"Mac OS 9 isn't dead for our customers yet, but it's dead for [developers]," Jobs said. "Today we say farewell to OS 9 for all future development, and we focus our energies on developing for Mac OS X."

"One hundred percent of everything we're doing is X-only," Jobs said.

Wow... that pretty much sums it up! What is your thoughts? I guess that announcement was an eventuality? Are you ready for the change over? Will you remain with earlier OS's?

Just thought you may have a thought on this... I am sure some have strong feelings one way or the other.

Cletus

About time. Free up my hard drive of OS 9 apps please! Give me more apps for OS X. Alot of big company developers had been producing in Carbon instead of Cocoa because 1) They are still trying to cater to those still in OS 9, and 2) Their companies were too cheap to recode everything for Cocoa. Just think about it: Photoshop, all in Cocoa. Cinema 4D and Lightwave, all in Cocoa. (And I guess) MS Office, all in Cocoa. Get rid of Classic!!! Good call Steve!

i think it is about time that we focus on X. After all it is the future and Apple needs to be gung ho. And it IS a better system. I've had FAR less (actually no) crashes. Some troubleshooting of individual apps has been tricky, but i'm getting the hang of it.

oh and BTW, carbon, cocoa - it doesn't matter. While i like the cocoa interface and X features better, both programming languages are equal footing on OS X turf, we just see carbon apps a little buggier because apple hasn't had the time to put much effort into solid carbon headers.

Amen to that! Goodbye, OS 9!

Thank god ! good riddance it's about time that was laid to rest.

It served it's purpose for the time it was around. like any OS should.

but it is history and X should be the only focus now... when we moved from 6 to 7 and 7 to 8 and 8 to 9 there was minimal overlap... the old technologies made way for the new. when we switched from 68xxx to ppc there was little hesitation why should there be now?

The only thing catering to 9 and those that wish to remain with it can do is stagnate and stall the process of moving forward.

Please by all means if 9 works for you then stick with it... but don't gripe that they are no longer providing anything to you... they no longer provide support for System 6 either.

Mac OS is dead long live Mac OS...

Cheers

A few points...

The transitions you mentioned (OS 7 to 8, 68K to PPC) were much simpler and less bumpy than the transition to X. Switching from 68K to PPC didn't break hardware compatibility with current printers and scanners, didn't require a clunky compatibility layer to run programs not written for PPC, etc. 68K apps may have a little slower under PPC, but you didn't have to boot into a 68K layer, either. These transitions worked the Apple way - they just worked.

Now Apple is giving the proverbial finger to those of us who simply cannot make the switch to X - print professionals. Hobbyists may not mind the rough edges, but the pros CANNOT afford to lose time and money.

In my case, switching to X would break my laser printer, our very expensive Howtek scanner and make networking with the non-X compatible machines dicey (networking on X is still dicey - even the rabid fans at MacAddict will tell you this). Even if I did switch to X, my printer likely won't so then I've got whole new headaches worrying about new font problems, and compatibility.

The classic layer is a joke. It's slower, less compatible than a true OS 9 environment, and switching back and forth between Classic apps and Carbon apps is jarring, with different behaviors and interface.

Software problems really aren't Apple's problem, but something they must consider. Photoshop is finally out, but still no Quark, and those of you who think all the design shops are going to run out and buy a new copy of InDesign, and lose time with a steep learning curve can send their checks payable to me. I hate Suitcase for X, it's a lot more intrusive under X than it was in 9, and ATM Deluxe is dead for X.

OS X is simply not ready for print pros. Apple is doing a huge disservice to one of their biggest markets.

"Now Apple is giving the proverbial finger to those of us who simply cannot make the switch to X - print professionals."

The finger on the other hand is raised to audio professionals. :)

MC

I agree to a point, but i think OSX will enable design/print pro's to move to another level of productivity.... ok ok so right now it's a bumpy road, i completely agree... i still use 9 occasionally, but the software is catching up and more and more of my work is in X.

I think the move is bold, but needed... hanging onto 9 for too long will hurt X in the long run.

my 2 cents. ;)

-wOOGe

As for the Classic layer, I'm almost positive that Apple engineers made it "clunky" and hard to use for a reason. If you can run Classic apps under OS X seemlessly then why even bother rewriting software to run natively under X?

