Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic

[Naiw]

I cannot tell if it is technically seen an emulation or VM or RTE or whatever. And that even doesn´t really matter if we care about the real problem. It still is, that many people think running Classic or even SheepShaver shows them Mac OS 9.
And most problems they are running into, are about the poor "emulation" not the OS. So I really would love to avaoid all terms like "Classic, classic, classic OS" or similar when we talk about our OS.

Classic is more of a runtime environment than a virtual machine as been said, I guess you could also view it as paravirtualisation if you want to. But then again it's not a typical process either.
The main thing is that Classic replaces pretty much all lowlevel code (read Nanokernel) in Mac OS 9 with a shim layer that funnels the calls to Mac OS X- so from Mac OS X point of view it's another application, Mac OS 9 runs as a "application" even on a native install though on top of the nanokernel (this is called the blue task).

So there is no emulation going on at all, there are multiple reasons for Classic software not working or behaving as they ought to with Classic though the one that I personally think is the most obvious most of the time is the fact Apple decided to patch the window manager, file manager etc heavily to allow Classic to run "rootless" together with Mac OS X applications. This had a lot of implications both beneficial and not so beneficial, the major pro is of course that the apps feel more integrated but it also means that you have two systems "fight" at times, Mac OS X is however the master at all time which makes some software malfunction. The other is that they decided to make Classic windows double buffered, this works fine as long as you use Mac OS 9s API (read quickdraw) so Mac OS X can figure when it's time to swap buffers. Unfortunately lots and lots of software old Mac OS software by passed quickdraw, often drawing directly to VRAM and that doesn't work good at all with double buffering, you usually end up with blank windows etc.
I think Apple would have been better of if they kept Mac OS 9 running inside a window (similar to SheepShaver/Basillisk etc) there would of course still be incompatibilities in some areas but at the same time it would have probably been better for compatibility as whole.

On the other hand, Classic was never intended to be "used" it was a stopgap solution to allow professional users migrate to Mac OS X until their software been updated or replaced with something else, and in that aspect it did work fairly well. Of course this does not apply to all kinds of professional software, especially not DAWs etc

[DieHard]

Thanks for that... it was great reading and was explained quite well

[ximiimx]

When i run OS 9 or below, I use the term “Native”, not “Classic”.

[darthnVader]

The Classic Mac OS refers to Pre-OS X, but not before 7.6, as it's just System 1.x-7.5.x.

The term is used loosely, and I can understand confusion with the Classic Env.( BlueBox ).

It's all just slag, and it's not that hard to nail someone down to Classic Mac OS or Classic Env.

Wink and nod if you used Pro Dos on your Apple II.

[IIO]

now that OSX is called macOS again, MacOS 9 can be easily confused with mavericks or with the latest macOS 10.x.9.

so i keep calling it OS9. normally OS9 is something completely different, but something almost unknown to the public (even more unknown than MacOS 9)

no wait, i was lying: in fact i am calling MacOS9 "Classic" and the classic enviroment "Bluebox" and a give a shit if others understand me.

[Naiw]

now that OSX is called macOS again, MacOS 9 can be easily confused with mavericks or with the latest macOS 10.x.9.

so i keep calling it OS9. normally OS9 is something completely different, but something almost unknown to the public (even more unknown than MacOS 9)

no wait, i was lying: in fact i am calling MacOS9 "Classic" and the classic enviroment "Bluebox" and a give a shit if others understand me.

OS9 or rather OS/9 is a completely different thing though.

"Classic macos {9} or classic 9" is probably the best term there is without causing more confusion.

[adespoton]

Apple has run fast and loose with the term "classic".  Here's a few of the uses:

• 1990: Apple introduces the Macintosh Classic running System 6.0.7 (but still sells the Macintosh Plus)
• 1991: Apple introduces the Macintosh Classic II running either 6.0.8L or 7.0.1
• 1993: Apple introduces the Macintosh Colo(u)r Classic running System 7.1
• 1993: Apple introduces the Macintosh Colo(u)r Classic II running System 7.1
• 2000: Apple introduces Mac OS X Public Beta, which includes the Rhapsody Blue Box, renamed "Mac OS X Classic Environment"
• 2007: Apple introduces the iPod Classic

Pedants will find all sorts of things wrong with this list, because it isn't completely correct in all literature from Apple and others.

