[P1] Backwards compatibility [WAS: Partitioning...OS]

[Jason Bennett]

Hi Richard,

Compatibility is by and large great on the Mac platform. In defence of 
Apple, I think they have reasonable backwards-compatibility standards 
-- even loads of 68x00 programs run just fine. Apple's decision to 
restrict new machines to the latest OS has more to do with the fact 
they test their new hardware only with the latest OS -- "the latest and 
greatest." My suspicion is by doing this, they can certify the machine 
works as it should and any software problems that may arise can be 
diagnosed during the warranty with minimal hassle. They simply don't 
have the resources to certify older versions of OS 9, and besides, 
newer versions usually have fewer bugs. This is probably also a way of 
forcing developers to ensure that their software will run on the latest 
OS.

> I am breathless. This is insanity...I don't want to go through the 
> hassle of
> reinstalling to confirm this myself but if its true and if I had known 
> I
> might have gone for a 500 model instead of the 700 I bought to have the
> compatibility (even though I don't need it) and saved some money to 
> boot!
> (pun intended) but then again there's the 10.2 issue...

Here you were referring to the inability to install 9.1 (I believe) on 
a newer machine. However, the fact you can only install 9.2 shouldn't 
preclude compatibility with 9.1 software. Or have you encountered a 
specific scenario where this is the case?

> I love my macs and have since first sight in '86 but this is unreal...
>
> First you can't run powerpc stuff on a normal mac...I still have an 
> LC475
> sitting around doing nothing...no ethernet card or PPC Chip... 
> otherwise I
> could use it as a server, then 10.2 madness with Quartz Extreme unless 
> 16
> meg video ram (ergo same fate for my iMac) and now no backward 
> compatibility
> for my new iBook...I'm starting to think maybe Apple should port X to
> intel...there doesn't seem to be the level of hard and software
> compatibility from the same manufacturer there should be to offset the
> disadvantages...

First, I'd recommend using an Internet resource like 
http://www.lowendmac.com -- they're a fantastic site for older 
Macintoshes. With a little digging, I think you'll find articles where 
people use 68x00 machines successfully as servers with early versions 
of Linux and other OSes for server purposes.

Back in the early 1990s, Apple had to make the switch from 68x00 to PPC 
to keep the platform growing technologically. The transition from 68x00 
to PPC was a daunting task full of pitfalls, but by all accounts Apple 
pulled off an amazing change. So much so, that many people didn't even 
notice! I read several articles about the numerous technological 
challenges of this transition, and I'd pass them on if I had them 
bookmarked. If you're interested, use Google and type "PPC Apple 
transition" and hopefully a few will pop up.

I use a Rev. A (tangerine) iBook with 10.2, and I can say that while it 
would be kewl to have Quartz Extreme as a feature, everything still 
runs fine without it. The one thing that is a drag with my machine, 
though, is the lack of OpenGL support, although this doesn't affect 
iBooks after FireWire was introduced. Still, I get a lot of milage 
under Jaguar.

Returning to the subject of compatibility: To use an analogy, we 
wouldn't expect Honda to ensure that the 2003 Accord is 100% compatible 
in parts with the 1983 Accord. Certainly the changes in technology over 
the last 10 years in computerdom have been just as drastic. As an 
example, in 1993, our family had a PowerBook 150 that ran at 16MHz on a 
68x000. Our 1999 iBook clocks in at 300MHz on a PPC. Nevertheless, I 
can still use my 10 year old copy of MS Word 5.1 on my PPC -- a program 
written for the 68x00 chip. However, it would be impossible to expect a 
program optimized for the PPC, such as Bugdom, to run on a 68x000.

In conclusion, I think Apple has done a pretty good balancing act 
considering that computers have changed so much within such a short 
time, relatively speaking. Also, I think compatibility is broader than 
your message suggests, and I'd certainly recommend checking sites such 
as LowEndMac for tips to give your older machines a new lease on life.

Cheers,

Jason