itunes playing your songs perfectly while checking your email and rendering a filter in Photoshop, there is no turning back. All OSX flaws are highly compensated by its stability. I used to work on a PC with NT and combustion made me restart it many times in front of my clients. I can trust that won't happen with OSX, and that is a huge adventage.
I think OSX will leave beta stage when it gets to 10.5, but until then it's the best OS there is.
Leave OS 9 alone...
The only reason why I'm not buying a new powerbook is that it CAN'T boot onto OS 9 and EVERYBODY who tuns music applications will tell you the same. There is a zillion of "VST" format plug-ins that are not and will not be implemented into Emagic Logic (Apple's own) for OS X. The Emagic folks are aware of it, it is for this reason that their latest version 6 is still released for OS 9 / OS X.
Cheers
J
The only reason why I'm not buying a new powerbook is that it CAN'T boot onto OS 9 and EVERYBODY who tuns music applications will tell you the same. There is a zillion of "VST" format plug-ins that are not and will not be implemented into Emagic Logic (Apple's own) for OS X. The Emagic folks are aware of it, it is for this reason that their latest version 6 is still released for OS 9 / OS X.
Cheers
J
OS X on iBook
Actally my iBook 700 with 256MB of RAM runs OS X fine. Yes it's not as fast as OS 9, but it's not dog slow.
Now I used to own an iBook 500 (same ram), that was god slow on OS X. So I would say it depends on what speed your iBook was.
As for the OS 9 vs OS X issuse. I mixed feelings on this. I think it's time we move on. I feel this debate is like the Wintel had when it came DOS and Windows.
I've pretty muched switched over to os X completely a year ago with 10.1. I hardly use OS 9 for any thing any more.
Sad thing is, when I do boot in 9 I find my self looking for stuff that is in OS X that isn't in OS 9.
Features I would love to see in OS X for me.. Have the control panels be independent apps like they are in OS 9. I wish I didn't have to load the System Preferences. That just feels like OS 6 again.
-Hugh
Actally my iBook 700 with 256MB of RAM runs OS X fine. Yes it's not as fast as OS 9, but it's not dog slow.
Now I used to own an iBook 500 (same ram), that was god slow on OS X. So I would say it depends on what speed your iBook was.
As for the OS 9 vs OS X issuse. I mixed feelings on this. I think it's time we move on. I feel this debate is like the Wintel had when it came DOS and Windows.
I've pretty muched switched over to os X completely a year ago with 10.1. I hardly use OS 9 for any thing any more.
Sad thing is, when I do boot in 9 I find my self looking for stuff that is in OS X that isn't in OS 9.
Features I would love to see in OS X for me.. Have the control panels be independent apps like they are in OS 9. I wish I didn't have to load the System Preferences. That just feels like OS 6 again.
-Hugh
Rationality anyone?
Okay, this debate seems to have lost any semblance of rationality.
Are the criticisms and desires of "the 9 crowd" really that much? Are any of us asking for any great feats of programming here? I think the answer is unequivocally "no." A lot of you come back with the standard response of, "That's too bad...keep your old Mac...live in the past...buy a Windows machine; I don't care."
While not only bad for Apple, these kinds of lines are also...how can I put it tactfully...friggin' moronic. It would not take much to satisfy most of the 9 users' preferences (audio users notwithstanding...sorry guys, you've been given the shaft by Apple on this one). But to enable 9-like fonts across the system would seem to be fairly simple, especially given that third party hacks do it to some extent without having access to the full OS source code and Apple's programming expertise.
It just boggles my mind why so many OS X users seem to think that UNIX/protected memory/stability have to be mutually exclusive with GUI performance.
Okay, this debate seems to have lost any semblance of rationality.
Are the criticisms and desires of "the 9 crowd" really that much? Are any of us asking for any great feats of programming here? I think the answer is unequivocally "no." A lot of you come back with the standard response of, "That's too bad...keep your old Mac...live in the past...buy a Windows machine; I don't care."
While not only bad for Apple, these kinds of lines are also...how can I put it tactfully...friggin' moronic. It would not take much to satisfy most of the 9 users' preferences (audio users notwithstanding...sorry guys, you've been given the shaft by Apple on this one). But to enable 9-like fonts across the system would seem to be fairly simple, especially given that third party hacks do it to some extent without having access to the full OS source code and Apple's programming expertise.
It just boggles my mind why so many OS X users seem to think that UNIX/protected memory/stability have to be mutually exclusive with GUI performance.
Re: Rhapsody
*EVERY* time this discussion breaks out - OS9 vs OSX - it ends with this gap of incomprehensibility.
"OSX is better because it never crashes!"
"OS9 is better because it is faster and has a better UI!"
And so both groups yell across the chasm without listening to the others. Dumb.
