Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

More on Phasing out OS 9, and Pinot (10.3)

Originally posted by BillGates
The new G4s coming out this month WILL boot OS9. Maybe they won't come with it loaded or even in the box but they WILL boot and run OS9 natively if you choose to do so. This is really good news for the prepress/design industry since some of our application developers are really dragging their feet.
Click to expand...

Wasn't there some odd bit about the eMacs not being able to boot into OS9? Or was that just a loose nut behind the keyboard?

That seems unlikely as well, being designed for the educational market, which has a lot of legacy software concerns, but it would explain why they were made available to the general public.

The real lag in pre-press will be with plug-ins. If I were on a production staff, I'd be hammering the authors of those plug ins hard about bringing quark, photoshop, and other plug-ins up to OS X compatibility.
 
Apple OS 9 Underground Sabotages Power Mac.

Sources close to the development of the upcoming revision to the Power Mac G4 indicate that sabotage by rogue elements within Apple has caused the machine to boot only into OS 9.2.
An Apple hardware engineer, who declined to be identified, said the machine's original design had called for it to boot only into OS X, in an effort to get professional users to switch to Apple's next-generation operating system.
"Adoption of OS X has been somewhat slower than we'd hoped," the engineer said, "So the new Power Mac was designed to be OS X-only."
Lowering his voice, the engineer went on, "But certain elements within Apple have begun to make their pro-OS 9 leanings known. Frankly, it's a little frightening."
A hardware controller on the motherboard of the new machine was to check the operating system version before allowing a boot. Somewhere on the way from design to manufacture, the code for that operating system was changed from looking for OS X to looking for OS 9.
"It's very possible we forgot to carry a one," the engineer allowed. "There's a lot of integer math that goes on in the processors on the motherboard and it can get confusing."

more here:
http://www.crazyapplerumors.com

:D
 
Os 9 was meant to die years before 8 was released. We all knew it would happen as far back as Copland and Rhapsody. 32 bit audio and core midi (finally), not to mention Apple's interest in Emagic, will suffice the audio world. We will see great things there in time. Quark should have an X-able app in about five years and after that, what's left? A useless operating system...one that even Windoze had beat in a few ways. I say let the bitch die. We'll all be better people for it.

Except one small thing...Marathon:(
 
Originally posted by peterjhill


Well, the GM of Jaguar will not run classic without having preinstalled OS 9 first.

...

So, we have a quandry. If the new machines will not boot OS 9, how would one install OS 9, in order for 10.2 to run Classic?
Click to expand...

Yikes!

There was a report that Steve Jobs sent an email reply to someone that wrote to complian about this and Jobs said it's a rumor, and it's not true.

So I guess until the new non-nine-booting Macs come out we dont have to worry... as long as we have a copy. I wonder if the retail version of Jaguar will come with OS 9?
 
How to lose more school market share

Schools invest in computers that will be around for years. So now you want to orphan their system 7.5 to system 9 software. Fine- you think we are going to actively publish system X only software as a forced upgrade? Think again. It will be full price and that is even if we bother. It use to be 75%Apple and 25% DOS/Win and now it is the reverse. So now we should look forward to even less of a market? This sounds like supporting Atari or Commodore 64.

The Apple 2e was a reasonable break from ProDos to MacOS .

This is not.

Transition- keep classic support, but have the OSX.x be so compelling that developers and users will migrate up. The same path for 6.08 to 7.X to 8.X as the developer ups the minimum requirements.
 
Legacy vs. New features

I don't think it's a bad idea for Apple to put OS 9 to rest. And, while it's unfortunate that developers have been slow to port to OS X, this will naturally happen over time.

The best way for Apple to make this happen is to keep bringing great features and cool frameworks to the Cocoa APIs. As a programmer, I know that's what really drives development. The easier it is and the more features that are "pre-written", the more people will write for it.

What I would love to see from Apple is "JavaScript Studio". That would be way better than AppleScript studio and open up Apple programming to a lot more people.

When all is said and done (after it becomes "silly" to write for OS 9), I'd like to see Apple make an instant-on version of Classic (similiar to what Virtual PC does). It would also be great if they could emulate some of the older hardware that certain apps (games and such) attempt to address. On future hardware, it should be fast enough and it will preserve the investments of many schools.
 
Its already silly to write for OS 9. Do you think its stuff being written now that is the problem? How much development do you think is taking place at this moment where at least Carbon is not the considered code platform?

