toggle

AAPL Stock: 562.29 ( -3.03 )

MacNN News

Apple pulls back on OS X-only plan for Macs

updated 08:45 am EST, Mon December 16, 2002

Apple has beginning in January 2003.

by MacNN Staff

print

email

(62)

TAGS :

industry

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

Comments

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:09am | report spam | close Reply |
**A** Power Mac G4???

If they release updated Power Macs but keep selling one of the currently-available models just because it will boot into OS 9, you know who's gonna buy that? NOBODY. They'll just stick it out with what they've got until Quark gets their s*** together-- or maybe they'll finally cast off the Quark chains and switch to InDesign. Like that one guy sarcastically said in an article I read last week, "Yeah, I'm really gonna buy *yesterday's* Power Mac to run [Quark's] app."

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:14am | report spam | close Reply |
hallelulia

they finally figured it out, again... listening to the customers?
there isn't enough software out there to run a biz on X yet, at least in my part of the world...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:19am | report spam | close Reply |
No surprise

I've been running OSX for almost a year now, and generally like it, but IMHO it still needs work before it's ready to be an exclusive system, particularly in the area of printing. Support for Epson printer features is poor, postscript printing produces variable results. Printing/DTP was the area where the Mac originally made it's mark, and Apple's lack of attention to this is a real problem.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:24am | report spam | close Reply |
They are NOT pulling back

People are misreading or misinterpreting what Apple has said. They are NOT pulling back on their OS X-only plans for NEW -- **NEW** -- Macs in 2003. This means new models as in new logic board designs, not "new" as in the box has never been opened. NEW designs of the FP iMac, Power Mac, and PowerBook will be OS X-boot only. A quote from the email from my Apple rep: "Apple will continue to offer our Education customers some configurations of the current eMac, iBook, and CRT iMac product lines that will boot into Mac OS 9 until June 2003."

SOME configurations of SELECT machines. C'mon, people. Use some logic -- there's no way Apple would be redesigning their upcoming OS X-only boards at this late stage just to accomodate a minority of people who don't want to switch yet. They're only saying that they'll keep some older stuff available for a few more months.

Clive
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2001

0

12/16, 09:50am | report spam | close Reply |
ARE pulling back

They are pulling back because they are now making provision for MacOS 9.x machines to be available, which was never on the cards before.

Does anyone really believe the statement they've given out "80% of our professional users have MacOS X as their default OS"?

There's no minority in the number of people not using X, IMO. If Apple wants to have a really bad sales year in 2003 then the way to do it is to introduce X-only Macs.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:57am | report spam | close Reply |
hallelulia

they finally figured it out, again... listening to the customers?
there isn't enough software out there to run a biz on X yet, at least in my part of the world...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:59am | report spam | close Reply |
Re:They are NOT pulling b

That minority of people who don't want to switch yet was, last I heard about 80% of Mac users...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:09am | report spam | close Reply |
Keeping old stuff around

Apple is probably going to do what they did with the original 15" CRT iMac. They kept it around for another season, available only to educational customers, because the new hardware (flat panel iMac) didn't fit some of their needs. When the eMac came out, it was finally killed.

Maybe all-new towers will be coming out in January, and Apple will keep one of the older OS 9-bootable towers around for those who can't abandon Quark (and other legacy apps like ProTools, etc.) just yet.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:10am | report spam | close Reply |
All NEW Macs

I think all that they did here was re-release that previous statement in a way that people better understood. The original statement said that all NEW macs released after Jan 1 would boot OS X only. I seriously doubt they had any intention on releasing a new model iBook, a new model PowerBook, a new model PowerMac, a new model eMac, AND a new model iMac. All on the same day. This just means that some of the current machines will still be available, but once those models are upgraded, they will be OS X only.

Anyone dragging their feet in upgrading to OS X is doing themselves a great disservice anyway. Quark will run in Classic, My CAD software isn't OS X native, but I still use OS X, I just run my CAD in Classic. And have seen no performace hit because of it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:26am | report spam | close Reply |
a bit on quark and OS 9

its now almost 2003. Mac OS 9 was state of the art in 1999. Today, Mas OS 9 is dead, it has no future other than the apple relic section on eBay. As for Quark, its time for the world to leave the darkness that POS program cast on design and publishing. the future is InDesign running on Mac OS X.

for all of the "i have to run quark in OS 9", then keep using your current machine. the program will never take advantage of any new hardware innovations Apple develops.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:28am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: All NEW Macs

>The original statement said that all NEW macs released
> after Jan 1 would boot OS X only.

