Xojo Conferences
MBSOct2019CologneDE

Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support? (Real Studio network user group Mailinglist archive)

Back to the thread list
Previous thread: AE: returning records
Next thread: Editfield bug in 4.02?


Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Colin Cornaby
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Dr Gerard Hammond
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Mr. Weasel Willits
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Mike Benonis
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Mr. Weasel Willits
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Geoff Perlman
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Carsten Friehe
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Mike Benonis
    Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Tony Spencer
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Mike Benonis
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Matthias Buercher
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Will Leshner
    Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Chris Dillman
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Will Leshner
      [OFF] OS X speed on PBs (was: Re: Is it time...)   -   Tony Spencer
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Matthias Buercher
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Tony Spencer
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Will Leshner
    Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Tony Spencer
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Kevin Ballard
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Jeff O'Brien
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Chris Bartlett
    Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Ryan Dary
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Joe Gillespie
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Toon Van Acker
      Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Geoff Perlman
     Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Tony Spencer
      Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Mr. Weasel Willits
       [OFF] help with Adobe GoLive 6   -   jeb eddy
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Jim Wagner
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Ram Kumar
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Roger Carlson
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Chris Smolinski
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Tony Spencer
   RE: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic sup port?   -   Wallingford, Ted
   Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   David Austin
  Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?   -   Emile Schwarz

Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 05:37 (Mon, 06 May 2002 21:37:56 -0700)
From: Colin Cornaby
Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up

With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple thinks
developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware that a
lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for Classic
Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for Carbon
use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with badges)
are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there is no
built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a package is
needed.

Don't get me wrong, RS shouldn't just ditch Classic OS support right away.
The interactive shell is a nice touch. I'm still using 3.5, so I'm probably
not seeing some X things. My experiences with 4.0 trial though have still
shown RB is not yet a great dev environment in X though.

I'm aware Windows is something else that RS is worried about. X specific
feature surely can't carry over to Windows builds. However, the more I work
in Cocoa, the more I get this weird feeling when I work in RB. I only work
in X, so it really bugs me to be constrained by classic-ness.

What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
developing for classic?

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 05:47 (Tue, 7 May 2002 14:47:01 +1000)
From: Dr Gerard Hammond

They wont do it so don't even worry about it (We would drop REALbasic
as our preferred IDE in a second if it did this though).

>Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up
>
>With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple thinks
>developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware that a
>lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for Classic
>Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for Carbon
>use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with badges)
>are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there is no
>built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
>authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
>maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a package is
>needed.
>
>Don't get me wrong, RS shouldn't just ditch Classic OS support right away.
>The interactive shell is a nice touch. I'm still using 3.5, so I'm probably
>not seeing some X things. My experiences with 4.0 trial though have still
>shown RB is not yet a great dev environment in X though.
>
>I'm aware Windows is something else that RS is worried about. X specific
>feature surely can't carry over to Windows builds. However, the more I work
>in Cocoa, the more I get this weird feeling when I work in RB. I only work
>in X, so it really bugs me to be constrained by classic-ness.
>
>What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
>developing for classic?
>
>---
>Subscribe to the digest:
><mailto:<email address removed>>
>Unsubscribe:
><mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 06:15 (Mon, 06 May 2002 22:15:54 -0700)
From: Mr. Weasel Willits
On 5/6/02 9:37 PM, the NSA intercepted the following message from "Colin
Cornaby" <<email address removed>>:

> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple thinks
> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware that a
> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for Classic
> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for Carbon
> use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with badges)
> are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there is no
> built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
> authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
> maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a package is
> needed.

These will come in due time. In the mean time, there are plugins available
to do a lot of things REALbasic doesn't.

> I'm aware Windows is something else that RS is worried about. X specific
> feature surely can't carry over to Windows builds. However, the more I work
> in Cocoa, the more I get this weird feeling when I work in RB. I only work
> in X, so it really bugs me to be constrained by classic-ness.

It's coming. I think a couple things really need to be changed in REALbasic,
particularly the menubar implementation (MULTIPLE MENUBARS PLEEEASSEE!!). If
RS could change the way some things work, like cursors & window resizing
then it would allow plugin developers to do a lot of stuff that RS would put
off for a while.

Either way, it's coming.

> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
> developing for classic?

Well my only selling application is Classic only! Stupid bugs in OS X won't
let me release an OS X version which even wouldn't be that useful, but
probably would sell alright.

All of my stuff is OS X first Classic second. I will permanently drop
Classic when REAL does, but probably very soon.

My personal opinion is that it would be OK to drop classic in 5.

------------------Seth Willits---------------
Don't EVEN say that didn't help you...
_____ http://freaksoftware.tripod.com/ ______



---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 12:48 (Tue, 07 May 2002 07:48:32 -0400)
From: Mike Benonis
I don't think that Classic should be dropped yet, but I do think RS should
seriously consider implementing features that are OS X and Windows only
(drawers, the Toolbar control, Universal Access - all Carbon Jaguar
features).

