Derailed steam engine. "Back on topic folks." The word "bish" in the top right corner. Could be referring to mad-Otaku, womanly-man idols of gushing animé fangirls?
Okay, okay, fine.
What kind of features would you be looking forward to in Mac OS X v10.4 Ocelot? And not just obvious fix-ups like metal consistency?
Classic is done for the most part. The only changes being made at this point are very minor bug fixes.
Classic doesn't "compromise" Mac OS X at all. If you don't use it, it's as if it wasn't even there to begin with. Remember, Classic (like so much else in Mac OS X) is just another app; its presence doesn't hamper anything else.
Remember that there are thousands of old programs that will never be updated and must forever run in Classic. If anything, now is the time for Apple to finally make using Classic a bit more transparent an experience, now that all major developers have jumped into supporting Mac OS X.
I use classic all the time for random little things like resedit or old apps I never got updates for.
I've also never understood the motivation of the 'kill classic, it's old!' crowd. It's not like it has any effect on you if you don't use it. Just delete the system folder and be done. Folks like me will continue to use it, and you can just forget it exists.
I can't imagine Classic going away. For one thing, Apple keeps refining it into a more and more reasonable OS X citizen - it just recently got double-buffering for all windows and a greatly improved launch time. For another, there are still more Mac OS than OS X users out there, and Classic is a great big carrot for them to upgrade (especially, but not uniquely, in education). Even after OS X becomes the dominant Mac platform - which will be a matter of years - it will require minimal effort to keep Classic going, with a significant payoff in terms of backward compatibility. It will be sort of like 68K emulation hanging around long after the last 68K machine shipped (although, to be fair, part of that was because significant swaths of Mac OS still used 68K code! Classic, however, doesn't, and it still has the 68K emulator).
Those who don't need it can simply not install it - I dropped Classic with Jaguar and never looked back. But for the many who don't have that luxury for whatever reason (needed apps or fun games or whatever), it's a significant feature.
The last OS that can run on a 68040 is 8.1, and the last OS that can run on a 68030 or lower is 7.5.5. However, 8.5 through 9.2.2, which are PowerPC only, still are mostly 68k code as far as I know. And I think that's why they got progressively slower with each release instead of faster.
II ci can run 7.6.1
I 'thought' one of mine is running 8.0. But, I must be wrong. I could walk 40 feet and see, but I'm too lazy.
That it does. I just checked Low End Mac which has lots of detailed information on really old Macs, and it appears as though the only 68030s that aren't approved for System 7.6 are the ones with the mixture of 32-bit and 24-bit ROMs. So the IIcx, SE/30, and older machines can only run 7.5.5. Of course, any version of 7.5 or 7.6 will be really slow on a 68030, except perhaps a IIfx.
I honestly can't believe the support that Classic is getting on these boards. I haven't let a client use it since Jaguar launched over a year ago.
10.4 will be Jan 2005 at the earliest. It will send Classic support to the shallow grave it deserves. Anyone needing needing OS 9 by that time needs to seriously reconsider their computer habits anyway.
I disagree. I think Classic will hang around more or less indefinitely... think about it...
They've got MacOS 9 running successfully on top of, and interacting with, a UNIX environment. Until they ditch that core right out the window, there's precious little they can do that would fundamentally screw that up.
As long as we have MacOS X more or less the same as it is now, Classic should be a no-brainer. Maintenance should be simple. What do they gain by killing it? Nothing. What do they gain by keeping it around? Plenty for the next couple of years, and customer goodwill as the years progress and people get nostalgic for Shufflepuck, etc.
I honestly can't believe the support that Classic is getting on these boards.
Never underestimate the importance of legacy to a platform.
Quote:
I haven't let a client use it since Jaguar launched over a year ago.
Its suitability for professional work is debatable (although its stability and compatibility have both been improved since Jaguar bowed in), but not everyone who'd be interested in Classic is a pro - especially now that Quark has pretty much told their user base to use InDesign with XPress 6.
Quote:
10.4 will be Jan 2005 at the earliest. It will send Classic support to the shallow grave it deserves. Anyone needing needing OS 9 by that time needs to seriously reconsider their computer habits anyway.
Bah. Dark Castle forever!
It will cost nothing, or next to nothing, for Apple to support it. It's just an application now. It's important to MacOS users to know that they can run (almost) all their old applications even if they end up ditching them after using OS X. As the old jazz saying goes, once you get the audience in your car you can drive them whereever you want to. First, though, you have to get them in your car, and there are currently some 20 million people whose productivity applications, documents, games and habits are all in some flavor of MacOS.
Its pretty consolidated to have WWDC to release the OSX DP, then a few months of tweaking, etc... presto, X10.x release comes out from other side a few months later...
And it is interesting to think about how long it'll be before you can't run the Mac OS on a 32-bit Mac anymore. The last 68k was sold in September of 1996 - the PowerBook 190. 68ks were supported until OS 8.5, released in September of 1998.
I wonder when the last 32-bit Mac will be sold? I guess it'll some form of iBook, a few years from now... two years later there may no longer be 32-bit support.
That it does. I just checked Low End Mac which has lots of detailed information on really old Macs, and it appears as though the only 68030s that aren't approved for System 7.6 are the ones with the mixture of 32-bit and 24-bit ROMs. So the IIcx, SE/30, and older machines can only run 7.5.5. Of course, any version of 7.5 or 7.6 will be really slow on a 68030, except perhaps a IIfx.
Mac512k: System 6 (with software hack)
MacPlus: System 7.5.5-Slow as molasssess!!!
Mac IIci: Mac OS 8.1 (with hack)!!!
Power Mac 6100: Mac OS 9.2 (with hack)!
Power Mac 7600: Mac OS X 10.1 (or 10.2 with proc upgrade)!
