Future Hardware and X Only Booting

[PosterBoy]

Query:

If future machines do not support booting into OS 9, I assume that it will be a firmware issue right? In anycase, would they still support OS 9 booting from a CD? Becase if they don't then that renders my Norton Utilities Disk almost useless as the main reason I use it is to do a full disk optimise which can only be done by rebooting from the CD, which has an OS 9 system on it.

So yes, do you think that they would be able to boot 9 from a CD?

--PB

[Ensign Pulver]

Please see my existing thread
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002450" target="_blank">here</a>

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: Ensign Pulver ]</p>

[Defiant]

now it's time to throw in an IBL.

I always wanted to do that. thanks !

[Matsu]

I'm so glad I gave In Before Lock an nice sweet abreviation -- now your chances of getting in (before the lock) are that much improved.

This is actually the 2nd or 3rd term I've contributed to net lingo/the English language, though this one is an acronym for a pre-existing term, so it's either 2 or 3, depending on how you look at it. It's funny, a term that I coined back in high-school has achieved a fairly wide local penetration, but I can't say it lest I should inadvertently identify myself.

Anyway, far be it from me to usurp the nascent thread for my own self agrandizement, back to your regularly scheduled techno-bickering.

[blue2kdave]

IBL ... PMPC


(padding my post count)

[Miami Craig]

For all you guys that are obsessed with the "in before lock" thing, see <a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=11&t=000297" target="_blank">this thread.</a>

<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

Youll notice that the mods are getting very fed up with it, plus the whole IBL crap adds nothing to a conversation and destroys threads that normally wouldnt get closed.

[quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:
<strong>
Henceforth, 'In before lock' posters are subject to a 1-day suspension of posting access.

I'm also going to fiddle with the censor filters. </strong><hr></blockquote>

Keep it up, douche bags.

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: Miami Craig ]</p>

[Matsu]

Did you mean Douche bag? This is a bad thing, analogically speaking, why? A device whose whole purpose is to spray vaginas with its liquid. Not so bad really, except that they wouldn't typically be clean vaginas... <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" /> Or maybe they would be, if the ladies prefer a regular and thorough cleansing? Now had you said enema bag, well, there's just no rescuing that one, unless you're into that sort of thing.

Anyway, you miss the point, we've just made a histrionic contribution to the linguistic fabric of the internet, this is a more lasting contribution than any of our specu-speak regarding Apples, Jobs, Microshaft, IBM, Moto's suckage, etc etc... I mean, that's all acceptable, but a little leeway is in order for such a momentus occasion even if it isn't exactly on topic.

Personally I don't care if we have more than one thread about a topic, and it's not my decision either way, so whatever happens, happens.

Back to the topic at hand, which isn't really future hardware either. I suspect that when OS9 is really locked out of all but classic mode operation, it will be at such a time as nearly all apps/utilities have a mature OSX version and that the machines have enough power to run older software convincingly in classic. That doesn't solve your specific problem, but if you really want to stay in OS9 you shouldn't waste the money on a new machine. I don't think Apple will retro-actively disable OS9 booting on older machines. If they tie some kind of firmware patch to, say, 10.3, they same applies -- you're using OS9, so just leave everything as is, future OSX versions won't be for you (at least not on that machine)

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: Matsu ]</p>

[blue2kdave]

[quote]Originally posted by Miami Craig:
<strong>Keep it up, douch bags.

</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's hilarious. If you are going to insult me, check your dictionary douche-bag. Ouch, I mean DOUCH!

[Miami Craig]

Leave it to you guys to attack a mistake in spelling or grammer when something you've done has been questioned. Rather than discuss and try to make an argument for why you should be able to say IBL and other uneccesarry comments like that, you point out the fact that i left out an e by accident in a word.

There are a bunch of people on these AI boards that need to do some growing up (me included probably, but at least i dont say things like IBL)

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: Miami Craig ]</p>

[Matsu]

Hey, I posted about the topics at hand, all of them!

[PosterBoy]

[quote]Originally posted by Ensign Pulver:
<strong>Please see my existing thread
<a href="http://forums.appleinsider.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=1&t=002450" target="_blank">here</a>

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: Ensign Pulver ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

That's great and all, but your existing thread doesn't answer my question and now this thread is all but useless what with the folks now more concerned with their In Before Lock bullspit.

Next time freaking read before you just link your thread. It is supposed to be an information exchange, not a populatrity contest. If you can't answer the question then don't post a response. if there are duplicate threads then a Mod will take care of it.

That said, can anyone answer my question or should I just start a new thread?

--PB

[PosterBoy]

[quote]Originally posted by Matsu:
<strong>Back to the topic at hand, which isn't really future hardware either. I suspect that when OS9 is really locked out of all but classic mode operation, it will be at such a time as nearly all apps/utilities have a mature OSX version and that the machines have enough power to run older software convincingly in classic. That doesn't solve your specific problem, but if you really want to stay in OS9 you shouldn't waste the money on a new machine. I don't think Apple will retro-actively disable OS9 booting on older machines. If they tie some kind of firmware patch to, say, 10.3, they same applies -- you're using OS9, so just leave everything as is, future OSX versions won't be for you (at least not on that machine)</strong><hr></blockquote>

It's not that I want to keep using 9, in fact I have been using X full time since 10.0.x, but Norton and a few other utilities that come with a boot CD come with an OS 9 Boot CD. It is established that new computers wont boot from 9 on the hard drive, but will they boot from a Norton CD? This is what I want to know.

