[HiDDeN]

Am I getting this right or am I just a bit confused? Does the new dual 1,42 G4 no longer support OS9 or does it just not come along with the software package but can still be installed on it? I hope I can still install it. i don't use OS9 that much anymore, but I still need it for those little silly things.

[CheesePuff]

It will not boot into Mac OS 9, but you can boot Classic from within Mac OS X, and that will let you run nearly any Mac OS 9 application right inside Mac OS X.

[HiDDeN]

Well that sertainly makes things hard for me. Some of the apps that I need to run, only run in the real thing and not through classic from X. If I wish to do so I need to locate and delete the RAVE file every time.

[Ron Goodman]

The new machines have hardware that was never supported in OS 9. Apple isn't going to keep supporting new hardware in an obsolete OS.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by HiDDeN:
Some of the apps that I need to run, only run in the real thing and not through classic from X.

Like what?

[HiDDeN]

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Like what?

Like my favorite game. Combat mission beyond overlord and Combat mission Barbarossa to Berlin.

[redrockdes]

I'm in the same quandary. I would love to buy one of the new 1.42 ghz dual systems, but for some reason, Airport will not work for me in a Classic environment. It works in 9 and 10, but Classic has a message that it does not support the Airport application. I also have thousands of Quark files that run better natively on 9 than in Classic, anyway.

Can a partition be created on one of the new G4s that can run 9? Or can I boot 9 from a firewire drive?

The other alternative is to just settle for the dual 1.25 ghz system with 9 on it, but it sure would be nice to have the extra speed since it is available for not very much more $$.

[Severed Hand of Skywalker]

Originally posted by HiDDeN:
Like my favorite game. Combat mission beyond overlord and Combat mission Barbarossa to Berlin.

Well guess you are going to have to stick with a pokey dual 1.25GHz system.

[Powerbook]

Originally posted by redrockdes:

Or can I boot 9 from a firewire drive?

That's a cool idea! Won't give you a top performance though.

PB.

[Eriamjh]

Or can I boot 9 from a firewire drive?

I doubt it. I belive OS9 support is required in the Firmware. Apple chose not to spend the money/time to develop the drivers for the new hardware to support OS9. They are not crippled. They are merely unsupported. Big difference.

If someone like a former Apple programmer could figure out how to patch the firmware and write drivers for the new hardware, I'm sure OS9 would run on it.

Otherwise, OSX is the only way.

[Leonard]

NO, you CANNOT boot into OS 9 from ANY volume internal or external. It is not a matter of patching the firmware to handle the new hardware. Apple has slimmed down the firmware to only what OS X requires to boot, to optimize the new machines for OS X. Ie. There is no OS 9 part of the firmware to patch anymore. If you buy one of the new machines your ONLY option is to boot into OS X.

We all knew this was coming. Apple told us 6 months ago.

[judd]

OK so you can't boot in OS9 with a new PM.

But if I were to get a new PM, can I still connect it (either ethernet or SCSI) with my old g3 powerbook and share/copy files back and forth?


Thanks

[Leonard]

Originally posted by judd:
OK so you can't boot in OS9 with a new PM.

But if I were to get a new PM, can I still connect it (either ethernet or SCSI) with my old g3 powerbook and share/copy files back and forth?


Thanks

Yes, you will always be able to network two Macs, new or old, via ethernet. No problem there.

I'm not too sure on the SCSI thing. I take it you're talking about SCSI target disk mode. Can you do this on new Macs still? New Macs don't have SCSI built-in so you'd need a SCSI card. But even then can you do it? I know there is Firewire target disk mode. But I'm not sure how these work. Whether they boot off the Powerbook's drive or boot of the desktop's drive and then acces the Powerbook. I've never used SCSI or Firewire Target Disk Mode.

Does your Powerbook have Firewire?

[judd]

Originally posted by Leonard:
Yes, you will always be able to network two Macs, new or old, via ethernet. No problem there.

I'm not too sure on the SCSI thing. I take it you're talking about SCSI target disk mode. Can you do this on new Macs still? New Macs don't have SCSI built-in so you'd need a SCSI card. But even then can you do it? I know there is Firewire target disk mode. But I'm not sure how these work. Whether they boot off the Powerbook's drive or boot of the desktop's drive and then acces the Powerbook. I've never used SCSI or Firewire Target Disk Mode.

Does your Powerbook have Firewire?

My powerbook is a wallstreet, so alas no firewire. I was thinking of buying a new PM with a SCSI card (the apple store actually has it as an option) and then connect it to my powerbook as a SCSI target disk. It used to work perfectly in the good old days of OS9, But not sure if it will work between OS9 and OSX. Anyone tried something similar?