Comments
Originally posted by Brad
Derailed steam engine. "Back on topic folks." The word "bish" in the top right corner. Could be referring to mad-Otaku, womanly-man idols of gushing animé fangirls?
Okay, okay, fine.
What kind of features would you be looking forward to in Mac OS X v10.4 Ocelot? And not just obvious fix-ups like metal consistency?
::eyeing Apple furiously::
? innovative stuff, too.
Originally posted by Brad
Classic is done for the most part. The only changes being made at this point are very minor bug fixes.
Classic doesn't "compromise" Mac OS X at all. If you don't use it, it's as if it wasn't even there to begin with. Remember, Classic (like so much else in Mac OS X) is just another app; its presence doesn't hamper anything else.
Remember that there are thousands of old programs that will never be updated and must forever run in Classic. If anything, now is the time for Apple to finally make using Classic a bit more transparent an experience, now that all major developers have jumped into supporting Mac OS X.
Agreed.
Originally posted by ryaxnb
Agreed.
Agreed
I use classic all the time for random little things like resedit or old apps I never got updates for.
I've also never understood the motivation of the 'kill classic, it's old!' crowd. It's not like it has any effect on you if you don't use it. Just delete the system folder and be done. Folks like me will continue to use it, and you can just forget it exists.
Those who don't need it can simply not install it - I dropped Classic with Jaguar and never looked back. But for the many who don't have that luxury for whatever reason (needed apps or fun games or whatever), it's a significant feature.
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno
The last OS that can run on a 68040 is 8.1, and the last OS that can run on a 68030 or lower is 7.5.5. However, 8.5 through 9.2.2, which are PowerPC only, still are mostly 68k code as far as I know. And I think that's why they got progressively slower with each release instead of faster.
II ci can run 7.6.1
I 'thought' one of mine is running 8.0. But, I must be wrong. I could walk 40 feet and see, but I'm too lazy.
http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl.../mac_iici.html
I honestly can't believe the support that Classic is getting on these boards. I haven't let a client use it since Jaguar launched over a year ago.
10.4 will be Jan 2005 at the earliest. It will send Classic support to the shallow grave it deserves. Anyone needing needing OS 9 by that time needs to seriously reconsider their computer habits anyway.
Codename? Tiger.
They've got MacOS 9 running successfully on top of, and interacting with, a UNIX environment. Until they ditch that core right out the window, there's precious little they can do that would fundamentally screw that up.
As long as we have MacOS X more or less the same as it is now, Classic should be a no-brainer. Maintenance should be simple. What do they gain by killing it? Nothing. What do they gain by keeping it around? Plenty for the next couple of years, and customer goodwill as the years progress and people get nostalgic for Shufflepuck, etc.
Originally posted by Ensign Pulver
I honestly can't believe the support that Classic is getting on these boards.
Never underestimate the importance of legacy to a platform.
I haven't let a client use it since Jaguar launched over a year ago.
Its suitability for professional work is debatable (although its stability and compatibility have both been improved since Jaguar bowed in), but not everyone who'd be interested in Classic is a pro - especially now that Quark has pretty much told their user base to use InDesign with XPress 6.
10.4 will be Jan 2005 at the earliest. It will send Classic support to the shallow grave it deserves. Anyone needing needing OS 9 by that time needs to seriously reconsider their computer habits anyway.
Bah. Dark Castle forever!
It will cost nothing, or next to nothing, for Apple to support it. It's just an application now. It's important to MacOS users to know that they can run (almost) all their old applications even if they end up ditching them after using OS X. As the old jazz saying goes, once you get the audience in your car you can drive them whereever you want to. First, though, you have to get them in your car, and there are currently some 20 million people whose productivity applications, documents, games and habits are all in some flavor of MacOS.
Its pretty consolidated to have WWDC to release the OSX DP, then a few months of tweaking, etc... presto, X10.x release comes out from other side a few months later...
wash, rinse, dry... repeat...
I'd say more for at least a year from the release of 10.3. That's what it usually is, at least in Ball Park range.
10.2.7-10.3 are Bridge operating systems (32 bit support but not yet full 64 bit)
full 64 bit by 10.3.6, but 32 bit support will live until at least 2008
And it is interesting to think about how long it'll be before you can't run the Mac OS on a 32-bit Mac anymore. The last 68k was sold in September of 1996 - the PowerBook 190. 68ks were supported until OS 8.5, released in September of 1998.
I wonder when the last 32-bit Mac will be sold? I guess it'll some form of iBook, a few years from now... two years later there may no longer be 32-bit support.
Originally posted by KANE
Gentlemen I give you: Cat in a bottle...
<img>http://www.catmine.com/pix/cat_in_a_bottle.jpg</img>
I Call FAKE!
"Bengal"
That is all.
Originally posted by Chopper3
One word;
"Bengal"
That is all.
You mean this?
Originally posted by Stoo
Isn't there an OS X version of Basilisk, the 68040 Mac emulator ?
Yeah, here.
Originally posted by Luca Rescigno
That it does. I just checked Low End Mac which has lots of detailed information on really old Macs, and it appears as though the only 68030s that aren't approved for System 7.6 are the ones with the mixture of 32-bit and 24-bit ROMs. So the IIcx, SE/30, and older machines can only run 7.5.5. Of course, any version of 7.5 or 7.6 will be really slow on a 68030, except perhaps a IIfx.
Mac512k: System 6 (with software hack)
MacPlus: System 7.5.5-Slow as molasssess!!!
Mac IIci: Mac OS 8.1 (with hack)!!!
Power Mac 6100: Mac OS 9.2 (with hack)!
Power Mac 7600: Mac OS X 10.1 (or 10.2 with proc upgrade)!