Become a MacRumors Supporter for $25/year with no ads, private forums, and more!

MacRumors

macrumors bot
Original poster
Apr 12, 2001
54,972
17,356
With a trickle of rumors and tidbits flowing in, it's easy to make assumptions and leap to conclusions. Frequently, the rumor community takes on certain opinions that are repeated and are assumed to be true.

Apple's announcement that Mac OS 9 will no longer boot on new machines after Jan 2003 has led many people to jump to the conclusion that there must be some sort of major hardware shift necessitating dropping OS 9 support. While this is possible, Apple dropping OS 9 in favor of OS X exclusively is likely a strategic move rather than a technical requirement.

Other assumptions floating around include that in order for OS 9 not to boot on the new systems, Apple would have to invest a fair amount of effort to not allow such a thing... when in fact, all new Mac systems have traditionally required "enablers" to allow the new Macs to boot the current OS. Historically, OS Releases would only install/boot on all Macs that existed up until the day of that OS's Release. Subsequent hardware that was introduced would come bundled with a later build of the operating system.
 

Bengt77

macrumors 68000
Jun 7, 2002
1,520
2
Europe
Let's cut the crap, please...

Why is everybody so upset about Macs not being able to boot into OS 9 come next January? I'm not, and I really don't think anybody should. Any possible application one might need is readily available for OS X right now.

Of course not everyone has the proper Mac hardware to play with OS X, but come on; it runs on iMacs now over four years old! And it runs well on them, no matter what one might say.

There are several reasons to be extremely happy not to have to use OS 9 anymore. OS X has far better OpenGL support, so games run way better on the new OS. (Can I even call it new, after over one and a half years?!) It is UNIX, so the stability of the OS shouldn't even be mentioned; it's awesome. Feature-wise, what's to say? We have Jaguar now. There's only one thing I miss when I think about good old OS 9 (and lower): labels (native ones, not the ones that can be bought for some €7, even if it's not much).

Anybody disagree with me here? We don't need OS 9 anymore. System Administrators and Network Operators must agree with me, since networks of Macs running the classic OS are a drag to support. No true, fool-proof possibilities to secure the OS against, well, fools, really. Plus the aforementioned stability. With SMB sharing, Macs operate transparantly in Windows networks, too. No miss there either. Why buy site licenses for DAVE when you can have it natively in OS X?

Let me see, any more advantages or disadvantages of OS X vs OS 9? Did I mention stability already? And the ability to run an X11 environment transparantly, and therefore being able to run any UNIX application without much trouble; how about that?

People: let go. OS 9 is dead. Just because one stupid company won't grow up and wants to stay with the things of old, doesn't mean the Mac community should stay with it too! Let Quark die a silent death, Adobe is king now.

The cartoon from Geek Culture's The Joy Of Tech seems to come true after all: http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/333.html.
 

Rocketman

macrumors 603
OS9 is a fact of life, as is OS8.6. I can see why Apple wants to focus on OSX for new systems but to claim OS9 is in some way going to diminish in use any m ore than OS8.6 has is silly.

Apple should get a life and actually admit OS9 is going to be here for some time to come and encourage OS( needers to buy a SECOND machine to do all the multi-homing and serving tasks OSX rules at.

Rocketman
 

BenderBot1138

macrumors 6502
Oct 28, 2002
439
0
Re: Let's cut the crap, please...

Originally posted by Bengt77
Why is everybody so upset about Macs not being able to boot into OS 9 come next January? I'm not, ...

Well, there are a few folks who have their reasons.

:cool:
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,401
10
toronto
Re: Let's cut the crap, please...

Originally posted by Bengt77


Anybody disagree with me here? We don't need OS 9 anymore.

yes.

i still boot into os9 to run:

1. protools
2. digital performer
3. techtool pro

these programs do not work through classic.

believe me, i'll be way happy once everything is osx and i'll be done w/ os9. but that's not the reality yet.

and -- i got a new ibook this week. i needed to get it under the wire so i'll still have os9 boot capabilities.

edit: oops -- i see a rumor that "the wire" may move to june. oh well. i'm still glad to have the ibook.
 

