Running OS X Applications on OS 9.

Discussion in 'PowerPC Macs' started by Intelligent, Mar 1, 2014.

  1. Intelligent macrumors 6502a

    Intelligent

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2013
    #1
    What happens when you do that? currently I'm not at home so i can't test but with sheepshaver it just crashes anyone bother to test?
     
  2. pacmania1982 macrumors 6502a

    pacmania1982

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2006
    Location:
    Birmingham, UK
    #2
    Mac OS 9 sees the apps mostly as folders, as in TextEdit.app and only opens the folder.

    Some apps however were written to launch in both as they were written in Carbon. These just launch and run without issue.
     
  3. mrkramer macrumors 603

    mrkramer

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Location:
    Somewhere
    #3
    Unless it is an older app that was programmed to work in both you'll have about the same thing happen as if you tried opening a windows app, it won't run.
     
  4. Hrududu macrumors 68020

    Hrududu

    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2008
    Location:
    Central US
    #4
    Exactly. Basically you can think of Carbon apps like what Universal Binary was for the Intel transition. Depending on when the program was released has a lot to do with whether or not it'll be written as Carbon, Classic, or Cocoa.
     
  5. AmestrisXServe macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    #5
    The Carbon SKD was the beachhead for OSX, in that it allowed easy cross-platform development, during the 10.0 and 10.1 era, when OS( was the default OS on Apple systems, that also included OSX as an optional OS.

    It may be hard to conceive now of OSX being the secondary, optional operation system, but in its infancy, OSX was buggy, and sluggish; and many people despised it.

    By the time that 10.3 was out, OS9 was a duck, and Carbon compatibility was out. The selection of cross-OS Carbon programmes is comparatively small, but you can find some that are useful, or use the Carbon SKD to programme software that is usable on either.

    Carbon has no 64-bit API framework, which is one reason that it is essentially entirely abandoned; but at the time when OSX was a questionable future, Carbon allowed mainstream developers to push product out that would run in either system of MacOS.

    Cocoa API software will simply not run on OS9 or earlier, as there is no Cocoa API framework in those operating systems. While it is theoretically possible to create a Cocoa framework for OS9, it serves no useful purpose. it would be like a reverse 'Classic Environment' in a way. All of the other Apple attempts to fully-integrate the old and new APIs (Yellow and Blue box; or Pink and Blue box) never panned out.

    I always felt it was a shame that the 'Classic' environment was relegated to an emulator, and not an OS-level API structure, but then, we were supposed to have all of this new functionality in MacOS8, which was never really released.

    The official 'MacOS 8', is actually MacOS 7.7, released as MacOS 8, to cut the clone market out of the picture, as the clone makers such as UMAX had an unbound license to 'Macintosh OS System 7', so naming the next release of System 7, as 'MacOS 8', make it impossible for them to use it; and OS 9 is actually more like MacOS 7.9; OS 8 and OS9 are still technically System-7 products.

    The real MacOS 8 was to be more or less what OS X is, except that it went from being an entirely in-house OS, to a BeOS/MacOS hybrid, to a NeXTStep/MacOS Hybrid, to what we have now, over a six-year period of time.

    The early showings of this beastie, were so fragile, that Apple developers couldn't understand how they could exist at all, in a public frame. This was true through the initial releases of OSX, from the first 'Public Beta', trhough v10.1, where OSX was prone to crashing from almost any exception, or fault, bringing down a full kernel panic. Thus, Carbon saved OSX in a way, as it allowed developers to continue making software, while waiting for Apple to clean up their act, and produce a stable version of OSX that would run on their own hardware, at a usable speed.

    Try OSX 10.0, or 10.1 on a Platinum G3, or an original iMac sometime, and you will understand why it was so critical to keep MacOS 9 alive, for just a bit longer, under codenames such as Moonlight, Limelight, and LU1 (Last Update).

    I believe that 10.1.4, or 10.1.5 was the first OSX version to de the default of OSX on an Apple system, in 2002, and it was around that same time that all work on OS9 ceased.
     

Share This Page