That isn't the point... its that there is too much legacy stuff that is not about to be rewritten or recoded, that is important to daily work flow. Third Party Plug ins- PRINTER and other hardware DRIVERS, legacy code in huge apps cobbled together over a decade, dependant on code that can only load into a BOOT of OS 9, by companies not even in business anymore.

Cutting off the client base ability to use an App isn't going to kick developers in the pants as much as it is going to give them a reason not to develop for the platform at all.
 
Silly to write for OS9

Yes! It is silly to write for OS 9 at this point. That's why Apple's driver engineers are considering no longer writing for it! It's not like the Apple hardware team makes a box and then OS 9 magically runs on it.

Another Point of consideration:

If I'm Adobe or Microsoft and I just spent gonzo dollars porting my software to OS X, I'm going to be PO'd if a lot of people aren't upgrading. In fact, I would be screaming bloody murder if Apple did "ANYTHING" that didn't encourage the upgrade to OS X.

Apple's got a tight line to walk right now.

Ironically, we'll likely see more OS 9 support after the last major software companies get their OS X port out the door. We should all be really p*ssed at Quark. But even then, don't expect Apple to waste energy on writing OS 9 drivers for new machines.

Instead, watch for Apple to make the following improvements to Classic for version 10.3.

1) Instant-on booting
- This would be fairly trivial to do
- This will make running the occasional legacy app less of a pain

2) Create the ability to "pipe" print jobs to Classic
- Allows printers without OS X drivers to work under X
- This can be done using various "tricks", but it should be user-friendly

3) Provide additional drivers?
- Some kind of generic scanner support would be nice
- Not as likely as the other items

4) Limited hardware emulation
- Limited hardware emulation so that more OS 9 software runs under Classic
- Possible, but not likely to happen
 
New Macs won't boot on OS 9

I have a new i.book 700 combo for about a month, I had a problem with the graphic card so I shipped it back to Apple care and they changed the Mother Board. I have got it back for couple of days now and guess what it does not work under os9. I can't either boot at all (error 10 or Bus error) or it hang as soon as I open any app. I tried to boot from the install CD(OS9) same even after reinstalling OS9. Under OSX it is working very fine even when running classic no hang no freeze no crash. I don't mind too much running OSX only but it seems really a strange way of influencing cutomer choice...
 
Re: Silly to write for OS9

Originally posted by oldMac


Ironically, we'll likely see more OS 9 support after the last major software companies get their OS X port out the door. We should all be really p*ssed at Quark. But even then, don't expect Apple to waste energy on writing OS 9 drivers for new machines.
Click to expand...

You know, I don't think even the most deluded OS 9 luddite is expecting that from Apple. I'm fairly sure every single change to OS 9 since 9.1 has been merely to make it mesh more cleanly as the classic layer in OS X. In fact no new drivers NEED to be written for 9- they already exist and work. It is drivers for OS X that need the attention obviously.

Unfortunately- not everything works so smoothly in classic, which is why many have to actually BOOT in OS 9 to produce work.

Perhaps we should examine why people still boot in OS 9 instead (if all the reasons could truly be addressed in the classic layer of OS X itself, people would not be crying over not being able to boot into 9, so in the list below Classic is not considered identical to OS 9; OS 9s mention means that the Mac must BOOT from 9)

Six figure or more imagesetter, scanner, direct to press, does not recognize OS X or Classic, only a boot into 9. Six figure or more Audio or Video Workstation peripherals do not recognize OS X or Classic, only a boot into 9.

PDF creation a horse of different color depending on Application used, OS used, not a cross platform miracle.

Font management a quagmire in OS X.

Third Party Plug Ins for daily production purposes, from print to multimedia, not OS X or Classic compatible- not likely to be rewritten.

Terabytes of storage not addressable via classic or OS X.

Network security at schools, custom courseware, doesn't run in classic layer or X.

Custom business app, creator long gone, doesn't work in OS X or classic layer.

Cut and Paste does not work between Classic layer and OS X applications.

Java web apps, browser plug ins, not available for OS X browsers.

and so on.

I like Classic fine, but it is not addressing all my needs. I'd rather not use it at all. But sometimes about once a month, I do find it absolutely necessary to be able to boot my Mac from OS 9. I do not see this as holding back development as much as biding time for proper development. Personally I cannot wait never to see the classic layer or OS 9 ever again, but even for every app that is OS X native, it will be a slow upgrade process, I tend to only budget in thousand dollar lumps.