I personally believe it's about time that Apple has officially decided to drop OS 9. The only way to move forward is to leave the past behind, and that's exactly what Apple is doing. OS 9's lifetime was limited, OS X's isn't, so why bother with 9 at all?

Many people still use OS 9, mainly those professionals and home users who have slower Macs. For the professionals, I understand the cost so if your Mac and apps still work then I don't see what you have to complain about. For the home users, if you have a pre-G3 Mac, I say you have lasted this long, why do you decide to whine now? If you have a G3 Mac, OS X still runs pretty well, at least it does on my Tangerine iBook G3 300MHz with 192 MB of RAM. If you have a G4 +, I don't see why you aren't on OS X yet.

Just because Apple decided to drop OS 9 officially and encourage developers to follow suit, it doesn't mean OS 9 and all its apps will vanish from this planet instantly. Even until today, you still can find many old apps that run on System 7. I'm sure 2, 3 years from now, there will still be people who don't want to let go and still run OS 9, therefore OS 9 won't REALLY die for quite a while.

Well, I don't really want to have to run X on a G3 iMac because it'd be very slow, and I'm really not ready to buy a comp that has a G4 in it yet... heck, the last computer in our house is a 7100, barely a ppc... probably ought to wait at least until the G5.

OS 9 is not really really dead to developers yet, though yes, most people would rather develop for X. The only thing I'll ever get upset about is if I'm still using 9 when they decide to remove the download links for OS 9 software.

"Well, I don't really want to have to run X on a G3 iMac because it'd be very slow, and I'm really not ready to buy a comp that has a G4 in it yet... heck, the last computer in our house is a 7100, barely a ppc... probably ought to wait at least until the G5."

What's the specs on your iMac? I run OS X on two G4s (450 & 733 MHz) and a 300 MHz iBook. X flies on the G4s as it should but it runs pretty fast on the iBook as well with only 192 MB of RAM. Have you honestly tried to run X on your iMac? Do you have more than 128 MB of RAM? Waiting for G5? If you have a 7100 then it means you have been using computers for quite a while and you should by now realize that computers age quickly and there will ALWAYS be a "new version". It's pointless to play the catch-up game, just upgrade or buy a new computer whenever you feel like your current one is out of date, not necessarily "waiting for the next best thing".

"OS 9 is not really really dead to developers yet, though yes, most people would rather develop for X. The only thing I'll ever get upset about is if I'm still using 9 when they decide to remove the download links for OS 9 software."

Even though software publishers don't exactly have a OS 8 or OS 7 software download link anymore (since they are long dead), but it doesn't mean you can't find old softwares around the net. Did you really think OS 9 is going to stay around forever just because YOU don't want to upgrade? Think again, the world doesn't revolve around you. Every version of an operating system has a limited life. Did you think Windows 95 would've been the ultimate version of Windows? How about Windows 98? 2000? XP?? One day, OS X is going to die too... but until then OS X is the present and the future.

It's the right step. OSX is far superior to anything out there (even OS9). I don't hardly use 9 at all anymore.

9 was great, but it's time to move on to bigger and better things.

OS X is the new direction. Do offense to lovers of OS 9, but you all better get used to it. OS 9 has a lot going for it, but it's a dead end. There's only so many bells and whistles you can add to an OS before it gets so bloated that it begins to look like "Windo$". At some point you just have to start over and fix all the things you just put up with for all those years. (Remember system freezes? OS X hasn't froze on me EVER)

On top of which, now we have programmer support! With OS 9 you had to have specialized knowledge to develop software for Mac. Now anybody with C (or any of it's cousins), Java, or Realbasic experience can write software for mac. In addition, Apple gives you quality developer tools to help you. Can Microshaft say that?

Sure OS 9 was nice, but if you can't stand change why do you even own a Mac? I'm surprised you aren't still using that old Apple IIc with no GUI interface and programming in BASIC. It was nice too, in it's day.

Note that Apple isn't developing software for that Apple IIc anymore either.

p.s. Yes, I know OS X is a bit bloated, but remember it still is a work in progress and it has been less than two years since the first public beta. I give it about two more years before it is aged like a fine wine and really cultivated. And I don't mean "before it has all the bells and whistles that OS 9 has."

