# Rhapsody Support/Development Site



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 4, 2009)

If people would contribute I could set up a Rhapsody support site just like was mentioned in this forum.  I would do most of the work but I need people that could help with support and give ideas.  It would be a site similar to RacerX's site but it would have a forum and we could possibly write software too (I am a programer).

Tell me what you think,
#1 Rhapsody


----------



## RacerX (Feb 5, 2009)

I'd be happy to help, but I should point out that back when that thread was active Apple had only just announced that they were discontinuing sales of Mac OS X Server 1.2v3 and accepting pre-orders for Mac OS X Server v10.0.3. So that was sort of the height of Rhapsody usership.

And the decline may have already started by that point as I recall Apple distributing a special version of the developers tools CD at WWDC 2001 with a (time limited) copy of WebObjects designed to run on 10.0.x systems.

So yeah... I'd be interested. But this also isn't the first time that such an undertaking as been attempted... There was a _Rhapsody Project_ site and forum (formerly at www.rhapsody-project.tk) which morphed into the _NeXT Information Archive_ site and forum (at www.nextarchive.net), and I watch for questions posted at the forums at NeXT Computers (which has a Rhapsody section which hasn't had any activity since last November). So because these things tend to pop up on the net from time to time and then disappear shortly after, I'd rather take a passive role.

My site has been semi self-sustaining, with articles I've written on the subject totaling over 50,000 words at last count as I recall. Additionally I've archived all of Apple's tech articles and manuals on the subject. But the main thing that drove my writing of articles was questions that I had been asked that hadn't been addressed yet or needed a little more exposition than what had been said before.


I'd say that in my experience the main reason why Rhapsody has been relegated to a _looky-loo_ status as a platform is that people have no idea that software existed (mainly because it wasn't the titles they were familiar with). Mac OS X Public Beta and 10.0.x had similar issues (and similar software titles). But even taking the time to show what can be done in Rhapsody with the right software, most people seem incline to simply install a downloaded copy, take screenshots of it running and then go onto their next installation conquest. Helping those types of users has gotten tiring after 8 years.

I have been checking in on this site and on the NeXT Computers site every week or so, and I'd be happy to add another site to check in on, but if I were you I wouldn't expect a lot of traffic to a dedicated Rhapsody forum.


----------



## fryke (Feb 5, 2009)

Back in the day I was using Rhapsody DR2 on both a PowerMacintosh 9500 and some AMD K6 machine, mainly for trying out stuff, "looking into the future" of Mac OS and, well, chatting and MUDding on the 'net.

Publicly available were only some versions of Mac OS X Server, but even at that time, the appeal to the public was very, very limited. If you needed a server for your Mac OS 8/9 computers, AppleShare was still more viable for most Mac administrators. Investing in "that new beast" just didn't seem that appropriate, since Apple themselves were talking about big steps that were still to come. Mac OS X DPs then showed that the whole OS was going into a different direction. It certainly didn't help adoption of Rhapsody (Mac OS X Server) then.

Nowadays, I don't see much interest in Rhapsody. Like Racer X says: It's hobbyists that want to install the system, take screenshots, "feel" the system for a couple of days (if not hours) and then move on. I mean: If someone comes around with a _new_ system, it's very important to get an active user and developer base so the project can gain momentum. Rhapsody had that chance when DR1 and DR2 were around, but the access to those versions was limited, of course, to official ADC members (and illegal copies). When OS X Server 1.x came about, it was an expensive system - not for the weak of money.

In a way, Apple did things right, btw.: They got the highend developers (I'm not talking big bucks like Adobe and Microsoft, though) on board with Rhapsody and OS X Server and got the momentum going with Mac OS X DP4 and Public Beta. That's when macosx.com came to be, btw. That's when hobbyists started to adopt Mac OS X. Mac OS X _is_ what Rhapsody and Mac OS 9 were combined into, and it's a success story. Rhapsody was a very interesting milestone, but nowadays it really _is_ a nostalgic hobby for most. I'd say Racer X clearly _is_ an exception, still using machines running those systems for work purposes. There may be others, but I've rarely heard about any such projects.


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 5, 2009)

The Rhapsody Project is what I'm aiming for.  I am going to try to get as many of their files using the Internet Archive.  I want to get people here and at Insanely Mac Forums to get back into Rhapsody.  I would like to write some code to make Rhapsody a more usable OS, just like the Rhapsody Project.


----------



## fryke (Feb 5, 2009)

what and who for?


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 5, 2009)

fryke said:


> what and who for?



What do you mean???


