OS 8.6

[heebiejeebies]

Yeah, exactly - it will have some localised elements but it will be an all-inclusive thing which, like everything international these days, will use American English.

 

[heebiejeebies]

"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

Goshdangit!! [8D] My Wallstreet came with the British version installed too. First time I've ever used it - nice to see Wastebasket and Colour for once. It's the main thing that stops me from upgrading that machine to 9.

 

[FunnymanSE30]

British SSW http://download.info.apple.com/Apple_Support_Area/Apple_Software_Updates/English-British/Macintosh/System/

 

[Blessed Cheesemaker]

I know we always want the thing we cannot have, but I always considered OS 8.6 to be the best classic OS for PPC.

OS 9 and above started getting really bloated, in order to support OS X and its technologies.

I still use OS 8.6 on my SuperMac, and Lombard...I really only use OS X to surf...

 

[Charlieman]

Trash versus WasteBasket labels? ResEdit is your friend.

 

[heebiejeebies]

I know we always want the thing we cannot have, but I always considered OS 8.6 to be the best classic OS for PPC.

Yeah I'd probably have kept it, if I owned the CDs. Ended up putting OS 9 on the Wallstreet. Can't see much advantage to it except that in 8.6 if you go to "Get Info" without choosing one of the submenus, it does nothing. Very annoying. By the way, I love your name and avatar! [8D]

Trash versus WasteBasket labels? ResEdit is your friend.

Tried that years ago. No way to do it. I managed to change "alias" to "nom-de-plume" though. Back in my crazy ResEditing days when I changed the Apple menu to a piece of swiss cheese. [8D]

 

[Blessed Cheesemaker]

Yeah I'd probably have kept it, if I owned the CDs. Ended up putting OS 9 on the Wallstreet. Can't see much advantage to it except that in 8.6 if you go to "Get Info" without choosing one of the submenus, it does nothing. Very annoying. By the way, I love your name and avatar! [8D]

[] ]'> Thank you re: my name and avatar. After 10 years (maybe 12) of surfing the net and coming up with the dumbest, most embarressing "handles"/user-names, I finally have stumbled onto something I like [] ]'>

Oh, and the other reason OS 8.6 is good is for older PowerBooks, like the 1400 and 2400, where you only have limited RAM. The OS 8.6 memory requirements are much lighter than OS 9, and you get much better battery life in OS 8.6 than earlier OS 8.1 and even 8.5 (well, at least 10% or more battery life).

With the Wallstreet, you are probably better off with OS 9.

 

[equill]

heebie

System CD numbers, for your capacious memory bank:

System 7.1: X691-0086

System 7.5: ZP691-0246-A

System 7.5.2: U95073-0528

System 7.5.3: U96073-016A

OS 7.6.1: U97073-052A (691-1613-A)

OS 8.0: Z97050-098B (International, ie not North American)

OS 8.1: Z97050-315A

OS 8.5: ZU691-2017-A

OS 8.6: B691-2369-A (British. A brief flirtation)

OS 9.1: Z691-2748-A

OS 9.2.1: Z691-3334-A

Never let it be said that Apple believes in consistent numbering systems.

As has already been noted, you need consistent localizations to install an update over an upgrade (or a preceding update). Stick to Z-prefix—and that applies to downloadable updates—and you should have no trouble in Australia.

de

 

[heebiejeebies]

I have 160 megs so plenty of ram for os 9. It runs very well for everything except web browsing, for which it pretty much stinks. iCab is very lousy; Netscape is slightly faster and nicer looking. Being used to OS X and a dual core, I really do notice its substandard multitasking abilities. Haven’t tried Wamcom just yet. I rather wish I’d just paid a little extra for a Pismo or something.

Thanque you for the CD numbers, equill. I’ve filed them alongside my collection of Calvin Klein boxer shorts reference codes and Roger Whittaker sheet music catalogue numbers. [8D]

Speaking of international systems and how my Wallstreet originally came with the British 8.6… I also noticed yesterday that it has a pound symbol instead of a hash - as God intended! So maybe my wallstreet is a closet pom? If I ever hear it complain about the weather then my suspicion is confirmed.

 

[equill]

I have 160 megs so plenty of ram for os 9. It runs very well for everything except web browsing, for which it pretty much stinks. ... Speaking of international systems and how my Wallstreet originally came with the British 8.6… I also noticed yesterday that it has a pound symbol instead of a hash - as God intended! So maybe my wallstreet is a closet pom? If I ever hear it complain about the weather then my suspicion is confirmed.

