Those Still Living in the Pre-OS X World need to "let it go"

[Phil St. Romain]

That's the title of this article (http://www.macobserver.com/editorial/2002/03/12.1.shtml)

It isn't unreasonable to picture Apple with 15-, 20- or even 25 percent market share. Even with conservative estimates, pure Unix has a sizable market share by itself. And wherever there exists Unix, there exists a potential desktop upon which to place Mac OS X.

I believe that the "hold outs" may be left behind, because they have to be left behind. There is no place for the hold outs in the future Mac OS. For too long, Apple catered to them and that held back the evolution and growth of the Mac as a consumer device and as a business machine. Unix wasn't necessarily the key to Apple's success before the advent of OS X, but now that the Unix die has been cast, OS X is the lock, stock and barrel.

Apple has no choice but to create and fine tune its OS X for future users, only making it "Mac like" enough to pacify the old users until the real market-share growth begins.

"Hold outs," you have a few years to get with the program. You have been warned.

25% market share!!

Now there's an optimist! ;)

[Craig R. Arko]

I'm not entirely convinced that the attitude expressed in that article actually benefits anyone.

I'm as enthusiastic an OS X guy as there is; I also still have systems running 6.0.8.

I'm getting moved forcibly into the Windows XP world to support customers who have it; I also still run NT 3.51 on a server.

We've got a PalmOS system; I also still use Newtons for some tasks.

There is something to be said for "the right tool for the right job"; and latest and greatest is not always 'it' by default. There is actually room for everybody, in a having and eating cake sort of way. This is not the same as making an OS 9.5 wish list, of course. ;)

[mervTormel]

i tend to agree with Craig. OSX has created somewhat of a schism in the Mac Community and schisms have a tendency to leave some people disenfranchised. we don't need any internal strife if the platform is going to get to that 25% share.

i would hope that we could all be more gentle with the pre-Mac OS X holdouts. not all Mac users want to be geeks on the bleeding edge. they may need a little coddling to get them to turn the corner. i look at it as an opportunity to prevent defectors to the dark side, and getting all pre-X users on the X-train, rather than creating resentful, disenfranchised users.

[Phil St. Romain]

I thought the author really took a point or two and developed them to the extreme, which accentuates a certain point of view and provides an opportunity to test one's views against this.

I'm as optimistic as he is about the expansion of the market into the Unix world, but that 25% figure seems a little high. But who knows?

His comments about veteran Mac users seem extreme, but he is pointing out a reality that some still seem to want to deny: that OS X is here to stay, and the development of Mac OS 9 is over--except to work better as Classic. There's no need to be "in your face" about this, of course.

OTOH, it seems there really is no crisis yet for those who just can't stomach OS X. OS 9 still works well, and in time, the kinds of configurability most of them want will come to pass--either from Apple or from 3rd party providers. There doesn't seem to be an either-or choice to make yet--especially as long as new Macs continue to be able to boot up in OS 9. I'm all for saying "hang in there and wait it out a bit longer" to those who feel disenfranchised.

[tarmaque]

I would almost agree with this "Get into the car or get out of the way" attitude, but I see those holdouts as a severe minority. OS X is easy enough to use for any day-to-day user, and in my opinion easier than windows. The holdouts are mostly people who fear OS X because of it's unix belly. Once they spend some time with it they'll come around.

But in the long term, OS X is here to stay. Witness the extremely rapid development of software for X. In the early days of Apple (Oh, how I miss those days!) it could take years to get your favorite application, and it was a complaint of all PC users that there wasn't enough programs for a Mac. Odd, when most of us got our first lessons in programming on an Apple IIc.

Now in what, about a year and a half- we already have tons of software, and in a month or two ALL of the important software will be X-able. Plus, any programmer who knows C+ or Java has the tools needed to build OS X applications. How's that for a brand new OS?

