Mac OS 9 Lives

General => HELP BOARD ! Installing & Troubleshooting the Classic Mac OS => Topic started by: Mat on February 01, 2013, 06:20:47 AM

Title: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Mat on February 01, 2013, 06:20:47 AM
One point that annoys me the last decade it the fact, that terms are not correclty defined.

Classic is the emulation used in later Operating Systems for booting Mac OS 9
So Mac OS 9 IS NOT Classic!

That is recently very important as I think. Especially when you look at different problems people got with Classic or other emulations, and blame the Operating System. It makes sometimes a bad feeling towards Mac OS 9 (or below) even if it is simply about the poor emulation!

How to deal with this? I have no correct term for Mac OS 9.2.2 and below. And I belive Apple itselve is not sad about the mixed up terms. I would love if we could try to establish a correct term. "Mac 9 and prior" or similar terms are too long and complicated. Any ideas?
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Ari on February 01, 2013, 09:13:26 AM
Why not use the term "Pre- OS X" :)?
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Mat on February 01, 2013, 10:42:29 AM
No. As X and 9 are totally different Operating Systems thats not a good solution. That would be like calling AmigaOS "pre MorphOS" ;)
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: DieHard on February 11, 2013, 12:19:40 AM
When I created the Mac OS 9 Lives site I alluded to the the fact that there is no "Class" in classic; meaning that the Classic Environment of OS X was not good enough and that it was not as the definition would imply (classic - something of lasting worth or with a timeless quality) and that booting directly to Mac OS 9 was far superior for professional applications (like a DAW).  I am with you that we need a term that describes running Mac OS when booting directly/natively... maybe "Pure Mac OS" or some other term that implies it has not been tainted/manipulated.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: rg8766 on February 11, 2013, 01:47:12 AM
Would not simply referring to it as OS9 or System 9 (the later linking it more to the System 6 System 7 lineage, the former linking it to the OS8 alterations) be sufficient.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Mat on February 11, 2013, 07:49:36 AM
Well "OS9" is something completely different - a very interresting philosopy, but has nothing to do with Macs. "Pure Mac OS 9" sounds good in my opinion.
BTW in some forums the iCrowd starts to post more and more Mountain Lion questions at Mac OS 8 & 9 subforums,
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: supernova777 on May 04, 2015, 05:47:05 PM
lets be clear on this fact ..

the emulator is named after the reference to the os.
Mac OS 9 .. is, for all intents & purposes, the "9th edition" of the "CLASSIC" mac operating system.

yes there is an emulator also called "CLASSIC" within Tiger.. but its called this in reference to the "Classic" macintosh opertating system
so there isnt just one definition .. of "Classic"  -- "classic" refers both to the emulator within the newer OSX Operating System & to the "classic" mac os, its dubbed classic mac os because after its longterm use, it has been REPLACED... some people use the word "legacy" to refer to old products.. some use words like "classic".. in the case
of the macintosh os.. i think the term "classic" is more than fitting!

its confusing only to people that think that one word should only one meaning.


Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: IIO on May 04, 2015, 11:07:49 PM
Would not simply referring to it as OS9

because OS9 (http://www.microware.com/) is something different.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: DieHard on May 05, 2015, 08:36:28 AM
Yeah, we have to "Think Different"
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: devils_advisor on May 05, 2015, 08:40:39 AM
maybe one of these days we can share the story how each one of us fell in love with os9 :D
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: ProfileName on July 31, 2016, 11:25:21 AM
The distinction is clear, no need for a new label.
Classic is the emulator
OS 9 is the system
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: geforceg4 on November 02, 2016, 02:54:48 PM
diehard looks like its time to change the registration questions when u have spambots registering + posting on the forum!
like the user above!


By Diehard...
Yeah... I deleted the post... looks like I'm going to have to check the newbies better again :(
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: GaryN on November 02, 2016, 03:47:32 PM
I feel nitpicky today so I'm going back to the beginning of this entire discussion to take issue with the definitions herein.

Classic is the emulation used in later Operating Systems for booting Mac OS 9

I submit that OS9 Classic is not an emulation.

Although it descends from The Rhapsody Blue Box, it does not operate as an abstraction. Rather…

It is a unique complete instance of an OS9 System folder, with System, Finder and a New World ROM File running in a sandbox simultaneously with OSX.

This is possible because it runs on Power PC systems only - up to and including G5.
All other SheepShaver-type emulators that run on Intel hardware are far more complex and less efficient because they have to actually imitate the OS9 functions in a "foreign" environment.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: nanopico on November 02, 2016, 08:23:30 PM
C
I feel nitpicky today so I'm going back to the beginning of this entire discussion to take issue with the definitions herein.

Classic is the emulation used in later Operating Systems for booting Mac OS 9

I submit that OS9 Classic is not an emulation.

