Post by: ejc on February 28, 2003, 05:43:00 PM
At advanced age, in 1985, wanted to learn to use personal computer. Friend lent me his SE Mac. Too expensive. Bought Atari. Excellent progs for word processing and DTP. Could understand what happened when I added new progs etc Black/white 19 inch screen much easier to see than B/W stuff on a color screen.
Bought 8500 Mac with OS 8.6 and laser printer cheap seconhand. Updated to OS 9.0.4.
Laser printer died. Could not find new laser in my price range. All new printers required USB. Tried to install USB card on the 8500. Unsucessful. (story for another day)
Bought eMac (17 inch screen). with OS 9.2.2 and 10 X. plus Epson inkjet. Works OK, but I boot only in OS9.
For me, OS X is not relevant. OS 9 rarely crashes. Why give out my hard-earned cash for updates when what I now have is good enough?
Also, I think I have a rough idea of what happens when I install progs under OS 9. From my simple perspective, the underpinnings of OS X are as unfathomable as (and similar to) those of Windows.
When my current hardware/software setup finally reaches its life's end I wonder why I should not become a Window-gazer?. Would save me money as I see it - and I want a good prog that lets me dictate my words directly into my computer. Mac offerings here are reported to be inferior.
For simpletons like me Windows (looks rather like OS X) starts to look like an attractive option.
One big advantage of the Mac is its relative freedom from virus attack. Let's hope the Mac does not gain enough market share to attract the "bio-terrorists".
Peace
ejc
Post by: iGuy on February 28, 2003, 06:44:00 PM
Your comments about OS X being similiar to Windows is inaccurate in my opinion. OS X is Unix and Windows is DOS. OS X looks nothing like Windows XP in my opinion. Some, I am sure. would say differently.
You say you don't have the money for OS X updates but you do have the money to buy a new PC? Doesn't your new eMac come with the latest version of Jaguar already?
Also, when you say your eMac works OK, what do you really mean by that?
Ryan
[ 02-28-2003, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: iGuy ]
Post by: jcarter on February 28, 2003, 07:06:00 PM
I am not saying that X isn't wonderful, just I'm not ready to deal with all the issues.
Then I will purchase a new computer with X installed, and not try to upgrade this whole system with all my old stuff which is working like a charm. I cannot afford a whole assortment of new software and external goodies either.
I don't want to deal with the PC world, so I am just going to wait. Most of my friends are waiting too, we can do our photo stuff , our web stuff, and most of everything, if it aint broke,,,,,,,,,,,
Post by: Xairbusdriver on February 28, 2003, 07:25:00 PM
I assume ejc is talking about upgrades to his programs, since he already has the newest OS upgrades. And that will cost money, usually, and not a small amount, sometimes. Likewise, he also has maybe the newest drivers for the new printer, so I assume that is not what he is concerned about, either.
Frankly, he may be just as happy with a PC. He doesn't really sound like he is a normal happy Mac user. Most of us don't care to do things the way a PC (and its software) make you work. But they are getting better, as more of the Mac GUI is copied.
But, ejc, you must be aware that changing to a PC will mean buying every thing new, except the printer (and that is probably the cheapest part of your investment)!
Since it doen't sound like you are a 'bleeding-edge' user (me niether! ) I don't see what the problem is. You have a great machine, nice size screen, a new printer, and two OS! I'm still in 9.1, '99 iMac 400DV, so I'm further behind you! But I actually enjoy using the Mac! If I didn't, I wouldn't keep/use it.
All I'm saying is, use what you like! Life is too short to worry about what others think about your computer of choice. What they don't know will only hurt them!
Jim C.
Post by: krissel on February 28, 2003, 08:45:00 PM
It shows how different people feel about X according to their needs. And that is the ultimate question. If you are satisfied with 9 and are not forced to use X for your applications, then don't feel like you must.
My Dad now has an eMac with Jag after having spent maybe a year playing with an old performa and 8.1/8.6. So at the age of 84 and new to computers, he has had a lot to absorb. Granted his needs are not complicated and the interaction of the OS and the apps is helpful, but he manages OK and has never used Classic or booted into 9.
On the other hand, yours truly is banging away on an older upgraded 9600 in 9.1 and doing 95 percent of my work under the older system. I do have X on my PB but don't use it much. After reading the above link I feel just fine staying with 9 until I am forced to move to a new machine and X. That will come when the apps I use no longer run in 9. At present they are faster and I don't have peripheral problems with 9 so I am staying there without regret.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on February 28, 2003, 09:12:00 PM
quote:I don't think this is really a new attitude at Apple. They did the same thing, although somewhat slower when they brought out the first Mac back in 94. Did the same thing when they went to the PPC. So it's just a normal progression and in this economy, there are no dollars to waste on support for older systems!
The ADC Compatibility Labs are frequently updated with new hardware and software, and outdated equipment is phased out. As a part of the latest expansion, the labs will no longer support any of the Apple product line before the G3 processor family. This includes Desktop, Mini-tower, PowerBook and All-in-One units. Additionally, support has been discontinued on Apple LaserWriter, StyleWriter and ImageWriter printers and Apple D-15 connector series monitors.
And I hope you will feel welcome to ask questions here about our 'older' machines and systems. That's what most of us like about this place - no pressure to get closer to the 'leading edge!'
BTW, noticed today that the 'OS 9.1' area at MFI has become '9.x and Classic' Might want to update your bookmarks or do it the easy way with URLMP (which is still supporting 9 and even earlier OS's!)
Jim C.
Post by: WDL on February 28, 2003, 09:13:00 PM
All our periphs and software are working beautifully, so there is no incentive or need to move to X.
Dec '02 bought an iBook to allow work-away-from-home. It's set to boot in 9 - X is present but not used.
I'm productive and happy - TTP & DW do my tuneups and all is well in the kingdom.
WDL
Post by: Epaminondas on February 28, 2003, 09:48:00 PM
(1) I am still running MacOS 8.6. Never saw any reason to waste money on that new-fangled MacOS 9, and whatever else it is that may have come later. ;-)
Writing as a fellow Luddite, I see no reason to upgrade a Mac until an application or piece of hardware or speed issues necessitate same.
Planning my next Mac upgrade circa MacOS 10.6.1 ("Hydra"). But, of course, that is only after Mac OS XI.x has been out for a while . . .
(Still waiting for MacOS X to get out of beta ;-).
(2) If cheap is your goal, Linux is your answer. I find that my $199 Walmart Linux box can do almost anything my Mac can do, and do it a whole lot faster. And all the accompanying Linux programs I am using, of course, are free as well.
Debian has around 8000 free packages currently available for download. If that is not enough to keep you busy, well - I guess you can buy some commercial applications too, as you like.
(3) If continuous speech recognition is your goal, Windows may, indeed, be your best bet. I know one gentleman who is a Dragon Naturally Speaking convert (clinical psychologist), and a fellow who gave up quickly in disgust (attorney).
