X Should not have Classic Mode

**natepalmer** · September 24th, 2000, 04:06 AM

Mac OS X should have the ability to run Classic application without bring up Mac OS 9. They should use a compatibility layer much like Windows NT. The additional time and memory requirement to load up Mac OS 9 under Mac OS X should be avoided. I feel like i'm running virtual pc to run a different platform but both of these Operating Systems are made by apple they need to merge the two a bit better so you don't have to have a copy of OS 9 to run classic applications.

**wmoss** · September 24th, 2000, 07:29 PM

Obviously, if you think the Classic environment is too slow there's nothing that anyone can say to contradict this. Since it's a matter of perception, I can't say that you should percieve it faster :-)

Think of Classic as an "above and beyond" sort of step. Apple has provided the API continuity for developers with Carbon (which is roughly akin to what Microsoft offered to get apps onto NT) and then they went one step beyond and offered the full older OS but placed in a nice little compatability cage so that it couldn't kill the other "well behaved" apps on the system. It even went one step further than that and made the two share the same screen and some of the same interface elements. That's a big feat in my book.

With that said, I'm not certain that I want to run Classic on my machine. I don't want ANY app that isn't built upon carbon or cocoa and it'd be nice to have a way to keep from accidentally launching the Classic mode since I don't want the compatability and I don't want the performance hit.

I did have a great idea that Apple should port the emulator for the old Apple //gs to the Mac and have it run in a similar way to Classic ("green box?"). That'd be impressive that they can now offer backwards compatability for customers since 1976 and might even be helpful for a few schools who still have to rely on old, out of date machines because they can't get decent software budgets even if they had hardware to upgrade.

The whole subject of compatability is a fascinating one and though I will make sure the apps I use don't rely on the compability boxes, I think that Apple has gone above and beyond the call of duty with what they have offered end users in Mac OS X.

**natepalmer** · September 24th, 2000, 08:33 PM

I agree with you on one thing I would much rather run Carbon and Cocoa apps exclusively. But the problem being. First of all there is going to be a period when all of your software is going to be changing from Classic to Carbon to Cocoa. And the only applications that are going to do that are applications that are currently in developement. Now rules out software the is still useful but no longer in development. I use the example of StarCraft a game I still use and there are many many more that do. Now is there going to be a push for Blizzard to convert an old, dare I say, outdated application like that? There isn't any reason why they would want to.

Now I started doing the MCSE training about a year and a half ago, then bought my first mac and lost interest. But with working with windows NT, they ran Windows 3.1 apps in a compatibility layer not loading up Windows 3.1 but probably using the specific API's from Windows 3.1. This would increase speed and would give Mac OS X the ability to run Classic applications faster, and bring us compatibility for old applications that we can't currently run natively on OS X.

Yes, the major applications are going to be converted very quickly, less popular slowly. In the companies point of view they are going to look at it. Is it going to be worth out companies time to re-release software in Carbon? If the software is no longer in development it's a re-release where the end user would probably have to pay for the upgrade. Not very appealing to a company.

**csajovic** · September 25th, 2000, 10:10 PM

fcuk classic support. its hack anyway who wants to load an os inside an os. switch between interfaces. and deal with all the inconsistancies and incompatabilities.

So I say fcuk classic. spank the developers until they port to carbon!!!

Native OSX ROCKS!!

**AdmiralAK** · October 23rd, 2000, 07:42 AM

Hey you dope, how about people who rely on softwindows to
get some of their work done ? Or hobbyists that use emualtors
of other OSs ???

If the switching b/w interfaces confuses you then dont use
an emulator but please dont make unilateral decisions and
conclusions about other people.

If there was no classic people would be faced with the linux situation. All the software they have bought up till now wont work...this does not make people happy...THINK man THINK!

**natepalmer** · October 23rd, 2000, 10:44 AM

I don't think you got the point here. Softwindows and any other EMULATOR is meant to emulate some type of hardware in order to run a certain type of software. I use Virtual PC myself so I can run windows programs. Classic mode is running OS 9 (built for the same hardware) under OS X (same hardware) There is no emulation here. I don't want to run Windows programs natively or any other hardware specific software.

Mac OX X is the version after Mac OS 9. Yet it cannot run OS 9 programs natively. Although there may be a technical reason for this that I may not know. But I know that apple can make it run natively. That was my point, to have it run in a compatibility layer much like Windows NT running Windows 3.1 programs. It would preserve the memory management OS 9 is used to.

Apple decided to address this issue in two ways. First they make it easy for existing companies toport their software over to X by using the Carbon libraries. And second for software that is not currently in development they can run it under Classic.

**AdmiralAK** · October 23rd, 2000, 10:55 AM

Mon ami,
Softwindows was juuuust an example, and indeed Softwindows does emulate Hardware but all emulators emulate hardware. They also emulate software. How about MOL ? I mean you DO run MacOS on LInux through emulation yet the hardware is there.
I do agree that OS 9 should not be run under some sort of emulation, I think that OS 9 apps should run without any overhead from emulation, but classic is here, classic is the way apple did it, and we should accept it how it is UNTIL apple makes something better of it, people should not just say "get rid of it and let the people with older software screw themselves!"... it just does not happen that way!

**natepalmer** · October 23rd, 2000, 11:06 AM

True. Mac On Linux is an example, also VMWARE on the intel side. I have since come to the conclusion (after posting this) that that way Apple has done this is probably the best way. Running an app in Carbon is better for the program being able to take advantage of OS-X 's better memory management and the likes. And for applications that don't update they can still run under classic mode. It would probably the best way to do it to also promote better and new ways of doing things. I mean you can still run old dos programs in Windows (though not all in WIndows ME) and I think that may have stumped growth.