Only booting into OS X in 2003

gigaflop

Check it out people. Direct from Apple's web site. iCal and Rendezvous news too at the site.



<a href="http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/sep/10macosx.html"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/sep/10macosx.html</a>;

dasdasein

[quote]Originally posted by Gigaflop:

<strong>Check it out people. Direct from Apple's web site. iCal and Rendezvous news too at the site.



<a href="http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/sep/10macosx.html"; target="_blank">http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2002/sep/10macosx.html</a></strong><hr></blockquote>;



This sounds a lot like new processors are coming. If it's any kind of 64Bit CPU it just makes no sence to port OS 9.

cubedude

Couldn't it be done with a firmware update? 64bit processors don't seem likely until spring 2004 to me. Could be wrong.

kickaha

*NEW* computers will lack the ability to boot into 9.



*OLD* computers will continue to do so.



Sheesh.



All this means is that some new technology that 9 was never designed for is coming down the pipe. RapidIO, HyperTransport, PCI Express, 64-bit chips... take your pick.



[ 09-10-2002: Message edited by: Kickaha ]</p>

keda

I think new HW is likely, but don't take this as THE sign. The move is a ploy to get people using OSX. Right now, most people who buy new Macs keep them in OSX.



[quote] Over 75 percent of customers using these Macs have elected to keep Mac OS X as their default operating system. <hr></blockquote>



This move will make that number 100%. Its pure marketing.



But, SJ did say something about OSX giving Apple 'option' in respect to HW. So, once 9 is out of the picture, Apple's hands are untied.

jimmac

Hey, they gotta move on sometime. Supporting two OS's wastes a lot of resources. This will take care of the last stick in the muds. They may lose some customers but, at this point they would have lost those people anyway.

multimedia

Is he saying that the next version of OS X will prevent any of us from booting into 9 from X? Or is he saying that the next refresh of hardware will prevent native 9 booting? So far all reports are very incomplete ? failing to explain what the announcement really means. Since 80% of Mac users have never even heard of OS X (;&gt , how the hell is Apple going to sell that core constituent new Macs if they won?t boot OS 9?



This sounds like one of the dumbest moves ever announced in the history of personal computing. ?We think 80% of our customers are WRONG! Therefore we will cater to the other 20%.? It doesn?t get any dumber than that.



And I?m a Jaguar user.

hmurchison

I'm with Kickaha



"sheesh"

zarafa

This clears the way for a new filesystem, at some point, should that be something Apple has in the works (otherwise, the filesystem would have to accommodate OS 9 booting as well). Presumably Classic would either use disk images or be fooled into thinking a new filesytem was HFS+ via the use of a VFS module.

jll

[quote]Originally posted by Multimedia:

<strong>Since 80% of Mac users have never even heard of OS X (;&gt , how the hell is Apple going to sell that core constituent new Macs if they won?t boot OS 9?</strong><hr></blockquote>



Since over 75% of the Macs sold this year boots in Mac OS X those 80% aren't exactly buying anyway.



[ 09-10-2002: Message edited by: JLL ]</p>

boy_analog

From my narrow perspective as a new Framemaker user, this is a worry, since FM doesn't support installation via Classic. You have to boot into 9 to install, then you can reboot into X to run it.



Adobe and Apple are undoubtedly aware of this. Despite the fact that we're dealing with a relatively small market here, I sure hope that Adobe issues a patch in time. It would be pretty embarrassing if FM couldn't install on the new Macs.



Are there any other big apps in this situation? I hear that an OSX-friendly Quark is coming along soon.

alpha mac

about time