Continuous speech recognition has plenty of pitfalls: before going that route I suggest that you check out a newsgroup or a mailing list or two to get an idea of what you are getting yourself into. You may find the following resources useful:
VoiceGroup ("1437 members")
Voice Users Mailing List
<< Peace >>
Sounds good to me.
Regards,
Epaminondas
_________________________________________________
[ 02-28-2003, 10:52 PM: Message edited by: Epaminondas ]
Post by: Epaminondas on February 28, 2003, 11:13:00 PM
Peace and music,
Epaminondas
Post by: taliesin on March 01, 2003, 04:10:00 PM
Another near neighbour (and I see we've got at least one person new from France too.
quote:Well, I hope your current set-up won't do that any time soon!
When my current hardware/software setup finally reaches its life's end I wonder why I should not become a Window-gazer?
I usually enjoy Mac life on the "leading edge", where I've also bloodied my fingers sometimes, but I also like going "back" into OS 9.x on occasion.
It's too easy to forget that it's a darned good system if you spend all your time in X.
Epaminondas might be right about PCs and speech recognition. I dunno, I do know somebody who's happy with ViaVoice on a Mac, but that's with OS 10, and some years back I tried Dragon Dictate on a PC, which soon drove me mad, but must have come a long way since.
As for OS X, while I understand your reservations, there's no reason you actually need to go into those underpinnings.
Since you've got it anyway on a nice machine, it might just be worth exploring if ever you feel like it.
That's what my daughter (turning 12 at the time) did, along with a friend more than six times her age. It seemed to come naturally to them both. Within days, my daughter had discovered shortcuts I hadn't, while my friend is content but not at all inclined to rush into upgrades. He has an Epson inkjet printer, like you and me, and zero problems with it.
It's very much a matter of taste, for him, as well as the choice Apple has still just about left us, for now.
Post by: Gary S on March 01, 2003, 07:28:00 PM
Thanks for link to that discussion. I've been there the last few hours!
Very good stuff.
I got a kick out of this : "I was at Macworld when Steve Jobs, just weeks after replacing Gil Amelio, stepped onto the Macworld stage and confidently declared plans to create exciting new products and to build a truly new and reliable operating system and to release it on time. While not exactly a home run, in retrospect this was like Babe Ruth pointing to the stands and hitting a solid triple."
ejc,
Don't feel compelled to move to an operating System that doesn't fit your needs.
At the present time I'm looking for a newer Mac that will run OS9 and OSX so I can learn it in my spare time. I'm running OS9 and it works just fine.
[ 03-01-2003, 08:49 PM: Message edited by: Gary S ]
Post by: RHPConsult on March 01, 2003, 09:00:00 PM
Let's see, first, regarding points of identification, I . . .
- am halfway through my 7th decade,
- have owned Macs since 1984,
- presently "operate a beige G3 with 8.6, and a Pismo with 10.2.4 (incl. Classic, of course,) and a bootable 9.2.2, plus
- we've spent several exceedingly pleasant vacations in my spouse's ancestral home in Breisach am Rhein, and yes,
- attempt to assist my brother-in-law in making some sense with his WIN98 + Gateway
- " src="biggrin.gif" />
- If you like 8.6, stay with it. It's a workhorse . . . just refrain from inspecting its teeth too regularly
- OSX is easy, when you overcome your earlier-Mac reflexes. It's f-u-n and has many seemingly-automatic features that make it powerful
- if incongruities with "normal" human expectations appeal to you, then by all means try WIN . . . say, like pressing START to SHUT DOWN, now there's a tribute to engineering genius if I ever saw one!
- If arcane technospeak seems easier than calling things by their recognizable n-a-m-e-s, then good luck. Why call a Folder a Directory? What is a BIOS or a Registry and why would you ever want to fool with one?
- Nobody ever said computing has to be fun . . . except Mac owners!
- " src="biggrin.gif" />
[ 03-02-2003, 02:49 PM: Message edited by: RHPConsult ]
Post by: Mayo on March 02, 2003, 12:18:00 AM
I haven't found a program that can replace it, and the company has not announced whether it will be available in an OS X version.
OS X was released too early, and now Apple is in effect forcing people to adopt OS X if they want to buy a new Mac. In my opinion, OS X is still very much in development, and I resent the fact that Apple is requiring its loyal customers to pay for the privilege of participating in ironing-out kinks in the OS.
If a person wants to be among the early-adopters, that's great, but a lot of us just want to be able to get our work done. As others have stated, it is likely going to be several versions before OS X will be ready for people like me.
None of this surprises me, since Jobs and Company have a long history of making bonehead decisions, including handing Gates the key that allowed for Windows and the M$ monopoly as we know it.
I now consider it altogether possible that sometime in the future I will be working at a Windows or Linux machine. Not because I want to switch, but because Apple will no longer exist as an alternative. We'll hang on to our legacy Macs as long as possible, but eventually we will have to switch because Apple blew it out of arrogance or just plain stupidity.
Post by: cdub1988 on March 02, 2003, 01:06:00 PM
Though I've never run Debian, I really like this distro and this distro.
Both run quite well on the Bondis we have at our office.
BUT, as many have cautioned, if what you have suits you, then roll with it.
No sense in spending the money if you don't think it will benefit you.
And Linux IS free. That's a nice incentive.
Take care.
Chris
Post by: Gary S on March 02, 2003, 07:17:00 PM
If it's true that Apple's hardware sales are down 50% I think their kind of shooting themselves in the foot.....but...what do I know.
Post by: kelly on March 02, 2003, 08:55:00 PM
http://www.macobserver.com/appledeathknell/index.shtml
Post by: Gregg on March 03, 2003, 12:50:00 PM
[ 03-03-2003, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: Gregg ]
Post by: Epaminondas on March 03, 2003, 10:32:00 PM
_______________________________________________
cdub1988,
I have not run Linux on a Mac [not enough room on my old SCSI hard drives to play with it], but I am certainly curious.
I am surprised that you are running Linux on office Macs. What are the advantages over just running a MacOs on them?
What differences do you see between Yellow Dog and Mandrake? Any preference for one or the other?
People write that Linux runs faster than Windows on PCs and runs faster than the MacOS on Macs. What are you seeing?
Stability of Linux on Mac hardware?
_________________________________________________
Mayo wrote:
<< I now consider it altogether possible that sometime in the future I will be working at a Windows or Linux machine. Not because I want to switch, but because Apple will no longer exist as an alternative. >>
As Kelly's follow-up url might suggest - concern as to Apple's demise may be a wee bit premature. ;-)
Particularly considering that Apple has around four billion dollars of cash on hand. And Jobs, no doubt, likely has quite a few more tricks to pull out of that wondrous magic hat of his. That man is no fool. E.g. - the IBM chip Mac, when it comes, might just blow us all away . . .
I am content to wait and see. :-)
On the other hand -
When I began using the Mac, Apple had about a 12% U.S desktop market share.
I have since watched that decline to 8%. Then 5%. Then 3% . . .
Apple's market share has actually declined since Jobs returned to save Apple from itself:
6.7% 1996
4.1% 1997
4.5% 1998
3.0% 2001
Do you begin to see a pattern?