-Mike

on 5/7/02 12:37 AM, Colin Cornaby at <email address removed> wrote:

> Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up
>
> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple thinks
> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware that a
> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for Classic
> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for Carbon
> use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with badges)
> are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there is no
> built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
> authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
> maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a package is
> needed.
>
> Don't get me wrong, RS shouldn't just ditch Classic OS support right away.
> The interactive shell is a nice touch. I'm still using 3.5, so I'm probably
> not seeing some X things. My experiences with 4.0 trial though have still
> shown RB is not yet a great dev environment in X though.
>
> I'm aware Windows is something else that RS is worried about. X specific
> feature surely can't carry over to Windows builds. However, the more I work
> in Cocoa, the more I get this weird feeling when I work in RB. I only work
> in X, so it really bugs me to be constrained by classic-ness.
>
> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
> developing for classic?

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 14:23 (Tue, 07 May 2002 06:23:36 -0700)
From: Mr. Weasel Willits
On 5/7/02 4:48 AM, the NSA intercepted the following message from "Mike
Benonis" <<email address removed>>:

> I don't think that Classic should be dropped yet, but I do think RS should
> seriously consider implementing features that are OS X and Windows only
> (drawers, the Toolbar control, Universal Access - all Carbon Jaguar
> features).

That's why they're at WWDC.


--------------- Seth Willits --------------
Procrastination is the worst of my virtues,
but one that I am associated with the most.
-- Seth Willits
---- http://freaksoftware.tripod.com/ -----


---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 11.05.02 15:37 (Sat, 11 May 2002 09:37:02 -0500)
From: Geoff Perlman
On 5/7/02 6:48 AM, "Mike Benonis" <<email address removed>> wrote:

> I don't think that Classic should be dropped yet, but I do think RS should
> seriously consider implementing features that are OS X and Windows only
> (drawers, the Toolbar control, Universal Access - all Carbon Jaguar
> features).

We already do implement features that are not accessible on all the
platforms we support (AppleScript, PPC shared libraries, XCMDs, etc.). We
will be looking at Mac OS X features that will be available to Carbon apps
in Jaguar and planning to introduce them in a future release (not v4.5 by
the way as it will ship before Jaguar is released).

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 12:58 (Tue, 7 May 2002 13:58:00 +0200 (MEST))
From: Carsten Friehe
Hi!

> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
> developing for classic?

I am still using RB in OS 9.2.2 and I don't expect that this will change in
the next time. When I see how slow and I mean REALly slow RB runs on OS X on
my iBook (500) which is only one year old, there is no reason to change to OS
X. For me there is no reason to use OS X.

Carsten
PS: RB isn't much faster on my Cube. The Cube is not exchanged until Apple
will bring us a real alternative for it. So OS 9 will be my system for the
next months or years.

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 13:15 (Tue, 07 May 2002 08:15:07 -0400)
From: Mike Benonis
on 5/7/02 7:58 AM, Carsten Friehe at <email address removed> wrote:

> I am still using RB in OS 9.2.2 and I don't expect that this will change in
> the next time. When I see how slow and I mean REALly slow RB runs on OS X on
> my iBook (500) which is only one year old, there is no reason to change to OS
> X. For me there is no reason to use OS X.

Slow? I have an iBook/500, and OS X runs quite fast. How much RAM do you
have? I have 384 MB, but it ran fairly fast at 128 MB too.

-Mike

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:45 (Tue, 7 May 2002 23:45:26 +0200)
From: Tony Spencer
eh? One app at a time maybe. I have a PBG3 128Mb/250MHz and it copes
pretty well, as long as I don't tax it too much. Maybe he tried X
earlier than 10.1 which really was unusable and a dog.

BTW, running Quark today on the 384Mb/400MHz iMac under 10, with about
200 check boxes on a form I was working on, it went treacle slow. Even
took about 20 seconds to click into the Finder, and another 20 secs to
click back to Quark. Don't happen under 9.

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 02:15 pm, Mike Benonis wrote:

> Slow? I have an iBook/500, and OS X runs quite fast. How much RAM do
> you
> have? I have 384 MB, but it ran fairly fast at 128 MB too.

Tony Spencer
St Etienne du Grès, (13) France
<email address removed>
http://homepage.mac.com/tonyspencer/

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:48 (Tue, 07 May 2002 17:48:14 -0400)
From: Mike Benonis
Yup. And I often have a bunch of apps open at any given time, around 6-8 or
more, including iTunes and Entourage.

-Mike

on 5/7/02 5:45 PM, Tony Spencer at <email address removed> wrote:

> eh? One app at a time maybe. I have a PBG3 128Mb/250MHz and it copes
> pretty well, as long as I don't tax it too much. Maybe he tried X
> earlier than 10.1 which really was unusable and a dog.
>
> BTW, running Quark today on the 384Mb/400MHz iMac under 10, with about
> 200 check boxes on a form I was working on, it went treacle slow. Even
> took about 20 seconds to click into the Finder, and another 20 secs to
> click back to Quark. Don't happen under 9.
>
> On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 02:15 pm, Mike Benonis wrote:
>
>> Slow? I have an iBook/500, and OS X runs quite fast. How much RAM do you
>> have? I have 384 MB, but it ran fairly fast at 128 MB too.