The miserable performance on the Web by Macs with OS 9.x is a consequence of program support, or rather the lack of it, as far as current browsers go. The attempt by site proprietors to enforce their view of what we should use is reprehensible. My PB1400/400 (Sonnet), nonetheless and bravely still gives a good account of itself, even on dial-up and Mozilla 1.0.2, when I am in the boondocks. That's a feature of its speed, of course, because it is gradually becoming less accomplished as sites get more feachers.

I have a Summer 2001 Indigo iMac/500, assembled in 'Czechoslovakia', that I bought near-new from a British migrant to Australia in Feb. 2004. Its Apple Pro keyboard has a 3/£ key (option-3) rather than a 3/# (shift-3). It also has §/± in place of `/~, which is handy for some technical writing.

de

 

[heebiejeebies]

Yes, I originally hoped to go for the leanest browser possible but naturally hardly anything displays properly on those systems. Couldn't even get through the wireless logon page with my old versions of IE/Netscape.

At least the new netscape displays pages properly. But seriously, surely someone can put together a decent browser for os9! It's not dead yet.

 

[equill]

I agree. With several New World Macs running OS 10.2.x to 10.4.x, I haven't pushed any of my seriously upgraded (G3) Old World beige Macs into OS X. Not even my two 'original' Beige G3s (DT and MT). The OW beiges include several 7300s, a 9600, a 9500 and a PowerTower Pro (under construction).

OS 9 is a damned good OS that has never given me bloat, sloth or fall-over problems even in memory-guzzling soundwave editing.

de

 

[Scott Baret]

If you're going to be dealing with inexperienced users or young kids, go with 8.6. It's the last version that can run At Ease.

 

[heebiejeebies]

Oh dear, At Ease! I think kids should be allowed to muck around using the real thing. Any kid with a brain will work it out in no time - it's easy to them; same as how kids can easily pick up multiple languages when they're young.

P.S. Equill, re: bloat - 9.2.2 seems to run OK once it starts but after starting up my 190cs running 7.5 yesterday in about 30 seconds, I notice how much crap this thing must be loading at startup - it takes nearly two minutes!

 

[Scott Baret]

I agree about At Ease. The only reason I brought it up is because I was working on an iMac yesterday with 8.6, At Ease with a password that none of us knew (school surplus machine), and a broken CD-ROM drive!

And about 9.2.2 bloat--ever notice how many extensions come pre-loaded on an OS 9 install? Add in a few drivers, etc and you have a parade that fills up the width of the screen and then some.

 

[heebiejeebies]

Yeah it's ridiculous but once you start trying to cut some out, things begin to break. It's a domino effect on os9!

 

[Quadraman]

I have 160 megs so plenty of ram for os 9. It runs very well for everything except web browsing, for which it pretty much stinks. iCab is very lousy; Netscape is slightly faster and nicer looking. Being used to OS X and a dual core, I really do notice its substandard multitasking abilities. Haven’t tried Wamcom just yet. I rather wish I’d just paid a little extra for a Pismo or something.
Thanque you for the CD numbers, equill. I’ve filed them alongside my collection of Calvin Klein boxer shorts reference codes and Roger Whittaker sheet music catalogue numbers. [8D]

Speaking of international systems and how my Wallstreet originally came with the British 8.6… I also noticed yesterday that it has a pound symbol instead of a hash - as God intended! So maybe my wallstreet is a closet pom? If I ever hear it complain about the weather then my suspicion is confirmed.

For a machine running classic Mac OS and ONLY classic Mac OS, iCab is your only real choice since it is the only browser for classic that is still being actively developed. It may not be as good as OS X browsers, but at least there is still hope for future improvement. All other browsers that run under classic are dead.

 

[heebiejeebies]

iCab is lousy. Netscape for os9 is way better. iCab hasn't been updated in a few years anyway so I doubt it's still being developed.

 

[Quadraman]

iCab is lousy. Netscape for os9 is way better. iCab hasn't been updated in a few years anyway so I doubt it's still being developed.

iCab 3.03 was released in August 2006 and is available for Mac OS 8.5-9.22 as well as OS X.

Netscape 7.02 for Mac OS 9 was released in February 2003. A lot has changed in those 3.5 years.

 

[Scott Baret]

I use IE 5 on OS 9. I can't stand Netscape or iCab.