Mr T

macrumors newbie
Sep 16, 2002
23
0
Sick and Tired

I am sick and tired of silly elitist Mac users who think that they speak for the Mac community. The majority of Mac users use os 8 or 9 so get over it and stop whining about how much better os X is.

Most people are getting enough capability from their current Mac and wont upgrade until much faster apple hardware is released. OS X might be stable put it feels slow as hell.

Lastly, Stop thinking that everyone on these boards is a typical Mac user because they are not.

:eek:
 

Booga

macrumors regular
Aug 8, 2002
122
0
Why Apple would stop supporting 9

I know these forums tend to be geeky places, but I don't know why "technical issues" is always the first thing to come up. Here's a question: which costs more, 1. development, 2. QA, documentation, and customer support. Even if the machines were technically capable of booting 9 out of the box, it could still very much make financial sense for Apple to explicitly disable it. That doesn't mean people will like it, or that it's what's best for the customers, but it may be the decision that makes the most financial sense for Apple.

Just speculating here.
 

strider42

macrumors 65816
Feb 1, 2002
1,461
7
Re: OS 9 Booting Opinion and Discussion

Originally posted by Macrumors

Apple's announcement that Mac OS 9 will no longer boot on new machines after Jan 2003 has led many people to jump to the conclusion that there must be some sort of major hardware shift necessitating dropping OS 9 support. While this is possible, Apple dropping OS 9 in favor of OS X exclusively is likely a strategic move rather than a technical requirement.

If the rumors below this one is true, the one about iBooks, emacs and CRT imacs being able to boot into OS 9 for education customers, it would indicate exactly the opposite for those machines: that there will likely be few changes to them at all, as it seems unlikely to me that apple would spend a lot of money making OS 9 compatible with major hardware changes in these machines. Not that anyone expected major changes to any of these right now anyway.
 

kylos

macrumors 6502a
Nov 8, 2002
948
4
MI
Why kill 9? Because if you buy a new machine you won't need 9 anyway(if you have old apps, run them in classic, that's still there), and if your machine is too old to run X you won't be able to run any decent modern software anyway. Any modern program written for 9 would run terribly on a 4 year old machine; your old macs just wouldn't run it.
 

cbrantly

macrumors member
Jul 17, 2002
30
0
If the rumors below this one is true, the one about iBooks, emacs and CRT imacs being able to boot into OS 9 for education customers, it would indicate exactly the opposite for those machines: that there will likely be few changes to them at all, as it seems unlikely to me that apple would spend a lot of money making OS 9 compatible with major hardware changes in these machines. Not that anyone expected major changes to any of these right now anyway.

The "rumor" below this one is not a "rumor" at all. It is a report about an email sent from Apple to its educational partners. The letter does NOT say that the iBooks and eMacs Apple releases in January will still boot into OS 9...it says that educational partners will still be able to buy the currently shipping iBooks and eMacs.
 

idkew

macrumors 68020
Re: Sick and Tired

Originally posted by Mr T
I am sick and tired of silly elitist Mac users who think that they speak for the Mac community. The majority of Mac users use os 8 or 9 so get over it and stop whining about how much better os X is.

Most people are getting enough capability from their current Mac and wont upgrade until much faster apple hardware is released. OS X might be stable put it feels slow as hell.

Lastly, Stop thinking that everyone on these boards is a typical Mac user because they are not.

:eek:

You obviously do not know anything about business. Apple does not make money when people do not buy their new OS. Apple can not afford to make OS X better if people are not buying it/using it. apple has invested millions of dollars in OS X and it has to be accepted for apple to survive. one way to guarantee this is to force people to use it.

most people in the pc world don't need a 2+ GHZ processor, but they ask for them, and sell them like crazy. those people who are happy with their os 9 and their performa are not the people who buy a new computer ever 1-3 years. the OS X people are the big purchasers. grandma won't upgrade her performa or her os very often, so she is not as important a customer to apple.

as ofr os x feeling slow- i sure don't notice it. my cpu is 1/2 as fast as the top of the line apple, only has 16mb vram, and windows open, resize and move EXTREMELY smooth. if it is too slow for you, why not try getting a computer with apple's recommended specs.

and of coarse people on these beards are not typical mac users. why would the average joe spend hours a day talking about what they see as "just a computer". not to mention- of you look at the amounts of cash people on these boards drop with apple, you will see why our opinions about apple's future matter more than grandma's.
 

