• Re: Clone O/S Upgrade from 8.6 to 9.2

    From Michael Allbritton@zcoevgg@znp.pbz to comp.sys.mac.system on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 10:29:58
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    In article <bjrowe-C55C77.20400719072003@nnrp05.earthlink.net>, Bill
    Rowe <bjrowe@earthlink.net> wrote:

    In article <1fyc8rg.nruwt2wyux8pN%mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid>,
    mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:

    Bill Rowe <bjrowe@earthlink.net> wrote:

    Note, there is no point in going to MacOS 9.2 since
    the differences between 9.1 and 9.2 were designed to address compatibility issues with OS X running MacOS 9.1 in Classic mode.

    True, but then companies like Intuit came along and released versions of Quicken and Quickbooks that require 9.2.2.

    I wasn't aware Intuit or other companies had done that. But I am
    curious. Do these versions truly require 9.2.2 or is that just lazy marketing?

    If these versions truly require 9.2.2, that means they are intended to
    run in Classic mode on a machine running OS X. Surely, that is a silly design decision since someone running OS X would undoubtedly prefer a version that does not require Classic mode.

    According to the Quicken 2003 for Mac web page it does require 9.2.2. <http://www.shop.intuit.com/store/jhtml/sysreq.jhtml?priorityCode=501034 8&categoryId=cat101202&productId=prod10047&productLine=Quicken&pageLocat ion=Quicken&sellType=>

    Quicken 2003 is a Carbon app that runs in both Classic Mac OS and Mac
    OS X, and since Apple has said that Classic Mac OS is dead I would
    surmise that Quicken simply sees no reason to continue to support older versions of Mac OS with new versions of the software.
    Michael

    --
    My email address is ROT-13 encoded. Decode to send email.

    Mac users enjoy a love-hate relationship with Microsoft - in which love is defined as "resigned tolerance" and hate as "lava-hot rancor fueled by the fire of a thousand burning suns."
    ~ Macworld

    GnuPG Public Key ID: C6E230A12F07FE72
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Charles Phillips@triples@nospam.ev1.net to comp.sys.mac.system on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 18:13:59
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system


    Michael Allbritton <zcoevgg@znp.pbz> wrote:
    In article <bjrowe-C55C77.20400719072003@nnrp05.earthlink.net>, Bill
    Rowe <bjrowe@earthlink.net> wrote:

    In article <1fyc8rg.nruwt2wyux8pN%mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid>,
    mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:

    Bill Rowe <bjrowe@earthlink.net> wrote:

    Note, there is no point in going to MacOS 9.2 since
    the differences between 9.1 and 9.2 were designed to address
    compatibility issues with OS X running MacOS 9.1 in Classic mode.

    According to some pundits - the Finder is noticeably faster in 9.2.2 than
    9.1. One my UMAX clone, 9.2.2 was a pretty easy upgrade (with OS9Helper)
    and it was pretty fast before.


    True, but then companies like Intuit came along and released versions
    of
    Quicken and Quickbooks that require 9.2.2.

    I wasn't aware Intuit or other companies had done that. But I am
    curious. Do these versions truly require 9.2.2 or is that just lazy
    marketing?

    If these versions truly require 9.2.2, that means they are intended to

    run in Classic mode on a machine running OS X. Surely, that is a silly

    design decision since someone running OS X would undoubtedly prefer a

    version that does not require Classic mode.

    According to the Quicken 2003 for Mac web page it does require 9.2.2. ><http://www.shop.intuit.com/store/jhtml/sysreq.jhtml?priorityCode=501034 >8&categoryId=cat101202&productId=prod10047&productLine=Quicken&pageLocat >ion=Quicken&sellType=>

    Quicken 2003 is a Carbon app that runs in both Classic Mac OS and Mac
    OS X, and since Apple has said that Classic Mac OS is dead I would
    surmise that Quicken simply sees no reason to continue to support older >versions of Mac OS with new versions of the software.
    Michael



    Charles
    http://www.academ.com/info/macintosh/
    All Statements Are Personal Opinion Only
    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113
  • From Michael Vilain @vilain@spamcop.net to comp.sys.mac.system on Wednesday, July 23, 2003 15:58:50
    From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

    In article <vhtk37b5vaf346@corp.supernews.com>,
    "Charles Phillips" <triples@nospam.ev1.net> wrote:

    Michael Allbritton <zcoevgg@znp.pbz> wrote:
    In article <bjrowe-C55C77.20400719072003@nnrp05.earthlink.net>, Bill
    Rowe <bjrowe@earthlink.net> wrote:

    In article <1fyc8rg.nruwt2wyux8pN%mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid>,
    mike@POSTTOGROUP.invalid (Mike Rosenberg) wrote:

    Bill Rowe <bjrowe@earthlink.net> wrote:

    Note, there is no point in going to MacOS 9.2 since
    the differences between 9.1 and 9.2 were designed to address
    compatibility issues with OS X running MacOS 9.1 in Classic mode.

    According to some pundits - the Finder is noticeably faster in 9.2.2 than 9.1. One my UMAX clone, 9.2.2 was a pretty easy upgrade (with OS9Helper)
    and it was pretty fast before.

    But my Newer MaxPowr G3 L2 card didn't run on 9.2.2. I got some sort of
    priv instruction trap. I can run using the 604e, but it slow compared
    to the G3 card. I stayed on 9.1.

    --
    DeeDee, don't press that button! DeeDee! NO! Dee...



    --- Synchronet 3.18b-Win32 NewsLink 1.113