StarDestroyer.Net BBS

I have not really used an apple since the Apple II C series......
When I got my first PC, it was an 8088 due to cost as much as anything else

Talking to some one about Mac OS and was told that Mac OS does not have the legacy support as Windows does....If you try running a word processor written in Two-Thousand, it will not work with a current version of Mac OS.

Is this the case?

Mac OS9 and before software does not run natively on OSX. It needs to be emulated, for the most part.

For fairness, let me step in right now and ask, just out of curiosity: if you think that's a big deal, when was the last time you fired up a circa-2000 piece of software?

It's a big big deal for major corporations, but it's not a huge impediment for many individual users.

Kitsune wrote:Talking to some one about Mac OS and was told that Mac OS does not have the legacy support as Windows does....If you try running a word processor written in Two-Thousand, it will not work with a current version of Mac OS.

It will if you are running a PowerPC-based Macintosh. However, if you are considering switching to the Mac, most of your software will be new and this shouldn't really be a problem.

erik_t wrote:Mac OS9 and before software does not run natively on OSX. It needs to be emulated, for the most part.

MacOS 9 and earlier software will not run on Intel-based Macintosh machines, since the PowerPC emulator is not up to the task of running the old Classic virtual machine.

No, a PC works for me so I really do not have any intention to switch. My PC tend to be a bit on the older side. I tend to be of the opinion that if it does what I want, I don't sweat about it.

I do run a fair amount of old Pre-2000 software, again because it works and I know all the tricks with it. Also, don't see the point of buying new software when the old stuff still works.

I understand why it may not be such a problem for many other people though who don't use a bunch of older software. I am just trying to understand the various Mac arguments.

Not being hidebound to legacy support is probably a boon to OSX developers. Being able to ditch old shit crap that nobody uses and just say 'no fuck you your old heap of crap won't work anymore we're doing things a better way now' is better than contorting into bizarre shapes to keep (dodgey) legacy support in XP.

Phongn, are there any PPC/OS9 VMs?

Stark wrote:Phongn, are there any PPC/OS9 VMs?

There are a couple PowerPC emulators out there but active development seems to have stopped quite awhile ago.

phongn wrote:

Stark wrote:Phongn, are there any PPC/OS9 VMs?

There are a couple PowerPC emulators out there but active development seems to have stopped quite awhile ago.

Couldn't you just run OS9 on Parallels or VMWare?

General Zod wrote:Couldn't you just run OS9 on Parallels or VMWare?

MacOS 9 is written for the PowerPC ISA.

phongn wrote:

General Zod wrote:Couldn't you just run OS9 on Parallels or VMWare?

MacOS 9 is written for the PowerPC ISA.

So it's a hardware rather than a purely software issue?

General Zod wrote:So it's a hardware rather than a purely software issue?

Pretty much. Virtualization software such as VMWare or Parallels requires that you use the same ISA.

You can't do you can't do it with virtualization but you can do it with emulation. I'd recommend SheepShaver if the need should arise and It can run on Linux, Windows, Mac or BeOS. It will run MacOS versions from 7.5.2 to 9.0.4.

darthdavid wrote:You can't do you can't do it with virtualization but you can do it with emulation. I'd recommend SheepShaver if the need should arise and It can run on Linux, Windows, Mac or BeOS. It will run MacOS versions from 7.5.2 to 9.0.4.

It hasn't been updated in years, though.