Choppaface

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,187
0
SFBA
Re: Re: Sick and Tired

Originally posted by idkew
one way to guarantee this is to force people to use it.

which is what microsoft wants to do with palladium....oh but of course microsoft is evil because this is a mac board so that connection doesn't hold up here...

so much for 'think different'....but then again it always was just marketing :rolleyes:

hopefully there will be some hack or something that will allow the new hardware to boot into OS9. jag is great but if they're really in it for the user, they'd maintain compatibility- one of the most important things from the user's point of view.
 

JupiterZen

macrumors regular
Re: Let's cut the crap, please...

Originally posted by Bengt77
Why is everybody so upset about Macs not being able to boot into OS 9 come next January? I'm not, and I really don't think anybody should. Any possible application one might need is readily available for OS X right now.


Readily available huh? So tell me where can I get:

- Protools for OS X
- Emagic Sounddiver for OS X
- Digital Performer for OS X
- Unisyn for OS X
- Nuendo for OS X
- QuarkXPress for OS X

Not to forget various drivers for professional audio recording gear. And there is NO decent MIDI synth patch editor/librarian alternative for OS X.

Until I can get the same work done in the same time with OS X I need to boot into OS 9 for my audio production. Period.

Don't get me wrong ... I love OS X and I already do everything that does work with Jaguar.
 

AmbitiousLemon

Moderator emeritus
Nov 28, 2001
3,413
0
down in Fraggle Rock
im going to ignore the osx vs o9 bickering going on and actually discuss the topic at hand.:p

the timing of all these things and the discussion of what will and will not be able to boot os9 is very interesting.

apple has told education customers (who run many programs that only run in os9 and will likely never have an osx counterpart) that ibooks, emacs, and imacs will be able to boot os9 until june. quark has also been told june. and another rumor suggests that the whole thing has been pushed back until june. well i am going to have to disagree with the statements made by MR up there regarding a significant hardware change and say this sounds very much like the no os9 booting will coincide with a significant hardware change. (i say coincide since any hardware advancement, significant or not, must consider past software and could just as easily leave os9 booting impossible).

a june date rather than a january date also make a great deal of sense. Consider that IBM's PPC 970 is not expected to reach volume production until mid-2003 (ie june). the coinciding of volume production of the PPC 970 and the os9 boot death in macintosh computers seems very telling.

will we see PPC 970 in June? i am still doubtful (but just because i have learned to be skeptical of next-gen chips — we have been predicting them for a very long time). But, despite my skepticism, all the stars do seem to be aligning on june 2003... guess we will just have to wait and see.:confused:
 

strider42

macrumors 65816
Feb 1, 2002
1,461
7
Originally posted by cbrantly


The "rumor" below this one is not a "rumor" at all. It is a report about an email sent from Apple to its educational partners. The letter does NOT say that the iBooks and eMacs Apple releases in January will still boot into OS 9...it says that educational partners will still be able to buy the currently shipping iBooks and eMacs.

Regardless, whether its a rumor or a report changes absolutely nothing about the content of my post. I wasn't saying the ibooks and eMacs will be able to boot into OS 9, I even said it was for education customers. I suppose you could mean that apple could update the eMacs and iBooks with major changes and still sell the currently shipping ones. I supose thats possible, but similarly unlikely, as it stretches their manufacturering rather thin across a lot of products (two ibooks, two eMacs, the CRt imac, G4 iMac, powerbook and powermac). So given that fact, it would seem to indicate to me that apple will not be making any major changes to any of those products until OS 9 is completely abandoned for them (note, I don't think they will keep the old machines around just for OS 9, I think rather that they may be willing to keep OS 9 around because the machines aren't due for any major updates for a while).
 

