Sidebar Sidebar
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

Originally posted by MacBandit
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.
Click to expand...

Therein lies the difference between "teaching, using a computer" and "teaching using a computer".

If the computer is a tool for teaching something else, you can limit the user to doing just about nothing ("Tabbed Users" in 9 also did this, although it was never perfected)

When teaching how to use a computer, there is a bigger problem, because it has to function the way a computer somewhere else would function, since teaching people how to use "this specific computer" is not very useful.
 
Originally posted by coolsoldier
Therein lies the difference between "teaching, using a computer" and "teaching using a computer".

If the computer is a tool for teaching something else, you can limit the user to doing just about nothing ("Tabbed Users" in 9 also did this, although it was never perfected)

When teaching how to use a computer, there is a bigger problem, because it has to function the way a computer somewhere else would function, since teaching people how to use "this specific computer" is not very useful.
Click to expand...

I find my method works because it allows someone to explore without caution. They can then learn and make mistakes and not cause any problems once they are comfortable with this level then you provide them with an admin password but not an admin account. This still allows them to make changes to the system but only after first entering the password for each case which ensures they are consciously making the changes and not just blundering into them.
 
Originally posted by MacBandit
Do you have your hard drive properly terminated?
Click to expand...

It's an internal drive

the hard drive cable has 3 connection points on it lets call it

A -------- B ------- C


A is connected into the SCSI drive and C is connected into the internal SCSI card

B is not connected to anything

Based on what i know about SCSI that seems like the proper set up
 
Originally posted by revenuee
It's an internal drive

the hard drive cable has 3 connection points on it lets call it

A -------- B ------- C


A is connected into the SCSI drive and C is connected into the internal SCSI card

B is not connected to anything

Based on what i know about SCSI that seems like the proper set up
Click to expand...

You do have the drive properly placed in the SCSI chain but you still need to terminate it. I couldn't find information on your SCSI card and you will have to look at an owners manual for you hard drive on how to terminate it.

Basically SCSI drive systems work in a chain and if the end of the chain is not terminated then it's an open loop and the data. This from my experience doesn't necessarily prevent the system from working but kind of hobbles it where it can cause problems and doesn't necessarily run at full speed. Some SCSI cards can self terminate but even with some of those cards you need to terminate the drive for it to be reliable.
 
Originally posted by MacBandit
You do have the drive properly placed in the SCSI chain but you still need to terminate it. I couldn't find information on your SCSI card and you will have to look at an owners manual for you hard drive on how to terminate it.

Basically SCSI drive systems work in a chain and if the end of the chain is not terminated then it's an open loop and the data. This from my experience doesn't necessarily prevent the system from working but kind of hobbles it where it can cause problems and doesn't necessarily run at full speed. Some SCSI cards can self terminate but even with some of those cards you need to terminate the drive for it to be reliable.
Click to expand...

But i didn't have this problem until i loaded OS 10.2 ... it worked just fine under OS 9
 
Originally posted by revenuee
But i didn't have this problem until i loaded OS 10.2 ... it worked just fine under OS 9
Click to expand...

OSX tends to be pickier about all hardware. Where OS9 was written in a way that you could have bad ram and a poor hardware setup and still use it OSX you can not. I believe Apple did this on purpose because the problems with RAM and hardware made OS9 unstable. Apple knowing this made OSX so it would not be compatible at all so that you would have to fix the problems thus eliminating the majority of system instabilities making OSX more stable from the start.
 
OS X on both of my computers. OS 9 is just a back up system for me on another disk, but I don't use it.
 
B&W G4 450Mhz - OS X (Panther)
Powerbook 1Ghz 12" - OS X (Panther)
iMac 800Mhz G4 - OS X (Panther)
iBook G3 600Mhz - OS X (Panther)


Do I count 4x?
 
Last night I fired up my PowerBook G3 with OS 9.2.2 and spent some time on it. I really can't see any problems with stability and it is still a bit faster overall than OS 10.3.2 even. I am sure that as we go towards 10.4 and beyond, it will become more evident that X will be the speed king, but currently I am blown away by the insane responsiveness of OS 9 on the lowly 400 MHz G3. It still doesn't compare to X with features and experience, I will have to admit. Nothing can really describe the wonderful feeling you get from using OS X, it's just in a league of its own.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back