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 08.05.02 00:20 (Wed, 8 May 2002 01:20:41 +0200)
From: Matthias Buercher
some performance tips
- use the last os version
- do not run classic environment multiple times without restarting

matthias

Le Mardi 7 mai 2002, à 11:45 , Tony Spencer a écrit :

> BTW, running Quark today on the 384Mb/400MHz iMac under 10, with about
> 200 check boxes on a form I was working on, it went treacle slow. Even
> took about 20 seconds to click into the Finder, and another 20 secs to
> click back to Quark. Don't happen under 9.
>
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthias Buercher <email address removed> www.belle-nuit.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 17:53 (Tue, 7 May 2002 09:53:04 -0700)
From: Will Leshner
I'm curious why RB is slow on your iBook. I have a 500Mhz G3 PowerBook
(Pismo) which is essentially the same thing, I believe. And OS X runs
quite nicely on it. RB is plenty fast enough as well. And when I
consider how much time I used to waste restarting, I never think about
going back to OS 9. I only boot into it to test my apps there.

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 04:58 AM, Carsten Friehe wrote:

> Hi!
>
>> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
>> developing for classic?
>
> I am still using RB in OS 9.2.2 and I don't expect that this will
> change in
> the next time. When I see how slow and I mean REALly slow RB runs on OS
> X on
> my iBook (500) which is only one year old, there is no reason to change
> to OS
> X. For me there is no reason to use OS X.
>
> Carsten
> PS: RB isn't much faster on my Cube. The Cube is not exchanged until
> Apple
> will bring us a real alternative for it. So OS 9 will be my system for
> the
> next months or years.
>
> --
> GMX - Die Kommunikationsplattform im Internet.
> http://www.gmx.net
>
> ---
> Subscribe to the digest:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>
> Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 14.05.02 02:48 (Mon, 13 May 2002 20:48:16 -0500)
From: Chris Dillman
>I'm curious why RB is slow on your iBook. I have a 500Mhz G3
>PowerBook (Pismo) which is essentially the same thing,

Are you sure?

The last set of Power books all had 100 Mhz bus and 1 meg L2 cach or
was that backside... any how a 400Mhz runs X a lot faster then 500G3
with only a 66 Mhz system bus.

> I believe. And OS X runs quite nicely on it. RB is plenty fast
>enough as well. And when I consider how much time I used to waste
>restarting, I never think about going back to OS 9. I only boot into
>it to test my apps there.

I personally Think X runs like crap on a ibook/500...
we have a lot of them at work and Ti books and all our developers
refuse to use them
because of the speed.

I have a Cocoa/JAVA/EOF apps that take two minutes to start up and
connect to a DB on a ibook... Basically even trying to use Web
Objects would be horribly painful on a Ibook/500.

I also run a ibook/500 as Server.... mail/ftp/web etc...
This is keeps up with fine.

But at around 200megs of ram it tends to chock and trash a lot.
Give it about 300 megs of ram and there is a night and day difference
in performance.

I would try and do real works... aka... 5+ programs open at a time on
anything less then 300 megs on a OS-X machine.

Also my ibook was just painful to use with X until 10.1... that was a
night and day difference...

Now Since I think X is compiled with PB aka GCC 2.95... and that
makes really poorly optimized PPC code... Im hoping that with the
release of GCC 3.0 on X and the generation of much much better PPC
optimizations that bigger speed boost of X running on systems like a
ibook/500 with a slow system bus etc...

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 14.05.02 05:23 (Mon, 13 May 2002 21:23:45 -0700)
From: Will Leshner
Pismo has a 100Mhz bus. I have one and it runs OS X very well.

On Monday, May 13, 2002, at 06:48 PM, Chris Dillman wrote:

>> I'm curious why RB is slow on your iBook. I have a 500Mhz G3 PowerBook
>> (Pismo) which is essentially the same thing,
>
> Are you sure?
>
> The last set of Power books all had 100 Mhz bus and 1 meg L2 cach or
> was that backside... any how a 400Mhz runs X a lot faster then 500G3
> with only a 66 Mhz system bus.
>
>> I believe. And OS X runs quite nicely on it. RB is plenty fast enough
>> as well. And when I consider how much time I used to waste restarting,
>> I never think about going back to OS 9. I only boot into it to test my
>> apps there.
>
> I personally Think X runs like crap on a ibook/500...
> we have a lot of them at work and Ti books and all our developers
> refuse to use them
> because of the speed.
>
> I have a Cocoa/JAVA/EOF apps that take two minutes to start up and
> connect to a DB on a ibook... Basically even trying to use Web Objects
> would be horribly painful on a Ibook/500.
>
> I also run a ibook/500 as Server.... mail/ftp/web etc...
> This is keeps up with fine.
>
> But at around 200megs of ram it tends to chock and trash a lot.
> Give it about 300 megs of ram and there is a night and day difference
> in performance.
>
> I would try and do real works... aka... 5+ programs open at a time on
> anything less then 300 megs on a OS-X machine.
>
> Also my ibook was just painful to use with X until 10.1... that was a
> night and day difference...
>
> Now Since I think X is compiled with PB aka GCC 2.95... and that makes
> really poorly optimized PPC code... Im hoping that with the release of
> GCC 3.0 on X and the generation of much much better PPC optimizations
> that bigger speed boost of X running on systems like a ibook/500 with a
> slow system bus etc...
>
> --
> My Games: Plaid World Studios http://www.plaidworld.com
> Teaching game programming at http://www.idevgames.com
> Day job: Software Engineer for http://www.riskwise.com, Part of
> LexisNexis
> My Band: http://www.trance-o-matic.com
>
> A one-question geek test. If you get the joke, you're a geek:
> Seen on a California license plate on a VW Beetle: "FEATURE"
>
> ---
> Subscribe to the digest: <mailto:realbasic-nug-
> <email address removed>>
> Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 13:40 (Tue, 7 May 2002 14:40:19 +0200)
From: Matthias Buercher
according to the last tidbits issue which made some statistics about
macintosh sales, there are still 90% of the macs running on OS 9 or
sooner. i have one avid xpress in rent on a mac 9500 running on 8.1!
and these systems run applications generally faster if they are classic,
not carbon.

