Is OS X shaping up to be the "new" system 7?

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 37
    ast3r3xast3r3x Posts: 5,012member
    if panther is 64bit adn runs of a 970 i want that too!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 22 of 37
    [quote] if panther is 64bit adn runs of a 970 i want that too! <hr></blockquote>



    One wet dream coming up...







    Lemon Bon Bon
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 23 of 37
    [quote]Originally posted by BuonRotto:

    <strong>Don't forget that Apple essentially jumped from System 1 to System 6. And OS 9 was a stop-gap until X was ready. Really it was 8.7/8.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    How did this happen? Although I've been using macs just about since system 1, back then I was too young to care or even know what an OS was or even less what version I was using.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 24 of 37
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    [quote]Originally posted by ericj551:

    <strong>



    How did this happen? Although I've been using macs just about since system 1, back then I was too young to care or even know what an OS was or even less what version I was using.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Same here, I'm afraid. I think that the origial Mac shipped with System 1, and in the long span between that release and the 128k model, they moved internally through the system software until the 128k Mac premiered with System 6. That's me trying to remember what I've read. I have no recollection of the transition. My Mac OS memories really begin with System 7.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 25 of 37
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    Here's what happened, as far as I know.



    Systems 1-5 were all quite similar. They all ran exclusively on a single floppy disk, and they all allowed only one program to be open at a time.



    System 6 was different... it was revolutionary. It included a new thing called "Multi-Finder," allowing you to run as many programs as you wanted at once, memory permitting. Systems 1-5 had also been released quite quickly, one after the other. In fact, since the 128k and 512k Macs were really just sealed boxes that had no expansion capabilities, getting a new system was a lot like updating the firmware on your iPod - except instead of downloading the update, you'd just bring some floppy disks to your friendly neighborhood Apple Authorized Service Provider, and they'd load the most recent system software for you (for free). System 6 was also free. I think it came out in 1989 or something.



    System 7 came out in 1991. Although you could use a boot floppy with it, it was recommended that you have a hard drive to use it. It had multi-finder enabled all the time, keeping in line with the evolving Macintosh platform. It was also free, just like before, but instead of taking 1-5 floppies, it took something like 8 or 10.



    System 7.5, the first major upgrade to system 7, came out in 1994 or '95... it was shortly after the release of the PPC. So you could actually run a special PPC-enabled version of system 7.1 (version 7.1.2) on a first-run 6100, 7100 or 8100. 7.5 came out soon after, and just before the release of the G3 in 1997, 7.6 came out.



    The long-anticipated OS 8.0 came out in 1997, along with the G3s. The rev. A iMac used 8.1, and the rev. B used 8.5 which was the first to fully support USB.



    It's kinda funny to think that the original iMac used a system so old, it's even usable on an old 68040. People have even hacked OS 8 onto some 68030s. What's more... the last 68040 Mac was the PowerBook 190, which was released in 1996, just a year before the G3 came out.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 26 of 37
    jmoneyjmoney Posts: 133member
    All I know is, my very first computer was a Mac SE and I loved the hell out of it. I spent so many hours staring at that thing, doing everything from creating my own banners (printing em out on my style writer) to playing games like the Manhole and MacMan (kinda like PacMan but with a lil Mac guy).. those were the days!



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 27 of 37
    One of the above post hit on a very good idea.

    Calling 10.11 10.12.



    However I wonder if Apple would be sued when it hit

    10-10-220?



    [ 01-19-2003: Message edited by: Mac X ]</p>
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 28 of 37
    bradbowerbradbower Posts: 1,068member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>Mac OS 11



    our OS goes to eleven!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Haaaaahahahahahaahahah. Good one!
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 29 of 37
    OS Xtreme



    OS X Extreme



    share the horror
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 30 of 37
    lucaluca Posts: 3,833member
    Holy crap. "OS Xtreme" or "OS X Extreme" is pretty bad... maybe "OS Xtreem!"



    Of course, Apple seems fond of the word "extreme" nowadays... Quartz Extreme, Airport Extreme...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 31 of 37
    outsideroutsider Posts: 6,008member
    [quote]Originally posted by Luca Rescigno:

    <strong>Holy crap. "OS Xtreme" or "OS X Extreme" is pretty bad... maybe "OS Xtreem!"



    Of course, Apple seems fond of the word "extreme" nowadays... Quartz Extreme, Airport Extreme...</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Don't forget Price Extreme and Delays Extreme.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 32 of 37
    <a href="http://www.dosxx.com"; target="_blank">Mac OS Dos Equis</a>
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 33 of 37
    serranoserrano Posts: 1,806member
    [quote]Originally posted by applenut:

    <strong>Mac OS 11



    our OS goes to eleven!!!</strong><hr></blockquote>



     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 34 of 37
    groveratgroverat Posts: 10,872member
    I say "System Ten".
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 35 of 37
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    Systems 1-5 went by really quickly. Systems 2 and 5 were so terrible that they were recalled and replaced as quickly as Apple could manage, and System 3 was basically just a shim until Apple could roll out what became System 4.



    MultiFinder first appeared as a third-party hack during the reign of System 4.



    I for one hope that OS X is very little like System 7. There were only a couple of good releases, the 7.5.x series was plagued with bloat, performance problems and silly technologies and stability problems that 7.6 only began to address.



    I assume that OS X will be with us for a long time, but as the new Mac OS, not the new System 7. So instead of System 1 - OS 9, we'll have OS X 10.1 - 10.9, and so on. I can only hope that Apple doesn't start losing focus around 10.7 like they did last time.



    As for what I call it, I just call it "OS Ten."



    [ 01-23-2003: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 36 of 37
    [quote]Originally posted by T'hain Esh Kelch:

    <strong>

    'cause Steve just looooves sci-fi movies, and Mac OS Y sounds quite futurish..

    </strong><hr></blockquote>



    Y not go straight for OS Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 37 of 37
    [quote]Originally posted by Mac X:

    <strong>One of the above post hit on a very good idea.

    Calling 10.11 10.12.</strong><hr></blockquote>

    Ten Eleven? This is not a 24/7 store U Know..



    Either way, the name has already been settled. "Mac OS Eleven"
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.