Slashdot Mirror
Macs Won't Boot Into Mac OS in 2003
Magnus Olsson writes "Apple announced at Apple Expo in Paris, that they are dropping the ability to boot into Mac OS after January 2003. It will still be possible to access Mac OS via the Classic environment under Mac OS X." Apparently, eWeek was right, and the final nail is being driven. So, where's mol for Mac OS X?
Can they really do this?
Apple has required minimum versions of system software to boot a Macintosh computer since at least 7.0.1, when the Classic II, LC II, and Quadra series couldn't boot anything before 7.0.1. It lets Apple gradually get rid of legacy hardware in a computer, something the PC side can't seem to do for some reason.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Apple even watched it happen once before, when they switched from 68k architecture, to PowerPC. They ended up having to include an interperater/emulator for 68k apps in later versions of Mac0S.
This is completely untrue.. PowerPC machines emulated 68K code from the start, which is often lauded as one of the most graceful computer transition in the industry's short history. Completely transparent, totally useable.
Oh, and yeah, Steve Jobs will not personally go around to Mac users' homes, deleting all old copies of MacOS 10 so you can all relax ...
Alison
"It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education." - Albert Einstein
Now we just need computers that will refuse to boot windows.
-S
We Apprentice Developers and Designers
I'm not so sure this is aimed at Mac users so much as developers. Antecdotal evidence suggests that Mac users have no problem migrating to OS X. It's companies like Quark and alot of the printer and scanner manufacturers that are dragging their feet in supporting OS X. It seems like its a way for Apple to say, 'Look, no one is going to be using OS 9 on any of our new machines, so if you want people to continue to purchase your products then you need to develop programs and drivers for OS X'. Seems reasonable enough to me.
You've got an easy breezy wind at your back...most of the time.
Apple *does* include the functionality to use OS7/8/9 apps in OSX, you just didn't bother to find that out. This article is about *ne hardware* not booting OS9 anymore - something that was bound to happen eventually, and not suprising if you know anything about the pairing of the Mac OS and Apple hardware. Essentially, Apple is just choosing not to continue to update OS9 for new hardware - which they've always had to do previously whenever new hardware was launched. Why should they update an OS they've long-since put on EOL, and which they already provide a solution for? Regardless, OS9 will still continune to boot within OSX, as it always has been able to, in the form of "Classic" - which will provide the exact capabilities you are attacking them for not providing.
Get your facts straight. You have a right not to like Apple - but at least know what you're talking about.
If Apple does not include functionality to use OS7/8/9 apps in OSX, then it will hurt them.
This doesn't sound like the usual troll, so I'm assuming you just really don't know what you are talking about. Apple's Classic environment (mentioned in the article) is provides exactly the functionality you seem to think is lacking in Mac OS X. It gives you the ability to run almost all OS 7/8/9 apps.
The reason Apple is dropping Mac OS 9 is no different from what Microsoft and other OS makers have done for years. Try installing Windows 3.1 on your latest snazzy desktop. Probably not going to find native drivers for that Gf4 Ti, or that DVD burner, etc... Apple doesn't care to write drivers to support their new hardware in an old operating system.
This isn't new, this isn't suprising, and this isn't going to hurt Apple.
Spyky
Apple is not explicitly doing anything to the hardware to prevent OS 9 booting that could otherwise occur. They are simply not bothering to update OS 9 to boot on the new hardware, since it is legacy code.
We Mac users do not want change. We fear it. We would like to run one program at a time, like God intended.
This is an affront to Mom, Patriots everywhere, and just think of the children! This cannot be allowed to continue. OS 9 is what this country was founded on, and frankly, if you think otherwise, I think you may be aiding the terrorists. For it would take a terrorist's evil black heart to come up with such a hellish fate for Mac users. Deny our children the God Given Right to use OS 9!?
No! We will fight tooth and nail! From hill to dale! You will need to pry my OS 9 CD from my cold dead hands! There will never be Freedom until OS 9 is freed from it's oppressors! Join me now! We must win this battle FOR THE CHILDREN!
From the press release:
:^)
All new Macs sold since January 2002 have had Mac OS X factory-set as the default operating system. Over 75 percent of customers using these Macs have elected to keep Mac OS X as their default operating system...
Is nobody at Apple paying attention to this number? When Jobs acted like this was a good thing at the last MacWorld Expo in NY, my jaw hit the floor. In spite of the fact that Mac OS X is the default boot OS on new Macs, Mac users were going out of their way to switch to OS 9 as their boot-up OS.
This means a lot, if you think about it.
* Obviously one-fourth of new Mac users are not using any OS X specific applications. There's no "Futuristic box" in OS 9 to parallel Classic in OS X.
* This quarter of new Mac buyers aren't happy with the "Classic from within X" compromise, for whatever reason.
