When will 10.x be like 9.2?
Bear with me.
Wasn't sure how to title this but essentially what I'm asking is what version of OSX will we finally get the majority of kinks out.
Granted it took Apple a long time in tweeking and perfecting it's OS. I remember the big leap to 7.0, then to 8.5 and then 9.0.
Today, OS9.2 is pretty complete...when will OSX reach that point.
I suspect Jaguar is not that point.
Wasn't sure how to title this but essentially what I'm asking is what version of OSX will we finally get the majority of kinks out.
Granted it took Apple a long time in tweeking and perfecting it's OS. I remember the big leap to 7.0, then to 8.5 and then 9.0.
Today, OS9.2 is pretty complete...when will OSX reach that point.
I suspect Jaguar is not that point.
Comments
It is way beyond 9.2 in a lot of areas and far away in a few. Jaguar is a big step in the right direction. Now we can expect for the next big revision (Tiger??) : the return of metadata and a lot of goodies.
When will OS 9 have true multitasking, a real VM, memory protection, opensource web tools, opensource databases, unix foundation, samba server,extreme graphics accelleration, system wide PDF support,world class java support blah blah blah....
<strong>Bear with me.
Wasn't sure how to title this but essentially what I'm asking is what version of OSX will we finally get the majority of kinks out.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The question you're really asking is "at what version will I be hard-pressed to think of any feature which was in 9.2 which isn't in X?"
The answer, I think, is Jaguar.
The spit and polish found in the 9.2 GUI is the result of over 10 yrs of tinkering. I don't think it will take that long for Apple to achieve that in OS X. In my opinion, the classic OS wasn't that special until System 7. It truly beat the crap out of it's competitors but it wasn't much before then. although 8 brought platinum, it wasn't until 8.6 that the platinum GUI really shined and everything since then has been incremental.
this is how i see things:
X = change from 6 -> 7
10.1 = 7 -> 8
10.2 = 8 -> 1
i think things are going to change dramatically from here on out with dramatic underhood improvements. carbon will continue to mature and eventually, we will not see a difference between the two.
it's been stated often here but let's not forget, because of mismanagement, lack of focus and a crappy OS, apple hasn't had the opportunity to truly innovate the OS in years. X allows for new opportunities and Jaguar is just the first step. :cool:
na
Not that 9.2 is better or has more features than 10.x as some have hastily retorted.
But the tweeking period to get 10.15 to a more finished and refined state.
Perhaps it'll be 2 or 3 more minor revisions before then. I just hope we don't need to get to OSXI before it's there.
But it's true that OS X does lack some of OS 9's features and little details that made it so sweet. Jaguar will bring OS X closer, but I think one more major point update will be needed after Jaguar before OS X drives a stake through the heart of OS 9.
If you meant basic stuff like interface speed, Jaguar is definitely getting closer. It's still slower because everything's still getting rendered in software (Quartz Extreme only affects 2D compositing... it doesn't accelerate drawing window contents) but Jaguar is considerably quicker than 10.1. Mounting servers on a LAN is now up to OS 9 speeds, printing is improved over 10.1 (although still feels a little clunky... but undoubtedly better) and there seems to be a lot more overall integration going on. OS X has so far felt like a core OS with a bunch of components attached to it... Jaguar feels (at least to me) more like it's a unified OS, which is a Good Thing?.
I think Jaguar will most likely make a lot of people happy. Don't expect it to completely revolutionize your concept of personal computing or anything, but I think most people comparing it to OS 9 will be pretty satisfied.
The UNIX interface philosophy and #)@#(%#(@) directory structure make OS X harder to use (such as in Open/Save dialogue boxes, and I'm glad I synched OS 9/X Desktop folders, and the horizontal scroll helps, but still, the layout is crap.) UNIX still shows through. I am very thankful to be able to run perl with BBEdit and do other NIX things but OS X still seems less friendly and harder to use in certain ways. The directory structure and where things need to be is one example.
