Snow Leopard The Death Of Mac As We Know It

Discussion in 'Apple, Inc and Tech Industry' started by mscriv, Sep 11, 2009.

  1. mscriv macrumors 601


    Aug 14, 2008
    Dallas, Texas
    Full Blog Entry here.

    I check this blog every now and then and the guy has some pretty good stuff. I thought this article/entry was interesting.
  2. NT1440 macrumors G4


    May 18, 2008
    I hate purists. They are still macs, there is no special criteria to make a computer a mac other than being made by apple and branded as such.
  3. mscriv thread starter macrumors 601


    Aug 14, 2008
    Dallas, Texas

    Did you even read the article/blog entry? He's not advocating a "purist" perspective at all, just simply recounting the journey of Apple/Mac and commenting on the evolution of the company and its products.
  4. Nugget macrumors 68000


    Nov 24, 2002
    Houston Texas USA
    Eh, seems sort of inflammatory and misguided to me. Things change and technology evolves. For instance, he says:

    Sure, Apple claimed for years that PPC was superior to Intel. I guess the inference here is that now Apple is lying to us, or has somehow gone against their previous position on the subject. Pfft. That's misleading and hyperbolic.

    PPC was superior to Intel for years. Now it's not. Not by a long shot. Would we seriously all be happier had Apple stubbornly refused to adapt to the changing CPU world? I think no. No, we're a lot better off with portable Macintosh computers that run cool and long on tiny batteries - and with Mac Pros that have fast memory and don't require boutique liquid cooling solutions.

    His whole point that Macs aren't Macs any more is myopic and, well, sort of puzzling. The best evidence he can come up with is that we're not really using Macs because the CPU has changed and because we can't run WordPerfect any more. Seriously -- that's his argument. WordPerfect. Let that one roll around in your head for a bit. Is that a sane criteria?

    The move from PPC to Intel is no more damaging to the "Mac" gestalt than the move from 68K to PPC. The loss of WordPerfect is more reflective of the fact that WordPerfect has been abandoned by the marketplace, not because it's the litmus test of what makes a Mac a Mac.
  5. Nugget macrumors 68000


    Nov 24, 2002
    Houston Texas USA
    "simply recounting" wouldn't claim that "The Mac is dead." (with oooooo underlining) and be titled "The end of the Mac"

    He's doing a lot more than just providing context. He's carving out a purist position and making a judgement on the current state of the Mac.
  6. NT1440 macrumors G4


    May 18, 2008
    No hes saying its not a "true" mac anymore because its built up from NextStep. That sounds pretty purist to me. But yes, he did a nice summary of the evolution of the mac.
  7. mscriv thread starter macrumors 601


    Aug 14, 2008
    Dallas, Texas
    Wow! You guys are so serious. :confused: Don't make me accuse you of being oversensitive fanboys. ;)

    I think the article is more tongue and cheek then you folks realize. The guy is a huge Mac advocate and the comments about Wordperfect are simply recounting his personal history with the mac as a student. Of course companies and their products evolve, that's his whole point and he ends with this:

    Relax, it's a historical point of interest piece, not a criticism of Apple or a pining away for "the good ole' days". The point is that Snow Leopard closes the chapter of what was the original Mac. He's not saying it's a bad thing, just noting the change and actually praising Jobs for his advancement of technology and retaking of his original company.

    Everybody take a deep breath... Hold it... Release... Now don't you feel better.
  8. NT1440 macrumors G4


    May 18, 2008
    ....No one said it was a criticism of apple. Only a purist mentality, which I dislike.
  9. Anonymous Freak macrumors 603

    Anonymous Freak

    Dec 12, 2002
    I despise people who get all 'purist' about the switch to Intel, yet they only came to the Mac very late.

    For me, "The Death of the Mac" could be more explicitly traced to one of two events:

    The demise of the PowerBook 190, the last of the 68k machines.

    The release of System 7, which was different enough than previous Macintosh operating systems as to have the effect of killing the original. (The whole 24-bit vs. 32-bit memory thing being the major consideration here.)
  10. NT1440 macrumors G4


    May 18, 2008
    Products don't die unless they are discontinued, merely evolve.
  11. rmansfield macrumors newbie


    Aug 7, 2007
    Simpsonville, Kentucky
    FWIW, Michael is interpreting my post correctly.

    I wrote the post in fun. I'm not dissatisfied with the current state of "Macs" at all. I'm not trying to promote a "purist" agenda. I don't long for the days of the PowerPC or the classic OS. In fact, I'd say that my current 15" MBP is the best computer I've ever used. I bought Snow Leopard on the day it was released--in fact the local Apple Store sold it to me an hour and a half before they officially opened for business, so I may have been the first person locally to buy a copy. All that to say, I'm very happy with the way the Mac is progressing.