Then... on top of this, we've got Apple and others referring to the original MC68000 Macs as "Classic Macs" which includes the 128k, the 512k, the 512ke, and the Plus.  Then we've got the division of 68k and PPC Macs, "Old World" vs. "New World" Macs, "Pre-G3", "GX" etc. Macs, etc.

On https://apple.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_Mac_OS_versions I list all pre-OS X Mac OS versions as "Classic Mac OS" even though the terms "Classic" and "Mac OS" don't really apply to all of them, separately or together.  That's because all the other terms fit even worse than "Classic" does.

Think about it:

Only Mac OS 9 will run in the "Classic Environment" -- except Mac OS 8.6 runs in the "Blue Box" which is essentially the same thing as the "Classic Environment".  The only "Classic Mac OS" versions that will run on a Macintosh Classic are System 6.0.7 through Mac OS 7.5.5.  Of those, only three OS versions are called "Mac OS".  Another two Mac OS versions (7.6 and 7.6.1) will run on a Mac with "Classic" in the name.

So the "Classic Environment" won't run a "Classic Mac OS" that will run on a Classic Mac.

So.  What I find still works to differentiate is 68K vs PPC vs Intel vs Intel64 vs ARM.  Apple will soon muddy this further, with macOS 11 being IA64/ARM, and version numbers overlapping with iOS/iPadOS/watchOS/tvOS.  I'm sure we'll soon have a Classic Watch or something as well.

So until someone comes up with something that actually works in all situations, I'll continue to not use the word "Classic" by itself when referring to anything; "Classic Environment" will refer to the OS X compatibility layer for Mac OS 9, "Classic Macintosh will refer to any Macintosh that can run Mac OS 9 or earlier (including the Mac Mini G4 now), "Macintosh Classic" will refer to the particular computer, and "Classic Mac OS" will refer to any Mac OS prior to Mac OS X that isn't A/UX, BSD or Linux.

Unless we want to switch to calling the older Mac OS "Toolbox Mac OS" which would be more descriptive; Mac OS X could then be NextStep-Based Mac OS, and macOS11+ could be... who knows what.

[Cashed]

Mac OS 9 IS NOT Classic!

I like this thread and I agree.
Loving the etymology of words, I can literary spend hours diving into a single word. However I'm not gonna do that today as, in the end it always results in I get a glimpse of understanding of how the whole clockwork of this world works and I loose the ability to pass it on for others to understand me at all.

When I researched and found this community. I was aware that it specifically was the Mac OS 9.2.2 you folks spend years on getting to boot natively on unsupported Macs. The last Mac OS of it's era before the 'modern' UNIX-based Mac OS X/OS X/macOS release in 2001. This community is so much more than just the Mac OS 9. For now this OS is enough for me, as I wasn't raised up with any of the earlier versions like so many others were. I will however go further back, when I stumble over a piece of software I want to use, that only runs on a earlier OS version.

Steve Jobs announced in his funeral speech that Mac OS 9 was sublimed by his next generation, Mac OS X.
After finding this site and using OS 9, I'm astounded at how extraordinarily advanced and fast the system and the thousands of applications are. Except for the GUI look and huge app sizes, the 'modern' have had very little, 'new' -if nothing, to offer me. (As an e.g. for guests* see 'Opcode Studio Vision Pro' part 1 & part 2) -and please do see past the looks of the graphical user interface.

When I've used the phrase keep-OS9-alive, I've been consciously referring to the title of this site. But in my consciousness I've at all times thought of the abbreviation of OS9 not as 'Operating System 9' but as 'Mac Original System 9.'

