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.
Mac OS X vs. Mac OS 9
- Thread starter posterboy81
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
iMac 400 G3 + 667 G4 PowerBook. Both running OS X 10.3.2 Both capable of running OS 9 but don't, not even installed.
Also maintain a Blue and White G3, my office computer, with OS X, no OS 9 present, as well as a beige G3, I gave it to my parents, running OS 9, not capable or running OS X.
Also maintain a Blue and White G3, my office computer, with OS X, no OS 9 present, as well as a beige G3, I gave it to my parents, running OS 9, not capable or running OS X.
TiBook 550MHz - OS X mostly, OS 9 for the rare outbreak of old school UT, I don't care for the half ass OS X port...
DP G4 450MHz - OS X mostly, stuck a little because I've got some OS 9 peripherals (ATI XClaim VR 128 video card/TV tuner that they won't support or release functioning software for in OS X...) so when the G5 comes I'm hanging on to the DP 450 but wouldn't want it OS 9 only for the video card functionality. The second processor would be useless. It's the only thing keeping the machine alive in OS X, I believe...
And last but not least, my LC III, running OS 7 with a IIe emulator card. Talk about old school!
cpjakes
DP G4 450MHz - OS X mostly, stuck a little because I've got some OS 9 peripherals (ATI XClaim VR 128 video card/TV tuner that they won't support or release functioning software for in OS X...) so when the G5 comes I'm hanging on to the DP 450 but wouldn't want it OS 9 only for the video card functionality. The second processor would be useless. It's the only thing keeping the machine alive in OS X, I believe...
And last but not least, my LC III, running OS 7 with a IIe emulator card. Talk about old school!
cpjakes
Use OS X on the Powerbook.... I think I used 'classic' mode once to try out some Oregon trail.
As I switched to Macs because of OS X, it's all I am familar with and will likely stay that way...
As I switched to Macs because of OS X, it's all I am familar with and will likely stay that way...
It's all about the Roman Numerals (X, not 10!)
Hopefully you ain't running a beta release of cheetah
Try 10.2.x minimus and preferably 10.3.x
Originally posted by encro
It's all about the Roman Numerals (X, not 10!)
Hopefully you ain't running a beta release of cheetah
10.2.8
and i'll call it X when it's not so damn slow
maybe i'll pick up 10.3 today at the campus store
My apps were fairly stable under OS9 but my system was not. Even if I ran the base extensions and even if I edited those down I never had anything but bad luck with 9. In my opinion it was the worst system Apple ever released. Even worse the 10.0.
I don't get how so many people had issues with OS 9 being slow or unstable because it was rock solid and insanely fast for me. I normally went for months at a time before a restart and everything was still far snappier in OS 9 with my 400 MHz G3 than OS X sometimes is with my 1.25 GHz G4.
Yeah I don't understand the reason either. It could be that I used OS 9 like I do OS X. I usually have about 8 apps open at once and they are all performing some function or another simultaneously. For me OSX is a god send it is so much more stable I can't even begin to describe it. For one I can leave the machine on over night working for weeks on end where as if I did that with OS 9 I would have to restart the next morning because it was running slowly or behaving oddly.
OSX
I have moved to OSX.3 on all of my machines (see sig) and all of them behave very well, although the iMac is a little slow.
I loved OS 9 until I met OS X, the first day I switched System Folders and booted into OS X I loved it, but it wasn't quite ready for me until Jaguar. Once 10.2 came out I've stopped using OS 9 altogether.
Personally, OS 9 did seem a little faster before OS 10.3 but now I really can't see a difference. Also, OS 9 was good, but OS X is more stable and more user friendly than OS 9, the dock is very useful, the new iApps are great, the command line, Preview, Safari, iTunes and iTMS, Konfabulator, etc. I'm more interested in my computer now than I was with OS 9, I don't feel like I'm going end up with an extensions conflict or get a Flash module that doesn't work properly in Netscape.
My iMac running OS 8 - 9 crashed once a week, sometimes more, my PB has had a kernal panic once or twice since I started using OS 10.1.1.
I have moved to OSX.3 on all of my machines (see sig) and all of them behave very well, although the iMac is a little slow.
I loved OS 9 until I met OS X, the first day I switched System Folders and booted into OS X I loved it, but it wasn't quite ready for me until Jaguar. Once 10.2 came out I've stopped using OS 9 altogether.
Personally, OS 9 did seem a little faster before OS 10.3 but now I really can't see a difference. Also, OS 9 was good, but OS X is more stable and more user friendly than OS 9, the dock is very useful, the new iApps are great, the command line, Preview, Safari, iTunes and iTMS, Konfabulator, etc. I'm more interested in my computer now than I was with OS 9, I don't feel like I'm going end up with an extensions conflict or get a Flash module that doesn't work properly in Netscape.
