Reprieve for Booting New Macs With Mac OS?

MatthewRothenberg writes "Apple has announced that as of January, new Macs will boot with Mac OS X only, but now MacInTouch reports that there might be a reprieve in the works for booting with Mac OS. According to one reader, a Quark representative has been calling pro publishers to ease their worries about the lack of a Mac OS X-native version of its QuarkXPress DTP program; after talking it over with Quark, Apple has agreed to move back the Mac OS X-only deadline until June." I can imagine that conversation with Jobs: "Why don't you just finish porting your freaking product already?"

Comments

Quark can't afford to make a mistake

[LordNimon]

Quark XPress 4.0 was rushed out with lots of bugs, and it took months to fix them. If the same thing happens with 5.0, then it's pretty much over for Quark, everyone will switch to Adobe InDesign.

In fact, InDesign 1.0 was garbage, but Adobe didn't care. They knew that time was their real advantage, and that as soon as they released a good product, everyone would forget the past. Well for Quark, all they have is the past. The vast majority of people who use Quark do it only because it's what they've always been using.

My guess is that Quark 5.0 will be so freakin' amazing, that people will forget how long it took to come out. In fact, I bet some people will laud Quark for taking its time and releasing a quality product.

not Quark related

[BigBir3d]

I have the feeling that this is due to the fact that there will be no evolutionary jump in Mac hardware for the next 6 months, so to continue shipping machines with OS 9 and OS X is no big deal.

Qaurk's market has shrunken noticably enough that not offering OS X ported version is no big deal...

Dinosaurs...

Screw Quark

[stubear]

Apple should say tough shit to Quark. They've been holding Apple's release of OS X for far too long. Adobe has had OS X native versions fo their apps, including InDesign 2.0 (IMHO a far better DTP application than Quark), for over a year now. In fact, users of Quark Xpress should say screw Quark too as Quarj has heldp back the adoption of OS X by designers and the publishing industry. I know lots of designer who want to move to OS X but can't because of Quark and I tell them to do themselves a favor by dumping Quark and getting InDesign.

What good should that delay be?

[capmilk]

Does it really make a difference to publishing pros if Quark XPress is finally available on Mac OS X or not? I can hardly imagine that everybody is only waiting for Quark so they can switch to X.

What about existing workflows and applications for scanning, printing, ripping etc. that either don't exist on X or cost a fortune to update I can imagine that the inevitable switch from Photoshop 5.x to Photoshop 7 might prevent a couple of companies to do so.

Now, if Apple starts delivering OS X-only Macs, what exactly are OS 9-based companies going to do? They can't buy new fast Macs, as they are not supporting OS 9. It might well be cheaper to switch to Windows... Dangerous game, Apple.

Quark?

[Hadlock]

i missed somthing - what exactly is quark, and what does it do? it couldn't be terribly important for the average home user, as that title rarely comes up in my online reading, but it must be at least marginally important, as they seem to have apple's balls in a vice.

Quark is just an excuse for Apple

[wakinyan7]

I think the Quark issue is a great excuse for Apple to back off of at least one of their arrogant mistakes announced at the last MacWorld. Jaguar was touted as the be-all-ready-for-prime-time version of OSX. Fact is, it was bug-ridden; with the last 2 releases fixing no less then 150 bugs (that is more than the $1 per feature cost of upgrading that Jobs touted).

They alienated thousands with the mis-handling of .mac and the full-price-only upgrade to Jaguar. Anyone who has a large number of Macs in design and publishing has stayed away from OSX because of the hidden costs of upgrading. And now that Apple has made it clear that it will cost about $700 to get to the next full version of the OS, multi-Mac houses are taking a wait-and-see approach. Remember, counting the software upgrades, a upgrade to OSX for the average design workstation is close to $1,000.

Apple is only too happy to back off of this "shove X down your throat" move and blame Quark.

Major Restructure...

[Anonymous Coward]

Be careful putting your faith in Quark. I'm still amazed at how blatantly people follow Quark, after how terrible they've treated their customers over the years. The Quark following is almost as fun to watch as the Mac followers.... =)

But, keep in mind. Quark is in the process of closing it's main office, in Denver completely. All development and support has been shipped over seas to India. Denver has a major growth of unemployed Quarkies now... things are getting interesting.

I won't post the obvious rumors that are about town, but if you've got a chance, I'd high recommend giving InDesign a look, it may be worth it in the end.....

Drop QuarkXPress

[White Roses]

The company clearly doesn't want to properly support Macs. Whatever spin the marketroids want to put on it, it comes down to Quark not giving a rat's ass about Mac support. I'm pure Mac OS X now (aside from one little legacy program that I don't think is even made any more - but it's not a heavy-duty program so emulation is fine), and it's great. Adobe has committed, M$, for %$@&'s sake, has committed. Quark simply doesn't want Mac business any longer. Leave them.

Quark is a private company

[Spencerian]

Quark doesn't have shareholders to impress for profits. Likewise, no shareholders means less pressure to make a Mac OS X move.

I've already stated my two cents on my blog about Quark's machinations. I do have one item to add: Quark appears to have hedged its bets. It knew full well of Apple's commitment with Mac OS X over 3 years ago. However, like many companies, they've been burned when Apple changed gears on their OS plan and announced several Yet Another Operating System Plans in the latter 1990's.

So Quark went on with its Mac OS 9 version of QuarkXPress (5.0) just in case Apple's OS X plans got chucked. Now that OS X appears entrenched and with direction, Quark is working on the OS X version. The question why they are so slow to port is up to speculation.

However, I don't feel that Quark's new OS X product will compare to InDesign 2, which has had a larger head start in both Mac OS 9 and now a Mac OS X version. It only takes two or three versions of an Adobe product before it has refined into a competitive product.

It's even possible that Quark has lost programming staffing and has had a harder time porting. That's just speculation, but it's yet another idea that makes you go "hmmmm."

I want some of your crack, sir.

[Mikey-San]

Here's a little experiment you can try at home:

Get a Power Mac G4 (Gigabit Ethernet) Software Install CD.

Get a Power Mac G4 (Digital Audio) Software Install CD.

Compare the two Mac OS ROM files in the System Folder of each CD. See how they're different?

With each hardware revision--notice those two logic boards are different--Apple updates Mac OS 9 to boot on the damned thing.

They do it with OS X, too, but it's not nearly as apparent.

So, why do they do that? The 1-MB bootROM of NewWorld machines, of course. It contains Open Firmware instructions that initialize an OS from a boot device. Change the hardware in certain places, change the software to accomodate. (Note that this is not always the rule, but it's the general practice here.)

Simply put, in the end, if Apple doesn't want you booting OS 9, dammit, you won't. (At least, not without some supa-leet hacksorin'.) The bootROM doesn't /have/ to initialize anything it doesn't want to--remember that OF can specify what toolbox ROM image gets loaded and which doesn't.

Yes, there is more OF code in the toolbox ROM image, and there's the bootinfo file in the master directory block, but what you're talking about is not something a low-level format will circumvent/solve/whatever.

Anyway, rather than exhaust myself explaining why you can't just low-level format a frickin' HD like you say--when have you ever needed to re-update the firmware on a Power Mac after a HD replacement?--I'll point you to some good reading you /should/ have done before making an ass out of yourself:

http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/hardware/Dev ic eManagers/pci_srvcs/pci_cards_drivers/PCI_BOOK.35. html

http://developer.apple.com/technotes/tn/tn1167.h tm l

If I'm wrong, I would love to know where and why. If Apple can be circumvented, who cares what Quark says? (Then again, who cares, anyway? Quark can eat a fat one.)

-/-
Mikey-San