<< Currently, Macintosh U.S. market share is hovering "around 3.5%," according to IDC analyst David Daoud. "That's down from 13.4% a decade ago and 4.2% in the year after Jobs returned." >>
<< annual sales have shrunk from nearly $8 billion to $5.7 billion since 2000 >>
<< Jobs is "pouring big bucks into his retail outlets. This year, Apple will spend $77 million, even though the stores aren't profitable." >>
<< Worldwide, Apple is in ninth place with a 2.4 percent market share [7/03/02] >>
And an interesting new twist:
<< IDC is saying that the Mac OS is going to be surpassed as the #2 desktop operating system by the various flavors of Unix [i.e., Linux - E.]. This, according to the research firm, will happen "sometime during the next year or so." >> [2003-2004]
My thesis is: you don't need the demise of Apple to have a reason to explore Linux.
Each OS has it's strengths.
The MacOS is highly innovative and it's adherents are happy to pay the substantial price premium for what they get: that four billion dollars in Apple's war chest did not come out of thin air.
Linux, on the other hand is not highly innovative, nor does it have a large war chest. It's strengths are merely that it is stable, open, fast and free.
Linux attracts a different demographic from that which is attracted by Apple.
Each demographic benefits from the other.
_________________________________________________
Gary wrote:
<< I don't quite understand Apple's decision to make the new machines bootable only into X at this time either.
If it's true that Apple's hardware sales are down 50% I think their kind of shooting themselves in the foot.....but...what do I know. [Smile] >>
I think you know a lot. ;-)
I am affected somewhat similarly - but to me, words like "manipulative" and "controlling" and "arrogant" and "desperate" and "kinda pathetic" also come to mind.
But that's just me.
Seems that while Apple is going after switchers, they are also alienating a certain number of true believers.
I suspect that it will all come out a wash, but I am not the one crunching the numbers.
In the meantime - I wonder how much Apple's intentional accelerated obsolesce of older boxes - obviously intended to force current Apple users into buying new hardware - will just result in people putting Linux on these boxes, instead.
Yellow Dog Linux claims it works on Mac PPC 7200s and above.
I don't think you can say that about about Mac OS 9.x - let alone Mac OSX.
Anyway - it is going to be interesting to watch Linux nudge Apple out for the number two spot over the next year or so.
I expect it will be a little longer before Linux edges out number one. ;-)
Peace and music,
Epaminondas
________________________________________________
On Tux the Penguin, the Linux mascot:
<< "When you think 'penguin,' you should be imagining a slightly overweight penguin, sitting down after having gorged itself, and having just burped," Mr. Torvalds once explained. "It's sitting there with a beatific smile - the world is a good place to be when you have just eaten a few gallons of raw fish and you can feel another 'burp' coming." >
________________________________________________
[ 03-03-2003, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: Epaminondas ]
Post by: ejc on March 05, 2003, 07:32:00 AM
The day after starting this thread I succumbed to a bout of influenza. Now nearly recovered.and able to thank everybody for their interesting and wide-ranging contributions.
One small point. Airbusdriver said "He doesn't really sound like he is a normal happy Mac user."
Fact is that I'm disatisfied with the whole PC scene - the Mac is just the least irritating system that I have encountered.
I confess that I am a skeptic in most areas of life. I trained as an engineer then migrated slowly to marketing of capital goods. I am capable of following technical instructions.
BUT, here we are nearly 20 years into the PC era - and IMHO we are still having to understand far too many complexities in order to get simple jobs done.
I expect that operating a PC should be as simple as driving an automobile. I know that autos have been around longer but the pace of development is now much faster.
Marketing people in the PC business, I believe, are too much conditioned by the past and by what those around them are doing.
Apple started with a good slogan - Think different. Back then they really had something new. It's high time the industry took a fundamental look at what users basically want.
Sorry, this has turned into a rant. Possibly Techsurvivors is not the best platform for my disillusionment. Most people in here, I suspect, are highly computer-literate. But I don't know how to reach the silent majority.
Enough.
Peace
ejc
Post by: ejc on March 05, 2003, 07:42:00 AM
Post by: jepinto on March 05, 2003, 08:25:00 AM
quote:You're not alone. Sweet'ums won't use a computer until he can talk to it. While voice recognition software has improved, it still isn't perfect.
Originally posted by ejc:
I forgot to add that I am irritated by the tyranny of the keyboard.
I saw a demostration of ViaVoice and was impressed. Have you researched it? (Might give you the impetus to go to X; ViaVoice for X was/is a great improvement over previous versions.)
Post by: Mayo on March 05, 2003, 11:45:00 PM
Gawd Knows things are better than when I started seriously computing in '97. For instance, installing and updating software is a lot easier and less likely to cause conflicts than just a few years ago.
But my initial encounter with Macs went very bad, very fast. The Performa 6300 I purchased in 1995 had tons of problems, partly due to documented hardware bugs and partly due to my inexperience. Of course, I didn't know about the hardware glitches until long after I had convinced the dealer to accept a return about three months after I bought the Performa, albeit with a 5% "restocking" fee which totaled $140...
I didn't buy another Mac for two years. I spent that time reading Mac mags and books. When I was ready to buy I hired a consultant who did a fair job of setting up the Mac for my business but who resisted telling me anything about how to properly run the computer and trouble-shoot problems on my own.
$1200 later I said Adios! to the fellow and resolved that I would never require his services again. So far, so good...Knock On Wood!
But I have spent untold hours with my Macs, way more time than the average person probably has at their disposal for dinking around with Beige Boxes. And I have read a fair number of computer books, something that seems alien to the majority of people I know.
The joke around our house is "How Do 'Normal' People Deal With It When Things Go Wrong, Really Wrong With Their Computer?"
In our house the More Normal Person is my Dear Wife, who only uses the iMac occasionally for e-mail, word processing and to find something on the Internet. We have had the iMac on our kitchen table for going on two years and she still hasn't attained a basic working knowledge of the machine.
She can turn it on and usually get to where she wants to go, but if a dialog box suddenly apppears or if there is a minor problem, I suddenly become Mr. FixIt. In other words, she treats the iMac as if it were an appliance, which it most certainly is not.
I think that this is the situation for many people, and what do folks do when there isn't a Mr. FixIt around? Young people can rely on each other for help, and I suppose that parents can get help from one of their kids. I have absolutely no idea how this works in reality, since we don't have kids (one reason that I have so much time to fool around with Macs...)
Most older folks I know are intimidated by the new technology, and I don't blame them. It might remind some of them of the early cars, where you had to be a bit of a mechanic or you would never get anywhere. Now cars can go years without a need for a repair, while computers are the equivalent of a Model T. If you have to rely on tech support or a computer "consultant" for help, it will become very time-consuming/expensive/frustrating, and who needs that?
I helped an older friend (early 70s) get his first Mac, which was his first computer experience of any kind. But in my experience he is unique, because he wasn't afraid to try something new, he actually spends time reading the Mac books I have suggested and he will fiddle with his Mac on his own, even if I have to encourage him now and then.