We know what they said, but now they are specifically saying they will have 9.x machines available - this is pulling back from the scenario where no one knew what would be available.

>Anyone dragging their feet in upgrading to OS X
>is doing themselves a great disservice anyway.

Yep, I'm doing myself a real disservice in not having to fight against beta software and a beta OS.

>Quark will run in Classic, My CAD software...

It doesn't sound to me like you're speaking from a position of authority. If your thing is CAD then it seems unlikely to me that XPress is your bag too. XPress has problem with Classic, in that Classic printing and networking is f*cked.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:34am | report spam | close Reply |
Funny...

I have been running my business for the last 8 months in OS X...and I can do Graphic Design, Publishing, Pre-Press, Web Design, Multimedia, and my accounting(not to mention play a game here and there), without ever even using Classic.

I really am not sure what the hold up it. As a design professional, Quark really is not worth missing out on the advantages of OS X, InDesign is Just as good if not better, and for those who have resistance from a press, then find another, I have plenty where I am that will take ID and PDF for printing, and I have never had a problem.

"You have nothing to fear but fear itself"

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:38am | report spam | close Reply |
luddites vs zealots

Hey I love the graphics and some of the features in OS-X, but when I look at available options for things like peripherals, accounting (to send out bills?) & contact managers (to find clients?) the offerings make me head past even OS-9 to my trusty peecee...

Machismo X users might want to widen their viewing angle...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:44am | report spam | close Reply |
Good move

Their OS X only sells to the same minority of users. They wanted to force people to use it and now they realize they can't even do this.

Maybe, I say, MAYBE OS X is a decent OS, but Apple doesn't produce machines fast enough to run it.

Aqua is ugly. I hate those horizontal gray lines everywhere on the palettes, windows, etc. Dimming buttons are annoying and the dock has too many flaws.

Apple should have make a "platinum appearance option" so the OS could run at a decent speed on any Mac.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:45am | report spam | close Reply |
re: keeping old stuff

Someone wrote: "Apple is probably going to do what they did with the original 15" CRT iMac. They kept it around for another season, available only to educational customers, because the new hardware (flat panel iMac) didn't fit some of their needs. When the eMac came out, it was finally killed."

Umm ... the CRT iMac hasn't been "killed." It's still available as I type at the Apple Store for Education starting at $699.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 10:47am | report spam | close Reply |
NOT pulling back

Someone wrote: "They are pulling back because they are now making provision for MacOS 9.x machines to be available, which was never on the cards before."

It was always in the cards. Read what was written oh-so-clearly before -- the plan was and IS for all **NEW** models to boot into OS X only. Only older models will still boot into OS 9 as was the plan all along. The message from Apple was simply reinforcing that idea; this is not a concession and has been the plan from the moment the OS X-only announcement was made. Get it? NEW machines. NEW MACHINES. Duh.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:01am | report spam | close Reply |
ARE PULLING BACK

Mr Moron wrote:
>It was always in the cards. Read what was
>written oh-so-clearly before -- the plan was
>and IS for all **NEW** models to boot into OS X only.

What was said was that new models would only run X, we all understand what "new" means in this context, dont't we - models with different specifications to thos shipping now. ie a 1.25GHz shipping next month is not "new".

But, what Apple are now saying is that they will continue to make some 9.x configurations available until 30th June - this was *never* said before. This leads us to suppose that Apple will either have no "new" PowerMacs to ship between now and July, or that they will be selling obsolete hardware.

Both of the above represent something of a first - since Apple "does not comment on unannounced hardware" and, to my recollection, has never shipped an obsolete PowerMac once new models have been announced.

This *is* pulling back.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:11am | report spam | close Reply |
luddites vs zealots

Hey I love the graphics and some of the features in OS-X, but when I look at available options for things like peripherals, accounting (to send out bills?) & contact managers (to find clients?) the offerings make me head past even OS-9 to my trusty peecee...

Machismo X users might want to widen their viewing angle...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:11am | report spam | close Reply |
Get a clue

"We know what they said, but now they are specifically saying they will have 9.x machines available - this is pulling back from the scenario where no one knew what would be available."

Only ignorant morons would think that all Mac OS 9 bootable Macs would suddenly disappear in January 2003.

Right now I can still go out and buy brand new, factory sealed, full warranty previous model Macs that were being manufactured last January despite the fact that ALL product lines have been updated once or twice since then. Why should 2003 be any different?