The important thing for the holdouts to know is that OS X is just as easy to use as 9.x.x but IN ADDITION is totally Geek-able. Most of them will come around

[dschep]

Mac OS 3.1 on a Mac Plus can kick any new computers @$$ in start up times. Beat like 5 seconds on your dual gig g4.

[AHunter3]

I'm one of those curmudgeonly holdouts.

Our griping about MacOS X sometimes improves the quality of the current product, guys. Were it not for a lot of screaming and shouting from folks like me, your OS X environment might well --

• have a Desktop onto which you cannot move or save a file. An alias at best;

• have no view options but column view;

• give you no option for having your drives (hard drives, removables) appear on your Desktop;

• lack AppleTalk capability except for the ASIP variety;

• support considerably fewer printers;

• sport an Apple icon but no Apple menu at all;

• provide few if any useful contextual-menu items;


etc etc... some of the things on this list may not be things you care about, but as long as the options and opportunities under MacOS X are on the increase, would you not agree that this is a good thing?

Are there any of the following features that you'd actively HATE to see as options under MacOS X?

• conventional list view instead of column view in Open, Save, and Save As dialog boxes if you wish;

• support for serial printers for serial-era Macs;

• an Apple Menu that lets you customize its contents;

• spring-loaded folders (or better yet, PopupFolder for MacOS X);

• A show/hide option for the Dock that lets you turn it completely off or toggle it on and off with a keystroke like the Control Strip;

• Support for popular CardBus cards used in PowerBooks;

• Platinum theme in lieu of Aqua;

• Restoring Command-N for New Folder and Command-Y to put away folders dragged out onto Desktop / eject removable media;


So how about some of you rethink that "Oh shaddup, quit living in the past" reaction you go into every time someone says they miss this or that feature of the traditional MacOS, hmm?

[Craig R. Arko]

Originally posted by AHunter3
I'm one of those curmudgeonly holdouts.

Our griping about MacOS X sometimes improves the quality of the current product, guys. Were it not for a lot of screaming and shouting from folks like me, your OS X environment might well --

...

• lack AppleTalk capability except for the ASIP variety;

...




Having personally worked with an Apple engineer in that particular area, I can verify that no screaming and shouting were required. Just a willingness to work through some of the problems, and provide accurate and fairly complete test data. I don't that is true of some of the other areas mentioned as well.

Asking and being willing to pitch in works; screaming and shouting produces a lot of hoarse and deaf people.

My 2¢.

[xchanyazy]

• Platinum theme in lieu of Aqua;

• Restoring Command-N for New Folder and Command-Y to put away folders dragged out onto Desktop / eject removable media;


I'd hate to see these two, partially. I wouldn't mind a platinum theme being a choice for those people that like it more, but I'd stick with Aqua, and I think that should be the default for new computers (looks snazzier, it has a "new and improved" feel that many new users like, as opposed to the slightly drab platinum theme).

Also, I use command-n for new windows much more often than new folders, especially when using column view. I wouldn't mind seeing command-y come back for ejecting drives, but I like having the standard (in every other program) command-z undo moves, etc.

[JayBee]

Yeek - this is like dealing with gunpowder due to the inflammatory thread topic... BUUUUUT

I think a lot of the improvements that have come into X since the Beta days (and before) have come from people refusing to make the switch from 9 before their favourite feature is implemented.

However, I would have to say that I reckon the MAJORITY have come from people using OS X and finding something missing, or finding that what they thought was a bad idea (the <cmd>+<n> shortcut reassignment, for example) was actually really sensible when they experienced it in context.

In any case, I think clamouring for the restoration of legacy shortcuts is fairly silly - if anything, let's clamour for CONSISTENT shortcuts among apps, or even (shock) CUSTOMISABLE shortcuts!

Regardless, I do believe that the more people that use OS X regularly, the more sensible and cogent the development ideas will become. Arguing that "we should have the control strip back" kind of goes against the idea of the new OS. Control Strip made sense in OS 9, but we're not in OS 9 any more, Toto.