matthias

Le Mardi 7 mai 2002, à 06:37 , Colin Cornaby a écrit :

> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple
> thinks
> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware
> that a
> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for
> Classic
> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Matthias Buercher <email address removed> www.belle-nuit.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:23 (Tue, 7 May 2002 23:23:05 +0200)
From: Tony Spencer
Of course, Apple would want to push OS X. However, even though it is on
new machines, the predominant OS in use out there must be Classic.

It's still way too early to ditch Classic. Many mainstream apps have
still not been ported (okay, at least Quark XPress and Photoshop
anyway), and really, OS X has only been usable since 10.1. For many, I
suspect, they won't even look at OS X until 10.2 (Jaguar) arrives, and
then probably the update after that.

If you make a living in a particular area, you may not be able to
upgrade all your software (nobody is releasing free updates, they're all
paid for). I work in publishing, and updating Quark, Photoshop,
Illustrator, Freehand, Flash etc will cost more than a new G4 PB, which
I could also do with, let alone upgrading all my SCSI and serial
hardware.

Thus I do little in X, apart from editing DV in iMovie and email. All
the rest, page layout, slide scanning etc is still done in 9 on my
non-firewire PB G3. Oh, I have to use my partner's iMac for iMovie work,
so the only X app I use on my PB is Mail, and that leaves things to be
desired!

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 06:37 am, Colin Cornaby wrote:

> Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up
>
> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple
> thinks
> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware
> that a
> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for
> Classic
> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for
> Carbon
> use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with
> badges)
> are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there
> is no
> built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
> authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
> maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a
> package is
> needed.
>
> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
> developing for classic?

Tony Spencer
St Etienne du Grès, (13) France
<email address removed>
http://homepage.mac.com/tonyspencer/

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:28 (Tue, 7 May 2002 14:28:01 -0700)
From: Will Leshner
Photoshop *is* available for OS X:
http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/systemreqs.html

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 02:23 PM, Tony Spencer wrote:

> Of course, Apple would want to push OS X. However, even though it is on
> new machines, the predominant OS in use out there must be Classic.
>
> It's still way too early to ditch Classic. Many mainstream apps have
> still not been ported (okay, at least Quark XPress and Photoshop
> anyway), and really, OS X has only been usable since 10.1. For many, I
> suspect, they won't even look at OS X until 10.2 (Jaguar) arrives, and
> then probably the update after that.
>
> If you make a living in a particular area, you may not be able to
> upgrade all your software (nobody is releasing free updates, they're
> all paid for). I work in publishing, and updating Quark, Photoshop,
> Illustrator, Freehand, Flash etc will cost more than a new G4 PB, which
> I could also do with, let alone upgrading all my SCSI and serial
> hardware.
>
> Thus I do little in X, apart from editing DV in iMovie and email. All
> the rest, page layout, slide scanning etc is still done in 9 on my
> non-firewire PB G3. Oh, I have to use my partner's iMac for iMovie
> work, so the only X app I use on my PB is Mail, and that leaves things
> to be desired!
>
> On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 06:37 am, Colin Cornaby wrote:
>
>> Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up
>>
>> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple
>> thinks
>> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware
>> that a
>> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for
>> Classic
>> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for
>> Carbon
>> use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with
>> badges)
>> are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there
>> is no
>> built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
>> authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
>> maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a
>> package is
>> needed.
>>
>> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
>> developing for classic?
>
> Tony Spencer
> St Etienne du Grès, (13) France
> <email address removed>
> http://homepage.mac.com/tonyspencer/
>
> ---
> Subscribe to the digest:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>
> Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:57 (Tue, 7 May 2002 23:57:36 +0200)
From: Tony Spencer
I just knew they'd release a X version if I mentioned it! Not that I can
afford to upgrade at the moment. At the moment I don't get English
speaking Mac mags to update me on stuff.

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 11:28 pm, Will Leshner wrote:

> Photoshop *is* available for OS X:
> http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/systemreqs.html
>

Tony Spencer
St Etienne du Grès, (13) France
<email address removed>
http://homepage.mac.com/tonyspencer/

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:58 (Tue, 07 May 2002 17:58:52 -0400)
From: Kevin Ballard
On 5/7/02 5:57 PM, "Tony Spencer" <<email address removed>> wrote:

> I just knew they'd release a X version if I mentioned it! Not that I can
> afford to upgrade at the moment. At the moment I don't get English
> speaking Mac mags to update me on stuff.

But you can always check out VersionTracker.com!

