I've HAD IT! Panther, yur OUT! TIGER, get in here!

Discussion in 'macOS' started by Cleverboy, Jul 14, 2007.

  1. Cleverboy macrumors 65816


    May 25, 2007
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    I sware... there's a conspiracy. I just don't know what the deal is, but programmers have it IN for Panther. Everytime I go to use some new piece of software... "OH SORRY, you're using Panther? Well, why didn't you say so? Nah, that's not going to run. What? Reason? Um, 'cause it won't."

    I'm impressed with Tiger, don't get me wrong... I just don't NEED it. Moreover, I still have a G4, and while I've a sparkly new iPhone that I mainly sync on my PC, I'm still saving to get a new 24" iMac... which presumably has Tiger already ON it, and moreover, if the timing is right, will have Leopard on it. --but, I think my patience has run out. Application developers are putting the needles to me on this. "STAY IN PANTHER, AND WE WILL HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH YOU!"

    What is this evil pact that has been made to usher Mac users into the future? Is there some distinctly loathsome reason no one wants to support Panther any more? I'm left wondering, am I spending $129 just to make my Mac a little slower? I figure by the end of the year, I'll be newly Mac'ed, but until then, am I buying into world of hurt for my G4, just to escape a world of hurt?

    ~ CB
  2. pianoman macrumors 68000


    May 31, 2006
    i think developers are not developing for Panther because their attention is focused on developing universal apps or apps for Leopard. Panther is old news.

    it doesn't seem right to disregard a perfectly functional version of OS X, but it's what happens as time progresses.
  3. ReanimationLP macrumors 68030


    Jan 8, 2005
    On the moon.
    Actually, Tiger runs faster than Panther.

    Plus then you can get it cheaper if you qualify for the education discount, or you can find it for about 50-80 on the Marketplace here, or on eBay.
  4. scaredpoet macrumors 604


    Apr 6, 2007
    I think you're missing the point of the question though: what makes Panther so much different from Tiger that an increasing number of programs simply won't run on the former and demands the latter? It's especially frustrating when you see programs that worked just fine in the previous version, and a minor bug fix release comes out... only you can't run it unless you have the latest and greatest.

    Unfortunately I'm not near my old dual G4 mirror-door at the moment, so I can't point out any specific programs right now, but I remember being absolutely frustrated by this. There were several programs I wanted to update but couldn't because the G4 is running Panther, and I find it pointless to sped the money on Tiger when I plan on buying Leopard for it in in a couple months anyway. Even then, I'm doing it not for any specific need, but simply because I know that an increasing number of programs will ditch Panther for no good reason that I can discern! So my Intel-based Macs running Tiger reap the advatanges of minor bug fixes, while a Panther-based Mac is left in the dust. Not to mention if I ever have to reformat my G4, I can't rely on downloading all these nifty utilities from the 'net, because no one seems to keep the old versions around that would run on it.

    It reminds me of the bad old days of the internet, when practically every website assumed Internet Explorer was a requirement to internet access, and would check to make sure you were using it. If you weren't, many such sites wouldn't even TRY to render a page... you would just get a notice that you HAVE to run IE to view it. it didn't matter if there was no technical reason for requiring IE, they just would, and you were out of luck if you chose to use something else. This continues to happen on some levels: FEMA's claims site had cross-browser issues during Katrina, for instance.

    But back to the point at hand: While some of us can afford to pay the requisite club membership fees of upgrading to the new OS (and periodically upgrading our hardware), there are lots of starving artists and college students who can't, along with those of us who feel it's ridiculous to pay for a current OS they'll only use for a couple of months. And it's annoying to see programs suddenly drop support for older OS releases for no disceranble technical reason.
  5. Littleodie914 macrumors 68000


    Jun 9, 2004
    Rochester, NY
    One of the main reasons developers are creating Tiger-only or Leopard-only software is not because they "want to," but rather because their apps use technology that is only available on the new OS. Core Data, for example, is only available on Tiger.
  6. Fahrwahr macrumors member