Buggy

macrumors regular
Oct 14, 2001
133
0
Canada
I work in Education

My lab is OSX with classic installed.

I am a big fan of OSX, however, I completely disagree with not allowing customers to boot from the OS that best suits them.

OSX 10.2.2 is not yet ready for mass adoption. Driver support is a major issue. I realize this is mostly the fault of third party companies, but school can not affor computers let alone buying all new third party products. Until our old scanners and printers can work with OSX then we can not move to OSX. Apple knows that they will lose MANY sales to education if they go OSX only. We are not yet ready. We do not have the budgets to support this change even if we wanted to change.

Our school server is still on NT, they havn't been able to impliment Win 2000 yet. Large scale changes do not move fast in education. By the sounds of it Apple is listening (though they should never have shot their mouths off before they though in in the first place!)

You want technical issues? Here they are. (these are just the ones I have to deal with every day)

- OSX AFP login locks up on NT sp6.

- SMB works well but its user interface is very "unMac like"

- PS print drivers are a mess!! (I have to run two different drivers for the same printer and choose which one is best for whatever program I am working on)

- SMB and NT cause corruption in files. JPG and AI seem to be the worst.
Network conncetion speed grounds to a near stand still on NT (at random times on random machines. Problem is still unknown.)

- Umax scanner support is incredibly poor. (OK not apples fault, but hey... if printers and cameras have included drivers then why can't scanners?)

- FCP 3 crashes on OSX 10.2.2. Problem is well know about and apple is currently working on a correction (ie new FCP update... problem is not fully gone)

- Audio software works much beter in OS9. Protools and other are on their ways but they are not here yet.


I hope that is enough to demonstrate that Apple is not ready to Move to OSX only let alone everyone else.
If not. Go to Apple's own discussion boards and check any of the topics. you will find many problems that still exist within OSX (and not all of them occur on the near side of the keyboard)
 

zimv20

macrumors 601
Jul 18, 2002
4,401
10
toronto
Re: Re: Let's cut the crap, please...

Originally posted by JupiterZen



Readily available huh? So tell me where can I get:

- Protools for OS X
- Emagic Sounddiver for OS X
- Digital Performer for OS X
- Unisyn for OS X
- Nuendo for OS X
- QuarkXPress for OS X

more importantly, many of these programs (os9 versions, of course) won't work under Classic.

_that's_ why we need macs to boot os9.
 

Rower_CPU

Moderator emeritus
Oct 5, 2001
11,219
0
San Diego, CA
Originally posted by Buggy
<snip>
- FCP 3 crashes on OSX 10.2.2. Problem is well know about and apple is currently working on a correction (ie new FCP update... problem is not fully gone)
<snip>

Is this an update other than the 3.0.4 update that was released last week?
 

bousozoku

Moderator emeritus
Jun 25, 2002
14,560
627
Lard
I still have to boot into Mac OS 9.x once in a while. It doesn't happen very often, but I may need to print to my Epson SC900 or use my SmartMedia/CompactFlash card reader or even my UMAX scanner, but those things don't work in Mac OS X right now. The UMAX scanner never will work, but then, I didn't expect it to work.

The fact is that I use Mac OS X 30 days for every 2 hours I use Mac OS 9. I don't have Photoshop 7, but Photoshop 6 works okay in Classic. Everything Carbon-ised works better in X than in 9. I don't want to return to entering memory numbers.

Apple won't put the work into changing my machines so they don't boot Mac OS 9--it costs too much. They'll work on the firmware on the machines to come. It's the only thing that makes monetary sense.

This will force developers to get moving on Carbon-ising their applications, or leaving the market. It looks as though the musician's applications are being handled. QuarkXPress is being handled but so what? If someone else did it for Quark, it would still take forever. :D
 

springscansing

macrumors 6502a
Oct 13, 2002
922
0
New York
For the last time...