[Person Man]

Originally posted by judd:
My powerbook is a wallstreet, so alas no firewire. I was thinking of buying a new PM with a SCSI card (the apple store actually has it as an option) and then connect it to my powerbook as a SCSI target disk. It used to work perfectly in the good old days of OS9, But not sure if it will work between OS9 and OSX. Anyone tried something similar?

What you're trying to do should work without problem using a SCSI card and PowerBook in SCSI disk mode

[goldplata]

That�s funny. Tere are people trying to run OSX on old Machines, and people with new brillant top machines trying to run unsupported OS9.... Why prohibited things are so tentating???

[redrockdes]

The standard response to people complaining about the demise of OS9 has been "your favorite applications will all run in Classic." Well, maybe all but one...AirPort.

"The application 'AirPort' is not supported by Classic," is the message I saw when I tried to print a Quark Xpress file using my AirPort network. I thought I had installed something wrong, but I didn't. AirPort works well for me both in 9 and 10, but not in Classic.

A phone call to AppleCare confirmed this. There is no workaround and no plans to develop one -- anyone who still needs to use Classic and AirPort is SOL.

[raferx]

Originally posted by redrockdes:
I'm in the same quandary. I would love to buy one of the new 1.42 ghz dual systems, but for some reason, Airport will not work for me in a Classic environment. It works in 9 and 10, but Classic has a message that it does not support the Airport application. I also have thousands of Quark files that run better natively on 9 than in Classic, anyway.

Can a partition be created on one of the new G4s that can run 9? Or can I boot 9 from a firewire drive?

The other alternative is to just settle for the dual 1.25 ghz system with 9 on it, but it sure would be nice to have the extra speed since it is available for not very much more $$.

InDesign handles Quark files just fine as far as I know.

[Chris Grande]

Originally posted by goldplata:
That�s funny. Tere are people trying to run OSX on old Machines, and people with new brillant top machines trying to run unsupported OS9.... Why prohibited things are so tentating???

This is so true! Now we just need Quark on OSX hey Quark! You feel this huh?, you feel it punk?!

[goldplata]

I cannot imagine thar Quark doesn�t exist on OSX????
It was one of the best Apps for desktop publishing in the OS 8 days!!!
QUARK YOU ARE SLEEPING!
Sorry but I also love these Icons!

[redrockdes]

Originally posted by raferx:
InDesign handles Quark files just fine as far as I know.

Yes, it's true that InDesign can open Quark files. But when I tried it, it did not automatically pick up all the links to imported graphics and some items shifted in position. It took several minutes to make adjustments to each Quark file, and I could not afford to do that with hundreds of Quark files on my systems that must be accessible at a moment's notice.

I prepare a lot of work for print, and although most printers I know will now accept InDesign files, they still prefer Quark in their pre-press departments.

Maybe I will start trying to use InDesign for entirely new work that does not need to share artwork with existing Quark files and doesn't need to go to a printer. I just hope Quark can get a version 6 to market very soon.

[booboo]

Originally posted by CheesePuff:
It will not boot into Mac OS 9, but you can boot Classic from within Mac OS X, and that will let you run nearly any Mac OS 9 application right inside Mac OS X.

'Nearly any' - except:

Most pro-audio plug-ins are currently unavailable in OS X: ALL of KS Waves plugs - IMHO the best in the industry - unavailable. Run in Classic? No.

Numerous (i.e. most ) VST and RTAS (Digidesign) plug-ins, including half of those made by Apple-owned eMagic - not OS X native. None of these will run in Classic.

Most of these will come it time, but they're not available now.

Plus being able to boot into OS 9 has really helped me fix some serious OS X bugs - I'd rather not have to boot into 9, but right now it is a necessity.

I can't help but feel it would have been piss-easy for Apple to provide full OS 9 support in this new revision of the old MDD's - even if it meant leaving out FireWire2 support (big deal) and that decision not to support 9 was more politic than anything else....

[Big Mac]

Originally posted by booboo:
I can't help but feel it would have been piss-easy for Apple to provide full OS 9 support in this new revision of the old MDD's - even if it meant leaving out FireWire2 support (big deal) and that decision not to support 9 was more politic than anything else....

Since the new machines have very few major hardware differences from the previous revisions, I have to agree with your assertion. This is Apple's way of forcing all new machine owners into OS X, even though some individuals may have valid reasons for booting into 9. We knew the break would come at some point, but I was hoping it wouldn't be until 970 machines (which will, of course, be substantially different from the previous generation).