Besides, as someone else pointed out, not all product lines are going to be updated in January. The current 2002 models will continue to be available in full supply and fully Mac OS 9 bootable until new 2003 models are introduced; after new 2003 models are introduced, there will be less supply of the current 2002 models, but they will still be available for some time.

Apple has not said that they are going to develop a new 2003 model Mac that will boot to Mac OS 9; they have said that you will still be able to buy select 2002 model Macs until July of 2003. How is that big news to anyone?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:16am | report spam | close Reply |
Read the whole article!

Some people go through their whole lives with blinders on

"Apple will continue to offer our Education customers some configurations of the current eMac, iBook, and CRT iMac product lines that will boot into Mac OS 9 until June 2003," the statement says.

Apple will also be offering its design professionals that use Quark the option to buy a Mac that will boot into OS 9.

"To accommodate a minority of our pro customers still running Mac OS 9 applications such as QuarkXPress, Apple will continue to offer a 1.25 GHz dual processor Power Mac that will boot into Mac OS 9 until June 30, 2003."

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:50am | report spam | close Reply |
Run a business on OS X

"there isn't enough software out there to run a biz on X yet, at least in my part of the world..."

For people doing print jobs on Quark and working with very specific configurations, i.e. printer drivers, press software, I won't recommend to upgrate to OS X. I'll encourage you to switch to PC. You get power (Great Athlon processor) for a small amount of money and you can work on the latest OS (Windows XP) and your favorite apps (Quark).

When your business is about web development, web services, digital media, video, there isn't an alternative to OS X. OS X is robust and has ALL the necessary tools to work with new media.

I personally run a business entirely on OS X. from customer management (Mail.app, Office, DayLite, MYOB), to software and web development (project builder, Dreamweaver MX, OS X Server, Java, Tomcat, PostgreSQL). And goodies including iSync with my cellphone -that always impress the clients.

I had OS X as a primary OS for more than a year. I frequently run my laptop for a couple of days before rebooting. I couldn't do this in 9 years with OS 7, OS 8, OS 9. In my office, the only computer that reboots a couple of time/days runs...classic.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:54am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: luddites and zealots

You can't get peripherals for OS X? Contact Managers? Give me a break! How many contact managers and printers do you need?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:59am | report spam | close Reply |
Another moron wrote:

> Right now I can still go out and buy brand new,
> factory sealed, full warranty previous
> model Macs that were being manufactured last January

Not from Apple you can't

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 12:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
OS X Beta?

I just read a message that said that OS X is beta. Where the h*** are you coming from on that one? OS X meets or exceeds the functionality and speed of 9 in just about every concievable way. Just because Quark is dragging their feet and a couple of other seldomly useful applications are being left behind doesn't mean that X is beta. For the everyday user, all we need is right here in X, just like in 9, but it looks better, doesn't crash and is the present and future of the Mac platform. So you'd better get used to it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 12:30pm | report spam | close Reply |
You won't get any...

pudding if you don't eat your greens.

So you'd better get used to it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 01:10pm | report spam | close Reply |
s**** this...

I'm goin' back to punch cards. I'm not putting up with that buggy, bloated DOS or Mac System 1.

At least with punch cards, if I want to move text, I just move the card - no bugs there!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 01:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
X is in the majority

I work in biotech. Of the four companies I have seen Macs at, all are running X on essentially every machine. The exceptions are clearly dead ends due for replacement, such as one machine too old to run X, which also runs an old version of FileMaker. Once they move the app it runs to a recent version, the machine will be replaced with an X machine.

So - clearly sufficient to run a business on, and clearly not a beta.

For what it is worth, our consulting group now is about 70% Mac, 85% on the biotech side.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 01:13pm | report spam | close Reply |
What they really mean

What apple really means is that the new machines they announce in january won't ship until march..april..or maybe may. So until then you can buy a new machine and boot into os 9 all day long.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 01:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
New CEP - new os

Given that IBM has said that the 970 will not run the older OS without tweaking, I suspect that Apple has both hard and soft deadlines to move to X.

9 has trouble competing with Windows nowadays, as it has not been substantially revamped for quite some years, which means that they are likely concerned about the level of commitment of any company that will not at least carbonize their apps. This has not been a new requirement - they have talked about Carbon for something like five plus years.