Although it descends from The Rhapsody Blue Box, it does not operate as an abstraction. Rather…

It is a unique complete instance of an OS9 System folder, with System, Finder and a New World ROM File running in a sandbox simultaneously with OSX.

This is possible because it runs on Power PC systems only - up to and including G5.
All other SheepShaver-type emulators that run on Intel hardware are far more complex and less efficient because they have to actually imitate the OS9 functions in a "foreign" environment.


The ROM though is actually part of the classic/blue box (which the binaries for classic are still labeled blue box in a lot of places). Just to further ad that it is not emulation.  You can remove the ROM from your OS 9 System folder for classic and it still works since Classic sort of acts like an Old World ROM machine. The ROM it uses is a shim that just maps most of the system calls in the ROM to the native OS X.  That's the short of it anyway.

I completely agree that it is not in any way an emulation!
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: DieHard on November 03, 2016, 08:13:14 AM
Great Job Guys :)

It's nice to teach an old dog new tricks... appreciate the clarification here.

I originally posted posted on the main site...
Quote
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.

Not incorrect... but vague... If I get time I will try to clarify it without getting too specific, but I will add the "PowerPC" only info. and mention that it is NOT an emulation since the vast majority will assume this...

So, now we got that straight... please add the "Classic Environment" to Leopard when you have some time guys :)
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: nanopico on November 03, 2016, 12:25:09 PM

So, now we got that straight... please add the "Classic Environment" to Leopard when you have some time guys :)

As if I haven't tackled enough, but I think this might be a weekend project, or a fall flat on my face and go back into hiding project.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: MacTron on November 05, 2016, 07:34:06 AM
Emulation not only refers to hardware emulation but software also. (or both)
The whole Classic environment in Mac Os X creates a virtual machine that emulates a Mac Os 9 environment to allow to run classic mac applications. (note the low and capital letters).
Apple called this environment Classic. But we can - using correct meaning language - to call classic apps and classic operating systems (Mac Os 9, Mac Os 8.x, System 7.x etc...) to ones before Os X or "modern" SO.

Furdermore the whole Classic environment will fade in to irrelevance in computer history. While mac Os classics apps, hardware am SOs will remain a hit in computer history. So I state for using this term for Mac Os 9, Mac Os 8.x, System 7.x ... hardware and software, while the use as Classic Environment on Mac Os X fades into irrelevancy.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: torvan on November 06, 2016, 03:12:42 PM
To me, and this might be technically incorrect but it is "feeling" correct:

I just trash all the "Classic" items in the System Folder. Sure, I would not be able to run OS9 and older apps when in OS X, but I use OS X only apps in OS X anyway.

I also use Greg's Browser to look at the OS 9 drive (note there are two drives-OS 9 and X) and remove all the "." items that OS X uses.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Mat on November 06, 2016, 10:24:50 PM
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.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Metrophage on August 23, 2018, 11:47:46 PM
Technically, the most accurate term for that environment is a "compatibility layer." I just still call BlueBox, that was its original name and is less confusing. And many long-term Mac users will remember the name.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Naiw on August 24, 2018, 04:24:35 AM
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
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: DieHard on August 24, 2018, 08:05:49 AM
Thanks for that... it was great reading and was explained quite well :)
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: ximiimx on February 20, 2019, 05:29:17 AM
When i run OS 9 or below, I use the term “Native”, not “Classic”.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: darthnVader on February 20, 2019, 04:45:01 PM
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. 8)
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: IIO on February 21, 2019, 04:11:22 AM
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.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Naiw on March 13, 2019, 03:56:35 PM
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.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: adespoton on July 11, 2020, 10:58:07 AM
Apple has run fast and loose with the term "classic".  Here's a few of the uses:

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.
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Cashed on January 06, 2022, 06:28:46 PM
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 (https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/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 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rwfX0k-fqK0) & part 2 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dnQ1vu-omKY)) -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 (https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/classic) are:
simple, typical, usual, representative, standard, vintage, prototypal, prototypical, time-honoured

Which makes it specifically ''one' of 'the' originals (https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/original):'
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 (https://www.reddit.com/r/apple/comments/64y7w5/do_you_remember_that_time_in_2002_steve_jobs_held/) 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 (https://seths.blog/2003/06/naming_a_busine/)
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 (https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/think) original.



Most companies fails in segmentation. -Cas
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: DieHard on January 06, 2022, 07:51:27 PM
From our Mac OS 9 Lives Webpage...
Quote
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.

Quote
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
Title: Re: Mac OS 9 is NOT Classic
Post by: Cashed on January 07, 2022, 01:03:47 AM
Quote
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.

(http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=24.0;attach=9455;image)

Thanks FBz (http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php/topic,6143.msg45879.html#msg45879)