OS X is still to "delicate." I want it to become indestructable like OS 9. Yes, I know OS X never crashes (I've never seen a kernel panic, how sad!
OS X still has "problems." Until it can work without people either having problems or complaining about lack of features or general nuances, OS X is still immature.
Jaguar will bring us halfway there.
<strong>How about the ability to put stuff where we want it?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Why is that needed?
[quote]<strong>The UNIX interface philosophy and #)@#(%#(@) directory structure make OS X harder to use (such as in Open/Save dialogue boxes, and I'm glad I synched OS 9/X Desktop folders, and the horizontal scroll helps, but still, the layout is crap.)</strong><hr></blockquote>
What's your huge problem? So you can't put it in those 10 or more folders (some of which are hidden by default) reserved by UNIX... so what?
Seriously, new users must be confused when installers mess up because they moved Mail.
KidRed, funny, but the "Model T" we're talking about is actually faster than the the new car. You can't say that about many cars these days... Of course, they don't make 'em like they used to
Jaguar is great. But the point of this thread was asking about when X will have feature/speed/maturity parity with OS 9. There are some things X is better at but that was not the point of this thread! That was funny though KidRed
fine. us jaguire users will buy you a beer when you get to mythical other half years from now.
<strong>I think Jaguar will most likely make a lot of people happy. Don't expect it to completely revolutionize your concept of personal computing or anything, but I think most people comparing it to OS 9 will be pretty satisfied.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Funny, working with 10.1 has already revolutionized my concept of personal computing.
<strong>How about the ability to put stuff where we want it?
The UNIX interface philosophy and #)@#(%#(@) directory structure make OS X harder to use (such as in Open/Save dialogue boxes, and I'm glad I synched OS 9/X Desktop folders, and the horizontal scroll helps, but still, the layout is crap.) UNIX still shows through. I am very thankful to be able to run perl with BBEdit and do other NIX things but OS X still seems less friendly and harder to use in certain ways. The directory structure and where things need to be is one example.
OS X is still to "delicate." I want it to become indestructable like OS 9. Yes, I know OS X never crashes (I've never seen a kernel panic, how sad!
OS X still has "problems." Until it can work without people either having problems or complaining about lack of features or general nuances, OS X is still immature.
Jaguar will bring us halfway there.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Directory structure seems fine to me. I like having a "home" directory that keeps my preferences and documents all together. It makes backing up easier. And what is wrong with putting apps in the Applications folder? That's not hard to do.
Compared to Windows, OS X's directory structure is very logical. OS 9's directory structure was more simple, but OS 9 was much less powerful as well.
<strong>Chucker, people like you and me aren't who I'm worried about. Nor are Windows users, they're used to be ****ed with by their OS (j/k)
Seriously, new users must be confused when installers mess up because they moved Mail.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I don't think it's that much of a problem really. What's really become worse is that you can's just drag "System Folder" straight over to the Trash... err I mean the Zip drive (yeah, it's been a while I've seriously worked on a Mac
Now it won't work that simple on Mac OS X either, unfortunately.
But if you're worried about OS X's directory structure, look at that of a more typical UNIX, such as FreeBSD or Solaris. Or of that of a UNIX clone, such as Linux.
in terms of simplicity, i don't think X will ever achieve that kind of ease of use.
apps do all sorts of wierd things when they install files with kernal mods and other things into the main library (system) folder w/o really telling the user what is going on. very few of these installers come with an uninstall option.
i still wouldn't go back to the old ways. personally, i love X.
na
Most of the grievences will be lost after Apple releases Jaguar. I feel we may be over half way there at this point. OS X is a phenomenal OS, and Jaguar shows us some ways Apple can innovate. It is only a baby step, and I am excited to see where we can go from here.
<strong>Copying a file to my zip drive doesn't bring my system to its knees any longer.
</strong><hr></blockquote>
Painful memories...
Barto