If he does get in trouble I am just over the back fence, and like I tell him, it really is difficult to totally screw-up things. If worse comes to worse you can erase the mother and start-over. Take THAT, you Bad Harddrive!!!
What he usually tells me over the fence is that everything is hunky-dory and the iMac hasn't crashed for months. And he uses it more than most people I know.
Which brings me back to OS X. A major reason that I haven't spent much time with X is because I would rather be doing other things these days than learning a new operating system. Like others have noted, OS 9 and even 8.6 work just dandy, I am not inclined to spend even more $$$ to upgrade perfectly good hardware/software and OS X is still (how shall I put this...?) less than fully-ripe, kind of like that tropical fruit available in mainland markets.
It looks pretty good, but the flavor isn't quite right.
[ 03-05-2003, 12:58 PM: Message edited by: Mayo ]
Post by: Spartacus on March 05, 2003, 12:02:00 PM
Classic is dead - Steve Jobs said that.
They force the user to buy OS X native software in future.
=> Software companies won't develope apps for Classic.
=> The software developers can spend their time and resources on the OS X apps. (Apple doesn't want them to develope Classic apps)
=> There will be more and better OS X apps.
=> Less and less people are going to depend on OS 9/Classic
It's where Apple is leading: OS X only. Sooner or later classic is probably going to be droped, too.
And by releasing Macs that cannot boot under OS 9 it's only a matter of time they can discontinue support on the classic OS.
Whether we like it or not, for Apple it doesn't make sense to have Macs that run OS 9.
Aside, I don't believe that Macs that can boot OS 9 would help Apple sell more Macs.
Just my 2¢.
Post by: Gary S on March 05, 2003, 12:32:00 PM
Mac OS X Justification
I found this one post interesting in that it proposed that Apple could put some their resources toward OS9x. as well.
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2003 10:20:07 -0800
From: [MacInTouch Reader]
Subject: Justifying X
As a former member of what one would call the NeXT community, and a long time Mac user I'd like to offer my opinion on X. At the beginning of the development cycle Apple made a decision that the people that are writing in to your site, artists and designers didn't really matter. They were just a small part of a big picture and X was to be a consumer based OS. In this regard Apple has failed miserably. As a consumer based OS, X is a disaster. The fact that it doesn't "crash," or has free iApps is a weak excuse for a OS that virtually has no help, no manual, and is not intuitive in the way something like the Windows Start command is. If you've used WinXp you know that it too doesn't crash and offers 100% compatibility with "the rest of the world" as we like to refer to it. And although I'm too lazy to drag my NeXTStation 25 mhz out of storage and fire it up, I'm certain "native" apps like Mail run faster on it then on my G4 Cube.
As an OS for professionals it is simply horrid. Slow, buggy, incomplete, and did I mention slow? I can at any time lock up a "top shelf" Mac coming out of Apple doing simple things like moving around large amounts of files. My friends at Apple reply that I can simply drop into terminal and get things done very quickly. Well sorry boys, I really don't feel like typing commands like I did in school. It violates common Apple user interface guidelines at every turn, but well, it does have some nifty screensavers.
Apple likes to use the term insanely great. The classic definition of insane is someone who continues to do something with negative results and expects change. Apple's hardware sales are off 50%. Granted the economic climate doesn't foster impulse buying, but the fact is as Apple continues to push X, people continue to resist or "switch." Apple's slogan of "think different" apparently isn't being heard in the board room. A unified OS 9 release, say 9.5 that supported something as simple as long file names would probably sell in excess of one million copies. At $100 each that's a nice profit. However, Apple and their chef software architect Avi Tevanian are so fully entrenched in "not invented by me" that the company continues to slide into oblivion while everyone makes due with aging hardware.
Perhaps Apple can licence the line from Metallica for their next advertising slogan. "You can do it your own way, just as long as it's how we say."
[ 03-05-2003, 01:34 PM: Message edited by: Gary S ]
Post by: Mayo on March 05, 2003, 12:55:00 PM
Post by: Bill on March 05, 2003, 01:40:00 PM
Fact is I was just at MacinTouch keeping up on that topic and I came back here and read Spartacus post.
I have (feel in need <gr>) to post this after reading Spartacus post.
"Classic is dead - Steve Jobs said that."
Steve jobs said it. So What!
Do you honestly believe he is thinking about the consumer?
Course he isn't. He's thinking about the share holders with suits and what new pony he is going to buy. Which is fine considering it was he and a few others that got Apple rolling BUT lets put this in it's correct perspective.
"They force the user to buy OS X native software in future."
Most of the underlined below is plain dribble.
The key word is -forced- sir.
Sure it makes good sense for Apples pony buyers.
I personally wouldn't mind if all the boys pool together and make one platform/software etc etc so everyone on this planet can say hey to each other without hassles of any sort.
In this stage of the game ... Never ever is going to happen (too late) naturally.
Now more than ever Apple needs to keep up with the Macoys and Hatfields.
So Stevie boy is -forcing- or pitching what he thinks is best for the consumer not to mention his own happy bank account.
my 2¢
Post by: Gary S on March 05, 2003, 01:45:00 PM
Although I couldn't resist posting that, because I think there was some truth in it, I'm going to try and learn OSX because I think Sparticus was probably right. There just isn't going be many OS9x apps developed. I just got off the phone with an Alsoft Tech and DiskWarrior 3 is going to be native OSX. So......buttons on your underware.
Post by: Gary S on March 05, 2003, 02:02:00 PM
One more copy/paste that hit home with me:
"I tell my clients that change is not always progress and OS X simply represents change, one that will lead to more expenses and less security. That is the opposite of progress."
What makes me angry right now is I'm getting a new Mac and I'm scared!
Post by: Mayo on March 05, 2003, 02:08:00 PM
I have never met Mr Jobs, but I pick-up an arrogant vibe from the guy. I sometimes find myself wondering if he ever has a meaningful exchange with Mac users outside Apple. And unless I am wrong, I recall that Steve didn't do such a hot job at Apple's helm the first time around. It's just that the fellows that followed were so awful that Steve looks good in comparison.
But I digress...
It pains me to see what I believe should be the top personal computer company sink further and further into irrelevancy. Yes, they have billions in the bank but that can be gone in the fiscal blink of an eye. Apple sells billions of dollars worth of goods and services and can barely make a profit; sometimes it can't even do that.
[ 03-05-2003, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: Mayo ]
Post by: kelly on March 05, 2003, 02:15:00 PM
I find it interesting that the original post was not so much against OS X as computers period.
Carry on.
Post by: Spartacus on March 05, 2003, 03:52:00 PM
quote:Did I say so? Or did I say I aprove his actions? I only said that that's the way business goes. Apple wants people to switch to OS X because it generates about 17% or their revenue.
Originally posted by Bill:
"Classic is dead - Steve Jobs said that."
Steve jobs said it. So What!
Do you honestly believe he is thinking about the consumer?
