Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

Podolsky · Jan 13, 2003, 10:21 PM

Not that I really care -- BUT....Is it really true that 17" won't boot 9? How do you think Apple will have engineered the no boot into 9? Doesn't the fact that Classic is supported mean that these systems are 9 capable? What are some ideas for workarounds - ie, how do we get these new systems to run a 9 session?

Mr. Blur · Jan 13, 2003, 10:34 PM

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=139871 (and probably other threads already as well....)

Podolsky · Jan 13, 2003, 11:27 PM

Originally posted by Mr. Blur:
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...hreadid=139871 (and probably other threads already as well....)

I've read them. They don't answer any of the questions I ask. However, I understand we may have to wait for the answers.

Leonard · Jan 15, 2003, 04:48 PM

Originally posted by Podolsky:
Not that I really care -- BUT....Is it really true that 17" won't boot 9? How do you think Apple will have engineered the no boot into 9? Doesn't the fact that Classic is supported mean that these systems are 9 capable? What are some ideas for workarounds - ie, how do we get these new systems to run a 9 session?

Yes, it is true they won't boot OS 9. Someone gave it a try already.

Running Classic and booting OS 9 are two completely different things. With running Classic, you are booting OS X and running Classic under OS X.

It's probably impossible to run OS 9 on the new hardware, since the new hardware uses a new motherboard. OS 9 and the OS 9 part of the Apple ROM have most likely not been modified to run on the new motherboard. In fact Apple has probably thinned down the Apple ROM to what OS X needs... should be able to verify this by the size of the Apple ROM.

In otherwords, if you want the new hardware, get use to OS X.

Podolsky · Jan 15, 2003, 05:03 PM

Originally posted by Leonard:
In otherwords, if you want the new hardware, get use to OS X.

I am used to OS X.

And I don't blame apple one bit for what they are doing. But, I want the newest hardware AND occasionally I may want an OS 9 session. It doesn't mean I am a Neanderthal

My original questions were meant to try and brainstorm a workaround. If Apple closed the door via Rom, than it may be very difficult or impossible. But there are a lot of other ways they may have disabled an OS 9 session that we can get past........

I will be getting a Mac in 2003 and when I do, I will be spending some time trying to boot back into 9.......

appledude83 · Jan 15, 2003, 06:36 PM

Well as things go along I would imagine OS 9 will eventually be dead, I think it is already except for maybe a few apps or something that aren't on X yet. Apple obviously wants everyone on X and eventually they pretty much will be.

Macola · Jan 16, 2003, 11:38 PM

Originally posted by appledude83:
Well as things go along I would imagine OS 9 will eventually be dead, I think it is already except for maybe a few apps or something that aren't on X yet.

Yeah, like Quark...ever heard of that one?

Mac Zealot · Jan 17, 2003, 01:03 AM

Frankly I find it faster to start classic than it is to start OS 9.

HOWEVER. Certain apps don't run at all in classic (they have this "This program will not run in classic" thing GRR!)

ARENA · Jan 17, 2003, 01:55 AM

I don't really get this threads...
Any of you have tried to get OS7 to boot on a Titanium?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
PS.: 9 is DEAD.

John123 · Jan 17, 2003, 01:58 AM

Originally posted by ARENA:
I don't really get this threads...
Any of you have tried to get OS7 to boot on a Titanium?

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
PS.: 9 is DEAD.

Does 7 have any redeeming features that 9 lacks? No.

Does 9 have any redeeming features that X lacks? YES!

Hopefully now you understand...

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 17, 2003, 02:05 AM

Originally posted by John123:
Does 7 have any redeeming features that 9 lacks? No.

Does 9 have any redeeming features that X lacks? YES!

Hopefully now you understand...

Hope you understand that is why Apple has a little something called ROM's.

If you want OS9 for it's "redeeming features" then you are going to have to stick with older hardware.

But since you don't even care I don't see what all the fuss is about.

ARENA · Jan 17, 2003, 02:21 AM

Originally posted by John123:
Does 7 have any redeeming features that 9 lacks? No.

Does 9 have any redeeming features that X lacks? YES!

Hopefully now you understand...

I was going to answer but Skywalker beat me to it.

As for redeeming features...no comment.

MickS · Jan 17, 2003, 05:35 AM

Originally posted by John123:
Does 7 have any redeeming features that 9 lacks? No.

It's smaller, less memory hungry, will run on my SE/30.

Does 9 have any redeeming features that X lacks? YES!

