Leopard-Classic-PPC

Hi qu1j0t3;

I think you are too late. Much too late to get Apple to change it's mind on this one.

Besides that you are talking to other user just like yourself here and not Apple anyway.

Allan

The deadline for classic has been coming for YEARS. Sticking with classic is a simple task - simply stick with Tiger.

Don't think that Leopard is a utopian field of green grass - it isn't. You'll be fine for years using Tiger.

Leopard may have a bug or two left in it, that is not the issue.

I'd like to hear their technical arguments for EOL'ing classic, because on the face of it, maintaining support should not be difficult.

Another casual black eye for interoperability... thanks Steve. This seems as good a place as any to reach him. There is a mounting pile of "geek goodwill" issues that he could choose to address, this is just one more. I guess there just aren't that many people left who think MPW running natively on OS X would be a) useful and b) really cool. 🙂 C'est la vie.

Since I moved on to using OS X, the early days of using Classic on my dual USB iBook were dreadfully slow. It was the main reason I started upgrading my software beginning with MS Office and Photoshop.

Fast forward to today with my iBook G4, Leopard is on a truck waiting to be dropped at my door. Running Tiger, I have only used the classic environment once mainly cause I was feeling nostalgic and had some old Mac games that I felt like seeing again. I have since sold the older games on Craigslist and kept the few that have OS X .apps that work with the older games libraries.

The main point is also as a developer, I would not be targeting my project toward a dead platform unless you already have a large installed userbase (such as the PS2 game console...) The best thing that's happened in recent years for Apple and Macs in general IMO, has been the move to OS X and Leopard putting the 'final nail in the coffin' for Classic support is a step forward.

"I would not be targeting my project toward a dead platform unless you already have a large installed userbase"

There is a large installed userbase of Photoshop 7.0 and earlier.

Not everyone can afford, or should bother, to keep up with the pointless churn of:
1. processor architecture
2. new releases of Adobe products with features most people don't need and whose only justification is to titillate gullible upgraders
...and where professional workflows exist, it is not even necessarily prudent to take the latest shiniest thing from the shelf: A lesson I have just learned with Leopard.

Thanks, Apple, for another lesson in trickle-down billionaire cynicism. If I wanted that, I thought I knew where to look (Microsoft).

On the other hand, for the other 99.9%, Leopard rocks. 🙂

"There is a large installed userbase of Photoshop 7.0 and earlier."

Would that be due to the lack of required activation and or piracy? Who knows, but I don't know anyone sticking to PS7 and earlier. Is it out of spite? Legit upgrading is pretty inexpensive especially in the corporate field of software licensing and sales.



"Not everyone can afford, or should bother, to keep up with the pointless churn of:
1. processor architecture
2. new releases of Adobe products with features most people don't need and whose only justification is to titillate gullible upgraders
...and where professional workflows exist, it is not even necessarily prudent to take the latest shiniest thing from the shelf: A lesson I have just learned with Leopard."

If you're developing for old hardware, how will your company grow for the future if you're only focusing on old hardware or software? I know some a company who still develop DOS applications but are still usable in Windows Vista. Finally they have seen the benefits of developing a 32bit native Windows application instead of the limitations of MS-DOS. Back on point, if you're only focusing on a select few, you're shooting yourself in the foot. Much like a game developer still pushing out games for the original Playstation when they should be focusing their efforts towards modern hardware (where the userbase has moved on to...)

For what it's worth, I'll put in a word for Sheepshaver. It's by no means perfect, but it does run on a PPC Mac at about 2/3 to half the speed of classic, depending on your application. It runs at about 1/8 speed on an Intel Mac. It's possible to extract the needed OS9 ROM from an Apple download, but you do need to have a legal copy of the OS you want to install, and it will go up to 9.0.4. My install is under Tiger, but I gather it does work under Leopard. There's a useful forum on it at www.emaculation.com.

The devils in this whole saga are less Apple than the developers who won't update their apps for OSX. My faith in Adobe has been seriously damaged by them not making Framemaker for OSX.

"For what it's worth, I'll put in a word for Sheepshaver."

I remember the legacy of Sheepshaver, it's been around for years and originated on early PPC based hardware known as the BeBox running BeOS. When Be ported thier OS to run on earlier Macintosh computers, Sheepshaver was a great way to still run the native Mac OS of the time whilst still in the much more robust BeOS enviornment. (Many BeOS users now have moved toward OS X even after Be moved to Intel hardware)

SheepShaver still had staying power even after the BeOS 5 release with PPC based users and remained the best option for those on a G3 based PowerMac or earlier model. Anyway, I do know of the program and on PPC based Macs, it was an awesome piece of software. 🙂

Save me the crap about targeting projects toward a dead platform...
I have some work to do, I managed to program for OS9, I don't have the time nor the resources to learn OSX programming. OK i am a amateur not a pro, nevertheless some work to do.
If I cannot maintain the database which I am already maintaining some 10 years....
No Classic, no Mac... If I have to change I can make the full turn around as well...
What's the difference between Apple and Microsoft anyway nowadays ???

johan

"I managed to program for OS9, I don't have the time nor the resources to learn OSX programming."

You state in your signature that you don't have the time or resources to learn programming for OS X but do you realize that Xcode happens to be included with Tiger? (if your copy is legal that is...) It's a great way to practice and learn porting your code for both PPC and Intel platforms and improved with Leopard.

I learned to code on an Apple II, then moved to HyperCard on the Mac. Afterwards I moved onto MS-Dos and Windows whilst still working on Mac Projects. If you know the foundation of your project, the rest is portable if you're careful.

Now, I don't know what your anger issues are nor why you are responding to me in such a hateful manner but why point the finger at me? Perhaps it's your own shortsightedness that got you where you are now? You could always move your codebase to Windows you know. 😉

Have a nice day...

Message was edited by: dunric