The hard deadline is likely the 970 - they are probably unwilling to make 9 work on the 970 architecture. The soft deadline comes a bit before - once their 9 team only needs to keep classic working, they can jettison a lot of code, and stop testing a lot of features. By dropping 9 support a bit before they have to, they can focus on optimal X performance for any 970 machines shipping mid next year.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 01:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
No death of 9

Many people simply don't want to switch now; being a hardware company, this is a wise choice for Apple to make, and is actually of very little surprise considering the adoption rate of X. Realistic estimates of the conversion rates place this number at around 20% by the end of the year). I have no idea where 80% came from in this article, but that figure is bogus. The vast majority of people still need to be able to boot in 9 for something or other, and rumours of its death are greatly exaggerated.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 01:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
OS X

I'm in tech support. The primary reason for "low" adoption rates of OS X among the 25 million or so Mac users is that many of those Mac users are using computers not capable of running OS X. And even lots of people with X-capable computers who bought them before X was released/default don't know anything about X and continue to use whatever version of the operating system their Macs shipped with. Since 10.2 was released, the number of OS X tech support calls I have received have increased dramatically.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 02:17pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: No death of 9

I have no idea where 80% came from in this article, but that figure is bogus.

It's 80% of new buyers - not Mac users in total.

80% of Mac users buying a Mac today use Mac OS X.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 02:20pm | report spam | close Reply |
Figures:

The figures quoted in the article come from specific market segments. It said "Apple's professional customers are rapidly adopting Mac OS X, with more than 80 percent now choosing Mac OS X as their default OS" -- this statement then only represents a subset of Apple total consumer base. The article also said "education customers are rapidly adopting Mac OS X and are now ordering over 50 percent of their Macs with Mac OS X as the default OS". Both of these figures are good evidence that MacOS X is catching on. Those figures don't account for older macs that can't run OS X, which the overall adoption rate does. But given these numbers it wouldn't surprise me if Apple reported that there was a more than 20% overall adoption rate of MacOS X at MWSF.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 03:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple IS pulling back

In fact, Apple is sick of people complaining about osX. So they're dumping it. In January, they'll announce OS 9.3 (code-named "Copeland"). It'll be just like os 9.2 except when it crashes, a dialog will come up with the message: "You should have bought OS X."

In June, they'll announce Mac OS 9.5, but it'll only run on Pentium 4 machines, which will ship from Dell but be Apple-branded.

The following January, Apple will sell the brand-name to Dell and the Mac OS to the Mac Unit of M$, and give all the money back to shareholders.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 03:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
Once again�

Quark dodges a bullet. Why forward-thinking companies and users have to continue to make excuses for this antiquated, lamebrain, customer-unfriendly company, I just can't comprehend.

They will not have a Carbonized version ready for June. Not 2003, 2004, or 2005. So read the news, Mac/Quark loyalists, these guys don't give a rat's a** about you or your concerns. They are concentrating on The Windows market, because it's huge. They want the money, period. OS X is just a f*** in a windstorm to them, and they may have version 6 ready in 2006, but I wouldn't hold my breath.

Now don't get me wrong. I enjoy using Quark, and it's not that I think that Adobe get's all warm and fuzzy when it thinks of the Apple platform either. But at least they are making an effort. Quark can't even manage that.

Sorry to break it to you like this, but honestly, I wish Apple would just say f*** it, let's cut the cord and move on, with or without the whiners and the companies who can't get their s*** together.

9 was great, but X rocks and is the only way to keep the XP lusers from taking the whole enchilada.

Get over it. 9 is done. Now get back to work,

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 04:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Apple IS pulling bac

The following January, Apple will sell the brand-name to Dell and the Mac OS to the Mac Unit of M$, and give all the money back to shareholders.

Sounds like a sound exit strategy - I hope Mr. Jobs and his cronies are reading this...maybe Apple's stock might top $15 if this were only real!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 04:41pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple pulling back

I would like to live long enough to see all the world running M$ on a Dell Box. I believe the movie is called Armageddon.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 04:57pm | report spam | close Reply |
Like some whine with that

Whine #1:
Waaah! I don't want to use a beta operating system!
(OS X is now no longer beta)
Whine #2:
Waaah! I cant switch because I need Office!
(Office X ships)
Whine #3:
Waaah! I cant switch because I need Photoshop!
(Photoshop 7.0 ships)
Whine #4:
Waaah! I cant switch because I need Quark!
(Quark finally ships)

See a pattern?

Now taking nominations for what OS 9 hangers-on will gripe about once Quark ships...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 05:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
OS9

Since I have a printer, film scanner, page scanner, and several RS-232 devices that cannot run under OS X or Classic - and since I would like one of the new killer dual processor Macs - there may be a solution out there.

How about running OS 9 on a Mac emulator that can run under Windows that can run under Virtual PC that cqan run under OS X!