[Nep2ne]

I just wish I didn't have to pay Apple prices on 512MB of RAM. Then that 9/X-bootable machines would look a little bit more affordable.

[michaelb]

Originally posted by Big Mac:
Since the new machines have very few major hardware differences from the previous revisions, I have to agree with your assertion. This is Apple's way of forcing all new machine owners into OS X, even though some individuals may have valid reasons for booting into 9.

It sounds like you're serious, but I don't think you realise that making a "Mac OS 9.2.3" or a "Mac OS 9.3" would be a serious drain on Apple's resources.

0) New extensions would have to be written for the new hardware - FW800, APX, optical drive revs, etc.

1) A quality control team would have to be set up to qualify each new addition against extension conflicts.

2) Releases would have to be seeded to device developers for testing.

3) Mac OS 9.3 would have to be further optimized for Classic use since all Mac OS X installations use the latest 9 as Classic.

4) Interactions between X and 9 (running as Classic) would have to be tested.

On and on...

This is all costly, tedious work that steals resources from getting Mac OS X 10.3 ready (hopefully for early demonstrations at WWDC).

Personally, I would love a new machine that could boot into 9, but even I understand the practicalities involved.

The price of progress is letting go of the old, even if what's old is still good.

[Burn]

Originally posted by booboo:
'Nearly any' - except:

Most pro-audio plug-ins are currently unavailable in OS X: ALL of KS Waves plugs - IMHO the best in the industry - unavailable. Run in Classic? No.

Numerous (i.e. most ) VST and RTAS (Digidesign) plug-ins, including half of those made by Apple-owned eMagic - not OS X native. None of these will run in Classic.

Most of these will come it time, but they're not available now.

Have you contacted the authors of these plugins? What are they saying? The whole (Mac) world is making the switch (has been for years now), are they happy working with inferior - out of date - discontinued - unsupported technology??? Reminds me of people who still do graphics on an Amiga. Yeeaa.. you're cool! People rag on a company like Quark for not rebuilding a giant app like XPress, what about "plugIn" authors?? weak, very weak.

ESPECIALLY considering the inroads Apple has made in the pro-audio area. Can you say Lazyazz developers? has nothing to do with Apple.

Plus being able to boot into OS 9 has really helped me fix some serious OS X bugs - I'd rather not have to boot into 9, but right now it is a necessity.

I can't help but feel it would have been piss-easy for Apple to provide full OS 9 support in this new revision of the old MDD's - even if it meant leaving out FireWire2 support (big deal) and that decision not to support 9 was more politic than anything else.... [/B]

Feel that way, but the reality is that the OS9 functionality was holding back OSX progression in the hardware arena.. so like any old trash - it's gone to the curb. Simple as that. I don't know what fixes you have for OSX working from OS9, but they're obviously not worth anything anymore. There's no giant goup of users with unusable OSX machines everywhere - is there?

No politics involved, please. Apple has covered this ages ago. They are continuing to make the 1.25ghz a dual boot machine.. for those that *refuse* to move ahead and stick with old technology.

What is so hard for people to figure out? It's time to move!

[Burn]

Originally posted by Nep2ne:
I just wish I didn't have to pay Apple prices on 512MB of RAM. Then that 9/X-bootable machines would look a little bit more affordable.

What 'Apple' prices do you mean? You never have to buy ram from them. (I didn't think anyone ever did)

Buy all of your ram from Kingston.

[Burn]

Originally posted by redrockdes:
I prepare a lot of work for print, and although most printers I know will now accept InDesign files, they still prefer Quark in their pre-press departments.

Maybe I will start trying to use InDesign for entirely new work that does not need to share artwork with existing Quark files and doesn't need to go to a printer. I just hope Quark can get a version 6 to market very soon.

I would be totally wary of ANY print shop that did not have a handle on InDesign. I mean come on, this app has been out for YEARS and is beyond Vers2! Adobe provides a few of my local shops with literally 50X the support that Quark considers. IN FACT because of ID and Acrobat I even work with printers that flat out prefer the PDF. Bubye Quirk!

If Quirk 6 is half as crappy as Quirk 5, I will fear for Quirks business BIGTIME. They are about to become the next PageMaker (joking there). Though I made the 100% switch to ID a while back, so I actually just laugh at the situation. Are people suckers for punishment or what?

The days of Illustrator 8, Photoshop5 and Quark 4 are over, move on!!

Find a new print shop.