Apple needs to address the lag in OS X adaption among those that are not using it merely out of discomfort- I have friends whos macs shipped with OS X that are using 9 due to familiarity. And they are doing this in good ways- iApps, and other features making OS X a must have.

Apple does not need to cut off the hands of those who must for some reason still boot into 9, but I imagine they should have an old mac around that can do that if they have that need, huh? Or maybe they bought a Dell to assign to that task...

But keeping a new mac from being able to boot in 9, if necessary, is not going to make that new mac more attractive.
 
Wry Cooter/Old Mac

Wry Cooter seems to understand.

We like lots of others are not Microsoft nor Adobe. We represent over 100 titles that collectively bring in a shadow of the above in sales.

We were quick to go to ProDos we waited until Mac became color (LC) then went in. We did not rush into ProDos 16 (remember that?)

Programmers want a fair return on investment- Unless it is games or industry tools- the education market will be face will horrible stuff because it runs on both Mac and Win.(not to say that is true with all programs)Some of the stuff I have seen, the Apple 2 would smoke it. We have Mac only as well as Win only software because of the fine programming.

I did not say we would not publish system X. It is the past software as well as the users computers who both need a fair return on investment.

Keeping an emulator is fine.

That is why I bought volvos for years since Detroit just did not get it.Who wants a car that rusts out or engine goes before 100,000 miles?

We are still Apple's biggest supporters even though Apple likes to shoot itself in the foot time and time again.
 
Re: New Macs won't boot on OS 9

Originally posted by Dominique
I have a new i.book 700 combo for about a month, I had a problem with the graphic card so I shipped it back to Apple care and they changed the Mother Board. I have got it back for couple of days now and guess what it does not work under os9. I can't either boot at all (error 10 or Bus error) or it hang as soon as I open any app. I tried to boot from the install CD(OS9) same even after reinstalling OS9. Under OSX it is working very fine even when running classic no hang no freeze no crash. I don't mind too much running OSX only but it seems really a strange way of influencing cutomer choice...
Click to expand...

That sounds like a software problem ... maybe an incompatible extension?

If the machine wouldn't boot from OS 9 you would get a dialog saying this machine cannot boot from this OS.

I use ConflictCatcher in OS 9 to start up in X with most of the OS 9 extensions and control panels turned off. That was the only way I could get classic to run without crashing. You could do the same in the Extensions Manager. That's for Classic though. I have no problems booting into OS 9 by itself.

You might want to try reinstalling OS 9.
 
hmw666

As a software developer, I understand that it can be annoying when your software breaks as an operating system gets updated. (ie, if your stuff won't run under Classic)

I also understand that the world doesn't stand still after you release a title.

Apple has provided the following to developers:

1) A very good Classic environment that you can run under while you work to produce an updated version of your app. (95% of old apps will run under this as-is) And, yes, I agree that Apple should make this environment even better to continue supporting legacy software.

2) A Carbon API that takes much of the work out of porting an Application to Mac OS X.

3) Free development tools that allow you to create applications in Carbon and Cocoa.

It's not Apple's problem if you try to hang onto your old titles and make more money off of them without investing in the future. Arguably, they wouldn't have even broken if you'd followed the guidelines in creating them. (But, yes, as a developer I know that's more difficult than it sounds.)

Personally, I would rather Apple spend money on making OS X better than writing drivers so that people can run 5 year old software on a brand new computer. Seriously... how much horsepower do you need to run that old software anyway? Just buy a couple old machines or something.
 
music apps

As of this writing niether cubase, protools, logic, digital performer, and thousands of instruments and effect plug-ins and ASIO Sound CARDS {dspfactory anyone cost me $1000 and I love it} are available in OSX, and when the programs are, most of the sound cards and plug-ins wont work until re-wrote. There will be teething pains plus an enormous exspense to upgrade the software unless it is a free upgrade(yea right look at itools}
If Apple Wants To make sure Music people give up os9 and by new machines for OSX then they better get off thier unowhat and help these companies get it together so us musicians great investment dosent become worthless overnight on the new machines or the used and upgrade market will steal big sells from them. for music OS9 is still great and dosnt crash much if you use one app at a time. I make a full move to OSX when my apps and soundcard and plug-ins are available in OSX if the price is not outrageous/
 
MY GAMES

I Have tons of great games that are only playable in os9 and they look great on my voodoo 5500 FSAA which of course is not supported by nvida in OSX or Classic. When I get a new G4/G5 I want them to still work or I just wont buy a new G4/G5 I get a Used one Instead.
 
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