Alternate solution - I will just keep my beige G3 upgraded to a G4 that works with everything I have.

Shape up Apple - there is something wrong with this picture.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 05:08pm | report spam | close Reply |
X usage _is_ near 80%

I know a fair number of both corporate and home Mac users, and only one still uses OS 9. She is in education support, and wants to use at home what she supports at school. By this time next year, they will be on X and so will she.

There is still some classic in use out there, and will likely be until a few games get replaced, but as far as booting in 9, I have not done so since early this year, and most people I know have not done so since Jaguar shipped.

So, among the dozen or so home users, and 50 or so corporate users scattered across four clients, the rate appears to be 98% X-only.

Scott

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 09:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
Get real

Apple wants 20% by the end of the year - yet they've suddenly got 80% running X? Yeah right.

I run support for three different studios, combined that's about 100 Macs - every one of them capable of running X. Only one of them is however, and that's a server.

Stop with the excuses about "older macs unable to run X". The G3 came out in 97, that's nearly six years ago - no professional org is running machines older than that. At least 75% of the user base can run X, but at least two thirds of them choose not to.

Here's my feelings on X: great, rock solid server, leave it alone, it just works. Neat integration for all things web, which cannot be beat.

However, IMO, the 10.2 Finder still needs a lot of work, spinning beachballs tend to lock it up - a lot. Great that you can switch to another app, but not so great when it's the Finder you want to use. Classic networking and print leave a lot to be desired - 'nuff said.

Support-wise... definitely getting into the realm of being unsupportable by the users on the ground. When people start asking "why can't I move/rename/delete this file/folder" then there's something wrong.

So ease of use has gone right out the window.

I hear a fair amount of "everything crashes all the time"/"I don't understand what went wrong" stories - where the cure is to reinstall the OS from scratch (that's PC land, isn't it, not for us Mac heads!?).

BTW, what I write above is not contradictory, 1 X Mac in 100 in the studios I support is correct - the other examples of X are from friends and our test machines.

Example of how to break the X Finder - put a couple of thousand files in a folder, scroll to the bottom (wait for the spinning beachball of death to do its thing), now try to marquee select some files... (problems with large numbers of files in folders were fixed with 8.5 - now they're broke again).

I've got some more like that.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
yeah, yeah

I just tried your suggestion, but my largest folder only contained 875 files - jpegs with some movies. All with custom icons (thumbnails). Some stuttering occurred, but nothing at all out of reason (500MHz G4, 1.3GB RAM). Marquee selection was also no problem.

There are certainly some bugs and adjustments to OS X, but I haven't found anything that can't be solved or worked around. OS 9 had its share of awkward behavior as well, as does Windows. I've got an old SCSI Epson scanner running, as well as an old Epson inkjet. It was an adjustment that took time, but I'd expect such an adjustment when migrating to a completely different OS like OS X. Some maintenance habits (like rebuilding the desktop) have been replaced by new habits (like repairing permissions). But the adjustment is worth it - whenever I think I'm fed up with OS X, I just spend some time in OS 9 and I can't wait to get back to X.

Bottom line - OS X will never be like OS 9, so you might as well start finding the solutions that your lab requires. And start enjoying the benefits of X - it will only get better with time.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/16, 11:33pm | report spam | close Reply |
So what?

There is no denying OSX still needs work. It still lacks many functions OS9/8 has had for years. If it's good enough to add, it should be good enough to keep.

These OS9 systems will do little more than continue to run old OS9 apps. There will be no additional functionality or features. 9.2.3 will be nothing spectacular. I'm sure people will be hacking it to run on their G4 upgraded 7300s (sheese).

OS9 is as dead as Windows 95 is. Many people are still using it and some people are still writing apps for it (that probably run on newer/older OSes as well). But there's no surprise people are still using it. The same thing happened when the first PPCs came out. They were slower than the '040 chips they replaced. eventually, '040s became dogs compared to newer PPCs. However, OSX will probably not "feel" as "snappy" as OS9 does on the same machine. But eventually, OS9 will not run on new PMs (like the IBM 970, anyone?) and all will have to adopt X and live with it, like it or not.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

12/17, 12:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: so what?

There is no denying OSX still needs work. It still lacks many functions OS9/8 has had for years. If it's good enough to add, it should be good enough to keep.