And fact is, if you like it or not, that Steve Jobs is CEO of Apple. If he says OS 9 is dead, it is dead.
quote:Again, I know what I wrote and I wrote that particular word on purpose.
Originally posted by Bill:
"They force the user to buy OS X native software in future."
Most of the underlined below is plain dribble.
The key word is -forced- sir.
quote:Of course he decides what he thinks is best for the consumer. He is trying to sell his products to consumers. And I believe his - and Apple's - success prove him right.
Originally posted by Bill:
So Stevie boy is -forcing- or pitching what he thinks is best for the consumer not to mention his own happy bank account.
Or perhaps I didn't get the point of your post...
[Edit] P.S. I found your post very offensive.
[ 03-05-2003, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: Spartacus ]
Post by: Mayo on March 05, 2003, 04:15:00 PM
I have long wondered why Apple put nearly all its apples (sorry 'bout that one!) in one basket by ignoring the obvious profits to be made developing superior software for the Mac. Microsoft apparently figured it out a long time ago that hardware profitability is relatively limited while software can be very profitable indeed.
And since Apple/Jobs seems so intent on focusing on hardware, it was mind-boggling that Apple introduced hardware licensing, a move that threatened to undermine the very foundation of the company. Of course, the licensing initiative didn't last for very long, but I cannot fathom why they did it in the first place.
Post by: Xairbusdriver on March 05, 2003, 04:30:00 PM
Steve will do what he thinks is best for the company (and its shareholders). If he is wrong, all we have lost is a great promise. If he is right, we will all have even better hard/software. And I will admit that I too, bought the "Missing Manual" book, along with a few others, but Apple has not made a penny off me with OS X. Nor do I expect to buy a non-9 bootable Mac for many years, given the choice. Like Mayo, I'm the resident fixit guy. I like my "reputation" even though it is only my wifes opinion! And she sounds similar to his wife, any dialog box almost always causes the 'deer-in-the-headlights' phenomenon! It seems sometimes she can't read English, anymore! It is not her fault, computers are still intimidating to many. I don't see OS X helping in that area.
I'm out of pennies, gotta go...
Let's remember we're on the same team here - the Mac User Support Team!
Jim C.
Post by: Mayo on March 05, 2003, 04:43:00 PM
Post by: Paddy on March 05, 2003, 05:35:00 PM
Um...where to start? I'm in a bit of feisty mood anyway, since last night the school committee candidate (also a personal friend) who's campaign I worked on non-stop for the past 6 weeks went down to a 60-vote defeat...but I digress. Grumpy? Me? About a town that just doesn't GET IT and just elected the first Libertarian School Committee member in the US? Who's signed himself up to www.sepschool.org ? (an organization that aims to do away with public schools?) So, take the following with a grain of salt - I'm not intending to insult anyone - I am in a rather dark mood.
Apple is a company that makes HARDWARE. Yes, it's a hardware company. It's in BUSINESS. It would like to STAY in business. Hence, it needs to make the customer want to buy MORE HARDWARE. So, one of the ways to do that, is to make a better, faster, more bells 'n whistles operating system...that, you guessed it...needs new hardware. They did it with just about every OS they've released - after all, we just finished discussing G4's that will boot 8.6 didn't we? And what was the conclusion? Not many will - only the earliest and the slowest.
Backwards compatibility is always nice, but it isn't forever - at some point you have to wonder if you're shooting yourself in the foot from a business standpoint. Afterall, how many software developers want to develop for TWO Mac operating systems? Sheesh - sometimes it's hard enough getting them to develop for ONE.
I find a lot of the charges levelled at OS X in the post Gary copied and pasted spurious at best. I've been using X for over a year now - and I am so comfortable with it now that using 9 feels about as different as using a PC...actually, I use my PC more now than 9, come to think of it. I've never managed to "lock it up" - despite doing lots of things simultaneously. Right now, on this Powerbook, I have 21 applications running. I've copied the content of entire drives - what the heck is he talking about? Jaguar on this Powerbook is fast - browsing with Safari is an incredible treat and makes IE on any OS, including 9 seem like molasses in January. Anything new is going to feel weird at first - I think I have characterized first experiences with X here in the past as being a "stranger in a strange land". Much like the first time I tinkered with a PC. It's that "wow...where'd my familiar Mac go?" feeling that I think some people get needlessly stuck on. It's still a Mac...just different. It hasn't morphed overnight into a PC or a LINUX box, though from some things I've read, you'd think it had. The Help menu...helps. It's not all-inclusive, but it's a start. There are a lot of resources out there - books, online discussions etc. And here, of course.
On the other hand, if you use and like 9 and are satisfied with the applications available for 9 (I wasn't) then go for it. But you can't in all honesty expect Apple to join you forever in the past. That's not what business is all about. Apple is not setting out to maliciously say " to heck with you" - it's simply trying to stay in business doing what a business must do - create demand for its products, or go belly-up. To invest this with a lot of emotion is somewhat pointless. Steve Jobs may be arrogant - but that's not why new Macs are only going to boot OS X.
Yes, the first official (as in non-beta) release of X was probably more of a beta than it should have been and yes, there are probably still some things that need ironing out in Jaguar (according to others, anyway - personally I've not experienced any problems - touch wood!!) but there is no such thing as a "perfect" operating system - and there probably never will be, as long as human beings have anything to do with it. Some are just less perfect than others...and your conception of perfection may not match mine. And that's what makes things interesting.
That and towns that lose their collective minds and elect Libertarians to School Committees...
Post by: Bill on March 05, 2003, 06:24:00 PM
As I did your first post sir for being so simplistic in your opinionated views as if what you say must be the whole-truth-and-nothing-but-the-truth.!.
Now if you did or do find that my post was offensive,you really,really should of seen it before I edited it [twice] then.
Also sir if you're going to quote me,it would help to not just pick portions.
"Course he isn't. He's thinking about the share holders with suits and what new pony he is going to buy. Which is fine considering it was he and a few others that got Apple rolling BUT lets put this in it's correct perspective."
Yet all this bit about being offended means knot considering just about every piece you wrote in your second post more or less states the same.
If you want to repeat your post over and over again, be my guest.
My first post speaks for it self.
Fact is,you say don't believe you got the point of my post.
Then perhaps you should re-read it again.
I can dance this game/debate/discussion with you Spartacus till the moon gets over stuffed with green cheeze if you care. Makes no difference to me.
Although airbusdriver is correct not to mention Mayo and his thoughts.
I might just add that I was using Jag and still am using Jag.
Kelly even stated this thread has gotten side tracked some.
my 4¢
I'm off to watch another movie.
Post by: pendragon on March 05, 2003, 06:27:00 PM
Harv
Post by: Mayo on March 05, 2003, 06:45:00 PM
Would leaving new Macs bootable into 9 really affect Apple's bottom line that much? New Macs already boot by default into X, and I assume that most new Mac owners would stay with the default OS rather than install OS 9. At least that has been my experience with a scientifically insignificant sampling of new Mac users I know...
