Will Apple nail the coffin with OS 9.5 ?

Posted:
in Mac Software edited January 2014
Apple/Jobs has declared OS 9 to be dead for developers, but not for consumers. Could this mean that they have planned a "final" version 9.5 to come out with Jaguar?



Considering all the new features and improvents it seems logical they will name Jaguar "10.5" or perhaps something like "MacOS X Titanium" so they can charge a significant upgrade fee for it. It would be an extra selling point if macos9 was EOL'ed with a 9.5 version bundled with jaguar.

It would also be a nice thing to do for owners of "legacy" machines..



Disclaimer:This is pure speculation. It would admittedly be a bad signal to developers to ship a new version of macos 9 with (probably) more work in bugfixing, etc. if it is a "dead" OS for developers. But what are your opinions. Do you think this is just my silly imagination playing tricks with me in a late hour?



Which features would justify a .5 designation in macos 9/classic?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 18
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    I'd be surprised if we see 9.5. Maybe 9.2.3 or 9.2.4 for Classic and/or new hardware compatibility.



    I think 9.2 is the last of the line, though. 9.5 would imply a paid upgrade, and I don't think even Steve Jobs could induce a round of paying upgrades to an OS that he's pronounced dead.
  • Reply 2 of 18
    tokentoken Posts: 142member
    "I'd be surprised if we see 9.5."

    Well, I have been surprised by Apple before



    But I buy your argument to some degree.. It would be most sensible if further improvements/ additions was made in the parts of the OS that had to do with classic/X integration and hardware/peripheral drivers.



    The problem as I see it myself is that Apple is selling hardware and wants to sell new machines that run Jaguar. But it would be a selling point for Apple if a hypothetical macos9.5 was bundled only with Jaguar. Then they could sell it to users with both older AND new machines (if the 9.5 part had enough improvements for legacy users)..
  • Reply 3 of 18
    posterboyposterboy Posts: 147member
    I think the only way we will see more of OS 9.x is as updates to the the classic environment. We may indeed see a 9.5 at some point, but by that time I would hope that Classic is basically gone the way of the Dodo.



    --PB
  • Reply 4 of 18
    jrcjrc Posts: 804member
    I'd like to see Apple sell the rights and code to another company or opensource OS9.x so that somebody else can keep it going.
  • Reply 5 of 18
    I think development of OS 9 as an independent OS is dead. I recall reading some rumors of a rev of 9 not designed to run independently at all, but only inside of X. Marking such a version as 9.5 would differentiate it better from 9.2 better than calling it 9.2.5 or something like that. I can see Apple at some point crippling 9 on new Macs so they can only boot in X while retaining the abiblity to run apps in the Classic enviroment. It'll be a cattle prod for users to move on as well as removing the obligation to test machines running 9.



    Side question: How long till classic is no longer installed on new Macs?
  • Reply 6 of 18
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    [quote]Originally posted by BobtheTomato:

    <strong>Side question: How long till classic is no longer installed on new Macs?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Two years generally, three or more in the education market.



    Just a hunch.
  • Reply 7 of 18
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    I think they are happy with OS 9.2.2 and unless they introduce some major bugs that can only be fixed on the "OS 9" side of Classic, we won't even see another 9.2.x
  • Reply 8 of 18
    tokentoken Posts: 142member
    "I'd like to see Apple sell the rights and code to another company or opensource OS9.x so that somebody else can keep it going."



    THAT is highly unlikely .. imagine some 13 year old kid hacking the code to give it protected, dynamic memory, symmetric multitasking, etc..

    too embarrasing for Apple it would be... <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />



    It makes much more sense for Apples bizznes to integrate it completety in X.
  • Reply 9 of 18
    zozo Posts: 3,115member
    i'm sure there will be constant updates for the next few years. Driver updates (OpenGL), QuickTime, networking, and general optimization/compatibility with whatever version of OS X will be out.



    What will NOT happen anymore is new features. Just maintenence updates and the such. There tens of millions of people out there that will be using OS 9 for a loooong time.



    When I was at the Wall Street Journal here in Brussels, you should have seen the publishing floor. They had macs with OS 7, 8, 9... all together. Its just a tool for them, and with exception of the graphic artists, everyone had archaic machines. But all the had to do was use Quark 3 (they refused to use 4 since it sucked so much)... and Word for text processing. Thats it.



    Annyway. Bottom line, Im sure updates will happen for a while longer.
  • Reply 10 of 18
    x704x704 Posts: 276member
    [quote]Originally posted by BobtheTomato:

    <strong>Side question: How long till classic is no longer installed on new Macs?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    I don't see it going away anytime soon at all (maybe 5+ years or more). Why? Well we can still run Pre PPC apps in OS 9 (and by extension in OS X). They didn't remove this legacy ability & I see no reason why they'd remove OS 9 either. Do I think that 3 years from now G6's (or whatever) will boot OS 9? No of course not (I think they'll stop booting in OS 9 probably when the G5 comes around). But why remove the Classic functionality? Makes no sense. Some old apps & many old games will be used for many years to come. Why remove this ability?



