[quote]Originally posted by Bogie:
<strong>Anyways, my thought is that Apple is very likely to do this [release a Mac that does not support Mac OS 9.x as startup software]. Market turn over is slow as many of you have mentioned.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple says that this is the fastest turn-over that has ever been. Does anyone seriously believe that all those people still using early G4's, G3's, 4400's, 7500's, etc will move to OS X before they either buy new hardware or they get a version of OS X that runs reasonably fast on their hardware?
Let's examine what will happen if the new Macs don't run OS 9. User A still runs OS 9 on a G3/233. It doesn't run OS X with decent speed, so he never tried it. He has been saving up for a new G4 and will try OS X on it, but wants to be able to run OS 9 as well (for the stuff that doesn't run on OS X or to run it permanently if OS X doesn't cut it for him). Then Apple comes out with OS X-only Macs. Suddenly the risk of buying a new machine and trying to move to OS X increases tenfold. What if a crucial piece of software (that doesn't (yet) have a replacement) doesn't run on OS X? What if he doesn't like the current version of OS X? What will happen if his SCSI burner isn't supported?
So user A decides to stay with OS 9 which works for him and never tries OS X. Oh yes, I forgot to mention that the sales of Macs will plummet and Apple will make a big loss.
[quote]<strong>And developer turn over is also slow.</strong><hr></blockquote>
In what universe? I think it's going quite well. Most problems exist when Apple doesn't deliver the tools to do the job. See the problems Retrospect had before Apple finally allowed a proper backup/restore. See the problems Roxio had with unsupported hardware, missing driver support and bugs in the OS. See the problem audio developers have because the beautiful API's that were promised are still MIA (after 18 months).
[quote]<strong>Now many of you mentioned that some customers have work based around Mac OS 9. And this Mac OS X only policy would disturb their upgrade cycles, no doubt in my mind. However, ask yourself why those customers have not moved to Mac OS X already and you will come to find that its not because they prefer Mac OS 9 but that they require it for compatibility.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Some do actually prefer OS 9 for having many features that OS X doesn't. But that aside, you simply cannot ask companies to switch to OS X in one big whoop. Let them dual-boot. Let them run some of the new Macs they bought with OS 9 and some with OS X. If OS X is really the best OS, they will switch to it. If it ain't, Apple should improve the OS, not bully users to OS X (or Windows
[quote]<strong>OK, so who provides this compatibility for Mac OS 9 and who will provide it for Mac OS X? Developers right?</strong><hr></blockquote>
Apple is the first too blame. They should make sure that you can do everything on OS X that you can do on OS 9. If you cannot, Apple shouldn't be forcing people, they should listen to consumers and improve the OS.
[quote]<strong>So where does this leave us? It indicates that Apple will have to continue to pressure developers to bring up their products to Mac OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Wrong. Most developers are already moving to OS X and the ones that aren't (Quark) are getting some heavy competition from competing products (InDesign). Of course, they is also quite a bit of software that is abandoned and never will move to OS X. Some of it won't run on OS X. If a new Mac doesn't dual-boot, people that use this software might not buy a new Mac.
[quote]<strong>Well, what else is left for Apple to do? Developers will continue to develop software for Mac OS 9 for sometime, but they will slow their efforts in accordance with the speed at which their Mac OS 9 market shrinks. The biggest influence Apple has over the size of the potential Mac OS 9 market is the introduction of new Macs to that market as adding more Mac OS 9 Macs will maintain and increase the Mac OS 9 market size.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The biggest influence Apple has is to improve OS X so users will actually want to move to it and will ask/threaten developers to create OS X-native apps. Don't forget that an OS X-native app can be OS 9-native as well. Developers will move to Carbon long before the majority of users run OS X. They don't have to abandon OS 9 users before they can profit from the OS X users.
[quote]<strong>Therefore, to shrink the Mac OS 9 market and thereby pressure developers further to drop Mac OS 9 support, Apple will need to drop Mac OS 9 startup support on Macs. The sooner they do this the sooner all applications [including custom software] will move to Mac OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
The OS 9 market will shrink far faster when there finally is a version of OS X that runs with decent speed on the most Macs it supports. Your solution is far less effective then an improved OS X, has grave risks and pisses loyal users off.
[quote]<strong>If Apple never made a Mac that would not boot Mac OS 9 you can bet that few developers would make Mac OS X only software, and few users would use only Mac OS X.</strong><hr></blockquote>
MacOS X only? Why? Are you one of those Cocoa zealots? What's wrong with Carbon exactly?