    The post simply originated a few weeks back when watching the movie MacHeads. As the history of the Mac was being recounted (which most of us here are very aware of) and as all the old Macs were being showcased, I simply thought to myself, "Wow, those machines have very little connection with current Macs other than the name." I pondered that a while and eventually wrote my thoughts down.

    There's a much cleaner break with the past when it comes to the Mac platform than if one were to make a similar comparison with the Windows platform--and I believe we Mac users are the better for it.
  12. nick9191 macrumors 68040

    Feb 17, 2008
    The death of the Mac that sucked ass (OS 9) and the birth of the Mac that was actually good (OS X).
  13. Flynnstone macrumors 65816


    Feb 25, 2003
    Cold beer land
    I have a Mac.
    Many actually.

    On my iMac I run WordPerfect (sometimes) still. But mostly run QuattroPro.
    yeah via Parallels.

    A processor is just a piece of silicon that chews bits.
    I think the processor that chews bits without apparent slowness is best.
  14. NT1440 macrumors G4


    May 18, 2008
    What was wrong with the pre OSX days?
  15. michael.lauden macrumors 68020


    Dec 25, 2008
    this is kind of common sense/old information to those who 'pride themselves' in owning apple computers.
  16. Jelite macrumors 6502a

    Feb 16, 2008
  17. polaris20 macrumors 68020

    Jul 13, 2008
    I didn't much care for it personally. wasn't very cross-platform friendly, not as stable (in my experience). I go back to 8.6.
  18. clevin macrumors G3


    Aug 6, 2006
    its bs, does anybody really expect PPC to be supported forever? Sacrifice the HDD space of all the new users, just for the sake of small fraction of people? Get real.
  19. jaw04005 macrumors 601


    Aug 19, 2003
    There was a lot wrong with the pre-OS X days. The now defunct "Classic" Mac OS had successor problems beginning in mid-1980's that lasted until Mac OS X was released in 2001.

    Let's take a trip down memory lane:

    There's "Pink" (1986), Apple's attempt in the mid-1980's to create an object-oriented next generation operating system to succeed System 6. Pink faced development hell and was eventually sold to IBM. IBM renamed it Taligent and briefly sold it in the mid-1990's. By 1998, IBM abandoned it.

    There's "Blue" (1986), Apple's other attempt to succeed System 6. It was supposed to ship in 1989, but also faced development hell. It finally shipped in 1991 as System 7.

    There's "Star Trek" (1992), Apple's attempt with Novell to port Mac OS 7 to Intel processors. Star Trek was killed when Sculley resigned as CEO, and its resources were put into "Capone."

    There's "Capone" (1994), which became known as System 7.5. Unexpectedly, System 7.5 became Apple's answer to Windows 95. It ended up serving as the primary operating system until mid-1997.

    There's "Copland" (1994), Apple's second attempt at creating a next generation operating system. It also faced development hell and despite hype from Apple's management, never succeeded in becoming an actual product. Copland was such a miserable failure, Gil Amelio killed it in 1996 after almost three years of development. Instead, Amelio went hunting for a outside operating system to replace the aging Mac OS.

    There's BeOS, run by former Apple executive Jean-Louis Gassée, who was partly responsible for the failed Copland project. Gassée wanted 200 million for BeOS, but Apple was only willing to pay 125 million. Therefore, the Apple board killed the deal.

    There's NeXT, Steve Jobs' troubled rebound company he created after being fired from Apple. NeXT had a next generation operating system based on NeXTSTEP known as OpenStep. Apple's board paid some 400 million dollars to acquire NeXT and Steve Jobs returned to the company as an adviser.

    Apple announced that it would ship an operating release every six months until its next generation operating system was released.

    There's "Harmony/Mac OS 7.6)" (1997) - Mac OS 7.6 was the first Mac OS to drop the System moniker. Additionally, it added new underpinnings that would later be reintroduced in "Tempo."

    There's "Tempo/Mac OS 8" (1997), originally named System 7.7, "Tempo" was initially a minor update to System 7.6. However, since Copland was killed and OpenStep wasn't a shipping product, Amelio decided to market System 7.7 as Mac OS 8. Mac OS 8 shipped in mid-1997 just days after Steve Jobs orchestrated a board room coup to fire Amelio. Amelio resigned days later.

    There's "Rhapsody" (1997), the next generation version of OpenStep that was to replace Mac OS 8. This again faced development hell as Apple and NeXT engineers ported OpenStep to the Mac platform. Rhapsody included a new Mac-like GUI and additional features that were not part of NeXTSTEP or OpenStep. At this point in time, Rhapsody was expected to be a consumer OS.