----------



## fryke (Feb 5, 2009)

I mean: Who would be the target for a more useable Rhapsody? In a way, Mac OS X 10.5 is quite a useable Rhapsody.


----------



## RacerX (Feb 5, 2009)

I'd point out that almost all of the app titles that I use in Rhapsody I also use in Mac OS X and OPENSTEP... it is that correspondence that has let me continue to use all three nearly seamlessly over the years. And the fact that Rhapsody 5.6 has a better version of Mac OS 8.6 _than_ Mac OS 8.6 makes it a great platform for me to run many of my older Mac apps as well.

But I bought all my software years ago when developers were still selling it. Andrew Stone will still sell a license for Create 5.x that works in Rhapsody, but he can no longer produce licenses for Create 10.0 for Rhapsody... which is a truly great application. I mean these shots of it in action (here, here, here and here) give you an idea why I can continue to use this platform effectively when most people who see it say you can't do anything with it.

I'm not sure how people are going to get to that level of efficiency with Rhapsody without applications (which was the main problem with the _Rhapsody Project_). I can point people at demo versions of most, but unlike with NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP, I haven't been given the permission to share Rhapsody licenses of apps yet. There are some really nice apps that are just lost now (like Glyphix, Marlowe, WriteUp and PasteUp).

The one great thing to come out of the _Rhapsody Project_ was a working version of ToyViewer for Rhapsody for Intel. Otherwise they spent a lot of time _spinning their wheels_. By contrast, my site's main goal is to be a repository of information on Rhapsody in all it's forms to help people get up to speed on it faster than if they were left to figure it all out on their own.

I've said it before and it is worth saying again... the best OS in the world is worthless without applications.


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 5, 2009)

RacerX said:


> I've said it before and it is worth saying again... the best OS in the world is worthless without applications.



I know, that's why I am going to use Rhapsody to further my programing abilities.  Does the developers versions of Rhapsody have programing documentation?  Also, if anyone wants to help with programing PM me.  I will soon have my site up with forum.  I'll post its address here as soon as its done.


----------



## fryke (Feb 5, 2009)

But that's what I don't quite understand... If you _do_ have a more or less current Mac with Leopard running on it, you get the developer tools for free with the OS. That way you can further your programming skills and actually have a _target audience_. Not only will an audience provide you with money (eventually) as your skills get better, your skills will get better, because there's an audience! You'll learn far more about where you went wrong (or if not wrong then maybe off the consumer's wishes) if you actually have an audience.

Develop the best little utility you want for Rhapsody, but as long as you don't also release it for a platform that's actually in wider use, the whole enterprise will be like swimming on dry land. Am I so wrong about this?


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 5, 2009)

I know I won't have much of an audience by using Rhapsody but I want to do it for fun.  Maybe I'll make something that will help RacerX out, since he has helped me (I'm sorry but I can't donate money to you, RacerX ).


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 6, 2009)

I have my site up and running!  Here it is.  The forums are the only part of the site that is really running.  The ads are to help pay for the site.  If you have any problems tell me.


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 6, 2009)

RacerX, can I use your Rhapsody cd picture for the icon of my site?

Thanks,
#1 Rhapsody


----------



## RacerX (Feb 7, 2009)

#1 Rhapsody said:


> RacerX, can I use your Rhapsody cd picture for the icon of my site?


I have a number of pictures of the CDs, but sure... I don't really have any restrictions for the use of anything on my site.


So... just out of curiosity, have you checked to see how _Rhapsody-friendly_ the site is in OmniWeb 3.x on a Rhapsody system?

The two reasons for building everything on my Rhapsody site in Rhapsody (using Rhapsody native applications) was to (1) insure that other Rhapsody systems would have access and (2) show that you really could do something with Rhapsody (besides just look at it). I would think that the first of those (Rhapsody accessibility) would be very important for a Rhapsody support site.


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 8, 2009)

I know.  You can probably view the site using Rhapsody but not the forums.  I would check but my Rhapsody system went down.  I'm thinking of setting up another system, do you think it should be Intel or PPC?  If Intel I need a list of network card drivers for Rhapsody DR2.


----------



## RacerX (Feb 9, 2009)

#1 Rhapsody said:


> I'm thinking of setting up another system, do you think it should be Intel or PPC?


Personally, I would think that going with a PowerPC system would be a good start. As a developer you would want a strong foundation system, and Rhapsody runs best on Apple hardware. I use Rhapsody on a Wallstreet and an 8600/300 for most of what I do, my ThinkPad is a backup system for the Wallstreet. Wallstreets are going for next to nothing these days, so that would be a good system... specially if you want to share Rhapsody with others in the real world.