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 08.05.02 02:34 (Tue, 07 May 2002 21:34:12 -0400)
From: Jeff O'Brien
there are thousands of older model macs that are just screaming to be reused
for such things as data entry. i'm using a bunch of old SE30's for data
entry into a database system in our production facility. this is just one
example. or maybe even an electronic time clock. this list goes on and on

> From: Colin Cornaby <<email address removed>>
> Reply-To: "REALbasic Network Users
> Group"<<email address removed>>
> Date: Mon, 06 May 2002 21:37:56 -0700
> To: REALbasic Network Users Group <<email address removed>>
> Subject: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
>
> Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up
>
> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple thinks
> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware that a
> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for Classic
> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past. RB apps for Carbon
> use small scroll bars for carbon compatibility. True sheets (with badges)
> are not supported (though carbon events does this quite nicely), there is no
> built in dock menu support, and I'm still seeing the watch cursor,
> authentication would be nice, bouncing the dock icon would be good too,
> maybe built in icns support in the build dialog, and compile as a package is
> needed.
>
> Don't get me wrong, RS shouldn't just ditch Classic OS support right away.
> The interactive shell is a nice touch. I'm still using 3.5, so I'm probably
> not seeing some X things. My experiences with 4.0 trial though have still
> shown RB is not yet a great dev environment in X though.
>
> I'm aware Windows is something else that RS is worried about. X specific
> feature surely can't carry over to Windows builds. However, the more I work
> in Cocoa, the more I get this weird feeling when I work in RB. I only work
> in X, so it really bugs me to be constrained by classic-ness.
>
> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
> developing for classic?
>
> ---
> Subscribe to the digest:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>
> Unsubscribe:
> <mailto:<email address removed>>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 06:20 (Tue, 7 May 2002 01:20:50 -0400)
From: Chris Bartlett
>What does everyone else think?

Its too premature. According to the latest TidBits mailing, there is a
guesstimate of only about 2 million OS X boxes in use, out of 25 million
Macs (roughly 10%). Killing classic right now would severely cripple RS's
ability to sell to a huge market of Mac users

>How many people here are really still
>developing for classic?

I'm not dev'ing anything for OS X at all yet. But I'm probably a bad
example, as I still actively develop for 68k so I may be a bit retro
compared to the normal user base.

-chris

<http://www.mythtech.net>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 06:51 (Mon, 6 May 2002 22:51:21 -0700)
From: Ryan Dary
I don't think it is time to discontinue OS 9. Just because Apple said
that they are done, doesn't mean we should be. OS 9 is pretty mature,
and can still be used for great things. The fact that most* Mac users
are still using OS 9 should say that software should be delivered to it.
REALbasic allows us as developers to work on the future (OS X) while
still delivering to OS 9. How great is that? Try doing that with
Project Builder! Perhaps RB should discontinue OS 9 compiles when
CodeWarrior does? Or perhaps they should do it several releases after
CodeWarrior does ;-)

Either way, I agree that there is a ton of new support for OS X which
needs to get into REALbasic, and I don't think we are the first to
notice. The REALbasic team works very hard at providing overall
advantage for using REALbasic; they can only work so much and so fast.
OS X has somewhat spoiled us in that it is encouraging us to grow our
expectations. I think that the RB team is going in the right direction.
Everyone needs to cast their vote on the necessary features through
REALbugs. The more we tell them, the closer they will deliver to our
expectations.

Classic won't go away for a while, remember how long it took for 7 to
completely die? Or 8 for that matter? There are still machines out
there in use with OS 7 and 8 and 9. Some think that is what is so cool
about Mac.

So I may have rambled a bit, but that is my opinion about OS 9. (Don't
get me wrong, I would love for everyone to just upgrade to OS X right
now, but we all know that wont happen for a while.)

Thanks,

Ryan Dary
=?DGDDwD/D{Dwww.ryandary.com
=?DGD?DGD?DGD
Tue, 7 May 2002 01:20:50 -0400

>>What does everyone else think?
>
>Its too premature. According to the latest TidBits mailing, there is a
>guesstimate of only about 2 million OS X boxes in use, out of 25 million
>Macs (roughly 10%). Killing classic right now would severely cripple RS's
>ability to sell to a huge market of Mac users
>
>>How many people here are really still
>>developing for classic?
>
>I'm not dev'ing anything for OS X at all yet. But I'm probably a bad
>example, as I still actively develop for 68k so I may be a bit retro
>compared to the normal user base.
>
>-chris
>
><http://www.mythtech.net>
>---
>Subscribe to the digest:
><mailto:<email address removed>>
>Unsubscribe:
><mailto:<email address removed>>


---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 09:14 (Tue, 07 May 2002 09:14:07 +0100)
From: Joe Gillespie
I'm a graphic designer and there are a lot of us who use Macs. I don't know
any graphic designers who have moved over to OSX yet, sure some have it
installed but don't use it.

I, for instance, have a whole heap of *very* expensive scanners and printers
that don't, and never will have OSX support. I'm not going to scrap those
for quite a few years.

The main application that graphic designers use is Quark XPress and there is
no sign of an OSX version of that yet.

In all the testing I've done so far, the apps I use run faster in 9 than in
X.

I think OS9 will be around for quite some time yet. If Apple are stupid
enough to force the issue, they are going to lose one of their key markets.

REALBasic should continue to support 9.x for the lifetime of current
hardware.

Joe

m i n i f o n t s . c o m
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
e s s e n t i a l f o n t s f o r w e b d e s i g n e r s

<email address removed>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 20:04 (Tue, 07 May 2002 21:04:21 +0200)
From: Toon Van Acker
on 5/7/02 7:51 AM, Ryan Dary at <email address removed> wrote:

> Either way, I agree that there is a ton of new support for OS X which
> needs to get into REALbasic, and I don't think we are the first to
> notice.