Speaking just for myself, of course, but when the time seems right I will take the plunge and go through the process of learning OS X. I never said it was garbage, just that the booting issue affects the most die-hard Mac owners: legacy users that have to balance productivity with the cost of upgrading, not to mention those of us who still use apps that cannot easily be replaced but which are not yet updated to be native to OS X.
If DiskLock wasn't totally incompatible with OS X I would already have it on my iBook and iMac and I would be playing with X as time and interest permits. I would probably be pretty familiar with X by this time except for that stumbling block.
Folks who are dependent on Quark and who have Macs used in a business obviously have more compelling reasons for staying-put than my relatively feeble excuse. I think that all of us will sooner or later make the move to X but IMVHO, the time isn't now. Even another year of "legacy booting" would be adequate for many folks; I just think the timing is off on this decision.
[ 03-05-2003, 07:49 PM: Message edited by: Mayo ]
Post by: Gary S on March 05, 2003, 08:02:00 PM
Paddy, your school election sounds like you live in Wisconsin!
I would like to thank you for your comments too.
Somehow your words had a calming influence on me. I don't know why the thought of running OSX.2 makes me anxious, but knowing I will surely need some help with the transition, I glad Techsurvivors is here and available to me.
BTW, I just went over to sepschool.org - ouch.
[ 03-05-2003, 09:09 PM: Message edited by: Gary S ]
Post by: RobW on March 05, 2003, 09:31:00 PM
Anyway, as most of you may remember, I was a somewhat strong opponent of OSX not that long ago. Actually, I was just angry about having an OS shoved down my throat. To be honest, I'd still be using OS9.x if Apple hadn't made it available to my wife, the public school teacher, for free. Realizing that it was going to happen for me sooner or later, and never again for free, I somewhat reluctantly jumped on the bandwagon.
Gary, in all honesty, you really don't need to be scared. Frankly, maybe because I drove people at TS nuts with questions ahead of time, and all but called David Pogue on the phone at his home a few times, but I found that the transition was really pretty easy for me. I found that the first couple of weeks I would from time to time be staring at the computer with the old "dumb cow" look while I tried to figure out how to navigate to a folder to find a file. However, before long it really did become 2nd nature.
ABD, like you, in my house when it comes to the computer, I'm the resident fix-it guy. (Trust me, this is only limited to the computer. There are zoning laws against me doing plumbing or electrical work.) In pretty short order, I was once again able to troubleshoot issues that came up since the move to OSX. I can even solve problems over the phone while I'm at work--just like the good old days of OS9. Fortunately, there've been very few to solve.
The thing I'd point out is that I moved to OSX on 12/20/02.--Only two and a half months ago. I really don't even notice the difference anymore or think in the "language" of OS9 anymore.
Bottom line for me and my $.02--if you like what you're using stick with it. If you want to move to OSX for whatever reason, it's really not anything to be all that worried about. (BTW, as I type that last sentence, somewhere in California I know that RHP is grinning and saying "I told you so". )
Ok, you can go back to the arguing now.
Post by: ejc on March 05, 2003, 09:45:00 PM
Mabe I'm missing something, but since Apple introduced their GUI (a genuine step change) I have seen no real breakthrough in ease of usage.
Frankly I will be mildly sorry if Apple goes under but for me that's a secondary point. What I am waiting for is another great leap forward in ease of usage. The way corporations develop I suspect it will come not from one of them but from a bunch of enthusiasts in a garage. Good luck to them!
Peace
ejc
Post by: Paddy on March 05, 2003, 10:44:00 PM
It would seem that things are bad all over for schools and public education. I'd consider moving...but where to? Corvallis, where I used to live, has class sizes of over 30 for kindergarten and first grade! Schools being closed, kids bused out of their neighborhoods clear across town, constant budget woes and seemingly, no state-mandated curriculum (at least that's what I've deduced from one of my friends who wanted to know how MA compared). It's not that bad here, yet...but we've got a $2.5M (or about 9% of the budget) between what we need to maintain level services and what our Town Manager has said the schools are going to get. A tax override last year failed - spectacularly, so that's not an option. It's not pretty.
Ontario, Canada, where I lived until 11 years ago, is no better according to my sis who is a teacher in Cobourg, ON. They've got very little support for Special Ed, ancient and unsupported technology, somewhat strange province-wide mandated curriculum and constant budget cuts and freezes.
I just don't get it. Everyone says that "Education" is the most important thing we do with our tax dollars - but when push comes to shove, nobody wants to pay for it.
So, now I've totally derailed this thread! Now, where were we?
Why can't Apple make Macs that still boot into OS 9 for another year or so? Probably they don't want to continue supporting OS 9. There has got to be some cost associated with it. Software companies are writing software for X, not 9 - so it's a win-win proposition for them too...buy new hardware...need new software. Somewhere along the line, the cord has to be cut, and no matter when it is done, it will no doubt be too soon for some. The snail-like development of Quark Xpress for OS X is problematic - no doubt about it. It now remains the only thing between many design pros and OS X & new hardware. And the longer the wait, the fewer customers will remain - InDesign is no doubt making some permanent inroads.
Post by: Spartacus on March 06, 2003, 06:20:00 AM
You say that my post was written like it was "whole-truth-and-nothing-but-the-truth". But in your post you do not disagree to anything I wrote.
Frankly, I don't see what your problem is.
Yes, Apple is taking decisions mainly based on business concerns (more revenue, profit, etc.). I totally agree with you, but I don't see where that contradicts to my post. Acutally, I think it underlines what I said.
And the fact that the guys at the board of directions of Apple earn lots of money (too much (?)) is true, no doubt, but irrelevant here as it is the way capitalism goes. And that's a different discussion.
I believe I got the point of your post very well. I just thought (hoped?) that I misinterpreted the style of your post. I guess I was wrong...
Mayo:
Look at Apple 1996 and look at it now. I believe it is pretty obvious that Steve Jobs (and Apple) IS successful.
Post by: Thomas S. England on March 06, 2003, 07:39:00 AM
Any Apple computer sold now or on the horizon can be made to boot into OS 9 by using partitioning.
That's not hard to do. I still have a full functioning 9.2 partition on my main machine, separate from Classic. Although these days I use it less & less.
For me, if I were not using OS X I would be missing out on some vital, absolutely vital, software for my business of digital photography.
But I'm really happy with OS X; it took a bit of a transition, like learning to use a new piece of equipment. When I do use OS 9, it now feels foreign and certainly retro.
OS X may not be for everybody now, but sooner rather than later, it will be.
Post by: Paddy on March 06, 2003, 08:25:00 AM
Post by: Thomas S. England on March 06, 2003, 08:34:00 AM
Well, then, I agree that's a bad move since there are still some things you can do in 9 but not in X, such as OneClick. Users shouldn't lose the capability to make use of a great program like that.