I think we should all be embracing OS X as a new system, and looking for ways to improve OS X - realising that "Improving OS X" and "making it more like OS 9" are not necessarily the same thing...

Okay, rant over. Nothing to see here! Move along!

:D :D :D

[griffeymac]

I bought a new G4 (733) right after they "bumped" them a few months back. While I'm definitely ready to "learn" OS X and get along with it, for most things, I fear, it won't do me much good.

While I realize that there is OS X-native software being made, I already have Photoshop, Quark, Office 98, and Dreamweaver, all of which run just fine in OS 9. That's great that there is Office for OS X now, but I don't make THAT much money that I'm going to just start replacing applications that aren't necessarily obsolete. I mean, that's a pretty big amount of invested money on all of those programs!

Does that make sense?

I'm having some fun playing with the new features of OS X, but I don't think I'll be running out and getting a whole new suite of applications to do what I'm already doing in OS 9....

G.--

[lerkfish]

Just wanted to say that we don't approve of schisms here at macosxhints...everyone is just a mac user like everyone else...we want to avoid the "you guys said this" and "we are right because" attitude....there are many places on the net to go find just that sort of thing, and it simply gets in the way of constructive discussion.

This is, after macOSX hints.com....we are basically here to help people who already are using or intend to use OSX...not to discuss whether there should be an OSX, that's a foregone conclusion.

additionally, as you must have read when you registered, we are interested in an honest discussion of problems with OSX, where solutions or workarounds are sought, rather than mounting tireless crusades against OSX or Apple. We are solution-oriented.

However, I know this is the coat room...so...uh....carry on I guess, but try to keep our side/your side thinking to a minimum.

[lerkfish]

sorry, I seem to have unintentionally derailed this thread...I posted my last post before I realized I was in the coat room, so went back and edited it somewhat. I most certainly was not directing my comments to the most recent poster, but to the thread in general. I was trying to forestall a miniflame squabble before it got any bigger. Of course, I did that with my usual hot air, so not sure that helped any.

please, carry on.


:D

[maxelson]

I'm big on X. I love it. I am quite nearly to the point where I can ditch Classic altogether.
What amazes me is the amount of folks (an admittedly small bunch) who are just being unreasonable about it. Example: last month, a very irate reader wrote into MacAddict. He was responding to the title article, "Time to Switch?" His tirade went along the lines of "since when are you in the business of telling users what to do? Cancel my subscription."
I am beginning to think there are quite a few similarities between some Mac users and Lutherans. "Change?!? Wha? WHY!?!? No change! Change BAAAAD!"
The nature of technology is that it moves. It grows. For the most part, you can resist for a while, but there will come a day when you WILL be left behind. Apple cannot please everyone. Apple is sucessfully pulling off a nearly impossible hat trick: pulling the rug out from under all of us and TOTALLY changing the OS, which is, let's face it, the cornerstone of the appeal in the Apple Market. Apple is not losing customers... or, if they are, they are being replaced as soon as those luddites jump ship. The market is opening. Good for Apple means good for us.
So, to that guy who was soooooo desperately offended by MacAddicts suggestion: the gangway is over there. Enjoy the good ship XP. No one will shanghai you. No one will push you off the boat. Hell, no one will even note your departure.

[Phil St. Romain]

Hi G. :) Welcome!

I'm having some fun playing with the new features of OS X, but I don't think I'll be running out and getting a whole new suite of applications to do what I'm already doing in OS 9....

Makes perfect sense to me, and the good news is that Apple still provides OS 9 on all its new computers, if you've a notion to buy one. Getting one's software and peripherals up to snuff for OS X can cost a bundle, depending on what one uses, of course. Updates like Golive 6.0 make it easy, however, as they run very well on both OS 9 and OS X. Other companies have made sure they get you to pay for both an OS 9 and OS X version . . . no names mentioned. ;)

Of course, even running OS 9, one eventually upgrades all of the software used for work. That's a good time to switch over to OS X. For most of us, there was a loonngg transition of running some apps in X, and others in Classic. It's a tolerable situation, for the most part, depending on what apps we're talking about. I'm pretty much all-X now, and it's a much better situation for me.

