OS 8.6

[heebiejeebies]

How's the stability of OS 8.6 vs 9.2? Any difference? My wallstreet came with 8.6 and I might just keep it on there rather than putting 9 on as originally planned. It seems to have all the good features of OS9 but it's missing some of the pointless ones as well as some of the stupid-ness (e.g. 8.6 doesn't the Applications folder in its place).

 

[Quadraman]

8.6 is considered extremely stable in comparison to all earlier versions of the Mac OS. I'm not sure how it stacks up against 9.2.x, but bugs and incompatibilities shouldn't be much of an issue if you can live without the newer features in 9.

 

[heebiejeebies]

Cool! Pity I don't actually have an install CD for it, but oh well. I was surprised by how close it is to 9. There's hardly any difference.

That's not what I've heard re: the stability though. I always thought all the systems after 7.6 were considered less reliable than the earlier ones. Could just be the people who told me that have been talking through their hats though.

 

[Flash!]

I always found OS9.0-9.1 to be just as quick as 8.6, without the bloat of the 9.x.x updates.

 

[Bunsen]

Cool! Pity I don't actually have an install CD for it, but oh well.

If you've got/can find 8.5, it's a free download upgrade from there.

I always thought all the systems after 7.6 were considered less reliable than the earlier ones. Could just be the people who told me that have been talking through their hats though.

HATS!! Yes they were. Generally 8.0 and 8.5 are a bit unstable, but the free point upgrades fix them right up. 7.5.x versions are way more unstable in my experience, especially on PPCs. I can't speak for 9.0 as I've never used it.

 

[Quadraman]

Another thing to keep in mind, if you have a system that will allow you to install and run 9.2.2, then you should probably use it because it runs noticeably faster than 8.6-9.1.

 

[heebiejeebies]

That's surprising. I have a cd of 9.2.1 but for some reason the updater to 9.2.2 won't work.

 

[The Macster]

Are you using the right localisation of the updater for your copy of 9.2.1? I seem to remember having problems updating 9.1 (which is what my disc is) to 9.2.2 on my G3 as it complained I was using the wrong updater - I managed to get another updater which worked; can't remember exactly which one it was I needed now though. What is the error that you get?

 

[Quadraman]

That's surprising. I have a cd of 9.2.1 but for some reason the updater to 9.2.2 won't work.

You have to have a copy of 9 installed for the 9.2 updater to work, I think. I remember reading something about that in another forum somewhere where some old Mac users who never updated beyond 7 or 8 were trying to install 9.2 but couldn't because you have to have some version of 9 already for the installer to work. Can anyone verify this??

 

[The Macster]

You mean they were trying to install the OS 9.2.2 updater on OS7/8? Of course that's not going to work, they are updaters, not OSes. That would be like downloading the XP Service Pack 2 update and trying to install it on Windows 98, thinking that would give you Windows XP! You of course need the full version of Windows XP to do that, not just the Service Pack.

The update path for OS 9 is 9.0.x (any version) > 9.1 > 9.2.1 > 9.2.2 - updates must be installed in that order, you can't just go straight to 9.2.2 using that updater from 9.0.4, for instance. As you have 9.2.1 (presumably already installed from the CD), 9.2.2 is the final one in the sequence to get the latest revision of OS 9, so if you get the right 9.2.2 update for your copy of 9 it should work.

 

[Quadraman]

You mean they were trying to install the OS 9.2.2 updater on OS7/8? Of course that's not going to work, they are updaters, not OSes. That would be like downloading the XP Service Pack 2 update and trying to install it on Windows 98, thinking that would give you Windows XP! You of course need the full version of Windows XP to do that, not just the Service Pack.
The update path for OS 9 is 9.0.x (any version) > 9.1 > 9.2.1 > 9.2.2 - updates must be installed in that order, you can't just go straight to 9.2.2 using that updater from 9.0.4, for instance. As you have 9.2.1 (presumably already installed from the CD), 9.2.2 is the final one in the sequence to get the latest revision of OS 9, so if you get the right 9.2.2 update for your copy of 9 it should work.

No, I mean trying to install over 7 or 8 from a retail 9.2.1 CD and the installer wouldn't run.

 

[The Macster]

Ah, I see - that makes a bit more sense! It sounds like Heebs has already got 9.2.1 installed from his CD though, as otherwise he wouldn't have been able to try loading the 9.2.2 updater and finding that it doesn't want to work?

 

[Quadraman]

Ah, I see - that makes a bit more sense! It sounds like Heebs has already got 9.2.1 installed from his CD though, as otherwise he wouldn't have been able to try loading the 9.2.2 updater and finding that it doesn't want to work?

You think maybe OS9 Helper might work?

 

[The Macster]

Unlikely, given that the only purpose of OS9 Helper is to bypass the check for a G3 or later processor, which is required for 9.2.x releases. The fact that the 9.2.1 CD has worked (as far as I gather) suggests that isn't the problem - I reckon it could well be the issue with different localisations of the updater that I think is what I encountered. The error message that it's producing will tell us whether this is the cause. Alternatively I seem to remember seeing a thing about "big system morsels" errors with the 9.2.x updaters - I've never got one but apparently they can occur randomly, and I think Apple have some info about it somewhere if that is the error.

 

[heebiejeebies]

Yes that's exactly what it is, Macster. I'm using the Aussie version of the system. I don't know where to get the updater for that version of it.

 

[The Macster]

There's quite a few different versions of that updater here - I guess the International English would be the right one, have you tried it? I can't remember my problem was, maybe I have a US version of OS9 but tried to install the International English one.

 

[heebiejeebies]

"International English" being a euphemism for "American English" I presume. But yeah you're probably right, that'd be the one I'd say. As we French say, "mucho gracias, señor"!

 

[Quadraman]

"International English" being a euphemism for "American English" I presume. But yeah you're probably right, that'd be the one I'd say. As we French say, "mucho gracias, señor"!

No, International English means English speaking countries outside the United States and Canada.

 

[The Macster]

"International English" being a euphemism for "American English" I presume.

I suppose so - I think it was 9.0 that dropped the actual ( ) English versions wasn't it? You know, those ones where Trash was Wastebasket and Color was Colour? I remember seeing those on Macs back in the day, but all of the pre-9 OSes I have (7.6, 8.x etc) I have are the "Trash" ones as that seems to be all that is available on the internet. I do have a couple of old restore CDs for Macs I don't have actually - I suppose they are probably the UK localisations. I'm used to Trash now, anyway Quite funny really, how they think we call bins "Wastebaskets"!