MANY AUDIO APPS DO NOT WORK IN X
MANY AUDIO APPS DO NOT WORK IN CLASSIC
MANY AUDIO APPS ONLY WORK IN OS 9

I will not buy a mac if it does not boot to 9 until reaktor is updated and everything I have works.
 

RogueLdr

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
119
0
People's Republic of Ann Arbor
Re: Sick and Tired

Originally posted by Mr T
I am sick and tired of silly elitist Mac users who think that they speak for the Mac community. The majority of Mac users use os 8 or 9 so get over it and stop whining about how much better os X is.

Most people are getting enough capability from their current Mac and wont upgrade until much faster apple hardware is released. OS X might be stable put it feels slow as hell.

Lastly, Stop thinking that everyone on these boards is a typical Mac user because they are not.

:eek:

While I agree with almost all of your post, Apple users that are using System 8.x (meaning that their Mac is an early G3 or older), really don't have to wait any longer for a much faster Mac, do they?

RL
 

conceptdev

macrumors regular
Nov 17, 2002
151
0
Apple Q3 SEC Filing

"First, third quarter sales of Power Macintosh and PowerBook Systems were weaker than expected. Unit sales of Power Macintosh systems during the third quarter of 2002 fell 21% from the second quarter and were 26% lower than in the same quarter in 2001. The Company continues to believe that current economic conditions are having a pronounced negative impact on its professional and creative customers and that many of these customers continue to delay upgrades of their Power Macintosh systems due to the Company's ongoing transition to Mac OS X, its new operating system, and in anticipation of certain software vendors transitioning their Macintosh applications to run natively in Mac OS X.
Further, the Company did not experience the anticipated increase in Power Macintosh sales it expected following the introduction of Adobe's PhotoShop 7 and did not fully anticipate the number of professional users who may be delaying upgrades of their systems until the Jaguar release of Mac OS X announced for the fourth quarter of 2002 and the availability of QuarkXpress for Mac OS X. " Link
 

Tweedledee

macrumors newbie
Dec 10, 2002
2
0
Is there any change in architecture on these new Macs? If a computer is set up (like mine) with a Mac partition and a Linux partition wouldn't you be able to access or install any OS on separate partitions and still access them? Maybe I'm unclear as to what is happening with the change.:confused:

Also, as far XPress for OS X, who cares? It does run quite well in Classic, but the fact is InD is far superior. I don't even bid with printers who don't support my InD files. I haven't launched XPress in months and have no regrets. I could care less if XPress for OS X is ever released.:D
 

daveg5

macrumors 6502a
Nov 28, 2001
741
0
Re: Let's cut the crap, please...

Originally posted by Bengt77
Why is everybody so upset about Macs not being able to boot into OS 9 come next January? I'm not, and I really don't think anybody should. Any possible application one might need is readily available for OS X right now.

re: many of us have software and/or hardware that is incompatable with Jag/and or classic remember OSX has barely a year under its belt as the default Macos and has only recently address many printing, scanning, sound cards, plugins, drivers etc.etc.
I use logic and cubase in OS9.2, vst plugins, Emagic audiowerk2 soundcard, Yamaha dspfactory with ax44 sound card with builtin effects and serial read stable midi interface and 1 oms usb midi interface. everything is very stable in nine although I do get a few crashes now and then. they do not work in classic or OSX even if I upgrade my software. $299 for cubase,$199 latest logic. Yamaha and Emagic "may" update my 1-2 year old soundcards (i love the dsp factory GUI and cubase and others are slowly updating vst plugin fx and instruments for a charge and judgeing from the threads i have read there are still a lot of teething pains with pops and clicks which I cant have.


Of course not everyone has the proper Mac hardware to play with OS X, but come on; it runs on iMacs now over four years old! And it runs well on them, no matter what one might say.

re:agreed while not as snappy as os9 on 1 year old or more macs with out Quartz extreme or a G4 it is now finally acceptable.