Phil

[lerkfish]

actually, since Retrospect OSX version came out, I have no reason at all to boot from 9. I did so last weekend due to an unrelated thing (was trying to fax something) and gawd! I wanted to log back in immediately.
Still on classic with some apps, but they work fine. I have to wait for 10.1.4 to use my fujitsu dynaMO, but that's the only hangup thus far.

[poocat]

this is interesting, because i find the divisions w/in the mac world as pointless as the rest of you.
i'm currently still running 9, but i'm intensely curious about x.
why?

because i know x is the future. i want x. i want x and i want _speed_ and i want native apps.

eventually, i'll be able to get all that.
and eventually, i'll have the money to afford it.

(looks more and more like around september i'll have all three)
and i'm excited about it.
sure, there are features i'm going to miss.
i use popup folders CONSTANTLY.
i use a variety of k-schemes, and i'm going to miss the variety.
i use a very customized apple menu,
but unlike most people, my customization is to make it smaller.
so i don't care.

but overall, i think that the more options x has,
the more flexible it is, both for the unix gang and the grandma9 gang,
the better off we all are.

and the better off we all are, the better off apple is.
(despite that some woudl argue the opposite).

go apple go.
i'm not resisting, i'm just waiting.

:)
poocat.

[griffeymac]

Well Phil, part of my desire to take the OS X plunge is from talking with you (somewhere else ;) ). I start my new job next Monday and should have all sorts of free time now, and I'm ready to spend it a) out in the garden and b) with my Linux box and my G4 with OS X. I'm SURE I'll be bothering the heck out of you folks then... :)

G.--

[xchanyazy]

Hey poocat, no worries..

Pop-up folders probably coming with 10.2 (I'm taking bets on MWNY, but then, the Lions are my second favorite NFL team, and I believe they'll turn it around any time now)

Duality (http://www.versiontracker.com/moreinfo.fcgi?id=13130&db=mac) is a great tool for installing themes, and though kaleidoscope still has more, people are making new ones all the time.

FruitMenu (http://www.versiontracker.com/moreinfo.fcgi?id=12974&db=mac) gives you great customization options for the apple menu, I'd say even better than OS 9.

Oh, and to ahunter3 and others, sorry if my last post was incendiary, so to speak. I forget we're all Mac users here :).

[Craig R. Arko]

Originally posted by xchanyazy

Pop-up folders probably coming with 10.2 (I'm taking bets on MWNY, but then, the Lions are my second favorite NFL team, and I believe they'll turn it around any time now)

Oh, and to ahunter3 and others, sorry if my last post was incendiary, so to speak. I forget we're all Mac users here :).


Yeah, really. No incendiaries; try to keep it to fragmentation grenades. :D

Apple says they will be previewing 10.2 at WWDC. That makes a July release sound pretty plausible.

"Dear Developer,

On May 6, WWDC 2002 attendees will be the first to explore the
powerful new capabilities of the next major release of Mac OS X."

[macubergeek]

If someone chooses to remain with macos 9 till doomsday, who cares?
I mean that person must readjust their expectations:
1. no matter how much *****ing and moaning they do Apple won't continue to support two operating systems. Eventually Classic will go away, first as a bootable os and then entirely.

2. Developers can't continue to support two macos'es....it's not like the 68k/ppc days folks X and macosx are very different beasts. In the not so far future you won't be able to buy classic apps or drivers or peripherals.