    May 23, 2007
    Southeastern U.S.
    Mozilla's programs appear set to raise the minimum requirement to Tiger as of the 1.9 platform release (Firefox / Thunderbird 3, SeaMonkey 2, Camino 2), of which some of the programs may arrive by the end of the year. The current Panther-compatible releases will continue to receive security patches through spring 2008. The argument from a developer's standpoint is that Apple added new APIs (programming "hooks", so to speak) in Tiger that make coding much easier -- in a Windows-dominated world, it's important that the limited resources allocated to Mac programs take advantage of whatever is necessary to keep development on the same schedule as other platforms. Beyond that, Mac users tend to keep up with the latest versions much more consistently than Windows users, so the market share for Panther may not justify additional resources to ensure compatibility. (Background Information on Mozilla's Wiki)

    On the other hand, with Apple raising the minimum requirements for Safari 3 to Tiger, it would have been a nice selling point for Mozilla to offer users of older operating systems greater longevity. Because Apple has major new Mac OS X releases much more frequently than Windows, that means that you have to pay to take advantage of the latest third-party software, some of which include security / bug fixes.
  7. Killyp macrumors 68040


    Jun 14, 2006
    I agree with other people in this thread, the reason developers are making their apps Tiger + compatible is because Tiger introduced new APIs (something which happens with every OS update).

    Think of an API like a set of instructions. If a program needs to process a video in a certain way, rather than the coders having to tell the program exactly how to manipulate the video, they can just pass it on to CoreVideo (an example of an API), which already has all the 'how to' stuff written in. CoreVideo does all the processing and hard work, and sends the result back to the original program. Makes things much, MUCH easier and quicker for developers, and almost always ends up with better results.
  8. A Pittarelli macrumors 6502

    Jun 1, 2007
    tiger is much faster than panther, and apparently more compatible
  9. scaredpoet macrumors 604


    Apr 6, 2007
    Then I respectfully submit that it will continue to be a Windows-dominated world, Vista's flaws notwithstanding, if this philosophy continues... unless more developers at least archive their older versions for the Tiger-challenged and soon-to-be Leopard challenged.
  10. Sean Dempsey macrumors 68000

    Sean Dempsey

    Aug 7, 2006
    If Apple machines and Apple OS's and software was as widespread as Windows, they would suck just as bad.

    The size of the apple community, and the developer community, is what has make it so much better than windows.
  11. cal6n macrumors 68000


    Jul 25, 2004
    Gloucester, UK
    IIRC, you're almost right. I believe that Tiger's APIs are supposed to be "set in stone". They can be added-to but they can't be changed. This is supposed to mean that, starting with Leopard, upgrades breaking apps should be a thing of the past. It also means that, aside from new implementations, backwards compatibility should also improve. With this promise, is it any wonder that devs are using Tiger as their baseline?

    Of course, this was before the intel transition but it'll be interesting to see how smooth the next upgrade is...
  12. ghall macrumors 68040


    Jun 27, 2006
    Rhode Island
    You could just wait for Leopard, because Tiger is next up to be chopped. Leopard should keep you going until 10.7 is announced.
  13. ReanimationLP macrumors 68030


    Jan 8, 2005
    On the moon.
    I hate to tell you this, but its getting harder and harder to find stuff that works under Windows 2000.

    Any support for anything below XP is starting to drop off the planet.
  14. Cleverboy thread starter macrumors 65816


    May 25, 2007
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    I can't remember what Jobs said exactly at WWDC, but I'm pretty sure Tiger users, while a high percentage, aren't so high as to make Panther users 4% of the marketshare of Mac users. His words were definitely meant to plant those seeds more earnestly though. Worth noting as well, Windows 2000 I THINK is officially unsupported, unlike Mac OS Panther.

    Small note though, would it KILL developers to at LEAST have a little NOTE that pops up saying the APP needs Tiger or something? I was just downloading Telekenesis, for remote controlling my Mac with my iPhone... and the app just quits out, wordlessly.... like all the other incompatible apps I've had the misfortune of downloading. Would it BE so hard? Grr. :mad:


    Anyway... something truly QUEER just happened at the Apple store. I went in and forked over my $129. Crowded store, everyone iPhone crazy... Apple employees wandering to and fro. I butt in on a conversation between one and a guy that seems odd, with nothing to do. He doesn't have a checkout doo-dad, so he leads me to someone who does (apparently they were just making small talk). I checkout and leave.