"Goodnight Gracy"

I take it classic support in Jaguar is nonexistant?

I really doubt that classic support is nonexistant in jaguar. Steve said OS9 was dead to developers, not customers. So you can still run classic apps in 10.2, It's just that most companies are not going to develop new 9 apps anymore. It will slowly die off. I feel that within 2 years classic mac OS will not be supported in OSX, but for now it's still in there.

"Looking forward…", "forget the past…" Hey guys, what do you think are Mac-owners ? Rockefeller's ? The use of a comp shouldn't be limited through the OS. I know a lot of people who can't afford to switch to X because they simply don't have money for a new Mac. For me it's a slap in the face for the longtime supporters.
And btw, personally I think OS X is a nightmare 'cos of slowlyness, incompatibility and handling. Was it easy to learn and understand how the old OS's work, isn't it possible for X without a graduate on computer science. And just the nice look does NOT compensate all this. I'll take at least still two years untill it might became easy and fast.

1. Key markets for Apple rely upon OS9 for a lot of applications and hardware(including scientists like myself)
2. OS9 needs a few tweaks (especially for Drive Setup as its latest cannot initialize FW drives and plops partition orders in a bad scheme on the DT). The Finder has problems transferring very large numbers of files and there are other problems.
3. If Apple does not correct these problems the millions of users of OS9 will suffer as a direct result despite the more than adequate resources at Apple. (Billions in cash reserves are held by the company.)
4. So if OS9 dev is dead at Apple, release the source code.
Cheers,
Tom

"1. Key markets for Apple rely upon OS9 for a lot of applications and hardware(including scientists like myself)"

The last time I heard, UNIX is pretty popular amongst scientists as well. Since OS X is based on UNIX, it's quite attractive to many in the scientific field. As for OS 9, just because Apple says it's "dead", it's not going to disappear.

"2. OS9 needs a few tweaks (especially for Drive Setup as its latest cannot initialize FW drives and plops partition orders in a bad scheme on the DT). The Finder has problems transferring very large numbers of files and there are other problems."

Even though I agree Apple shouldn't completely abandon OS 9 until it's full-featured and nearly bugless. However, that's simply impossible at the moment because people are always going to request new features and new technologies would introduce new bugs and such.

"3. If Apple does not correct these problems the millions of users of OS9 will suffer as a direct result despite the more than adequate resources at Apple. (Billions in cash reserves are held by the company.)"

I believe those billions of dollars would be better spent on OS X, the future, rather than on OS 9, the past.

"4. So if OS9 dev is dead at Apple, release the source code."

The point of "killing" OS 9 is so that people would focus on OS X. By releasing the source code, it'd just create a diversion.

Again, I don't understand why people are whining? If you can't afford a new Mac to run OS X then fine, don't run OS X! No one is forcing you to run OS X. If you're comfortable at running OS 7, 8 or 9, then fine, run your old OS. Just because Apple has officially stopped developing for OS 9 it doesn't mean that OS 9, along with all its apps, will disappear from the face of this planet. If you are familiar with the computer industry at all you'd know that computers age fast, there will always be new versions of any piece of software, including operating systems, and new versions tend to replace old versions.

So if you don't have the money to buy a new Mac to run OS X, or simply can't afford to buy OS X versions of all the apps you're running now then fine, stick to OS 9, live in the past. No one is forcing you to switch. Just because you want to stay behind, don't hold the rest of us back along with you.

Nobody is whining here. If you had $8800 of software for which the OS is left with a variety of documented bugs you'd be unhappy too. Apple has sufficient resources to fix these bugs so I doubt that OS X development would be hurt in any way. We are not asking that the OS be upgraded---just fixed. Over time we'll certainly migrate to OS X, but right now we could at least use some source code to enable us to do our work. if Apple leaves OS 9 as is. Nor do I see any "diversion" in this. We would vertainly not be diverted from moving to X by having the source code since we are not moving to X any time soon anyhow. Of course we shall do so as we migrate our code over a reasonable period of time. In fact, we run OS X on some of the less critical machines (like that of our secretary), but it is difficult enough fending off the PC people as things are and we should not have to defend problems like system freezes whenever we transfer files.
Cheers,
Tom

First of all, OS 9 will *NEVER* be "fixed". OS 9 is a collection of new technologies and upgrades which piled up over the course of 15 some years. It's old, messy, and buggy. Opening OS 9's source code might seem like a good idea in this case since the public can try to fix the remaining bugs in OS 9. However, some have mentioned earlier that OS 9 may include many technologies licensed by 3rd party companies and therefore prevent them to fully open OS 9. Also, even by releasing the source to the public, Apple would still be spending some of their resources away from OS X. Besides, Apple is not obligated to release their source codes anyway.