3. Graphic artist will go to X because of it's stability. Quark is the only major holdout right now. Even they will be assimilated :)

[Andrew LaGow]

3. Graphic artist will go to X because of it's stability. Quark is the only major holdout right now. Even they will be assimilated
There are many QuarkXpress users out there who are taking a serious look at InDesign 2.0, which is OS X-native now. I've switched, and I was the biggest QuarkXpress booster out there. But Quark seems to hate both its customers AND employees. Unfortunate, really, because I'm not sure I want Adobe locking up yet another graphics category. But Quark has really dropped the ball.

Now that Photoshop 7 is shipping, there's no reason for anyone who does print design (the vast majority of graphic artists) to use Classic; it's all in place for us. I'm waiting with baited breath for my copy from MacZone.

Andy

[macubergeek]

Reports from friends who tried the X beta tell me that it was superb. No obvious bugs, stable...

You might also take a look at a former NeXT program called Tiffany which seems to have a good feature set.

http://www.caffeinesoft.com/

[macubergeek]

I'm a member of a mac user group that still has Apple ][ users.
Once a week we have a clinic you can bring your machine to, to get it fixed. I've gotten yelled at all the time for not "knowing" how to fix Apple ]['s.

I guess all I can say is if you want to keep using your older machine, then you must assume the consequences and responsibility that comes with it...

no new software
no new peripherals
no one will help you fix it

I mean if you are willing to accept these limitations then by all means keep the sucker, run os 9 till 2010....but deal with it and don't expect the rest of us to make allowences, or be inconvenienced.

System 9 has limited life in it. Thats just the way it is. X is the future. <off soapbox:D >

[lloyd1981]

Originally posted by Phil St. Romain
That's the title of this article (http://www.macobserver.com/editorial/2002/03/12.1.shtml)

It isn't unreasonable to picture Apple with 15-, 20- or even 25 percent market share. Even with conservative estimates, pure Unix has a sizable market share by itself. And wherever there exists Unix, there exists a potential desktop upon which to place Mac OS X.

I believe that the "hold outs" may be left behind, because they have to be left behind. There is no place for the hold outs in the future Mac OS. For too long, Apple catered to them and that held back the evolution and growth of the Mac as a consumer device and as a business machine. Unix wasn't necessarily the key to Apple's success before the advent of OS X, but now that the Unix die has been cast, OS X is the lock, stock and barrel.


I paid $3495.00 in 1997 for an 8600/250. Almost the same thing I paid for a 512Ke years earlier. I have added FireWire, G3, USB, FastWide extra internal drives and a lot of software from scanners, label writers, Orb drive, two serial printers, one USB printer, a NeoPost Postage Meter and other stuff and I don't think it realistic to walk away from things that work just fine with 9.1 to satisfy OS X proponents.

Regarding new software, I am running some good stuff that dates back to 1992 and it still runs beautifully on 9.1.

I do have a Ti Book (one of the earlier ones) that I have ugraded but I still have a partition with 9.1. I am learning more about OS X and find little so enticing about it at this point (just check the Other forum about how many programs will not work if you twitch) to make me a 100% OSX user. That's why I joined this Forum. To learn.

I was pleased to see a inside-cover, double-page ad for a Ti book totally directed to Unix in April 29 eWeek

By the way, nice to see you again, Phil.

Lloyd

[Phil St. Romain]

. . . I don't think it realistic to walk away from things that work just fine with 9.1 to satisfy OS X proponents.

Hi lloyd. Good to see you here as well!

You make a good point above. I don't see why anyone who's happy in OS 9.1 with a set-up like you describe should bother upgrading. After all, the point is to get one's work done, and to be satisfied with the equipment one is using.

Of course, eventually things need to be replaced--first a printer, perhaps, then a scanner, etc. What I've been suggesting to people is that when they replace equipment, to consider purhcasing something that is OS X-compatible. Most will work on OS 9 as well, so that's no problem. And if the Mac needs to be replaced, the new one will definitely be OS X and OS 9 compatible. One could use OS X for some tasks and Classic for the rest. That's how most of us have been working for over a year now, ever edging toward 100% X-compatibility. I'm about 90% there now, the rest depending on a Umax scanner driver, which I don't really think is forthcoming. I could sell the scanner and purchase an X-compatible one, so the choice is really mine to put up with Classic a little longer.

