I seem to remember some stuff for the Comm toolbox interfacing with stuff like IBM and Oracle databases.
-
Hello MLAers! We've re-enabled auto-approval for accounts. If you are still waiting on account approval, please check this thread for more information.
Apple Older Software Downloads
- Thread starter mbaran
- Start date
Well, 7.1.1 (System 7 Pro) was a commercial product, so that's why it was never put up by Apple for free. 7.1.1 (non-pro) was specific to the Powerbook 520/540 & Powerbook Duo 270/280, so it never saw a general release. 7.1.2 (68k) was Performa/Quadra specific and only seen with a limited number of early edition Quadra/Performa 6xx models, so it never saw a general release. 7.1.2 (PPC) was also model specific and never saw a general release.
As for 7.1 itself, I can't really explain why that one isn't available. I have seen mention of a "7.1 Update" that makes it sound like it was available for 7.0.x machines to update to a generic 7.1 release. IDK. The apple system compatibility chart seems to indicate it was compatible with a wide range of Macs from that time period:
http://support.apple.com/kb/TA47341
As for 7.1 itself, I can't really explain why that one isn't available. I have seen mention of a "7.1 Update" that makes it sound like it was available for 7.0.x machines to update to a generic 7.1 release. IDK. The apple system compatibility chart seems to indicate it was compatible with a wide range of Macs from that time period:
http://support.apple.com/kb/TA47341
Last edited by a moderator:
There was a general non-Pro 7.1 release for 68k Macs.
Since the files are still available from Apple, and just the page of links is gone, I've made some pages of selected links for Macintosh Plus System Software, for English North American versions of System 6, System 7.0, and System 7.5.
...If the links are still available but the page leading to them is gone, are we allowed to make a 'mirror' of the URL links from the old page and post them here?
One used to be able to get to those files by typing in the directory where they were stored on the server because then the server would return a directory listing but now it seems to redirect the user to a "file not found" page.
Actually they did. It costs them money to host files that get accessed not more than I would guess about once a month at most.
They might have deleted it last August; things can stay in server caches for surprising amounts of time even after they've been officially deleted (sometimes they can even stay there indefinitey until the storage space is needed for something else).
Last edited by a moderator:
It is still possible to get directory listings, using a trick by Hiroto. Start at http://download.info.apple.com/Apple_Support_Area/ and retry until the correct listing appears.
As far as I know it is legal, which is why I put some Macintosh System Software links on my web site.
That actually wouldn't cost much at all then. Apple wouldn't have to pay for the storage, only the bandwidth which would be nothing at most.
I bet you couldn't even measure the amount of money that it costs them. I have users and web sites on my main server going back to the 1990s - could I take the total cost of the machine, the total utilization and divide it up over fifteen years and figure out that Elfen's files and account sitting on the server account for 4 cents, but even just trying to figure something like that out would cost more than the thing itself.
Yeah, Apple has no decent reason not to keep those files and those pages exactly the way they were.
I also discovered why the 7.1 Update for System 7.0.x was never put up for download, apparently it was the very first SSW update that Apple charged for, and they'd never put up a product for free that they charged for, so that explains why 7.1 has always been missing.
I also discovered why the 7.1 Update for System 7.0.x was never put up for download, apparently it was the very first SSW update that Apple charged for, and they'd never put up a product for free that they charged for, so that explains why 7.1 has always been missing.
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes they do have to pay for the storage. They would be using storage for files that almost nobody uses anymore whereas they could otherwise use that storage for something that a lot of people are actually using.-
They made MPW freely available on the basis that it was obsolete software, so I see no reason why they couldn't do the same thing with the System 7.1 update or any other obsolete software for that matter.
I'm fairly certain they own their own servers. The bandwidth used to download a couple floppies wouldn't even show up compared to downloading OS X updates. Small businesses and the like pay for their web hosting/storage. I doubt Apple pays for (as far as hosting is concerned) anything other than electricity, their connection to the internet, and maintenance for their servers.
Apple has their own CDN now, though they still have Akamai as a backup.
Helps when you own an entire Class A IP block.
Helps when you own an entire Class A IP block.
Ok. I invite you to do the math to calculate how much it'd cost to store 10 gigabytes of data on a worldwide CDN.
The amount of money is a non-issue. Rather, it's an issue that is the opposite from what you think - the money which was spent on the m68k and early PowerPC hardware which we typically have represents a much larger investment into the Apple which exists now than a top of the line Mac Pro bought today would make. The pennies (if the cost is even more than one penny) per month spent on keeping those old files is completely meaningless when it comes to the amount of importance that those products have in where Apple is today.
I agree with johnklos that people's investment in Old Apple is huge. I was just looking up info on the IIci I am working on and trying to fathom that they charged around $6k of 1990s money for this.
But tech companies - especially larger, image-conscious ones - tend to have a backwards approach to legacy products. Legacy is something of a dirty word for them, because it implies support for things they want to leave behind. Not unlike how I can practically feel the groaning over the phone when I try to still get some support in authorizing a program for OS 9. Much of this comes down to the image of their products and the use of them they want to project. This marketplace is fueled by novelty, so showing off the great stuff they were capable of 20-30 years ago can be perceived as extremely negative. Somewhere out there, there will be some git laughing beer up his nose at a System 7 video with the realization that "This is wut those great MACS look like LOL". Acknowledging their illustrious past does not help them to convey that they are The Latest Thing.
Also, the industry-wide expectation that any decent company offers instant access to everything via FTP has mostly disappeared over the past ten years. Even many university FTPs have disappeared. I think this "lets them off the hook" of maintaining these resources (not that it took much!) for security reasons. Secure FTP never caught on as much. Consider also the rampant bot-spamming to public spaces, such as has affected Usenet recently. I still think that FTP is one of the easiest, most effective ways to host and share data - but it has certainly lost favor with many.
But tech companies - especially larger, image-conscious ones - tend to have a backwards approach to legacy products. Legacy is something of a dirty word for them, because it implies support for things they want to leave behind. Not unlike how I can practically feel the groaning over the phone when I try to still get some support in authorizing a program for OS 9. Much of this comes down to the image of their products and the use of them they want to project. This marketplace is fueled by novelty, so showing off the great stuff they were capable of 20-30 years ago can be perceived as extremely negative. Somewhere out there, there will be some git laughing beer up his nose at a System 7 video with the realization that "This is wut those great MACS look like LOL". Acknowledging their illustrious past does not help them to convey that they are The Latest Thing.
Also, the industry-wide expectation that any decent company offers instant access to everything via FTP has mostly disappeared over the past ten years. Even many university FTPs have disappeared. I think this "lets them off the hook" of maintaining these resources (not that it took much!) for security reasons. Secure FTP never caught on as much. Consider also the rampant bot-spamming to public spaces, such as has affected Usenet recently. I still think that FTP is one of the easiest, most effective ways to host and share data - but it has certainly lost favor with many.