Honestly, I don't know exactly what kind of major bugs still remain in OS 9. However, Apple has tried to "polish" it before they abandonded it. Why do you think there was an OS 9.2? 9.2.1? 9.2.2? All came out after OS X was released. I'd say that most of the time, crashes in OS 9 are caused by corrupted file(s) than anything else, therefore you should just use something like Norton Utilities to make sure all your files are in good shape. Like I mentioned about, OS 9's source codes are 15 some years old, even if it was released, what makes you think normal people can improve it while Apple engineers can't.

I don't know exactly what kind of business you're in, but many major applications have already made their way to OS X. The only way for OS X to be fully adopted is if developers write softwares for it. The only way developers will write softwares for OS X is if more users adopt OS X. It's a two way street and it seems like some of the major developers are taking their part of the compromise by releasing softwares for X, maybe it's time for more users to adopt it (I personally have been running OS X since the public beta and haven't looked back).

Apple has already officially anounced that it will direct 100% of its resources to developing for OS X, therefore ANY effort spent on OS 9 would contridict that statement.

In life, we must look forward and not backward. OS X is the future while OS 9 is the past. If you want to stay behind then go right ahead, it's your choice. I don't see anyone holding a gun up to your head forcing you to switch to OS X.

On the source code---the worst bugs appear with the Finder and with Drive Setup. These do not involve 3rd party code. Even with a perfectly optimized disk and a clean version of OS 9.2.2, the Finder invariably crashes after several transfers of large numbers of files (on a LAN, to FW disk, etc). If you read my messages you'd know I am a scientist. (you said you don't know what kind of biz I'm in). We write code and use rather expensive sw for R&D experiments and data analysis. We run 32 Macs each fully licensed for the sw. I don't claim that Apple is obligated to release source code, but if they don't fix bugs then they are forcing us to migrate to PCs as the sw we use is also available for NT and W2000. I've used ResEdit to allocate more memory to the Finder and that helps, but does not cure the bugs. Ours is just a representative case (a sister lab uses 100's of Macs). so it is just bad business for Apple to play this game. We also use lots of unix boxes and are desperately trying to port code to X, but in the meantime we are pressured to either migrate to PCs to get projects done or find workarounds for the bugs. We are not "looking backward"; we are trying to do scientific research. We would be ready to move to X as soon as the sw we need is available (this Fall), but with the present Apple policy we may never make it and if we don't make it, lots of others won't either. Apple has only a tiny marketshare and it has fallen over the past several years. I would not like to see it fall further.
Cheers,
Tom

You mentioned that the software you need will be available for OS X this Fall. That's at most 4 months. Even if Apple didn't "kill" OS 9 this week, do you think that they will fix all the problmes in OS 9 before then anyway? Besides, no one ever said that Apple's move of totally replacing OS 9 with OS X is a perfect idea, however, it is the one Apple has chose to stick with. Whenever a company makes such a drastic decision, it's difficult to please everyone. I'm sure you will agree me that OS X is just far more advanced than OS 9 (memory protection, multi-tasking just to name a few). Most of these technologies are impossible to implement into OS 9, that is why Apple decided to start from scratch with OS X. If Apple were to split its resources to develope both 9 & X, X's developement would be slowed down and so will its adoption and eventually Apple would just have two crappy OSes.

For those who care, you can find videos of Jobs at WWDC here:

http://news.com.com/2014-1089-0.html

The OS 9 one is flat-out hillarious.

And the Ink pad one is very cool.

The down side is that the video is only WMP or Real. But it's worth it to see them

-DVG

Can someone convert them to QT MooV and post?