Post by: Bernie on March 06, 2003, 09:20:00 AM
Post by: kelly on March 06, 2003, 10:29:00 AM
Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2003 14:28:04 -0500
From: Stavros Karatsoridis
Subject: Re: Mac OS 9 issues with new Power Macs
Does anyone know of a way to get the new 17" G4 Imacs and/or the new Tower models, which are "not compatible" with OS9 to boot into OS9? I understand that there has been a change with the ROMs to prevent this and make them OSX bootable only, even though they have the "Classic" option. It seems to me that being able to boot these new machines into OS9 would be a great advantage, even if Apple doesn't think so.
It is a common misconception that Apple has "intentionally crippled the ROMs," and that a simple hack will magically enable Mac OS 9 to boot on the machines. This is absolutely NOT the case.
When Apple makes a new motherboard design (and that has been done with all the new 2003 macintosh models), they have to update the Mac OS with motherboard-specific drivers to be able to run the operating system on the machine. Without those drivers, the machine won't boot (this is similar to the System Enabler system Apple used to use back in the days of System 7.1). This is also why in Mac OS 9.2.2 there were updated versions of some files (like the Mac OS ROM file, for instance), and why a Mac OS 9.2.1 disk for an earlier macintosh won't boot a newer Macintosh that boots into Mac OS 9.2.2
Apple decided that in 2003, they would not spend the effort to keep updating Mac OS 9.2.2 to run on the new machines. This requires quite a bit of extra time and effort separate from getting Mac OS X to work on the machines, that could be better spent elsewhere. Therefore, since they're not updating the operating system to support the new hardware and motherboard designs, they have removed the Mac OS 9 boot code from the ROM as well (there's no need for it).
In short, to get Mac OS 9 to boot on the new machines, one would not only have to add Mac OS 9 boot code to the machine's boot ROM, but they would also have to figure out how to reverse engineer the operating system itself and the new motherboard designs to figure out how to write the low-level drivers necessary for them to talk to each other. Then they would need to figure out how to write drivers to support new features (Firewire 800, for example). They would need to "roll a new version" of the Mac OS ROM file, along with updating some of the control panels, extensions, and other code needed to run on the new machines. Needless to say, this is a major undertaking.
Some may attempt it, but I honestly don't think it will happen. Even if people should be able to do it, it won't run as well as it could, unless the people that do it are Apple engineers themselves with access to the necessary technical info and Mac OS 9 source code. Besides, I wouldn't be surprised if Apple tried to invoke the DMCA to prevent any such efforts either.
http://www.macintouch.com/g4-2003pt02.html#mar05
Post by: Mayo on March 06, 2003, 11:39:00 PM
Getting back to OS X, I hadn't even considered all the neat shareware programs I have come to rely on in OS 8/9... Where would I be without FinderPop? How about Greg's Browser, a simple but effective way for navigating through myriad volumes and folders? And I won't even get into the various control strip modules I have grown to love...
A question: Didn't I read that Apple is dropping support for its LaserWriter printers? Is that true or am I mistaken? I have a barely-used LaserWriter 360 that I purchased in '95, hooked-up to my 7300. It still runs like a champ and isn't anywhere near retirement, and I see no good reason for dumping it because it isn't supported in OS X.
Heck, Apple wouldn't even get a hardware purchase out of me if that is true...Apple doesn't make printers anymore!
Post by: Roadguy on March 06, 2003, 11:45:00 PM
Many of us know the problems that have plagued Apple over the years (ie: Powerbook 5300).
I haven't put OSX on any of my Macs. The newest one I own is a Powerbook (Wallstreet 266), with some upgrades. I've had no need, they do what I need them to do and they do it well.
As for Apple, someone mentioned it here, they are a hardware company, that's what they do. They need to sell computers. How many of you out there still have older Macs that run as well as they did when you got them? I know friends that do including myself, I still have a MacPlus that does exactly what it did some 16 years ago. I'm not saying you would use one that old for everyday computer use now. However there are many Macs that are 8 or 9 years old that will do the basic everyday things people need them to do. How many old Windows machine will do that today? Most of the Windows machines that old won't even startup.
My point is for the most part Apple built computers that will work for years and years. They know this. So now they want you to buy a new OS. How do they get you to buy it. Market it as a must have and make new hardware that will only use this OS and not the older one you have now. They also get other companies to make or upgrade apps that run only on this OS.
This is what Apple wants. Buy the new software but also buy a new Mac. That's fine, they are a business and they need sales to survive.
So we, in the Mac community, have to face the fact that if Apple and the Macintosh is to survive, we will need to spend some money on a new OS and maybe some hardware down the road.
I know I want to see the Mac survive. I would hate to have to switch to Windozes. Oh wait....my Macs run fine. Never mind.
Post by: tacit on March 06, 2003, 03:23:00 PM
To be fair, it's not as simple as that.
Apple needed a new operating system because people kept asking for things that were almost impossible to do in the old operating system.
OS 9, and all the operating systems before it, had a lot of problems. OS 9 does not offer protected memory addressing, for example, which means that when a program crashes, it can kill the entire operating system--the #1 technical complaint of Mac users.
OS 9 is also built on OS 8, which is built on OS 7, and so on--meaning that some of the code in OS 9 is still 68K code, and some ofthe code is almost impossible to change.
Also, OS 9 is not really multiprocessor friendly. Programs in OS 9 must be specially written to use multiple processors or features like AltiVec; changing the architecture of the operating system so that programs automatically use multiple processors would so radically change the way the operating system handles processes that most existing programs would not work any more.
Trying to do a major overhaul of the system, bringing it up to date with regards to things like task handling and multiprocessor utilization and protected memory, involves such radical rewriting of the core of the operating system that you're basically starting from scratch anyway.
I remember when System 7 first came out. A lot of my System 6 software didn't like System 7, and it was slow, and it felt clumsy. The user interface totally sucked--opening folders took forever, emptying the Trash took forever. I swore I'd never use it, that I'd just keep using System 6.
Of course, Apple started releasing hardware that only ran System 7, and as the hardware got faster and System 7 was refined, it got better and better. Soon, I didn't miss System 6 any more at all.
OS X right now is where System 7 was when it first came out. But the fact is, OS X is Apple's new operating system. They can't keep supporting OS 9 for exactly the same reasons that they can't keep supporting System 6. It just makes no sense.
Apple created OS X because people today are using their computer to do things that are difficult or impossible to do in OS 9. OS 9, with its static memory addressing, non-protected memory space, and primitive task handler, is not suited to tasks like high-speed IO (think DVD creation here) or busy server environments or Web serving, and it will never be as stable as OS X can be.
You can still use your computer usefully in OS 9. But that will change.
Back in the day of System 6, nobody ever believed that people would use a home computer to do things like make a CD, much less make a movie. Nobody ever believed that people would connect their computer to a high-speed real-time worldwide network. Nobody could ever have imagined using a home computer as a file server or as a sound editing workstation or even to play games as sophisticated and complex as Age of Empires.
If we were still using System 6, guess what? We still would not be doing any of those things. System 6 is not capable of doing them.
Today, nobody can imagine what we will be using home computers for in 10 years. But I can tell you this: We will be using them to do things that OS 9 is simply not capable of doing.