Hopefully now you understand...

Doe's X have any redeeming features that 9 lacks? YES!

The argument cuts both ways.

As has been said OS 9 is dead, you can't buy it anymore unless you can find a dealer with stock. It's not a question of understanding that people hanker after the safe, familiar world of 'classic' Mac OS. Regardless of wether Y or Z feature isn't present in OS X if you want to run a new Mac, you need to learn to use X.

Leonard · Jan 17, 2003, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by MickS:

As has been said OS 9 is dead, you can't buy it anymore unless you can find a dealer with stock.

Actually, I wouldn't say OS 9 is dead, I'd say it's a legacy OS, just like 6, 7 and 8. They're not dead, they just run on legacy Macs (ie. old Macs - Macs made to run those OSes). In you first statement about your SE, you basically said OS 7 isn't dead, you're still using it, just not on NEW Macs.

I have no problem with people running OS 6, 7, 8 or 9, just don't expect it to run on hardware that's not made to run it.

Severed Hand of Skywalker · Jan 17, 2003, 04:37 PM

Originally posted by Leonard:
Actually, I wouldn't say OS 9 is dead, I'd say it's a legacy OS, just like 6, 7 and 8. They're not dead, they just run on legacy Macs (ie. old Macs - Macs made to run those OSes). In you first statement about your SE, you basically said OS 7 isn't dead, you're still using it, just not on NEW Macs.

I have no problem with people running OS 6, 7, 8 or 9, just don't expect it to run on hardware that's not made to run it.

It is END OF LIFE then, Dead is just the marketing term. OS9 is no longer being sold, run on new hardware or updated, for Apple that means dead.

cwasko · Jan 17, 2003, 04:49 PM

Originally posted by Leonard:
Actually, I wouldn't say OS 9 is dead, I'd say it's a legacy OS, just like 6, 7 and 8. They're not dead, they just run on legacy Macs (ie. old Macs - Macs made to run those OSes). In you first statement about your SE, you basically said OS 7 isn't dead, you're still using it, just not on NEW Macs.

Whatever. Its all semantics. I guess the overall point is that if there are developers out there that are making *new* software for OS9, I think they should be keel-hauled. The OS is dead and should not be carried on in the after-life. Put it to rest, its buried now, get over it, move on... you know it would want you to

.

I ordered Lapzilla and I'm actually excited that it will not be able to boot 9. I'm hoping that they went all-out on removing every aspect that OS9 needs to boot one of these things. I really want no remnants of that OS anywhere near this new laptop. In fact, when i get it, the first thing I'm going to do is a DOD wipe of Classic.

icruise · Jan 17, 2003, 05:00 PM

Originally posted by cwasko:
I ordered Lapzilla and I'm actually excited that it will not be able to boot 9. I'm hoping that they went all-out on removing every aspect that OS9 needs to boot one of these things. I really want no remnants of that OS anywhere near this new laptop. In fact, when i get it, the first thing I'm going to do is a DOD wipe of Classic.

Have some anger issues to work out with regard to OS 9?

Interestingly System 7 and 8 work pretty darn well on my windows laptop (via Basilisk II emulation of course). It's a little surreal. I can't run them on my powerbook at all (of course it won't boot into them, but not even in emulation for some reason).

cwasko · Jan 17, 2003, 05:10 PM

Originally posted by Icruise:
Have some anger issues to work out with regard to OS 9?

LOL. Naa. I'm just ready to move on now. I've been fulltime OSX once Adobe shipped GoLive 6.0. I still have OS 9 running on my 7100/80 av upgraded to a 440MHz G3, so, if I *really* need an OS9 app, I've got an outlet. Runs like a champ and has been on for about 90% of the 7.5 years I've had it.

dwishbone · Jan 17, 2003, 05:15 PM

"dead...dead, dead, deadski"
- beetlejuice

Podolsky · Jan 17, 2003, 06:04 PM

Originally posted by Severed Hand of Skywalker:
Hope you understand that is why Apple has a little something called ROM's.

If you want OS9 for it's "redeeming features" then you are going to have to stick with older hardware.

But since you don't even care I don't see what all the fuss is about.

I really don't care all that much but I have one app I wrote that I love but not the time to port to X right now. I actually runs under Classic. But, it would just be nice to have a 9 session now and than. I have actually really enjoyed having access to 9 and X. I have only felt it an advantage during the transition. I has made servicing X easier. When 9 is gone I will miss it but, I am not gonna cry or anything....