Can't RS keep OS 9 support and still add OS X specific functions?
REALbasic can exclude them from OS9 builds and/or warn that they cannot be
used on OS 9.

Toon Van Acker <<email address removed>>
<http://homepage.mac.com/toon_van_acker/therealfreak/>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 11.05.02 15:39 (Sat, 11 May 2002 09:39:28 -0500)
From: Geoff Perlman
On 5/7/02 2:04 PM, "Toon Van Acker" <<email address removed>> wrote:

> Can't RS keep OS 9 support and still add OS X specific functions?
> REALbasic can exclude them from OS9 builds and/or warn that they cannot be
> used on OS 9.

Absolutely! A feature doesn't have to be available on all platforms for us
to add it to REALbasic. The choice to use that feature is left to you, the
developer.

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:30 (Tue, 7 May 2002 23:30:06 +0200)
From: Tony Spencer
Too right!

In my household we have iMac (10.1.4), PBG3 (10.1.4), Colour Classic
(7.1 - not enough RAM for 7.5), 128k (Finder 0.9!) and an XL (aka Lisa
running 4.2), oh and a Newton MP100 (Newton OS 1.0) all of which get
regular use. Okay, maybe not serious use, although the CC is used for
Games and my accounts app which won't run on G3s.

Oh, and I forgot to say that I'm still only developing for Classic,
largely because I can't afford to upgrade to Rb4 at the moment (still
using 2.1.2).

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 07:51 am, Ryan Dary wrote:

> Classic won't go away for a while, remember how long it took for 7 to
> completely die? Or 8 for that matter? There are still machines out
> there in use with OS 7 and 8 and 9. Some think that is what is so cool
> about Mac.

Tony Spencer
St Etienne du Grès, (13) France
<email address removed>
http://homepage.mac.com/tonyspencer/

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 08.05.02 02:35 (Tue, 07 May 2002 18:35:18 -0700)
From: Mr. Weasel Willits
On 5/7/02 2:30 PM, the NSA intercepted the following message from "Tony
Spencer" <<email address removed>>:

> 128k (Finder 0.9!)

It's how that works isn't it, them releasing a .9?


--------------------Seth Willits-------------------
An answer to a panhandler's plea for spare change:
Dang! I was gonna ask you the same thing.
________ http://freaksoftware.tripod.com/ _________


---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 06:21 (Mon, 6 May 2002 22:21:25 -0700)
From: Jim Wagner

Heck, I'm working on a project that I believe needs a 68K version!!!

Jim Wagner
Oregon Research Electronics
---------------------------------------------------------
<email address removed> Tangent, Oregon 97389
<email address removed> near Corvallis OR, home of
<email address removed> Oregon State University
----------------------------------------------------------
A computer without Windows is like a cake without mustard. - anonymous



---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 07:11 (Tue, 07 May 2002 11:41:35 +0530)
From: Ram Kumar
on 07/05/2002 10:51, Jim Wagner at <email address removed> wrote:

> Heck, I'm working on a project that I believe needs a 68K version!!!

85 % of our customer base is still using Classic

regards, ram

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 07:19 (Mon, 6 May 2002 23:19:10 -0700)
From: Roger Carlson

I would not say that they need to phase out classic support, but I would
say that they need to pay attention to where the center of mass is and
how it is moving. I expect they are.

But, since I get a vote, as far as I am concerned, they can drop 9. Just
last week I sent an email to the dev list wishing that the basic menu in
the new project looked more like X than 9, at least under X, but I know
they should not put a lot of weight on my requests, I am way over on the
X side.

I can't clearly remember the last time I booted classic. I think it
might have been to run an auction tracking app a few months ago (AID,
from epigroove, I mention it to challenge any RB database guy to make
something as good that runs under X, the world needs it). I am also not
sure which of my machines even have 9 on them (I know my laptop does,
but not sure of anything else). 10 is good, but I do understand the pain
of bugs in X holding you back, the beta was not kind to us.
Incidentally, I've been running a mac since 84, and only ran linux for
about a year at work when they gave me an intel box, so I consider
myself a mac guy, not a unix guy, but I am pretty happy with x from top
to bottom. I do use the command line a lot, several of my machines are 3
states away. I am really eager to see what happens when more unix
hackers jump in, the press from WWDC and o'reilly have me pretty excited
about all the tools *(and friends and customers) we'll get.

y'all see the conference announcement from O'Reilly?
http://conferences.oreillynet.com/macosx2002/
" We make our living at O'Reilly watching the "alpha geeks" and
documenting what they do, since the early adopters tell us a lot about
the shape of the future. One thing that's been overwhelmingly clear this
year is that the alpha geeks are choosing Mac OS X."

I was really please to see Matt Neuburg's book listed as part of
O'Reilly's OS X publications. I hope all this, including the low-level
unix hacking, leads to more business and synergy for realbasic, I hope
that the industrial tools don't make RB a toy. The IDE is wonderful. I
wonder, sometimes, if having "basic" in the name is harmful.