    Later in the parking lot, the customer the Apple employee had been talking to hails me. I give him the once over for concealed weapons, and when he reaches me, he apparently wants to SELL me his copy of Mac OS. "Well, I noticed you bought a new copy, and you haven't opened it, so you could just return it. I just bought a copy, and I could sell mine to you. I've already installed it, so I don't need it any more..."

    Interesting (part of me, perhaps the writer can't help but poke odd moments with a stick). "How much?" I say feigning polite curiousity. As soon as he starts with, "Well, I paid $129 just like you, so I guess I could..." I knew he was going to say silly things to me. Not that I was considering it anyway. Now it was like a stickthing I wanted to shake off. "That's ok... I'm good!" I murmur a few half-hearted excuses like, "I uh, want to register it." and "Oh my look at the time." He fires back, "Name your price!" I smile and wave as I get in my car.

    What the hell WAS that? :confused: What's next, someone going to catch me outside of Best Buy and get me to return my Back to the Future collected edition 'cause they've bootlegged theirs? Sheesh.

    Anyway. Got my Tiger by the tail. Now to shove it into my Mac. I still think this is bogus, but if its really faster, maybe I can do what I want and put my PC and 2nd class citizen status. Looking forward to getting in on the Dashboard community.

    ~ CB
  15. Sean Dempsey macrumors 68000

    Sean Dempsey

    Aug 7, 2006
    I feel the same way. When Vista came out, I kept XP on all my machines. Even now with VMWare installed, I put on XP Service Pack 2.
  16. iBunny macrumors 65816

    Apr 15, 2004
    Well at this point I would just wait for Leopard.

    I mean, Tiger is great, but leopard will be out in ~ 3 months.

    You should have switched to Tiger like 2 years ago when It came out....
  17. jdechko macrumors 68040

    Jul 1, 2004
    I was going to echo the sentiments about the new APIs/hooks that are constantly being introduced into new software, but I also wanted to ask about these apps that don't work under older versions of OS X. Are these applications from larger, well-known developers (ie: Adobe, Microsoft, etc) or are they smaller companies that develop (for instance) a few pieces of relatively small software (MTR, Handbrake, misc utilities, and the like)and that's it?

    If it's the former, than there really ought to be no reason for incompatibilities in such a small OS jump. It's probably why Adobe will never take advantage of Core Image/Core Video technologies--even though their software could recognize huge performance gains, they wouldn't want to alienate a large (majority or not) portion of their user base.

    If it's the latter, there could be several reasons for cut-backwards compatibility. It could just be that the author doesn't have time to maintain (feature parity for) what would need to be 2 different versions, especially if the software is free and it's more of a side project than anything else.
  18. afornander macrumors 6502

    Apr 5, 2006
    i agree with ibunny, with 10.5 on its way soon, wich will have many new features, and run even faster than tiger if u have a 64bit, multi core, or intel computer. u might as well wait for that.:D:p:apple:
  19. Cleverboy thread starter macrumors 65816


    May 25, 2007
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    No. Developers have made it too painful to have a Panther machine. You can't run any new software. That's NOT a reason to get Tiger, I'm sorry... it just isn't. Imagine the sales pitch, huh?
    SALES: "Hey, you need Tiger!"
    YOU: "Why? I'm doing perfectly fine with my existing OS I just bought the other day."
    SALES: "Well, you bought that 2 years late, didn't you?"
    YOU: "Yeah, I let them work the kinks out... runs great!"
    SALES: "Well, we're selling a NEW OS now! Its even better!"
    YOU: "Actually, this has all the features I need. Nothing you're selling looks that compelling."
    SALES: "What?"
    YOU: "Thanks! I just don't need those features!"
    SALES: "Did we mention all the new programs and newer updates to software you already use will stop supporting what you just bought REAL SOON NOW?"
    YOU: "WHAT??? WTF? Why?"
    SALES: "No reason. So, $129. How 'bout it!!!"

