An Experimental Classic Environment for Intel Macs

Why would anybody need to keep a Classic app? Here's why:

I was COO for a financial institution, which included being IT director. Before that I had a software support and programming company and worked as a custom application architect and developer.

I presided in these various roles over the software life cycle of some custom software handling custody of $200 million in assets in certain unusual investments for IRAs. The software used an excellent development platform from the 1990s, FoxBASE +/Mac. Microsoft bought Fox software and, IMHO, ruined it. There was a migration path to FoxPRO, but you had to discard all your development tools. Luckily we didn't choose that because MS later dropped it entirely.

So the company can continue to develop and run the app in the Classic environment running the MFoxBASE app that FoxBASE compiled in 1990! Before PowerPC. It was a very expertly written app that complied perfectly, and Apple preserved its accurate execution through total changes of both processor and OS. Awesome!

Why not just rewrite it and walk away with snide remarks ridiculing anyone who would use an old Classic app? Because there's a quarter million dollars of development and any current rewrite project would probably easily bust half a million and take a couple years if all went perfectly. That's why.

Actually, if it has to move, they should move the language and tools, not the app. It would be easier.

I think another loss would be all the Voyager CD-ROMs.

I haven't run them since I moved to OS X, but I think they will only work on Classic.

From my previous post, #4, I stated that it would be tough for institutions to deal with having to have a Mac ROM code for each Intel Mac running Sheepshaver. Well, a posting at today's (2/8/06) MacIntouch.com convinced me that it's not that painful.

"Kevin Lepard shared some notes on one of the first "Classic" emulators to run on Intel Macs, Gwenol頂eauchesne's Sheepsaver:

According to the Sheepshaver's documentation, the ROM from the iMac 1.1 update works. The iMac 1.1 update is still available from Apple; I just downloaded it.
You have to use TomeViewer under Classic to extract the ROM. I was unable to find a way to expand it from the tome under OS X directly, creating a bit of a catch-22. Anyone know of a way to access a tome under OS X without Classic? Still, I think most people who are wanting to run Classic on a Intel-based Mac would have access to a macine that is currently able to run TomeViewer to obtain the ROM. (Just don't lose it later!) ...[SNIP]..."

I downloaded the iMac 1.1 Update and archived it for a rainy day project. If you need Classic, I'd recommend you do the same.

I work in a High school district, for 14 years now.
It is easier to buy the hardware, than software. Software usually comes from several different pots of money, while the hardware is purchased as a district purchase.

I have a teacher gradebook application we have for OS9. The district refused to pay the $20 upgrade price to get the OSX version. The company would only accept a school p.o., so two years later no $20 and we still use 9. The browsers are the biggest problem, cause they are so out of date.

The district would rather send 600Mhz iMac DV's with 512meg ram to salvage for scrap metal prices than buy software. Public education is a strange beast.

They just got done forcing PC's in our campus's this last summer. They require SO much support, and as far as abilities, we have taken a 5 year stepback. So through the politics of the district and personal preferences. We have removed so many capabilities that people have gone back to copiers and just avoiding the electronic delivery entirly. I know this stuff can be done on pc to match what we had, but it will require so much extra software. I doubt they will ever purchase it. Oh they did pay the grade book company for a new site licence for windows. Once again avoiding the $20 upgrade per school = $240, site licence = $2500+.

I just spend my day fighting virus's. Waste of time, and the ugly dell boxs can never replace the beauty of the Snow iMac's we had in the classrooms and labs.

So as you can see, they would rather pay for new hardware than pay $20 for a software upgrade. I know this seems strange to people not in public education, but it is the norm!!

If you want to make a big difference in your kid's day. Ask them about the computers they use, and if there are issues. The parents are the only ones that can make a difference in public education, getting involved in your kid's school is the best thing you can do.

If schools don't have money to upgrade the software, then might I recommend NOT BUYING NEW HARDWARE??

I am a sys admin in a graphic design and marketing firm. We have the latest G5 systems... blah blah blah... The idea of loosing classic support is an issue for US. Why?? We still have clients (who pay us real $) that require us to use Illustrator 8 and Quark 4. Do we have the new versions, oh ya, but there are REAL world reasons to keep Classic. Also working in an education world for a few years I will reiterate what was said. $ for software does not come from the same budget as $ for hardware and the private university I worked at we still had software that ran in Classic and though I did what I could before I left to get the ball rolling to replace it some of the software simply was not available anymore due to companies going out of business and there were no quality replacement products. So seeing that software like this is out there in an early stage is a big positive for me.

I still run a couple of OS9 audio apps that have to real equal in OSX. I currently have a G5 iMac, but plan to get an Intel Mac next year. When I do that, I'll be without two critical apps.

My solution was to buy a 600Mhz G3 iMac. It's fast enough, boots into OS9 or OSX, and can serve as a backup if my G5 iMac ever takes a dive. And it's kinda cute.

A legacy application needs a legacy computer!

That was Snaggy!! From Geek Culture and the Joy of Tech!! OMG!!!

Oh, and hey, if they have time and the need to do this, great, let them, and if you find it useless, I'd recommend the TV metaphore: change the channel and forget about it.

"solution"? That suggests there's a "problem". As I recall, OS 7-9 was the "problem", and OSX is the solution.

Are they thinking of coming with a telegraph, too? As a "solution" to the telephone "problem"?

A company called Reflecture (www.Reflecture.com) out of Hong Kong did a research project for Apple in Asia and found that:

1. Education software does not need to be updated nearly as often as productivity apps. Kids tend to learn the same stuff every year and each year there is a new batch of students that need to learn the same content.

2. Schools tend to stick to what works as the administrators have little incentive to upgrade whereas corporations are always looking to improve productivity and security.

3. Schools spend proportionally more on software than hardware as they usually get steep discounts on software.

4. Many educational institutions will be slow to upgrade to Intel-based Macintoshes.

5. There is some great educational software from small developers that has not even been ported to OS X yet alone Intel OS X. Some of these titles do not have a replacement in OS X or Windows - and the market is not big enough for an enterprising developer to create a viable replacement.

The conclusion is that OS 9 is still needed in educational institutions. And in Asia much publishing is still done using OS 9 as Quark has not released an OS X version yet for some languages.

There is still a small chance that Apple will release an Intel compatible version of OS 9. It is all in the numbers.


Daniel Kroc