Post by: Mayo on March 06, 2003, 03:50:00 PM
In the end I suppose that the easiest solution is to hang onto a legacy Mac to run the older printers, etc. and gradually make the switch to X when it comes time to get a new machine.
Post by: swhitset on March 06, 2003, 04:33:00 PM
Steve
Post by: Paddy on March 06, 2003, 08:11:00 PM
Post by: powermacg4_450 on March 06, 2003, 08:45:00 PM
your wrong in many ways..... but you did bring up one good point. If OS 9 works for you and you like it, then by all means keep using it.
Eventually, if you want newer programs, there will come a day when you cant get them under OS 9, as all future stuff will be osX only.
You said os 9 rarely crashed.... it always crashed on me! In fact, ive used macs for over 11 years, running OS versions from 7.1 through 9.x, and the Mac OS has been buggy and crash prone for a LONG time.
I never thought I would admit that...But since moving to OS X, i've never looked back.
I cant even use 9 anymore.... yuk! Its so outdated and buggy. Ugly.
But to each his own... good luck.
Post by: Bill on March 06, 2003, 09:42:00 PM
Not just because some of the apps/programs NOW will work in Jag [as opposed to the earlier version] but because I like it.
There are a few things which I have to do differently and does take a bit more time but hey adapt. An example would be in 8 or 9 when uploading to a server,all I would have to do for saving the upload back to my DT with the url (say an image) would be open the image on the server and download. The url would be there with the image for me to put away in whatever folder. Not only a backup but also a quick access to the url.
Now in Jag one has to copy the url while in your servers domain and paste it in the "get info -comments". Just takes a bit longer is all. Sometimes with Safari you don't have to go through all that,yet sometimes you do. At first I thought it depended on the server host as to why Safari was a hit and miss but that's not the case. No matter.
That's just one small example.
Oh sure. I knew the change was a situation where Apple needed/had to do just to keep a float.
Or as Tacit (and a few others) put it, the old OS's rubberband is just stretched too far.
I still work out of 9 for different task though because 9 gets the job done more effectively and faster. Whether that's due to my being used to doing things there or what,the bottom line is it gets done.
SO. Until I can learn to be quick-draw-Bill in Jag,I choose to have machines that can boot in 9 or Jag. As far as I'm concerned classic can take hike.
Maybe by the time I can run around in Jag where I don't have to stick my left arm out to make a left turn, Jag will be called zebra and you don't need to do zilch but talk to the box. <gr>
Can see it now ... computer:show me a picture of Dreambirds left toe. <gr>
Oh Wait! Already have that one.
Hey. Once in another life time an employer wanted me to shave my beard off or else.
Told him to *()#@.
Post by: Dreambird on March 06, 2003, 11:24:00 PM
quote:Wha' huh??
Can see it now ... computer:show me a picture of Dreambirds left toe. <gr>
Gawd! If you're talking about that picture of dog, Spencer with the feet in it... those are my sister's feet... So you have a picture of her toe.
Post by: neokm on March 07, 2003, 09:34:00 AM
Mike -$.02
[ 03-07-2003, 08:42 PM: Message edited by: neokm ]
Post by: WDL on March 07, 2003, 11:54:00 PM
Helped me get a better understanding of what's
evolving and why.
WDL
Post by: Highmac on March 08, 2003, 06:26:00 AM
Post by: Xairbusdriver on March 08, 2003, 10:49:00 AM
At least the functionality of Greg's Browser is sort of built-in with X. I understand he originally created it because he liked the abilities he saw when using a UNIX system. Of course, X doesn't quite provide the same functions as his way ahead of its time Browser (can one 'see' into a Stuffed file from Jag's browser? )! Even the name was ahead of its time! Back then most people didn't know that the term would be usurped by internet 'browsers.'
Post by: CyberPet on March 08, 2003, 06:40:00 PM
Well, I haven't lost my voice yet so I haven't been forced to boot into OS 9 at all. The only time I boot into OS 9 is once a month when I run DiskWarrior to make sure that my harddrives feels OK (Apple's own Disk Utilities isn't working too well ont it's own system!).
So once a month a boot into OS 9 to make some disk maintenance and I boot up Classic about every 14th day to run some old software (I think it's called Quark XPress).
At the end of this year my voice aid software is going to be released for OS X and about the same time (hopefully earlier) we'll see Quark XPress being run on OS X as well. DiskWarrior for OS X will be released very soon (if not already). So at the end of the year I won't boot into OS 9 nor Classic EVER!
Mac OS X can be very intimidating if you're used to OS 9 (or older), but with a few weeks using it, it feels like home, and when you boot into OS 9 you don't want to stay there long because it just doesn't have the right feel to it.
Since I don't have any "old" hardware as of december 4th, I don't feel OS X isn't ready yet. It *is* ready now and it's just going to become better and better. It's become faster and more stable the last 6 months and will probably keep on going that way as well.
OS X is like a house built upon a stable ground, come earthquakes and come floods. It'll stand steady on the ground while OS 9 and previous versions will float away.
Post by: kelly on March 08, 2003, 07:28:00 PM
"Once you use X you'll hate going back" so to speak.
I'm probably about 70% OS 9.x and 30% OS X.
I don't hate OS X but I don't "love" it either.
For sure it has it's strengths and it's certainly fast enough on my Dual Gig.
It's great for multitasking etc.
But I've got years invested in using the now Classic OS and I prefer it for most day to day things.
I'm just a lot more effective there. Jag still seems pretty "clunky" sometimes. My fault I'm sure.
Maybe I'll use OS X more and more as time goes on but I'll never "hate" OS 9 and before.
I made sure to get a Dual Boot machine. I knew this was coming 8 months or more ago.
Everyone is free to make their own choices. The Leader will even sell you a brand new Dual Booter for a little more.
I just don't think we should presume to tell others what they will or won't like.
Post by: jcarter on March 08, 2003, 08:05:00 PM
If we are going to be forced to go to X, I will wait until I can(or need to) purchase a new Mac and not go thru the trauma of upgrading my machines. But I can be sure that I won't do anything without your advice,,,,, Keep this topic going!
Post by: sokukodo on March 08, 2003, 08:21:00 PM
Post by: jepinto on March 14, 2003, 07:46:00 AM
Thanks! Pendragon.
[ 03-14-2003, 08:48 AM: Message edited by: jepinto ]
Post by: cdub1988 on March 14, 2003, 12:46:00 PM
Too bad I don't have the hardware to run it.
Still kicking hard with:
6500/225/13GB/8.6-9.1/128MB/EpsonStylusPhotoColor600/HPLaserJet2100M/MacSense10/100(unused)/Dial-up(for now)/AWholeSlewOfClassicApps/
I've been thinking I may install Linux on it and run Classic via MOL. I really liked that setup before when I installed Mandrake PPC and it would actually run all right on my box that I have now (at least a smaller build).
As far as I'm concerned, use what suits your computing.
Tacit's absolutely right.
But if it doesn't suit you, don't use it.
Just don't expect it to be supported.
Chris