--PB

[Defiant]

no. I don't think you'll be able to boot from the cd.

get drive 10

[lundy]

{Racing thru terminal}

{Showing boarding pass}

{Racing down ramp}

{Door still open}

{Takes seat}

[Matsu]

That could supply some new IBL opportunities for everyone to take part in?

But seriously, It'ss to soon for you to garner anything by the way of serious advice since Apple has not made or yet announced such a move. IF you stick to 9 all your nine stuff will work, and if you move to X it will work in classic, but system level stuff like boot discs and the like may not, you'd probably have to buy X versions in that case.

[Ensign Pulver]

[quote]Originally posted by PosterBoy:
<strong>

That's great and all, but your existing thread doesn't answer my question and now this thread is all but useless what with the folks now more concerned with their In Before Lock bullspit.

Next time freaking read before you just link your thread. It is supposed to be an information exchange, not a populatrity contest. If you can't answer the question then don't post a response. if there are duplicate threads then a Mod will take care of it.

That said, can anyone answer my question or should I just start a new thread?

--PB</strong><hr></blockquote>

So I'm supposed to "freaking read before I link", but you're not supposed to "freaking search for identical existing threads before you start your own"?

[TommyBrando]

[quote]Originally posted by Ensign Pulver:
<strong>

So I'm supposed to "freaking read before I link", but you're not supposed to "freaking search for identical existing threads before you start your own"?</strong><hr></blockquote>

Dude, stfu. If anyone should worry about closing threads and linking to other ones that the topic can be discussed in, its the mods. Its not your job to do that.

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: TommyBrando ]</p>

[blue2kdave]

[quote]Originally posted by Miami Craig:
<strong>Leave it to you guys to attack a mistake in spelling or grammer when something you've done has been questioned. [ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: Miami Craig ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Well, let's see now, Matsu and I were having a little fun about these silly abbreviations, and you called me a "douch" bag. And you say I attacked YOU? I don't mind being questioned on my content, but don't expect to insult me and get no response. Both of my posts were meant as humor, and don't think yours are.

I've have seen many of these IBL posts, and found them funny. It is a way to comment on the threads, like this one, that seem irrelevant or retreads. I find it better than attacking the poster directly, and it adds a little humor. They do no harm, and often accurately predict the lock.

[blue2kdave]

[quote]Originally posted by TommyBrando:
<strong>

Dude, stfu. If anyone should worry about closing threads and linking to other ones that the topic can be discussed in, its the mods. Its not your job to do that.

[ 09-24-2002: Message edited by: TommyBrando ]</strong><hr></blockquote>

Actually, I think he's got you there whether you want to admit it or not.

[Amorph]

I might as well try to salvage something out of this thread.

All Apple has to do to break OS 9 booting on new hardware is not write enablers (hardware-specific drivers) that allow OS 9 to run on that hardware, and change the hardware enough that existing enablers won't work.

The Norton CD you have, PosterBoy, won't work on the new hardware any better than OS 9 would off a hard drive. If Steve meant what he said, the new machines will not boot OS 9, by any means.

That said, Drive 10 just received an update, and you can be sure that the various vendors are hard at work on X-native disk utilities. If you get one of the 2003 machines, you'll have to rely on those.

[FlashGordon]

[quote] Leave it to you guys to attack a mistake in spelling or grammer when <hr></blockquote>

It is spelled g-r-a-m-m-a-r. You douche bag.

[PosterBoy]

[quote]Originally posted by Amorph:
<strong>I might as well try to salvage something out of this thread.

All Apple has to do to break OS 9 booting on new hardware is not write enablers (hardware-specific drivers) that allow OS 9 to run on that hardware, and change the hardware enough that existing enablers won't work.

The Norton CD you have, PosterBoy, won't work on the new hardware any better than OS 9 would off a hard drive. If Steve meant what he said, the new machines will not boot OS 9, by any means.

That said, Drive 10 just received an update, and you can be sure that the various vendors are hard at work on X-native disk utilities. If you get one of the 2003 machines, you'll have to rely on those.</strong><hr></blockquote>

Thanks, that is what I was looking for, and what I had assumed. I probably wont be getting one of the 2003 machines, due to the fact that my funds are still drained from the iBook purchase back in the spring, I just wanted confirmation.

And Ensign Pulver, if your thread had a quick and easy answer to my question, i wouldn't have started this thread.

--PB

[TommyBrando]

[quote]Originally posted by FlashGordon:
<strong>

It is spelled g-r-a-m-m-a-r. You douche bag.</strong><hr></blockquote>


I respect what miami craig is saying. All you jerk-offs can do is make fun of his typing errors. Grow up.
<img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" /> <img src="graemlins/oyvey.gif" border="0" alt="[No]" />

[Amorph]

OK, since the question was answered, that's enough of that.