RB works really well for me under X. I'm always interested in
improvements, but I really can't seriously complain. I'd like to see
more with quicktime, I'd like to see the basic menu look more like X
than 9, I'd like easy access to the prefs menu and the big icons, but I
know they are working on it. Sheets and other trinkets don't matter too
much to me, but I acknowledge their importance to others. I'd rather
have them get into multithreading, not sure how much a dual proc would
help me right now, but I'd like it to. And I am secretly dreaming of
running a quiet realbasic app with no gui, on a headless server, without
the finder and window manager running....

last week I wrote an app to parse a text file for parameter names and
values, so that an app could read its configuration from a text file
with certain delimeters. Between instr, countfields, and nthstring, I
cranked it right out and it actually ran right the first time. Try that
with perl.

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 12:20 (Tue, 07 May 2002 07:20:54 -0400)
From: Chris Smolinski
> From: "Colin Cornaby" <<email address removed>>
> Okay, I'm aware this is controversial, but someone had to bring it up
>
> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple thinks
> developers should start developing for X only.

When OS X was announced, Apple thought that developers should (and
would) immediately snap to attention and start producing OS X only
(Cocoa) applications, Carbon was (and to some extent still is) the
red-headed stepchild. Jobs' Reality Distortion Field (tm) must have been
plugged in backwards that day, I think he was the only confused persion.

Anyway, of course Apple wants folks to develop for OS X. It is their
brand new OS. If killer apps are available for OS X (or better yet,
*only* for OS X) then folks will buy copies of it, or even better yet,
buy shiny new Macs so they can run OS X. This is very good for Apple.
And can be, but not necessarily must be, good for developers.

> I'm aware Windows is something else that RS is worried about. X specific

Windows is very important, to me at least. I can't speak for others. But
I can speak for myself. I buy RealBasic *purely* for the Windows
support, and ability to develop both Classic, OS X, and Windows versions
of several of my programs (all my other programs are Mac only and done
using CodeWarrior). If Windows support is dropped or even sufficiently
degraded, I'll drop RB in a heartbeat. I don't think that's the case,
and RB seems to show great interesting in continuing to improve support
for Windows, so I'll continue to buy RB. Just my two cents.

> What does everyone else think? How many people here are really still
> developing for classic?

*Raises hand*

Classic is still probably around 90% of in installed base (I'd say even
more than that, maybe 95%). But it is substantially less of what I call
the *buying base*, that is, Mac owners who actually buy software. Lots
of folks with old systems don't buy as much, or any software. Take the
68k base. I've seen some folks tout that there are still such and such
many folks running 68k systems. That may be true. But how many of them
are buying software? <BLUNT MODE ON>My own guess is that folks to cheap
to buy a new computer are too cheap to buy software. The guy still
running his Quadra 700 isn't going to shell out money for a program.
</OFF>

Even though OS X is maybe 5 or 10% of the Mac installed base, my own
registration and download data shows that it is much more active,
accounting for about half of the registrations, and more than half of
the downloads. Folks who just spend $1k-$4k on a new Mac are IMHO more
likely to spend money on your software.

But that still leaves half of the sales coming from Classic folks. And I
see no reason to stop developing for Classic, until it becomes
impossible, or impacts/degrades OS X performance, which it isn't
presently doing. Heck, I was still releasing FAT (68k+PPC) versions of
applications until about a year ago.

Chris Smolinski
Black Cat Systems
http://www.blackcatsystems.com/

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 07.05.02 22:39 (Tue, 7 May 2002 23:39:57 +0200)
From: Tony Spencer
Probably an element of truth there, but truthfully anyone with a G3 or
higher can do just about most things including editing DV movies just
fine. Unless your day job is retouching hundreds of images in Photoshop,
I don't think anyone need much more speed.

In fact when I started using my Cube at work, it took some getting used
to: MS Word and Quark would scroll way too fast to find things.

More speed less haste as they say.

Any non-Power PC user, such as a Quadra 700, probably ain't gonna buy
much software, unless they are a charity, school or other institution on
a very limited budget.

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 01:20 pm, Chris Smolinski wrote:

> <BLUNT MODE ON>My own guess is that folks to cheap
> to buy a new computer are too cheap to buy software. The guy still
> running his Quadra 700 isn't going to shell out money for a program.
> </OFF>

Tony Spencer
St Etienne du Grès, (13) France
<email address removed>
http://homepage.mac.com/tonyspencer/

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

RE: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic sup port?
Date: 07.05.02 14:09 (Tue, 7 May 2002 09:09:54 -0400 )
From: Wallingford, Ted
RealBASIC ought not dump classic support until they work the stability bugs
out of the Carbon IDE.

-----Original Message-----
From: Matthias Buercher [mailto:<email address removed>]
Sent: Tuesday, May 07, 2002 8:40 AM
To: REALbasic Network Users Group
Subject: Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic
support?

according to the last tidbits issue which made some statistics about
macintosh sales, there are still 90% of the macs running on OS 9 or
sooner. i have one avid xpress in rent on a mac 9500 running on 8.1!
and these systems run applications generally faster if they are classic,
not carbon.

matthias

Le Mardi 7 mai 2002, à 06:37 , Colin Cornaby a écrit :

> With WWDC, it seems to be more of a valid point. Its clear that Apple
> thinks
> developers should start developing for X only. I'm perfectly aware
> that a
> lot of developers here don't have X capable machines, or develop for
> Classic
> Mac OS machines. But, RS seems to be stuck in the past.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
Matthias Buercher <email address removed> www.belle-nuit.com
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 08.05.02 01:38 (Tue, 07 May 2002 17:38:15 -0700)
From: David Austin
on 5/7/02 1:33 PM, many people wrote:

> I definitely think it's time to drop support for classic ; - )

Not in my opinion!

