10 Jan
2006
10 Jan
'06
5:27 p.m.
remains that
most users don't need or care about classic support. This is
one of the reasons I'm still running 10.3.9.
EtherTalk was added back in 10.2, which is still the version of OS X I use
day-to-day (my file server runs 10.3 and my laptop runs 10.4, but 10.2 seems
to be the best compatibility conjunction for me). Myself, I still use an old 68K version of OmniPage
because it's sickeningly
fast on this dual G4, and there's a few games I like to play, and a dev
environment or two which I use to write stuff for the old Macs in the shop.
Also, some ostensibly Carbon apps seem happier in Classic (Palm's emulator
is one of these).
I have to be able to play the Mac version of the original "Master of Orion",
and I'd really like to be able to run "Warlords 2" as well (I forget which
version that quite working with, might be as far back as 8.0).
There's stuff like BasiliskII, Sheepshaver (both
of which I use occasionally)
and PearPC, but even though Classic is clunky, it integrates as well as can
be expected with the host operating system and most operations proceed
transparently. A "Mac in a window" application would have the limitations of
VPC, which works pretty well considering, but is still inconvenient for some
kinds of tasks from an interface and integration perspective.
I think it's been a *LONG* time since I looked at either of those. I didn't
even realize Sheepshaver ran on Linux, and I've never looked at PearPC. Are
there Mac OS X native versions of any of these? Sheepshaver looks close to
what I'm looking for.
Apple's page on Rosetta and the Intel Macs is
exceptionally unhelpful about
explaining the eventual software roadmap, but this is pretty typical for them.
Based on what little time I was able to spend earlier looking at the site
trying to get info on iLive '06 they seem to be seriously lacking on info on
their new products.
Zane