While OS9 hardly ever crashes on me - it's a lot to do with giving it enough RAM - I accept that OSX generally is more stable. While the OSX speed issues are being solved by throwing bigger iron at them, OS9 will be faster by far for a long time to come - no matter which setup you test on. And Let1KWindowsBloom is not the best test - scrolling and window resizing are the main issues here.
But OS9 is arguably the MOST COHERENT and intuitive UI of the two - once four basic behaviour tenets are learned by the user, everything else can be "explored" and understood (aided, of course, by the far better Help system in OS9). And the UI is not just a superficial feature: the basis of the Mac idea (or "experience", if you will) is precisely the mode of interaction, rather than the algorithms or the hardware used. Nor is the UI about specific, individual features, important though they might be.
Here is my point: why weren't we given both things? Why didn't Apple put the polished, coherent User Interface they already had, on top of the true and tested *nix underpinnings, thus creating a best-of-class OS? They could still have jazzed up the graphics, and even introduced a Quartz layer. That is not the issue of contention.
Why did Jobs and his NeXTians insist on rejecting a well researched, optimized UI paradigm in favor of the present jumble of loose ideas, NONE of which (!) have be subjected to any human-interaction testing and research?
The answer, I suspect, lies in the realm of psychology. And the future of the OS9 experience is moot, not w00t...
engpjp
*EVERY* time this discussion breaks out - OS9 vs OSX - it ends with this gap of incomprehensibility.
"OSX is better because it never crashes!"
"OS9 is better because it is faster and has a better UI!"
And so both groups yell across the chasm without listening to the others. Dumb.
While OS9 hardly ever crashes on me - it's a lot to do with giving it enough RAM - I accept that OSX generally is more stable. While the OSX speed issues are being solved by throwing bigger iron at them, OS9 will be faster by far for a long time to come - no matter which setup you test on. And Let1KWindowsBloom is not the best test - scrolling and window resizing are the main issues here.
But OS9 is arguably the MOST COHERENT and intuitive UI of the two - once four basic behaviour tenets are learned by the user, everything else can be "explored" and understood (aided, of course, by the far better Help system in OS9). And the UI is not just a superficial feature: the basis of the Mac idea (or "experience", if you will) is precisely the mode of interaction, rather than the algorithms or the hardware used. Nor is the UI about specific, individual features, important though they might be.
Here is my point: why weren't we given both things? Why didn't Apple put the polished, coherent User Interface they already had, on top of the true and tested *nix underpinnings, thus creating a best-of-class OS? They could still have jazzed up the graphics, and even introduced a Quartz layer. That is not the issue of contention.
Why did Jobs and his NeXTians insist on rejecting a well researched, optimized UI paradigm in favor of the present jumble of loose ideas, NONE of which (!) have be subjected to any human-interaction testing and research?
The answer, I suspect, lies in the realm of psychology. And the future of the OS9 experience is moot, not w00t...
engpjp
What irks me is the Apple apologists. I mean, cmon...if we're here, odds are good that we're not PC trolls.
Yet you breathe a bit about the good ole days of OS 9 and you get called every name under the sun. It's like we've sinned or something!
I suspect that a good deal of the criticism of "my people" comes from folks who are recent switchers...OS X is the first thing they saw and used, and to use 9 becomes incomprehensible to them. I can see that perspective.
But to those of us who grew up with it -- 9 provides a very workable and clear interface. You know where every single dadgum file is. Invisible files? Ha. The only ones that really matter pre-exist from OS 8 days -- DesktopDB and DesktopDF. Preferences were stored cleanly in the Prefs folder, extensions in the extensions folder, etc...all neatly placed within the System Folder. Conflicts? Easy to isolate via the Extensions Manager.
But I guess this mode of thinking is foreign to many Mac users, for better or for worse. I think, though, that if you don't have a clue what ResEdit is, you shouldn't be bashing OS 9.
Just one old Mac user's opinion...
Yet you breathe a bit about the good ole days of OS 9 and you get called every name under the sun. It's like we've sinned or something!
I suspect that a good deal of the criticism of "my people" comes from folks who are recent switchers...OS X is the first thing they saw and used, and to use 9 becomes incomprehensible to them. I can see that perspective.
But to those of us who grew up with it -- 9 provides a very workable and clear interface. You know where every single dadgum file is. Invisible files? Ha. The only ones that really matter pre-exist from OS 8 days -- DesktopDB and DesktopDF. Preferences were stored cleanly in the Prefs folder, extensions in the extensions folder, etc...all neatly placed within the System Folder. Conflicts? Easy to isolate via the Extensions Manager.
But I guess this mode of thinking is foreign to many Mac users, for better or for worse. I think, though, that if you don't have a clue what ResEdit is, you shouldn't be bashing OS 9.
Just one old Mac user's opinion...