    If Apple wants to make people migrate then all they have to do is stop it from booting in 9, not remove classic support. Therefore I see no reason why they'll intentionally cut classics life span short
  • Reply 11 of 18
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    [quote]Originally posted by Token:

    <strong>"I'd like to see Apple sell the rights and code to another company or opensource OS9.x so that somebody else can keep it going."



    THAT is highly unlikely .. imagine some 13 year old kid hacking the code to give it protected, dynamic memory, symmetric multitasking, etc..

    too embarrasing for Apple it would be... <img src="graemlins/embarrassed.gif" border="0" alt="[Embarrassed]" />

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    If anyone could do that without breaking a lot of applications (such as all the MS applications, which depend on memory not being protected for their implementation of OLE) it would be a 13 year old.
  • Reply 12 of 18
    roborobo Posts: 469member
    [quote]symmetric multitasking<hr></blockquote>



    Woah.. that is a mind bending concept



    The fusion of symmetric multiprocessing and preemptive multitasking, to take computing to a whole new level! Insanely great!







    -robo
  • Reply 13 of 18
    stroszekstroszek Posts: 801member
    I seem to recall that there were rumors/speculation a while back that there were plans for an OS 9.3 and an OS 9.4, but that they might not be stand alone OS's. At least 9.4 would run only as a classic environment. I don't remember the speculation as to whether 9.3 would stand alone or not...
  • Reply 14 of 18
    aquaticaquatic Posts: 5,602member
    9.2.2 needs work. It is solid on my iBook, but "funny" on my B & W G3 rev1. Plain vanilla everything with nothing but iTunes installed, as I haven't even moved my exts/panels/prefs back. Maybe this is 9.2 or iTunes, but when I got iTunes 2.0.4 and 9.2.2, if I leave it on the visualizer in full screen it crashes. Graphics get _really_ weird looking, to the degree where it's almost like when Windoze crashes. Though the visualizer is left on for days, because my free 21" monitor turns "green" (weak solderin joint and I'm lazy) if turned off and then on. This is just an example. I've heard terrible things about data loss etc. on MacFixIt et al. Someone said this was the worst thing Apple had unleashed on the public. I wouldn't go that far, after all, there was the "puck"! But, even I had data loss, when I upgraded 9.1 to 9.2.2. Prefs were corrupting all over the place. Now I'm on a fresh System Folder, about to begin migrating stuff back.



    I would be thrilled to see a 9.2.3, or 9.3.x.



    How is everyone else getting along with 9.2.2?
  • Reply 15 of 18
    fischerfischer Posts: 35member
    Mac OS 9.5? I think Apple would sooner release OS 9.2.4.0.1.5b Revision 2...



    The bring side? Noone's used such a long version number before - on the desktop, that is. Woohoo! Go, Apple Go!
  • Reply 16 of 18
    the cool gutthe cool gut Posts: 1,714member
    Apple cannot push OS9 past 9.2, because it will give the appearance that it is being developed more then 10.2 is.
  • Reply 17 of 18
    spiffsterspiffster Posts: 327member
    [quote]If anyone could do that without breaking a lot of applications (such as all the MS applications, which depend on memory not being protected for their implementation of OLE) it would be a 13 year old. <hr></blockquote>



    Hey! I'm 13 (well only for 1 more day )! If anyone could give me the money to get the rights to OS 9 I'd love you like a father!!!!



    Well, now back on subject .



    Not being able to boot into 9, and having it run only as classic, would seem like the way to go. Maybe removing some code would speed it up. As others had said, it just doesnt seem right that Apple whould develope an OS it pronounced dead (but then again, CRTs were pronounced dead, but then we get the eMac) <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> .



    I still think that having it run only in Classic would be the way to go. It would ween people off of 9 and still allow them to run their old apps. But not being able to boot into 9 means a major speed bump in classic. As i stated before, maybe removing some code would speed it up some (but i dont know much about OSs yet so dont take my judgement for fact).



    My opinion.
  • Reply 18 of 18
    [quote]Originally posted by Aquatik:

    <strong>But, even I had data loss, when I upgraded 9.1 to 9.2.2. Prefs were corrupting all over the place. ..... How is everyone else getting along with 9.2.2?</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Within a couple weeks of installing 9.2 I lost my entire drive (while it was running it was *quite* flaky). I've heard 9.2.2 is better than 9.2 but I'm not giving it another whack at my data (I had some file backups but I lost all my email, my favorites, and contacts). For the remaining time 9 is on my Mac it will be 9.1 (unless Jag requires it and then I will prolly get a second hard drive for Jag and keep 9.2 locked in its own dungeon...I mean partition.
Sign In or Register to comment.