Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 12th Sep 2016 17:20 UTC
Apple

The reasons some Mac lovers stick with OS 9 are practically as numerous as Apple operating systems themselves. There are some OS 9 subscribers who hold out for cost reasons. Computers are prohibitively expensive where they live, and these people would also need to spend thousands on new software licenses and updated hardware (on top of the cost of a new Mac). But many more speak of a genuine preference for OS 9. These users stick around purely because they can and because they think classic Mac OS offers a more pleasant experience than OS X. Creatives in particular speak about some of OS 9's biggest technical shortcomings in favorable terms. They aren't in love with the way one app crashing would bring down an entire system, but rather the design elements that can unfortunately lead to that scenario often better suit creative work.

If OS 9 had modern applications and - even moderately - modern hardware, I would be using it. No question. I have an iBook G3 fully working and running OS 9, including important software, within arm's grasp (I used to have an iMac G3 for the same purpose). It's difficult to explain, but the reason for me is Platinum, the user interface. OS 9's Finder, the graphical and behaviourial aspects of the user interface, the speed, the BeOS-like quirkiness - it all adds up to an operating system with a personality that is incredibly pleasant to use, regardless of the hodgepodge house-of-cards internals.

And personality is, unfortunately, what Windows, desktop Linux, macOS, iOS, and Android sorely, sorely lack.

Thread beginning with comment 634263
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
For me, Cmd-H did it
by arkeo on Tue 13th Sep 2016 06:48 UTC
arkeo
Member since:
2008-04-21

I was living in the US at that time, and I had one of those late CRT iMacs that could run System9 (yeah, it's not the proper name and I love it!) and OSX.
Those were the times of MS Entourage as an email client and MS IE as a web browser! Yes, I'm that old, and no, Firefox came a couple of years later into the game.
While I loved with all my soul System9 and MOST IMPORTANTLY its spatial Finder, I simply found Cmd-H to be the single most important "innovation" (please, notice the quotes). And it was GOOD. So much so that, in those months of US-based dual-booting, I gradually stopped using Classic altogether.
Cmd-Tab wasn't good enough, and its purpose was different anyway. Having both options at hand made a difference for me.
A short lived one: I didn't have enough time to fully appreciate Tiger--the first REAL OSX release--and Steve Jesus Jobs switched to Intel.
Oh, and at the time (MacWorld Boston, 1997) we were all amazed by how much BeOS was quicker than MacOS9. On the same hardware. Now we're remembering them as incredibly fast, both of them.
How bloated are these "modern" OSs, all of them...

Reply Score: 1

RE: For me, Cmd-H did it
by IndigoJo on Tue 13th Sep 2016 10:04 in reply to "For me, Cmd-H did it"
IndigoJo Member since:
2005-07-06

A short lived one: I didn't have enough time to fully appreciate Tiger--the first REAL OSX release--and Steve Jesus Jobs switched to Intel.

First real OSX release in what sense? I had an eMac (a white G4 version of the CRT iMac, originally aimed at colleges but released to the general public) and it came with Panther. I was excited to get a decent Unix-based system that had proper supported applications, which Linux didn't have (well, a tiny number). I upgraded it to Tiger as soon as that came out, and it was a dog -- it was a lot slower, and while upgrading I thought it had crashed when it paused for what must have been nearly an hour, presumably to build the search index (it didn't tell me that). I didn't bother with Leopard. They were both Unix-based, so I don't know how Tiger was a 'real' OSX release and Panther wasn't. Both had Classic, but I never used it because I had no OS 9 apps. I didn't use the Tiger widgets much (have had three Macs since and that's still the case) but I did miss the quickness of Panther.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: For me, Cmd-H did it
by arkeo on Tue 13th Sep 2016 10:17 in reply to "RE: For me, Cmd-H did it"
arkeo Member since:
2008-04-21

I only meant to say that I consider Tiger the first really polished OS X release. I understand you might hate it given your installation issues.
Having used Rhapsody and then the various iterations of System 10, I can say that 10.1 was the first usable alpha, 10.3 a good beta, Tiger the first proper.
Snow Leopard also wasn't bad: it was a nice OS *AND* I could run some PPC apps (some of those were actually 68k, later ported to PPC--what about good coding practices hey?) on an Intel MacBook I had to use for work. It was called Rosetta?
Anyway, that was kinda the best of two worlds...

Reply Parent Score: 1