There are several reasons to be extremely happy not to have to use OS 9 anymore. OS X has far better OpenGL support, so games run way better on the new OS. (Can I even call it new, after over one and a half years?!) It is UNIX, so the stability of the OS shouldn't even be mentioned; it's awesome. Feature-wise, what's to say? We have Jaguar now. There's only one thing I miss when I think about good old OS 9 (and lower): labels (native ones, not the ones that can be bought for some €7, even if it's not much).

re:Stability is the number one reason, the new GUI is the second. on my older Biege g3 upgraded with g4, 8600 with G4 and voodoo 5500 card games dont run in OSX or classic I must use OS( good thing it has 4saa anti alias on all 3d games. There is still a lot of room for drivers for scanners and higher end printers cut sheet and roll. (not apples fault) but Jag is Great I use it for things other then printing music and internet my 10-100 driver does not work in jag or classic..

Anybody disagree with me here? We don't need OS 9 anymore. System Administrators and Network Operators must agree with me, since networks of Macs running the classic OS are a drag to support. No true, fool-proof possibilities to secure the OS against, well, fools, really. Plus the aforementioned stability. With SMB sharing, Macs operate transparantly in Windows networks, too. No miss there either. Why buy site licenses for DAVE when you can have it natively in OS X?

re:Well if I did not have about $3000 in music apps and hardware that works great in OS9 but not yet compatable in Jag I would agree with you.
But that is not the case so I have to "Disagre with You" the networking features are great but not really any harder for those in nine with modest home networks.

Let me see, any more advantages or disadvantages of OS X vs OS 9? Did I mention stability already? And the ability to run an X11 environment transparantly, and therefore being able to run any UNIX application without much trouble; how about that?.

re:number 1 disadvantage is incompatabilities with older hardware. lack of drivers and first generation software that is still going thru teething pains as the programers learn it. remeber the main music software producers had to wait until Jag to code there software and there is still plenty of bugs there it will be a year or two before the major studios switch mainly because of upgrade cost and relearning new software. I should be switched over by this time next year ,my sound cards should have drivers and the audio apps should be mature (no more pops and clicks) I agree OSX is Great but not for everyone yet.

People: let go. OS 9 is dead. Just because one stupid company won't grow up and wants to stay with the things of old, doesn't mean the Mac community should stay with it too! Let Quark die a silent death, Adobe is king now.

re:Quark is doing the right thing rather than rush unfinished product out with a made for OSX sticker on it they are taking thier time and doing it right. we will all be better of because of this and it will be better than the xp version. I wish that more OSX developers, specifically Music Apps makers, Protolls, logic, cubase, motu dp, etc would take thier time and do it right the first time instead of rushing it out and having us download an upgrade every other week. and as much as I like the core Audio Concept Prior to this summer there ewere no Core Audio Sound cards, Apple should release info to allow the former standard asio sound cards to be incorporated into core audio as it would stand to reason that software with the most support for all the major pree 2002-3/4 sound cards.

OS9 is not dead for all mac users, this is not a Macos vs Windows debate but rather a macos9 and macosx discussion and for many like myself its great to have both to be able to use software and hardware that wont work with the other.I must admit after OSX I dreaded looking at the OS9 GUI so I hoped over to http://www.aquamakeover.com and downloaded the Osx theme for nine now sometimes I dont know which OS is on my screen. because OS9 and classic now look the same.
Basically I agree with most of your points, for people with newer macs and OSX compatable hardware thier may be no reason to go back into OS9 although it is useful at times to have that option.
But for others with older machines and large investment in OS9 compatable software and hardware (and no upgrade money) OS9 is not an option but a necessity. for those check out http://www.aquamakeover.com
OS9 is not dead, it will be around and used by schools, businesses and individuals for at least 2 more years as people plan their upgrade paths and save money and more drivers and "good not rushed apps" become available.
The way I look at it is I have 2 of my favorite operating systems running on my machine and I love them both. with out OS9 and its faithful users OSX would have never seen the light of day and as it passes over the next 2 or so years lets let it go with respect. instead of like yesterdays garbage remember OS9 users are not window users. some simply cant go all OSX for reasons known to them.
peace out
The cartoon from Geek Culture's The Joy Of Tech seems to come true after all: http://www.geekculture.com/joyoftech/joyarchives/333.html.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.