    I remember Jaguar had PROBLEMS, and not supporting Jaguar made sense (especially not supporting all the other previous MacOS versions). There's absolutely NOTHING wrong with Panther. NOTHING. Yet, running the latest apps is on non-starter. For instance, I just saw a new app advertised on Apple's download website, "Podcast Maker 1.3.2". As I go to download a copy, I see the all too recurring words:
    System Requirements
    * Mac OS X 10.4 or later
    * QuickTime 7.0.2 or higher

    I can appreciate having the most recent version of Quicktime, but they're abandoned Panther support in just 1 increment. Kindly, on their website, it says "If you are using Mac OS X 10.3.9, download Podcast Maker v1.3." A few months ago, I was using the app "SiteSucker". I'd downloaded a previous version that worked FINE on Panther. Then... I lost track of it and went to download it again, and there was ONLY a Tiger compatible version. I couldn't see ANY amazing new features... just one... NOT PANTHER COMPATIBLE. Does Apple pay developers a $1, everytime the move their product to Tiger only?

    Actually... Quicktime... that's another one, huh? You buy Quicktime Pro, and then Quicktime 7.0 gets released, and your $30 investment is gone as you're prompted to over-write it and pay AGAIN for a "pro" version. Nice!

    SALES: "Hope you like the new features!"
    YOU: "Grrr....."

    ~ CB
  20. kolax macrumors G3

    Mar 20, 2007
    If the whole world was like you, then we would never move forward.

    Why invent a car when people were happy with walking? People who are so stuck in their ways and unwilling to accept change for the better is what generally holds society back from fast progession.

    You are happy with Panther because it meets your needs. Why did you buy the iPhone exactly? Why not a perfectly normal phone that will easily "meet your needs" by doing what a phone does - call people and send text's.

    Seems a slight contradiction by buying the best and latest phone out there but moaning about having to update your OS because your current OS is so outdated that it holds technology back.

    If you have any knowledge of computers, you'd know how fast technology progresses. It can be a pain - need to spend money on updates, new OS's etc. But it is for the better. Computers are getting extremely fast now - and for that to keep happening people need to keep upgrading.

    If we all froze and stuck with what worked for us now, then nothing would progress. We are human - we are never satisfied and we can always make improvements. Would you really want to go back to living in a cave, since living in a cave met most requirements - shelter, warmth by a fire etc. Yes?
  21. KurtangleTN macrumors 6502a

    Apr 2, 2007
    I got to admit, as a newer Mac user, this is probably the most frustrating aspect of Macs.

    I knew there were things that didn't work on Panther that needed Tiger, but I was pretty surprised to see the level when I got my iBook, it sucked because I won the auction with Tiger but I asked the guy to put Panther on it, fearing lesser performance (which from iBook owners, this isn't true)

    I wish I logged all the Apps I was really exicted for, and then had to ignore it because it was 10.4 only. It's really amazing the level of abandonment that comes with a new OS X version, Firefox is dropping Panther support (Even though it still harbors over 25% of the OS X market according to SJ WWDC Keynote) the webkit in Safari on Panther is really flawed compared to Safari 2+3 even on Windows XP, and it limits you from other webkit based browsers like Omniweb and Shiira.
  22. kolax macrumors G3

    Mar 20, 2007
    You make it sound like it is only Apple that gives users this problem.

    Look at all the fuss made when XP came about. Now look how many programs that were made for Windows XP run on Vista without any problems.
  23. Daveman Deluxe macrumors 68000

    Daveman Deluxe

    Jun 17, 2003
    Corvallis, Oregon
    The thing is, this is a huge advantage for developers, especially indie Mac developers.

    There are some important new APIs that are extremely useful for developers and are ONLY available as of Tiger. Core Data is a HUGE one. For example, Wolf Rentzsch absolutely SWEARS by Core Data, and considers it one of the most important parts of Tiger for developers, because it allows the developer to write to the API and now things such as multiple undo/redo history are handled ENTIRELY by the API rather than having to write his own code. Core animation has the potential to do the same thing for new apps written for Leopard. Wil Shipley has written that he has big plans for Delicious Library 2.0 that will only be made possible by Leopard, so DL2.0 will be Leopard-only.

    The thing that you won't find out by reading Apple's OS X preview pages for new versions of OS X is that there are HUGE under the hood differences with each revision. Every one introduces new APIs, and WWDC attendees seem VERY excited about the new APIs that will be in Leopard, even though they can't offer specifics because they're under an NDA.