Actually, that's not true. There's a lot of people who think the dock isn't good enough to keep. So why should some OS 8/9 'features' be worth adding back in (nothing like adding more instability by hacking in more 'features' - I'm sure you all know of the problems with Apple Menu Items for one). Seriously, half the so-called 'deficiencies' in OS X more revolve around the fact people are just used to the way things were done, no matter how it was. Seriously, the application menu was NOT a great interface device. If you knew it existed at all, it was completely on the opposite side as all the other menus on the screen. And the Apple menu? Flexible, sure. But how many percent of the people knew you could change it? And how many of those actually did? And on top of that, it wasn't very user-friendly to set up. No interface to add items - you had to open the system folder->Apple Menu items folder, then drag an item or alias to there. No way to rearrange stuff without doing stupid tricks with spacing or other funky characters.

Oh, and I love the complaints about OS X not being as 'snappy' as OS 9. Gee, you don't think it has anything to do with the fact that OS 9 could take full control of the processor whenever the h*** it felt like it, do you?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 01:51am | report spam | close Reply |
Get a life

If you are fully satisfied with OS X, good for you. But if you actually believe people stick to OS 9 simply because of Quark, think again. In my company, we rely on third-party extensions and specific software which haven't been ported to OS X. And probably ever won't. We'll have to find replacement solutions, which we are working on.

Now if you are a basic Mac user, maybe OS X is your best choice. If not, in case you forgot, OS 9 is still highly usable.
You should understand that the transition OS9-OSX is far more difficult to go through than going from 68k to PPC. Classic, as good as it may be is not as well integrated as 68k emulation.

As far as saying Quark should go away,
1. this would mean full Adobe monopoly in the DTP branch (with the only exception of Macromedia's FreeHand but no-one hardly ever use it)
2. I still think that the great quality in Quark is its gradual simplicity. InDesign has some great features but I wouldn't go as far as saying Quark has no future.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 04:50am | report spam | close Reply |
Mac emulator

You do realise you can already get a couple of Mac emulators for Mac OS X (no I'm not talking about Classic).

There's a program called vMac, which emulates a Macintosh Plus, you can run System 6 on it.

There's another one called Basilisk II, which will emulate anything from an LC to a Quadra, and can run System 7 through to Mac OS 8.1.

Abeit you will only be able to run very old 68k apps in these emulators - but hey you were asking for backwards compatibility (never said how far back).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 09:17am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: get a life

Finally someone with some sense - 100% agree with this post.

And from the above - the dock really does suck: die, die, die. It may be true that some people didn't know how to config the Apple Menu, that doesn't mean that no one knew how to use it. As far as digging through the system folder to fix it goes - wrong move: just put an alias of the Apple Menu Items folder inside the Apple Menu Items folder - then it's available in the Apple Menu (didn't confuse you did I!?).

App menu, er... I kind of liked that it was entirely separate - and I use the app switcher more often anyway.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 09:19am | report spam | close Reply |
When People...

Start to realize that Mac OS 9 really runs like c*** on the new hardware they'll move to X. OS X is far more impressive on my PowerBook G4 800 than 9 ever will be.

But in order for Apple to really start putting out new cutting edge hardware they have to dump OS 9. To make hardware that still supports 9 is going to keep the hardware specs mediocre at best. No point using 533 MHz RAM, 8X AGP slots, and faster multi processors when OS 9 cannot support it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 10:04am | report spam | close Reply |
X is not like 9

"OS X meets or exceeds the functionality and speed of 9 in just about every concievable way."

No. I have a G3 266, my system is old but I cannot afford to get a brand new Mac. OS X runs very sluggishy on my system. Also, you're not looking at all the software any particular professional uses - I've not seen (and please correct me if I am wrong) a TrueType font converter that can convert Windows TTF fonts into Mac OS Compatible ones, or vice versa. I'm not a musician, but I know many many bands rely heavily on ProTools and whoever said it was old, well, you're not going to convince Trent Resnor to update to a new application, he'll ditch X and stick to 9 until his app goes Carbon. This is how the world works. As for Quark, yes, it's old and complex. I much preferred PageMaker (and still use it), InDesign is a nice upgrade, but it's going to take some time for it to catch on as "mainstream." So, no, you're going to have people whining about the update process because there are tons more apps for 9 that will not see the light of X for some time. In education, for example, there are hundreds of shareware games available for OS 9, hardly any for OS X. Granted X is more controllable in an educational enviroment, I take function for the users (kids) over whether or not I can spy on them (security in X). IMHO of course. "9 is Fine." I can't say that "X is Best" unless you have a shiny new Mac with a G4 chip (even the 500Mhz iBook in my family feels slow under OS X with my "usual" set of apps running - Photoshop, Illustrator, Internet Explorer and DreamWeaver - where in 9 there was no slow down et all.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 10:11am | report spam | close Reply |
Lack of Ed Software

As a k12 school tech person, the real reason schools can't switch yet has to do mainly with student information system software. The biggest vendors, like NCS Learn/Pearson (who make SASI and probably have 60-70% market share) have software that crashes constantly in Classic or doesn't run at all. And we have not heard of any versions for OSX coming out yet... Schools aren't going to buy OSX until teachers can take attendance and grades on their computers like they can with OS9.2... Apple needs to hold these vendors to the grindstone. We are trying, but the phone calls haven't produced....