My iMac running OS 8 - 9 crashed once a week, sometimes more, my PB has had a kernal panic once or twice since I started using OS 10.1.1.
As I write this, I'm running Mac OS 8.6 on a Power Macintosh 8600/250. It's got a CD, a Zip Drive and a Floppy Drive. Pretty awesome, huh?!
Why? Have you heard Apple might offer updates? I sure could use a faster Mac!
Why? Have you heard Apple might offer updates? I sure could use a faster Mac!
1) OSX (also dual boot with Yellow Dog Linux, but not used in about a year, i think) on the G4, the rest of the computers OS9 (one dual boot with Yellow Dog Linux) or OS6.0.7 or OS7.5
2) only the G4 is capable and has OSX on it from the first day OSX came out and the rest of the computers is not able to run OSX
I think I (I and my family) have about 6 or 7 working macs of witch 2 or 3 are regulary used. My brother used to collect a bit. We also have a couple of Apple IIe (including 2 clones of the IIe) running ProDOS.
2) only the G4 is capable and has OSX on it from the first day OSX came out and the rest of the computers is not able to run OSX
I think I (I and my family) have about 6 or 7 working macs of witch 2 or 3 are regulary used. My brother used to collect a bit. We also have a couple of Apple IIe (including 2 clones of the IIe) running ProDOS.
Yep. Certainly more stable than Mac OS 9.0. No multiple-user features (read: issues)...
Mac OS 9.1 was a very good update, though.
Originally posted by Edot
Booting into console mode is far snappier than MacOS9!
I was referring to MacBandit's post:
"8.6 was the best operating system Apple ever made prior to OSX"
Prior to Mac OS X.....
I agree with him.
Mac OS X is one of the best things that has happened to Apple's recent history, IMHO.
You are right. Mac OS 9 was going nowhere. Especially if you had the opportunity to look at Mac OS X in the early stages (Server 1.2 and later the DPs of the Client)...
Looking back, it was pretty obvious that Mac OS X was the way to go, even when running DP4 on a 400 MHz G4 wasn't considered snappy at all! Not even DVD support, nor CD burning and so on. But the stability was pretty much there allready, as the use of real multi-user environments.
But WOW.. we are spoiled now with Panther on a G5....
Times are good for us.
I used 8.6 till Jaguar came out and now i'm on panther. as good as 8.6 was it doesn't even compare to osx. when I was on jaguar I still had the original G3 350 cpu in my tower and just after I upgraded to panther I got my G4 upgrade. the G4 chip makes a huge difference, its only 150MHz faster than the G3 was but altivec makes a huge difference. not many things do support altivec but osx really comes alive with it.
I have a adaptec micro orange
which i have a lot of problems with under 10.2 ... when i install the driver it only works under the s initial reboot ... the second reboot doesn't mind the drive anymore ... i have to delete the driver and then reinstall and then restart in order for the drive to mount
I run 10.2.8 on a 350 MHz G3 iMac and 10.3.2 on a 800 MHz g4 iMac and an 800 MHz G3 iBook.
All are capable of running 9, and if I didn't need apps that were X-only, I would still be running 9. 9 was easier to teach/learn (the underlying technical stuff was less visible), and the interface, although it was ugly, was clean and simple to use.
There were reliability issues with 9.0.4, but 9.1 and above were stable, and produced a lot fewer of those "Unexpectedly Quit" boxes than X (any version) does.
All are capable of running 9, and if I didn't need apps that were X-only, I would still be running 9. 9 was easier to teach/learn (the underlying technical stuff was less visible), and the interface, although it was ugly, was clean and simple to use.
There were reliability issues with 9.0.4, but 9.1 and above were stable, and produced a lot fewer of those "Unexpectedly Quit" boxes than X (any version) does.
I have a Lombard (PowerBook G3 Bronze Keyboard Model) 333mhz, running OS 9 (or whatever you want to call it) for now. Upgrading to OS X as soon as the extra RAM comes and I find a driver for my wireless card. So capable of running OS X, but running 9 for now.
The other one is a 500mhz Cube, capable of both, but primarily running Panther, booting into 9 once in a while.
The other one is a 500mhz Cube, capable of both, but primarily running Panther, booting into 9 once in a while.
I personally find X way easier to teach then OS 9. I can set someone up as a normal user with no access to important files like they did in OS X. Then I set it up so the only things that show up on there desktop and in finder windows is their home account and applications. They can do anything they want and they can't screw the system up.