    There's "Allegro/Mac OS 8.5", (1998), since Rhapsody wasn't ready, Apple went ahead and shipped a minor update to Mac OS 8. "Allegro" became Mac OS 8.5. It introduced support for GUI themes (although no built-in themes shipped with the final release). It also included additional performance improvements and a new search application known as a Sherlock.

    There's "Rhapsody" again (1998), Steve Jobs announced that Rhapsody would ship as Mac OS Server 1.0 and to much surprise and disappointment there would be no consumer version of the operating system. This was likely because developers did not want to rewrite their applications in Yellow Box (what became Cocoa since Carbon didn’t exist yet) and the “Blue Box” environment in Rhapsody wasn’t up to consumer standards. Instead Rhapsody development would be forked into "Darwin" the underlying open source operating system that would become the basis for Mac OS X. Apple would later announce that they’re adding a stop-gap API, known as Carbon, and a more user-friendly “Blue Box” known as the “Classic Environment” to Mac OS X to appease developers. And that Mac OS X would be a consumer release.

    Finally, there's "Sonata/Mac OS 9" (1999), While internally positioned as a stop-gap between OS 8.6 and Mac OS X, it was billed as a major release. Mac OS 9 was the first Mac OS operating system to be heavily marketed since Mac OS 8. It introduced features such as Keychain, Software Update, VoicePrint password, Sherlock 2 and the original version of Apple's online web services known as "iTools.”

    9.2.2 was released in December 2001 to finish off the classic Mac OS operating system. In May 2002, Steve Jobs announced Apple had ceased development on Mac OS 9 and all future development would be on Mac OS X.

    In conclusion, classic Mac OS was hell and took forever to get away from. :D Looking back, it's amazing at how many different directions Apple and the Mac could have went if some of their failed replacement operating system projects had just worked out.

    Oh well. Some 12 years later, we finally got our next generation Mac OS.
  20. MisterMe macrumors G4


    Jul 17, 2002
    A trip down massive misinformation.
  21. Michael CM1 macrumors 603

    Feb 4, 2008
    As someone who works in an office with Panther running Classic, A-FRIGGIN-MEN. I used to be an Apple hater, and I probably had good reason in the pre-OS X days. But even I the PC fanboy was impressed when I first saw Mac OS X. It keeps improving as time goes by and is pretty much the mojo behind Mac's increased market share.

    Most of us really don't care what's inside a computer as long as it works. I can easily tell the speed difference between my C2D MacBook Pro and my dad's iMac G5. Add the benefit of dual-booting Windows -- I don't do it, but it's an option -- and you can see a reason or two why Apple switched.

    And speaking of stupid legacy software, that's what holds Microsoft back a lot. MS tries way too hard to support every Windows application ever written, which increases the size of Windows and wastes time that could otherwise be used to make improvements. I have read that Windows 7 will not support native DOS apps, but why that was still done with even XP is beyond me. Most people running crap that old won't want to spend money upgrading the OS, so it's very counterproductive.
  22. mofunk macrumors 68020


    Aug 26, 2009
    hmm I still run OS9 on one of my Macs. I'm sure it works 10x better than Win98 or WindowsMe if I can only find one to compare. :eek:
  23. justaregularjoe macrumors 6502

    Nov 28, 2008
    This blogger's post is pointless, insomuch as the except I read. He makes no argument. He has a conclusion, but the rest of that post is purely recounting history. WTF is he going on about? How does the most leading edge update to (yes, arguably) one of the best OSs in existence mean the death of mac? Does the writer only consider Mac to be a PPC/Motorola compatible OS? If so, he is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.
  24. FakeWozniak macrumors 6502


    Nov 8, 2007
    It hit me the same way...

    The article is more a history of major architectural change. So what. If you like the old Mac Plus, you can buy one on Ebay for $50 and run System 6.0.8.

    The Thread Starter's choice of Thread Title seems poor and suggested something inflamatory IMHO.

    I would argue, however Joe, that the best OS of all time was Apple IIe/IIc/IIc+ with ProDos 8. :D :D :D
  25. eawmp1 macrumors 601


    Feb 19, 2008
    I programmed for the Apple ][. Don't miss it a bit.
    I listened to music on a reel-to-reel. Don't miss it a bit.
    I lived/practiced in a an era before some modern vaccines. Don't miss it a bit.

    We tend to look back with nostalgia, but forward with anticipation. Back in the Apple ][ day you could have given me Snow Leopard and the ability to run it, I would have jumped at the chance. All you whiners grow up and accept progress.

Share This Page