If RB dropped support for classic now, I'd drop them and move on to another
development tool. My company (computer graphics industry) is about 75% Mac
(15% windows, 10% other). There are only a few machines nationwide,
throughout the company that actually run OS X. Until all hardware drivers
and software applications are updated for OS X, making the switch to OS X is
useless, will render billions of dollars worth of hardware useless. Adobe
has just recently released Photoshop for OS X. Quark (the main player in
prepress and design) has yet to release an update. The music industry is in
a similar situation. ProTools dominate in the studios. It hasn't even
mentioned an OS X release. In fact they advised (in the past) that you
remove OS X from your disk if using Protools. I use OS X on a laptop, at
home. Many people I know and work with use it (OS X) at home, but I do all
my development for work in OS 9 first, then a Carbon version secondary. We
run a few machines os OS X for testing purposes but those machines are not
as productive as the machines running OS 9.

Are there any published specs available regarding the number of users
running OS X compared to OS 9?

Who are business and who are home users?

I'll bet most OS X users are home users or corporate users that are doing
simple tasks such as word processing or database entry.


_____________________
David Austin
<email address removed>
_____________________

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>

Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
Date: 08.05.02 07:52 (Wed, 08 May 2002 08:52:54 +0200)
From: Emile Schwarz
Saying that 10 years old computer owner will not buy anything for its machine is just like telling the same for a 10 years old car owner’s...

You present the problem using a wrong way.

What is the price of a Quadra 700 ?

What can be the price of any piece of software or hardware (for Quadra 700) ?

How long does it takes for one to reach some software or hardware (for Quadra 700) ?

Then, you can try to make assumptions about the answers.

That does exclude that these users (Quadra 700 owners) want to buy goods to evolve.

Also, it is possible that these guys (or gals) are happy with their computer / softwre / hardware.

Last, if this people did not have a printer, they have few choices (since Quadra 700 did not have USB nor FireWire ports)... Same
apply for a scanner, and so on.

My conclusion is:

If Quadra 700 owners reach low cost products they need (or want or desire), they can buy... Else, they better buy a less old
computer (say some PowerMacintosh)...

I used the example computer (Quadra 700) because it was noted (see below) and I have one at home; however, I have also some LC,
Apple IIgs and one Apple //c (1 MB model with external power supply).

Of course, I wanted to upgrade the Quadra 700 memory (but since I have to buy 4 SIMMs and their price is high), change the hard disk
(but I can buy a more recent Macintosh with a new hard disk), etc.

And if I talk about software (no mention of REALbasic [version 3.5.2 maxi]), where can I buy software that runs on MacOS 8 (or 8.1
?) AND are cheap ? (if they are not cheap, the price can be higher than a more recent Macintosh...)


Emile


[OFF]
When I was working at Apple France, we (Apple) sell from time to time upgrade from old machines to brand new... Examples are
Macintosh II, IIx to Macintosh IIfx; Macintosh IIcx, Macintosh IIci to Macintosh Quadra 700 (but the latest upgrade was cancelled —
Macintosh Quadra 800 MLB * is Quadra 700 compatible) and so on.

What I used to say at these time was that the upgrade price path must be:

Second-Hand base computer price + Upgrade price < current target Macintosh price.

Why ? Because the “current target Macintosh price” usually have more memory, a larger hard disk, etc. Another reason is the consumer
point of view: why buying an upgrade if for so few bucks I can have a brand new computer ? (with a faster and larger capacity hard
disk, more memory, a full warranty, etc.)


* MLB: Main Logic Board. And before some one talks about what I wrote previously, after some people tells me that, I have done by
myself the “fake” upgrade: I removed a MLB from a Q800 and put it into a Q700 case. I could power on the computer and use it... Of
course, I put MLB back to their respective cases.
Last on Quadra 800: this is exactly the same MLB that you can find in the other two products that were pushed commercially the same
day under different cases at lower speed... this is like SCSI IDs: change an object position to go from a 25 MHz machine (non Q800
model) to a 40 MHz (33 MHz ?) machine...

\\ **************************************************************************** //
Subject: Re: Is it time for REAL Software to start phasing out classic support?
From: "Tony Spencer" <<email address removed>>
Date: Tue, 7 May 2002 23:39:57 +0200

Any non-Power PC user, such as a Quadra 700, probably ain't gonna buy
much software, unless they are a charity, school or other institution on
a very limited budget.

On Tuesday, May 7, 2002, at 01:20 pm, Chris Smolinski wrote:

> <BLUNT MODE ON>My own guess is that folks to cheap
> to buy a new computer are too cheap to buy software. The guy still
> running his Quadra 700 isn't going to shell out money for a program.
> </OFF>
_____________________________________________________________________
/~\ The ASCII “If I’d lived in Roman times, I’d lived in Rome.
\ / Ribbon Campaign Where else ? Today America is the Roman Empire
X Against HTML and New York is Rome itself.”
/ \ Email! John Winston-Ono Lennon, early 70’s.

---
Subscribe to the digest:
<mailto:<email address removed>>
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:<email address removed>>