Those of us who use it all the time, know very well the benefits of Mac OS X. Arguably, it's the best commercial, consumer-oriented Unix offshoot around. And it comes with some of the most exciting, reliable, and visually stunning hardware money can buy.
People must be mad to cling on to OS 9, right? They're missing out on all the fun stuff -- hacking scripts in the Terminal, churning out tunes in GarageBand, Safari surfing, and so on. There are so many great tools built in to OS X, and so much more available from third parties, that OS 9 and its predecessors just don't cut it any more.
Well, not quite. Lots of people are using old systems and old software. Some are quite happy with their existing setup; others have made a deliberate effort not to follow the upgrade path.
Why stick with the old system? What are the benefits? I decided to contact some OS 9 users and ask them straight out.
On the way I encountered some charming and witty computer users. I'd like to say thanks to them right from the start; without their cheerful willingness to discuss their deepest-held computing beliefs, this article would have been a whole lot shorter.
 Russ Bravo, editor of the Christian Herald and OS 9 fan. |
Russ Bravo edits the Christian Herald, a weekly newspaper for the evangelical Christian community in the UK. At work he uses an eMac running Panther, but at home he still runs OS 9.1 on an iMac, and OS 8.6 on his iBook.
"The reason I use OS 9.1 on my iMac at home is that it serves my needs perfectly well, and I can't afford a copy of Panther to run on it at the moment," he says.
"I use 8.6 on my iBook basically because a) it means I can use one or two things like retro digital cameras (a JamCam and a QuickTake) that don't seem to like any OS that is more up-to-date than 8.6, and b) because I mainly use the iBook for word processing and a little bit of web browsing, rather than graphics-intensive (the photo files on my retro cameras are not huge). I have no real need for anything later than 8.6."
Russ doesn't find stability a big problem. Most of the time, he's only running one or two programs at once.
"I belong to a number of mailing lists where I go for advice, buying and selling bits, and so on, and I also consult LowEndMac regularly. I wouldn't expect much support from Apple as my machines age, although I do think they should release older OS systems as freeware, rather than trying to charge people still for anything newer than 7.5.
"It might pay Apple to see that since their machines are durable and many people are more attached to them than beige PC boxes (even the beige Apple boxes!), that a little more ongoing support for their heritage models might not go amiss. But I guess it doesn't do much for the bottom line."
Russ thinks that anyone buying a computer should consider their needs before they buy. He encourages people with simple requirements to buy a simple computer.
"I am a Mac evangelist and push them heavily to anyone interested in computers, particularly PC users fed up with viruses and Windows bloatware. I collect old Macs and currently have a Mac Classic, an SE/30, a 5300 PowerBook, a 9600/350, a "black Mac TV" 5500/275, a couple of 7300s, and an LC475.
"What I recommend to people would very much depend on what their needs are -- for someone wanting to surf the Net, do some basic word processing, and a bit of image storage, I would recommend a secondhand iMac, which can be picked up for £100-200 on eBay these days. For more high-powered users, I'd recommend an eMac or similar running Panther. For families with young kids who want to pick up computer basics, I'd recommend an old Power Mac or Performa. Horses for courses, really.
"If the machine does what you need from it, then cost, convenience, usability, and space will be bigger factors than which OS."
Meet Ken Hagler, a Frontier programmer from Los Angeles.
And here, meet his desktop:
 Ken Hagler's Mac OS desktop. |
Since his work is all about cross-platform programming, Ken uses all kinds of operating systems on a daily basis. Having that sort of knowledge of Windows and Mac operating systems, old and new, is bound to leave someone with opinions.
And as far as Ken is concerned, the old Mac OS wins hands-down.
|
Related Reading 
Mac OS X: The Missing Manual, Panther Edition |
He says: "I dislike Apple in its current form (which is really just NeXT, Inc. in Apple clothing), and like the Mac OS (which I've been using since 1984), but that's not why I still use it.
"I use the Mac OS because it's the best desktop operating system around. If at some point another OS surpasses it, I'll switch. Eventually I'll have to switch anyway, as my Mac OS computers will eventually give out."
At work, Ken uses a Windows XP box and a Mac running OS X 10.3.4. At home, he has another Windows machine ("I use it mostly for games") and his old Mac system.
Perhaps unusually, in Ken's experience OS X has been less stable than the older Mac OS. This has been one of the main reasons for his decision not to upgrade.
"I've had very few stability problems with the Mac OS, while OS X has been very unstable. Windows XP is actually the best of the three for stability.
"I used to make jokes about how Windows troubleshooting was 'reinstall Windows,' but in fact I've never needed to do that on either my home or work PC, whereas I've 'reinstalled windows' three or four times on my OS X build machine.
"I find that OS X doesn't usually crash per se, it just gets into a state where things don't work quite right. For example, a build will suddenly start to fail for no apparent reason, then I restart the build machine and the problem disappears.
"It's also very fragile -- kernel panics and application crashes are quite likely to produce hard-drive corruption or irreparable damage to system files. Based on what my PC-centric co-workers have told me, OS X is comparable to Windows 98 in its lack of stability.
"On those rare occasions when one of my Mac OS systems crashes, I just restart and continue working. I run Norton Disk Doctor as a precaution, but I can't even remember the last time a Mac OS crash resulted in any kind of damage."
