[mrchin]

Anyone else see this 9.2 Beta floatinf around on Carracho and Hotline Servers?

Anyone using it and what's new? Is it stable etc?

------------------
Cocoa Krispies. Burning Pentiums to a Crisp!
Need help, or better yet, can you help me, mrchin777@home.com

[C-Eye]

Here's some info from Artificial Cheese - http://www.artificialcheese.com/articles/may01/macos92/

------------------

[OverclockedHomoSapien]

I came across this:
http://www.macossupport.com/92.html

Very interesting. I plan on using OS 9 for a long time, and it's good to see Apple optimizing it even further. The funny part is that with each speed increase of Classic, OS 9 increases in speed. So it's going to make OS X look even slower! Ah, but in the end we all benefit.

I really dig Apple. They rock.

[Gregg]

Even for someone stuck on OS 8.1 for awhile, the 9.2 release sounds intriguing. I was planning to skip it and go right to X, but with all the problems it has run into on desktop G3's like mine, I'm not so sure anymore. The question for me will be whether the final OS 9 version or some update to X will be best for me until I buy a new Mac, and how much it will cost; dollars, and set up time.

[Mac_Nacho]

When should 9.2 be available. Aslo, I read somewhere that 9.1 had the ability to manage memory in a more "modern" way (I think I read protected memory, but not sure of that one) and that Steve decided to pull out that feature so that 9.1 won't compete with X.
Should we expect somechange in memory management and stability?
regards.

[Cipher13]

Not 'protected memory' so to speak, but perhaps improved page buffering... yeah, the new microkernel had many improvements, and Steve decided not to release it so it wouldn't kick his babys ass...


------------------

AIM: Cipher1387
ICQ: 48111606
mail: cipher13@mac.com

[This message has been edited by Cipher13 (edited 05-11-2001).]

[Moonray]

I don't think the speed is a big issue any more in 9.x. In fact some Finder actions (moving/trashing files) seem to be slower than in 8.6 for me.
New 9.x versions will rather be bugfixes than introduce much new features.
The more important thing for Apple (and me) is the CarbonLib development to ensure carbonized programs run well with same features on 8/9/X. Version 1.3.1 should be available now
-

[fisherKing]

for me, 9.1 has been the fastest, most stable mac os i've used (started at 7.1)

anywhere to download the 9.2 beta??

[Kestral]

Originally posted by fisherKing:
for me, 9.1 has been the fastest, most stable mac os i've used (started at 7.1) anywhere to download the 9.2 beta??

Me too, 9.1 has been solid for me as well. Would have liked to see that new microkernel people here are talking about. If Steve did indeed axe it because of OS X, then he's kind of a goober. So much for thinking different - you can only do so as long as you agree with Steve.

My suggestion is to not install a beta and wait for the actual release. I do hear that the 9.2 beta is really really solid though, but better to wait and let the early adopters take it up the arse. We have an old saying on Wall Street, the second mouse gets the cheese

[OverclockedHomoSapien]

for me, 9.1 has been the fastest, most stable mac os i've used (started at 7.1)

Same here.

I don't know about these rumors of Jobs neutering the OS 9.1 kernal so it wouldn't compete with OS X. That sounds like the sort of internet fodder that gets passed around only because of the sensationalism, not the validity. But if it were true it wouldn't surprise me at all. Apple needs to use every trick in the book to make OS X come across as "the world's most advanced OS".

[Cipher13]

I guess I'm gonna have to go against the flow and say 9.04 is the best... 9.1 was nothing but problems.
The 9.1 update, that is. I'll try the full version eventually...


------------------

AIM: Cipher1387
ICQ: 48111606
mail: cipher13@mac.com