The synonyms for classic are:
simple, typical, usual, representative, standard, vintage, prototypal, prototypical, time-honoured

Which makes it specifically ''one' of 'the' originals:'
authentic, initial, aboriginal, beginning, first, infant, opening, pioneer, primary, starting, archetypal, autochthonous, commencing, early, elementary, embryonic, first-hand, genuine, inceptive, introductory, prime, primeval, primitive, primordial, pristine, prototypal, rudimental, rudimentary, underivative, underived

»Mac OS 9 was probably pretty superior, so this was Steve Jobs way of letting people know that he admired it.« -Reddit quote from 5 yr. ago. 2nd comment. Antonyms words used, as I wont refer a comment from an ignorant here, so have a peak. This just shows what the majority of people don't know about this operating system and probably never will.
One cannot change other peoples beliefs by pulling one's own belief over their heads, changes always comes from inside, by experiencing it first hand oneself. People get caught up in their own story if nobody shows them a way out.

When 'some' people see the words like;
OS9 - some think it's an older OS for the iPhone. Others see the OS-9 Motorola 6809 assembly language.
lives - some think it's dead.
vintage - some think it's expensive.
old school - some think it's old-fashioned or traditional.
PPC - some think it's pay-per-click. Others a powerful PC.
Macintosh - some reads it as McIntosh, Mackintosh others begin thinking Hackintosh. Heck every time I go to
www.machintoshgarden.org
my browser tells me; server not found because time again and again I make the same typo.
www.macintoshgarden.org

"a brand name is a peg that people use to hang all the attributes of your business. The LESS it has to do with your category, the better." -Seth Godin
There's nothing wrong with the name of the website, all we need is a great tagline.

One day there undeniable will be sites for the 'GenOSX' applications. Which brings me to my point.

Any Mac OS version before X will always be regarded as the original. The only difference I personally found differentiating from the next generation are the GUI, that could be worked on and included in the 'CD Extras folder.'

People love originals, so posting videos that compares the original app with the same app run on OS X could potentially drive people here.
The day I start showcasing my futuristic art along with my futuresynth/synthwave/retrowave/outrun tracks on video sites. I'll make sure to let spectators know it was created using PPC & 68k architecture apps and point them here with a great tagline.

MACOS9LIVES

   Think original.™

Most companies fails in segmentation. -Cas

[DieHard]

From our Mac OS 9 Lives Webpage...

There is no "Class" in "Classic"
Without getting too bogged down in the technical jargon; the computer must be capable of booting to Mac OS 9 directly and without OS X present whatsoever. This is as opposed to running OS 9 via the “Classic Environment” (a hardware and software abstraction layer in Mac OS X that allows OS 9 applications to run on Mac OS X). The main problem with Classic is that it does not allow the direct access to hard drives and audio cards (if you're building an audio or video studio Mac). Retro gaming also benefits greatly from booting directly to OS 9.

From Cashed...
Loving the etymology of words, I can literary spend hours diving into a single word. However I'm not gonna do that today as, in the end it always results in I get a glimpse of understanding of how the whole clockwork of this world works and I loose the ability to pass it on for others to understand me at all.

OK, me also... I like play with the phrasing as you can tell and the terminology of many things "classic"

One last note about our "name" here is that...

Mac OS "9 Lives"... kinda like the original Mac OS (Pre X) has 9 Lives, like a cat, and the original OS X versions were all a single cat... coincidence ?

Maybe... Maybe not

[Cashed]

There is no "Class" in "Classic"
Mac OS "9 Lives"... kinda like the original Mac OS (Pre X) has 9 Lives, like a cat, and the original OS X versions were all a single cat... coincidence ?

Maybe... Maybe not

Awesome! High Paw
-That perspective had totally slipped past me, it's kinda like DieHard.
Everybody knows cats pull viewers -that's a classic.

Thanks FBz

[Jubadub]

The correct term for "Mac OS 9.2.2 and earlier" is very simple, universal and undebatable.

It is simply:

Mac OS

Which necessarily excludes "Mac OS X", "OS X" AND "macOS", all UNIX crap unrelated to the actual operating system known uniquely as "Mac OS".

If one day that spelling also got adopted by Apple for something else, it would not matter, because that fact would still remain untouched and unchanged, which is that only Mac OS is Mac OS. Anything named after it afterwards would be simply misnamed, and an attempt to usurp the name of what it actually stands for. A fake is a fake.