> Does the developers versions of Rhapsody have programing documentation?


A couple PDF files, nothing extremely in depth. Mostly NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP examples that have been around for quite some time.

I would suggest the following:
 *Rhapsody Developer's Guide*
by Jesse Feiler
 *WebObjects web application construction kit*
by George Ruzek
Both are nice books, and really just about any WebObjects 4.x documentation would be helpful. Same with any early Mac OS X developer documentation or reference (from 10.2 and earlier) as most of the basic tools were the same as in Rhapsody. I would think that Cocoa Starting Point would be helpful too.

If you are using Rhapsody 5.3 or 5.5, the developer tools on the WebObjects 4.0.1 CD should be fine. If you are using 5.6, you may want to find WebObjects 4.5 as it has an updated version of the developer tools for that version (though the version of the 4.0.1 CD will still work fine for most things).

And remember, even though you can use either Objective C or Java in Rhapsody, Apple has discontinued future enhancements of Java in Mac OS X. So if you are wanting to move in that direction, Objective C would be a better choice.


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 9, 2009)

RacerX said:


> Personally, I would think that going with a PowerPC system would be a good start.



Can you emulate Rhapsody for PPC?  My old PowerPC computers are in my garage and I don't wan't to bring them inside.  I can run the emulator on Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X

Have you tested my site in Rhapsody?  I didn't realize that DR2 doesn't have OmniWeb on it.  How do I get it?


----------



## #1 Rhapsody (Feb 12, 2009)

What about using YellowBox?  Would it be better for developing than DR2?


----------



## RacerX (Feb 15, 2009)

#1 Rhapsody said:


> Can you emulate Rhapsody for PPC?  My old PowerPC computers are in my garage and I don't wan't to bring them inside.  I can run the emulator on Windows, Linux, and Mac OS X
> 
> Have you tested my site in Rhapsody?  I didn't realize that DR2 doesn't have OmniWeb on it.  How do I get it?


Rhapsody for PowerPC systems can't be run in emulation as there is no emulator that emulates Open Firmware correctly (some don't even attempt to provide actual drive images, but rather emulate _large_ floppy drives). But the point of using the PowerPC version would be to use it on a real stable hardware platform rather than something jury-rigged together. Emulation (or any type) is worse in this regard, not better.

There is a copy of OmniWeb on the DR2 CD, but it is a demo version that is timed out if you are using the current date... I'm not sure where the Omni Group is keeping their older software these days, so you might have to wait for me to finish putting together my applications site.

And yes, when you first put up the site I checked... it looks okay in Rhapsody.



> What about using YellowBox? Would it be better for developing than DR2?


Rhapsody applications are Yellow Box applications... unless you are talking about _Yellow Box for Windows_, in which case you are talking about Windows applications.

If that is the path you want to go down, then Rhapsody isn't where you want to be... you should be using some version of WebObjects on Windows.

Honestly, this was the problem I had with the Rhapsody Project and other things like it... they weren't using Rhapsody to begin with. I was using Rhapsody as a _work-a-day_ operating system long before I started my Rhapsody site.

I mean, think about it this way... I don't own a Windows system, the newest copy of Windows I own is Windows 2000 Professional, and I haven't touched a Windows system since 2002. If I started up a _Windows Support/Development Site_ today, would you take me seriously? I'm not even a Windows user at the moment and don't have a functioning Windows system.

I see you putting the cart before the horse here. You should first become a user of Rhapsody. Learn how to make it do the things that it needs to do to be a useful part of your computing environment. Learn how to side step problems and get the most from the system.

When I started using Rhapsody, I did it without a safety net. I used my ThinkPad with Rhapsody (and nothing else) as the system I brought with me to help me fix other people's computers. It had to function perfectly (you can't have a crashing computer and keep clients faith in your abilities to fit their systems), store and display all my manuals (which were PDF or HTML documents), and let me do some _on the fly_ graphic design while working with clients. I had no other system with me away from home, so it was Rhapsody or nothing. I had to make it work.

At one point in time I was pretty good with Linux, and I could help others... but today, today I know next to nothing about Linux. I surely wouldn't attempt to help people with Linux until I was able to help myself first.

I would suggest this (and it is what I suggest for anyone looking at other platforms)... take a week to figure out what you might need on the new platform, and then *ONLY* use that platform for a week or two. Whatever you normally use for computing, pack it up in a box and put it in storage during that time.

You learn to swim by getting into the water and doing it... and you better know how to swim before you attempt to teach others. Same thing here.


----------

