From: Todd Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Come on, you're always telling everyone else to do some googling, how
come you didn't? ;) Here's a link to a google on this topic:
http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=schiller+Mac+intel
+classic&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
That search didn't offer any specific articles that said "Classic is
dead," but then I didn't read all 25 articles that came up on the
first page of that search.
I was already aware that Classic doesn't run on the development Intel
Macs, but that in and of itself doesn't constitute evidence. There
are several tenets of the Mac experience that aren't supported in the
current development Intel Macs -- such as Firewire booting -- that
everyone knows will come in time.
I'll be the first to say that Classic is on its way out and that
Apple may be unwilling to devote any serious resources to making it
work on Intel Macs, but if they choose that route I'd consider it a
(minor) mistake. It won't affect the majority's experience much (most
OS X users already work more or less exclusively in X, and OS 9-
booting machines will be almost four years gone by the time Intel
Macs arrive in force), but it will annoy a small but vocal segment
enough that there's a real possibility that a third party may step in
to make it work.
As I said before, I could certainly be wrong. Perhaps I should have
said "I hope" Apple finds a way to allow Classic to continue in Intel
Macs -- but if they don't and you're dependent on it by the time they
start to show up, you'll be able to buy a brand-new 2006 or 2007
model PowerPC-based Mac to keep Classic going for another five to 10
years on. So now we're essentially saying to people "You're really
going to have to abandon OS 9 as a viable software platform by 2012
or so."
That may seem hard-hearted of Apple in comparison to MS's (deeply
resented) inability to kill off Windows 95 ten years on, but I don't
see this as a huge problem.
Then there is this quote from the Universal Binaries Development
home page on Apple's Developer site:
"If your application runs in a version of the Mac OS that is earlier
than Mac OS X version 10.0, you should first read Carbon Porting
Guide and Technical Note TN2003 Moving Your Code to Mac OS X."<<
That sounds pretty clear to me. :)
Unless you have the Carbon Porting Guide or the text of TN2003, I'm
afraid it's not clear to me. The quoted sentence seems to be saying
that if you have an app that runs on OS 9, you'll need to follow
special guidelines/overcome particular obstacles in order to make it
work. It does NOT clearly and unequivocally say "No."
Read the first article indexed in that google search above by C/Net.
This comment caused me to re-look at the URL for the google search
you provided, and I realised that the email program broke the line,
meaning I didn't get part of the full URL. Now that I've corrected
this, I see where your certainty comes from.
I get the impression from reading that article that Classic users
could persuade Apple to include (or at least attempt) Classic support
if they heard from enough of them. Phil quite specifically didn't say
that it was impossible -- his quotes make it clear that they just
don't think there's any call for it that's worth the effort. So that
*could* change, though I'd say it's pretty unlikely without a massive
call for support. Anybody here remember when the original iMac was
announced with a 33.6 modem? There was a HUGE hue and cry and Apple
had to change the spec. Pressure works in some cases.
But given the article you cite, let's assume that Classic IS dead as
2007. So?
I mean, seriously. As I mentioned above, buying a PPC-based Mac in
2007 (or for years afterward, since they will be widely available say
three years later as G4 towers and iMacs are today) will give you
another five to ten years of Classic availability. Cripes, some of us
don't even expect to be around before the last PowerPC-based Mac
running Classic croaks its last!
Thanks for the additional info. It's good to talk to someone on this
list who can discuss ideas -- even in disagreement -- without getting
hyperdefensive. I'm perfectly open to being pointed to new sources of
info, and perfectly willing to change even a strongly-held opinion if
the facts are there. I'll also say I'm wrong when I'm wrong (see
above). Classic, I still believe, has a future -- it may be shorter
than "forever" now, quite a bit shorter if everything works out the
way they're talking about it now -- but I have a feeling people will
still be running some OS 9 apps in 10-20 years just the way a heck of
a lot companies and persons still rely on DOS for certain tasks after
more than 20 years.
_Chas_
"To use the Mac is to be confronted, over and over, with the idea
that the most mundane task can be done artfully and compassionately,
beautifully and invitingly. " -- Glenn McDonald
--
The iMac List is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and...
Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives |
- Epson Stylus Color 580 Printers - new at $69 | & CDRWs on Sale! |
Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html>
iMac List info: <http://lowendmac.com/imac/list.shtml>
--> AOL users, remove "mailto:";
Send list messages to: <mailto:[email protected]>
To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/imac-list%40mail.maclaunch.com/>
---------------------------------------------------------------
iPod Accessories for Less
at 1-800-iPOD.COM
Fast Delivery, Low Price, Good Deal
www.1800ipod.com
---------------------------------------------------------------