Clive
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Jan 2001

0

12/17, 10:25am | report spam | close Reply |
Win TT fonts

Miraculous though this may seem, in MacOS X you just drop Windows TT fonts in the fonts folder and they "just work". ATSUI aware apps in 9.x can also use them.

FontLab has also just been released for X/9.x as a Carbonised application: http://www.fontlab.com

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 11:14am | report spam | close Reply |
That's Funny...

"No. I have a G3 266, my system is old but I cannot afford to get a brand new Mac. OS X runs very sluggishy on my system."

Mac OS X seems to run "very impressively" on my Bondi 233 iMac.

"Also, you're not looking at all the software any particular professional uses - I've not seen (and please correct me if I am wrong) a TrueType font converter that can convert Windows TTF fonts into Mac OS Compatible ones, or vice versa."

You can use Windows TTF fonts in Mac OS X without doing anything to them.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 11:18am | report spam | close Reply |
Tired old Argument

You know what, I cannot run my 10 year old scanner on Mac OS 9 because there are no drivers for it. Probably ought to consider a new scanner, AFTER ALL THEY ARE ONLY $75 NOW!

At least you can still run most OS 9 Apps in X, although ideally you should have a Mac OS X version. It is NOT Apple's fault these software companies are dragging their feet. I mean was Mac OS X such a surprise to them? It is 3 years old now. And developers had their hands on it long before that.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 11:23am | report spam | close Reply |
Quark

Should take the "X" out of "XPress" until they have an OS X version shipping....And they need to work on their website....it is SLLLLOOOOOWWW.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 11:35am | report spam | close Reply |
OS 9 is not "dead"

Interesting forum. A lot of whining and stupid generalizations. Mac users aren't anything if they aren't vocal.

Look. I love OS X. But OS 9 is not "dead". Maybe in the sense that, eventually, an OS looses interest with the masses. It becomes "old". Developers stop writing apps for it.

But "dead"? Come on. Just because you're using yesterday's mac, doesn't mean it doesn't work. You are just as productive/unproductive as you always were. h***, I even have an old Mac Plus in my closet. Still works. Still runs OS 4.3. Still has the same apps it had when I was using it. Still lets me get work done. Sure, it's old as h***. Obsolete even. But if I want to use the damn old thing, I can use it. You can scream that this system is "dead" till the cows come home, but that doesn't mean, if I like using it, I can't go ahead and use it if it does what I want it to do.

People who are pushing that OS 9 is "dead", need to get real. YOU might be an OS X fanatic. YOU might see that OS X offers "everything OS 9 does". HOWEVER. Many, MANY people are unwilling or unable to change. Or (gasp!) they are just flat out happy with their current situation. Look how many Quark users are still sticking with Quark, even though they might have to go through hoops (in some cases) to use it.

The point is, stop trying to call OS 9 dead. It's a pointless statement, used more often for people to justify THEIR OWN decision to use OS X. "Use OS X, because it's the future." You know what? Some people don't give a c***. Why do you feel the need to force your decision on others? USE YOUR FRIGGIN OS X if you want to! OR USE OS 9 IF THAT'S WHAT YOU LIKE. It doesn't really matter, so long as your computer is doing what you want it to do.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 11:36am | report spam | close Reply |
OS 9 is not "dead"

Interesting forum. A lot of whining and stupid generalizations. Mac users aren't anything if they aren't vocal.

Look. I love OS X. But OS 9 is not "dead". Maybe in the sense that, eventually, an OS looses interest with the masses. It becomes "old". Developers stop writing apps for it.

But "dead"? Come on. Just because you're using yesterday's mac, doesn't mean it doesn't work. You are just as productive/unproductive as you always were. h***, I even have an old Mac Plus in my closet. Still works. Still runs OS 4.3. Still has the same apps it had when I was using it. Still lets me get work done. Sure, it's old as h***. Obsolete even. But if I want to use the damn old thing, I can use it. You can scream that this system is "dead" till the cows come home, but that doesn't mean, if I like using it, I can't go ahead and use it if it does what I want it to do.

