• 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.

OpenTransport manual install or better source?

Well, if there are any features you want in specific to 7.5+, grab TomeViewer and look through the tome files for the installation of the higher system versions on the Legacy software CD and pull them out of the tomes. Drop them into 7.1.2-68k and see if they work. The worst that can happen is that it fails, then you can just yank the extension, etc... and reboot. No Harm, no foul. I have a version of 7.1.2-68k on my Powerbook 540c running pieces of MacOS all the way up to 8.1.

As far as cosmetics, grab the Appearance Manager SDK for System 7, and drop in the pieces you want. It can make your System 7 look just like System 8. Just know that it takes up a fair piece of RAM, I think 2-3 MB.

 
Thinking about it, this is one very overlooked aspect of the classic Mac operating system that was light years ahead of Windows. You could drop pieces in and out of the system, and if they worked, great, if they didn't, you could just throw them away, there was no risk to the Core OS, no lingering crap that may stick around, etc... It really demonstrates how much more advanced it was compared to Windows at the time, where you had to deal with left over DLL files, permanent alternations to system files, uninstallers that left crap behind, left over registry entries that would cause nothing but trouble, etc... It really makes you wonder why Apple didn't have a larger marketshare, I mean, Mac should have been considered the OS of choice for people that didn't have many, if any, IT skills. They really couldn't hurt themselves.

 
this is one very overlooked aspect of the classic Mac operating system that was light years ahead of Windows.
Eeeehhhhh.....

In practice, it was quite difficult to clean up a System Folder until Extension Manager came along, and even then, few people actually bothered to do it. Long-living system folders, especially any that migrated from one machine to the next, along with changing software needs over the years is probably a lot of what caused system conflicts and to a certain extent, system unreliability.

We, of course, do know Classic Mac OS can basically be unstable out of the box, but a system folder with a bunch of stuff in it from a mix of different eras that's never been cleaned or curated will naturally make things worse.

The other thing is, I feel like it's a relatively poor design overall that the Mac OS treats everything as loaded and active regardless of whether or not there's a good reason for it to be. In Windows, the TCP/IP stack isn't using memory if you aren't using it, so there's not a very great reason to rip it out of the OS.

In practice, too, most people on Windows didn't track down individual reliability problems. Either it was acceptable as it was or it was bad enough to take it to a shop and/or reformat it.

It really makes you wonder why Apple didn't have a larger marketshare,
Does it?

I thought the near-universal answer was price and availability. Macs were notoriously difficult to actually buy throughout the '80s and '90s, and that's one of the reasons the Performa family began existing - to make it possible to buy a Mac at a store that might have been in or much closer to your particular town, and not in just the state's biggest major metro, or in some cases, a state over. Sears, for example, has way more retail locations in Oregon and Washington than The Computer Store, a Mac retailer that existed in Portland and Seattle. So, if you lived in, IDK, Yakima, you could go down the road a couple miles to the sears in Union Gap rather than having to plan a day or weekend out to Seattle or Portland.

Even in Union Gap, once you got to the sears, it's nearly completely inevitable that Packard Bell, HP, and Compaq had something on display that was less expensive.

Mac should have been considered the OS of choice for people that didn't have many, if any, IT skills
I do think Mac OS' potentially easier to learn filesystem layout meant that you could have application power users (people who really are only on the computer because they are good at one or two applications, usually as part of some greater trade) self-servicing with returning their system to a usable state after an incident occurs (for example, someone tries to install a new driver and the system crashes) but that doesn't really mean that the Mac was, in fact, any better for people who professed to have no skills.

You still have to get someone to have recovery media on hand, think about using it, and then be aware of how the system was organized, and if I'm remembering correctly, that particular information was not really in Apple's own user-facing documentation, you'd either need to buy a tips or "everything!" book (not necessarily a bad deal, they were like $25 and they went through most relevant knowledge, and they made good references as well) or have someone describe the process over the phone.

So, yeah, "boot from that CD, navigate to your disk, go into extensions, sort by date, remove the three newest things" is easy to describe over the phone, (easier than editing autoexec/command or, as you say, navigating the registry) it's not any easier to intuit from zero knowledge that that's what you should do than it would be on DOS.

That and, to be perfectly honest, thinking about it, I view the entire practice of just stripping out parts of the OS you aren't using or don't like in order to save a few kilobytes of RAM a little.... indicative of the fact that Apple chronically under-equipped their machines. (Imagine buying a 7500 new in 1995 for like $2500 before the cost of a keyboard, display, or any software and then having to disable the TCP/IP stack, the Ethernet driver, the printing stack, and any interesting features (Macintalk, AppleGuide, PowerTalk, QuickTime) in order to run whatever software caused you to buy a 7500, because it only came with 8 megs of RAM, just about enough to boot the OS.)

 
The other thing is, I feel like it's a relatively poor design overall that the Mac OS treats everything as loaded and active regardless of whether or not there's a good reason for it to be.
Blame it on INIT 31. Until INIT 31, all INITs had to be located within the System resource file in order to be loaded into the system heap at boot time. But System file 3.0, introduced in 1986 with the Macintosh Plus, had INIT 31, which looked around and loaded INITs located outside the System file, living in their own files. This made it a lot easier to distribute and install INITs, but probably the system software designers did not anticipate the huge proliferation of INITs that would result, and the corresponding incompatibilities of having so many loaded at a time.

 
Back
Top