    The truth is, the APIs in OS X have generally been a moving target from 10.0 to 10.4. Tiger was the first time that Apple provided any real guidance on which APIs will be deprecated or unavailable in future versions of OS X (for now, no Tiger APIs will be broken in Leopard--expect this to change in future versions). In the past, this has generally meant significant updates to existing apps when new OS X revisions arrived.

    My personal take? I think that developers should feel free to write new versions of existing apps that function only with the new version of OS X. But I also think that when new versions of their apps don't work in older versions of OS X, they should offer old versions for those who haven't updated OS X. They could even still charge full price for old versions, and I would find nothing wrong with that. But bear in mind that selling more versions increases a developer's support costs, so the calculus and result will differ from developer to developer.
  24. Cleverboy thread starter macrumors 65816


    May 25, 2007
    Pocket Universe, nth Dimensional Complex Manifold
    Utimately I think you're right. Events like the release of a much more friendlier and/or powerful set of APIs certainly leaves customers stranded, but its much more friendly for developers to say, "here's the older version for the older operating system, but its NOT supported", than "I'm sorry, you can only use our software if you have the most current operating system". It's just alarming to me to not give customers options.

    You should talk less and listen more. Your comments bare all the hallmarks of a child. Honestly. Enfant terrible. Or, yes... maybe you're a robot. That's it. Try a bolt of lightning Johnny-5. Might loosen a gasket for you. :rolleyes:

    A little empathy goes a long way. Even as someone who loves new technology, I don't believe in having existing equipment systematically rendered obsolete. I've had a long standing arrangement with my mother and sister, where they'd get the Mac I no longer needed. Lately however, my old Macs are becoming USELESS. Unlike my old PC. Consequently, my mother "shifted tracks" to a $400 Dell (on my sober recommendation), which I have to admit is pretty smokin'.

    I don't mind that 68k died in favor of PowerPC, or that PowerPC is dying in favor of Intel. I don't mind that MacOS 9 is dead, and that OS X has a clear and healthy evolutionary path. The Mac OS evolution has lots of corpses. No problem here. I have basic old software that won't work on my latest machine, and basic new software that would never work on my old machines. Big deal That's life. I can still run Windows notepad on Windows 95 and on Windows XP though. Sometimes the details make the bigger leaps less painful.

    I do stop to care however, when the OS I purchased in early 2005 is obsolete 2 years later, and rendered incapable of downloading a copy of the software it used 3 months prior (that worked fine), because the developer has switched over something, and now it only works on the latest OS that came out 3 months after I picked up my copy of the previous OS.

    Over a decade ago, I remember my sister got caught in the worst Apple goof-up EVER. She was upgrading her MacPlus she'd got at the start of college to a Mac IIvi, a device that literally only had a 4 month shelf life, before Apple discontinued it, and shipped a replacement device, the IIvx, with a processor TWICE as fast. When people say, "hold off on upgrading too quickly", I'm not the one you need to tell twice.

    Tiger has NEVER been a reason to upgrade for me. It offered me NOTHING I needed. Period. This isn't comparing walking to driving a car. That's a comparison worthy of no one here. This is saying "Oh, unless you upgrade your engine, you can't use our windshield fluid." There's clearly a technical reason, but on its face, its a bit hard to swallow. Leopard... cat of a different color. Time machine alone has me chomping at the bit. --But, getting things done means I can't keep putting it off. I couldn't even use many of the latest web server pre-compiled binaries of the last year.

    Moot point however. I made my $129 purchase. I spent all weekend installing the OS due to strange upgrade problems, and now I've got the latest OS for the next three months. Woo-hoo. If Leopard wasn't delayed, we probably wouldn't be having the conversation anyway.

    ~ CB
  25. darklyt macrumors regular

    Jun 5, 2007
    10.2.8 is fine

    I run 10.2.8 with no problems (not that I'm doing many intensive things). I actually go for weeks, usually months, between restarts on a G4 iMac 800 Mhz which I use for hours everyday.

    Only problem is of course that nearly ANY program I go to download requires 10.3 or higher. So yea, 10.3 users suffer, but not as much as us 10.2.8 users who get nearly no new programs. Not that I'm complaining or anything, I'm just too lazy to upgrade. I'm just saving up for a MBP and 10.5 at this point, and that'll last me another five years or so.

Share This Page