* This number doesn't count the people who simply don't know how to switch to OS 9 as their default boot disk. That might sound crazy, but in one usability test for our software, we had a user insert the CD upside-down, and not by accident but by ignorance. You can, unfortunately, never underestimate your spectrum of users. Think of how many new Mac users, if they knew of OS 9, might prefer it.
* This also means that the number of OS 9-only users is still pretty solid. Take the users of all the Macs out there now that are still running that won't run OS X -- even if all the people buying new Macs are old Mac users you're only reducing their numbers by 75% the number of new Macs sold. That's pretty slow. Heaven forbid some of that nearly 25% are new Mac users are choosing to boot into OS 9 from the start! It's a hard sale for Apple. The most users in the Mac market, believe it or not, are still on OS 9 or below.
Regardless, and in a complete Jekell/Hyde move, I think Apple's doing the right thing, at least from the point of view of Apple's continued financial success. People must be forced to move to the new OS for a couple of reasons. First, if the users move, the pushers (software developers) will follow. Second, if Apple wants to move to x86, they aren't going to be bringing Classic along with them.
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
If they're going to kill the ability to boot into OS 9, they better find a way to:
(1) Give Mac OS X the ability to upgrade firmware, whether it be the computer itself or hardware components. Currently you can only flash firmware or ROM updates from Mac OS 9
(2) Get bootable Mac OS X rescue disks for things like Norton Utilities or Diskwarrior, because sometimes fsck -y doesn't solve everything
(3) Update all Mac OS X software components so that they are as complete as the OS 9 equivalents. For example, Apple System Profiler. So far the Jaguar version still doesn't tell you everything like the OS 9 one does, like the Uni-North CPU version, which tells you if an older Mac can accept a dual-cpu upgrade.
The great thing about having OS 9 bootable is that you could use it for troubleshooting.
Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
<p><i>All I can say is welcome to the world of microsoft in 1995-1996.</i></p>
:-) welcome to the fun that is the Intel world!</i></p>
<p>Hey! I don't even want into the world of Microsoft in 2002!</p>
<p>Seriously, though. This is no big deal. The only people making a big deal about it are flame baiters. Apple has always done exactly this with their operating systems and hardware. Every new Mac released ships with and runs the current version of the OS, and nothing earlier.</p>
<p>The only difference now is that Apple institued a multi-year phase-in to OS X, in recognition of the fact that it was a far more dramatic change than from 6 to 7, 7 to 8, 8 to 9, etc.</p>
<p>Slashdotters are not giving Apple a lot of grief over this precisely because it is not a big deal.</p>
<p><i>It's just that Mac users got the shove alot later in the game.
<p>Actually, there have been two momentous changes in Macintosh history. On the OS side, moving from OS 6 to OS 7 added all kinds of under-the-hood changes, such as multi-tasking. On the hardware side, moving from 68K to PPC was a change to a completely re-designed processor. The fact that Apple made those transitions so smoothly and gracefully is the reason that many people don't realize just how dramatic the changes were.</p>
<p>Welcome to the world of Apple.</p>
Mike van Lammeren
It will challenge your head, your brain, and your mind.
isn't Classic that interpreter/emulator for OS 9?
No.
Don't think of Classic as an emulator, like Virtual PC. Think of it instead as just a program. Mac OS 9 was a shared-memory, cooperative multitasking system. Classic implements that entire system as a UNIX process. Within the process's address space, you have the entire Mac OS 9 operating system and all your apps. But the apps aren't running under emulation. They're executing native PowerPC binary code. In some cases, apps run faster under Classic than they did under OS 9.
Of course, some stuff had to change. Since Classic isn't really an OS, but just a process running under UNIX, it can't talk directly to the hardware. Some software-- not much, but some-- can't work under Classic because of this.
But it's not an emulator. It's more like vmware than it is like an emulator.
I bought a Power Macintosh 8600/250 in 1997...
...AND IT WOULDN'T EVEN BOOT INTO System 4!!!!!!
WTF. How is anyone supposed to get anything done? I can't even play StuntCopter or Cairo Shootout in the right resolution/screen depth! MacPaint becomes garbled and unstable under the "Finder", really just the damn MultiFinder in disguise! What a marketing ploy! Thanks ALOT, Apple!!!!!
</FUNNY>
<INSIGHTFUL LIKELY="maybe">
Seriously, if tons of people are worried about paying thousands to replace old shareware programs on the Mac with new commercial software, why not just write to your favorate Mac OS X shareware developer and request they create a replacement product? Be sure to elaborate on exactly what it would replace, and why such a thing would be popular with whoever needs that particular product. Panic and Ambrosia are probably two good places to start, and I'm sure there are hundreds more.
Trust me, the Mac shareware scene WANTS your feedback.
</INSIGHTFUL>
CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?