Surely some of the exciting applications and system tools available on OS X are tempting to a programmer?
"I never find myself wishing I could use an OS X-only app. There aren't many such apps, and the ones that might interest me are inferior to apps that exist on other platforms. For example, Safari is inferior to Firefox, and OmniOutliner is inferior to MORE.
"I do often find myself wishing that there were an OS X version of a Windows app (such as Groove or Skype), as most of the people I know outside work use OS X."
So is Ken's choice just a case of sticking-with-what-works?
"Yes, definitely. I have Mac OS, OS X, and Win XP systems side-by-side in my cubicle here at work, so every day I'm exposed to a practical comparison of which OS works best. The Mac OS is the clear winner."
|
Deep in the idyllic countryside of Sussex, near the south coast of England, Ben Gabel and Kate McAvoy operate a small business supplying high-quality natural vegetable seeds for gardeners.
The VidaVerde seed catalogue is kept up-to-date using two PowerBook 3400 laptops running OS 9. Ben is clearly very proud of his low-cost computer setup (pictured below).
 Ben Gabel's FileMaker database. |
"It's a great setup; we have 5 enormous FileMaker databases that track all the seeds in the seedbank, with photos, growing notes, passport data, and so on.
"They also generate instructions for people who request seeds. We also use Dreamweaver for web site maintenance, and Word for most of our business document."
And if all that isn't delightfully lo-fi enough for you, just wait until you hear how the computers are powered and networked:
"Our setup is solar-powered. Internet connection is via a village-wide wireless network; then to a DirecPC satellite link belonging to a neighbor.
"I have no problems at all running this lot from OS 9, except that the machines themselves are getting a bit old -- about six years now -- and so backlights and keyboards do need replacing from time to time."
Upgrading to OS X would be nice in theory, but this is a small business designed to bring in a family income. Costs have to be kept down. By saving money on hardware, Ben and Kate have been able to spend more on seed stock.
"Why not go to X? Well, for a start it would cost a couple thousand for two new machines. Our budget is very small for this project; by using old machines bought on eBay for a couple of hundred pounds, we have much more funds available for our seed-saving.
"And everything works under 9. We have the recent versions of almost everything, and it works great. They are perfectly fast, even with big FileMaker searches. I think the newer ultra-fast machines are really only necessary for 3D games or intensive graphics work."
Doug Murray is a freelance sound editor. As with other specialized professionals, he has very specific requirements from the computers he uses for work. Unlike our other interviewees, Doug runs OS X on his personal laptop, but usually finds himself using OS 9 in the editing suites he works in.
OS 9 and Pro Tools 5.x have become something of an industry standard in sound-editing environments, he says. While there would be some obvious benefits to upgrading, commercial commonsense dictates that the studios keep using what works.
 Doug Murray's dual-monitor desktop, showing his professional sound-editing environment in Pro Tools. |
Doug says: "I use Pro Tools every day, and like most sound editors working in established facilities, I work on an older G4 machine with older Pro Tools hardware and software and OS 9.
"For reliability, to get the most out of the extensive hardware and software investment, and to minimize training requirements, most of the installed base of Pro Tools film post-production sound facilities is very slow to change.
"But I use OS X on my own laptop. I have written about Pro Tools 6 and OS X, and I am a fan of both of them. If you have a fast enough machine, OS X is well worth using.
"Pro Tools 5.x and OS 9 have together become a standard in the sector I work in, sound editing for film. Most sound editors work as freelancers, moving from one editing facility to another. Equipment is provided by the facility, which might be quite small, or a very large one with dozens of editing rooms. Since one setup has become the standard in most of these suites, it will take quite an effort across the sector to upgrade to Pro Tools 6 and OS X.
"I think people know that we should upgrade; everyone knows there are arguments to be made. The thing is that the current setup works.
"People wouldn't get enough benefit from the upgrade to make the cost of doing it worthwhile. The day will come, eventually, but it's not here yet."
This theory is confirmed by another interviewee who preferred to remain anonymous. He works as a graphic design consultant in London's Soho, where there is a high concentration of TV, film, advertising, and design companies within a small area.
This mystery contributor uses OS 9.2 on a G4 Quicksilver, and has no inclination to switch to OS X until it becomes "absolutely necessary."
He says: "I work with several studios and with the exception of the odd machine reserved for a specialist task all are still working with OS 9. This is simply because they have an infrastructure that works, they know how to troubleshoot it if need be, and in a busy environment everyone needs to be on top of their game.
"The last thing that is needed is production teething troubles, searching for an OS X driver for peripherals, or finding one's way around a system that appears quite different from previous versions.
"Applying OS X across the board would render a proportion of existing equipment useless or require further investment in RAM [and] processor upgrades, when it can do its job perfectly well under OS 9. A lot of expense, in other words.
"OS 9 is very stable. I'm sure OS X is a fine operating system, but for plenty of us it is not a 'must have' right now."
Giles Turnbull is a freelance writer and editor. He has been writing on and about the Internet since 1997. He has a web site at http://gilest.org.
Return to MacDevCenter.com.
Copyright © 2007 O'Reilly Media, Inc.