People who are pushing that OS 9 is "dead", need to get real. YOU might be an OS X fanatic. YOU might see that OS X offers "everything OS 9 does". HOWEVER. Many, MANY people are unwilling or unable to change. Or (gasp!) they are just flat out happy with their current situation. Look how many Quark users are still sticking with Quark, even though they might have to go through hoops (in some cases) to use it.

The point is, stop trying to call OS 9 dead. It's a pointless statement, used more often for people to justify THEIR OWN decision to use OS X. "Use OS X, because it's the future." You know what? Some people don't give a c***. Why do you feel the need to force your decision on others? USE YOUR FRIGGIN OS X if you want to! OR USE OS 9 IF THAT'S WHAT YOU LIKE. It doesn't really matter, so long as your computer is doing what you want it to do.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 11:58am | report spam | close Reply |
Tired old t***

>You know what, I cannot run my 10 year
>old scanner on Mac OS 9 because there are
>no drivers for it. Probably ought to consider a
>new scanner, AFTER ALL THEY ARE ONLY $75 NOW!

It's more like my two year old, $10,000 scanner and $50,000 printer don't work at all. And my carefully honed workflow has a few hiccups...

Hmm, what's easier for me to do, switch to X or switch to Windows...

But with your $75 values I wouldn't expect you to understand that anyway.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 12:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
ProTools

I'm not a musician, but I know many many bands rely heavily on ProTools and whoever said it was old, well, you're not going to convince Trent Resnor to update to a new application, he'll ditch X and stick to 9 until his app goes Carbon.

Umm ... http://www.digidesign.com/news/hotnews/PTv6/

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 12:29pm | report spam | close Reply |
ProTools

SIS? One word: PowerSchool. SASIxp blows so hard it's not even funny. Daily updates, then updates to fix modules broken by those updates, ad nauseum. No, thanks. Check out PowerSchool, and I don't say that because it's now owned by Apple. I was a PowerSchool convert before Apple bought the company and it's only gotten better since!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/17, 02:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
Hmmm......

I have a $4,000 Microtek scanner, it doesn't work with OS X either.

However,

My $75 Canoscan has a higher DPI and color rating than my 2 year old $4,000 scanner. It works with OS X and is a lot faster. Plus it is small enough to put in my laptop bag with my PowerBook. Seems kinda silly to spend that much again for the same performance.

Basically, for $75 I've got better performance, and better quality. Looks like $75 is worth a lot more than you think.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

12/27, 10:50am | report spam | close Reply |
oh well

Oh well, yet another Mac OS X snag...
1)Apple cancels copeland project 7 years ago after years of development work. (and cost of 500million plus)
2)Apple buys NeXT OS (based on a 30 year old Unix OS) for another half billion and struggles to get it to work on macs for the next 7 years.
3)Apple says the OLD OS 9 (which is really OS 7 with Sherlock and 19 years of hacks) might be around for just a bit longer, citing yet another lame excuse to cover up fundmantal flaws in the company's racist, ego driven political structure.
Racist Klan Kompanies like apple deserve to die off and pave the way for New technology + ideas.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

01/01, 06:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
Dock

I hate, hate, HATE the Dock and I'm pretty tired of that damn spinning beachball.

Show More Comments

Login Here

OR

toggle

Network Headlines

05/26	Apple updates iOS 5.1.1 release for...
05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple hiring new chip engineers for...
05/25	Third-gen iPad coming to Philippines...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...

05/27	Manufacturing problems delay blue Samsung...
05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/25	Google picks up webOS Enyo team, Open...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/23	Google launches redesigned Search app...
05/22	Leaked next-gen iPod touch part hints...
05/22	Hulu Plus updates with iPad Retina...
05/22	TiVo Stream to push TV to iPhones,...

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Most Popular

MacNN Sponsor

Recent Reviews

iHome iW2 AirPlay speaker

iHome generally isn't known as a luxury brand when it comes to audio, but it is prolific -- the company's docks and speakers are every ...

Logitech Ultrathin Keyboard Cover

One of the iPad's main weaknesses has always been productivity. It's not a question of apps; while it has taken a little time for a na ...

Logitech UE Air Speaker

If maybe a little more slowly than Apple would like, AirPlay is becoming a staple of the wireless speaker market for iOS devices. The ...

Most Commented

10 Most Discussed

Popular News

MacNN Marketplace