Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Software - Troubleshooting and Discussion > macOS > Apple could make classic seamless?

Apple could make classic seamless?
Thread Tools
6116
Junior Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: NY, NY, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2001, 12:46 PM
 
Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but after the first time Classic starts up, couldn't it write its ram contents to a file and just read in the from that everytime, instead of actually going through the startup process? Weren't there some powerbooks that did something similar to this? It seems like the only annoying thing about Classic is how long it takes to start up, and this would take care of that.
     
gunnar
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Feb 1999
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2001, 12:59 PM
 
That would seem very possible. VirtualPC 4 does a similar thing. I would also like to see an aqua theme for classic and passing open applications to the dock not the old apple menu for consistency. Apple wouldn't have to sell 9.x with the theme or changes. It would only function in X. There'd be no reason to stay in classic, it would just make it more seamless.
     
foobars
Mac Elite
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Somewhere in the land surrouding Fenway Park
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2001, 01:22 PM
 
Originally posted by 6116:
<STRONG>Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but after the first time Classic starts up, couldn't it write its ram contents to a file and just read in the from that everytime, instead of actually going through the startup process? Weren't there some powerbooks that did something similar to this? It seems like the only annoying thing about Classic is how long it takes to start up, and this would take care of that.</STRONG>
There are a number of reasons why this can't happen. The largest one being that Classic isn't a program so much as it is a front end to a much larger system. Remember that OS9 isn't emulated in X. It runs natively one the hardware, unlike VPC.
     
ink
Mac Elite
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Utah
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2001, 01:29 PM
 
Originally posted by 6116:
<STRONG>Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but after the first time Classic starts up, couldn't it write its ram contents to a file and just read in the from that everytime, instead of actually going through the startup process? Weren't there some powerbooks that did something similar to this? It seems like the only annoying thing about Classic is how long it takes to start up, and this would take care of that.</STRONG>
That would work if you never booted back into OS9. If you were allowed to do this, and then you rebootd the machine to watch a DVD or whatever, then the filesystems will all need to be checked (risking possible corruption, etc.) -- and then when Classic is started again you could have all sorts of problems (especially if you ran Software Update in 9.1 while in 9.1).

OSX could shut down Classic when the 'switch startup disk' panel is used, I suppose. (speaking of which, who wants a startup choice like PowerPC Linux give you, instead of fully booting into one OS and then rebooting into the other?)
     
maxintosh
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: New York, NY
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2001, 08:00 PM
 
Another reason this would be challenging to say the least is the fact that Classic thinks it has 1 GB of RAM automatically. Writing 1 GB to the hard disk would not only consume vast amounts of space, it would also take a very long time.


Maxintosh
     
dogzilla
Grizzled Veteran
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Boston, MA USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 12, 2001, 11:09 PM
 
Originally posted by maxintosh:
<STRONG>Another reason this would be challenging to say the least is the fact that Classic thinks it has 1 GB of RAM automatically. Writing 1 GB to the hard disk would not only consume vast amounts of space, it would also take a very long time.


Maxintosh</STRONG>
Well...wait a sec. Isn't that 1GB of RAM (or what's used anyway) *already* on disk? You'd just write out what's already in memory. And writing contents of memory to disk has to be reasonably fast, as we all use it every day (OSX's virtual memory/paging).

I don't know that this isn't technically feasible. There are other systems that do this, at least partially.
     
Craig R. Arko
Forum Regular
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Minneapolis, MN, USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Jun 13, 2001, 08:13 AM
 
Originally posted by dogzilla:
<STRONG>

Well...wait a sec. Isn't that 1GB of RAM (or what's used anyway) *already* on disk? You'd just write out what's already in memory. And writing contents of memory to disk has to be reasonably fast, as we all use it every day (OSX's virtual memory/paging).

I don't know that this isn't technically feasible. There are other systems that do this, at least partially.</STRONG>
Nope, there's only 80 MB (or so) on disk already. Allocated VM doesn't create swap unless it needs to.

I suspect the reason this will never happen is because of the bad time with the iBook/PowerBook 'save memory on shutdown' bug. Remember, they had something like this and it was hosing machines so badly Apple just released an 'update' that disabled the option. They wouldn't want to get burned twice.
     
   
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:07 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,