Phil

[vonleigh]

Hello,

Personally this is how I think it should go. Apple should, as soon as it rolls out it's last upgrade to it (or sooner), open source it. That way it could be used by developers as a tool.

OS 9 is a great OS for smaller, specific applications, it's also a great troubleshooting tool. A customized OS 9 could come on the DiskWarrior CD for example, so that when you reboot it works faster, more efficiently, whatever.

That's my 2 bolívares (2/950 of a dollar)


Vonleigh

[Craig R. Arko]

Developers speak on the death of OS 9 (http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/0205/07.developers.php).

It doesn't sound like they'll miss it much. I wonder if this means Quark will get off their behinds now?

[Emersive]

I agree completely with his post. We do need to not create sides in this. Mac OS X is the future. So we need to help those who aren't ready for the switch to make it a smooth as possible for them when they decide that they want to. It is there choice. (I would suggest the switch) To those who still need a few things in X before you will switch write Apple they have been listening alot more in the last few years. X is right for me. Already.

[macubergeek]

There are no real sides here...
There is a price to change and there is a price to not-changing.

So long as you know the costs of the course you want to follow, then by all means go that way:D

I'm reminded of what happened at WWWD this year....Apple had a mock funeral for macos 9. Jobs came right out and said that 9 is dead for them, that they are investing no more efforts behind it going forward....that while their customers may need it for now, the future is X.

All I say is keep in mind where everything seems to be going.
It is not a given that macos 9 will even boot on machines coming out in the future.

[Craig R. Arko]

Originally posted by macubergeek
All I say is keep in mind where everything seems to be going.
It is not a given that macos 9 will even boot on machines coming out in the future.

I think you can take it as a given that OS 9 will not boot machines with a 64 bit architecture, which I'd expect to see in 2003. Note that Classic should still work on those machines.

Also I won't be too surprised if the new server boxes are OS X only.

[Marcwic]

I am new to Macs. I got myself a G3 iMac last summer.

I had experience with windows and linux based pc, i wanted a new computer to college work as my celeron 300 was getting a bit tired and old.

I chose a Mac because of OSX. It looks better then XP, has Unix underpinnings and is easy to setup. The processor and ease of hardware setup also atracted me.

I would not have got a Mac if they were still on OS9, because i know although it's easy to use and fast, it can't multitask very well, it has no future really. What type of OS stops everything when you open a menu?

So OSX is the future, Macs have better processors, hardware and now software than PCs.

I only use Classic for my scanner, and the scanner software - other than that OSX all the time.

It is my view that Apple should continue to provide support for OS9 and before. You can't expect them to start new things like iPhotos but issuing patches and tech support they should still do.

[bahamutX]

Although I like OS X ALOT, but if I let the Pre-OS X World go, means that I am letting my old games like myth 1,2 , Close Combat go. It's so sad.... :(

[jayscheuerle]

Where I work, the Macs are hooked up to a Novell network to share files with PC's. Though Groupwise works through Classic, the server cannot be accessed through either Classic or OSX & seeing as the most recent Mac software from Novell is dated 1998, I don't expect it to come by soon. Though I've been running OSX since the public beta & am among the first to install it at work (mostly to find out troubles like this), there is little possibility of the rest of the art dept. moving to OSX unless we find a solution.

Sometimes the desire to change is there, but the tools are not...

[Craig R. Arko]

Jay: are you running a version of NetWare that doesn't support the Native File Access add-on? That would allow AFP/IP access, and NFS access as well, I believe.

You should start a thread in the 'Networking' forum asking about this. I think there have been a few Novell users here.