Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [wpmac] PPC Apps in Lion?

Expand Messages
  • Randy B. Singer
    ... My guess is that Rosetta is permanently gone, and that you won t be seeing any sort of replacement for it, ever. First off, Rosetta wasn t an Apple
    Message 1 of 29 , Oct 20, 2011
      On Oct 20, 2011, at 9:42 AM, Mikeca wrote:

      > Apple actually bought the limited rights to Rosetta (which allowed
      > PPC programs to run in Leopard). And that limit was time... Pretty
      > certain Rosetta could be tweaked to run in Lion and of course the
      > glaring problems of not being able to run things like Quicken 2007
      > and MacLinkPlus Deluxe (and there being no apt replacement) is
      > bound to motivate some to work on this. But as yet, I've heard
      > nothing... just people complaining about what Apple did.

      My guess is that Rosetta is permanently gone, and that you won't be
      seeing any sort of replacement for it, ever.

      First off, Rosetta wasn't an Apple technology. They licensed the
      technology from Transitive (now owned by IBM). There is no telling
      how long the license was for, how much it cost, or even if IBM is
      still willing to license the technology.

      It turns out that others have wondered if Rosetta could be made to
      run under Lion, and so they experimented with installing Rosetta in
      Lion. It turns out that Apple was very serious about discontinuing
      Rosetta when they created Lion. They didn't just remove Rosetta from
      Lion, the modified the entire OS right down to the kernel so that
      everything in the OS that Rosetta needed to hook into is gone.
      Lion's kernel doesn't support Rosetta even if Rosetta is installed.

      See:
      Rosetta does NOT run. Killed by OS kernel (in German):
      <http://www.heise.de/mac-and-i/news/foren/S-rosetta-laeuft-NICHT-Im-
      Kernel-und-im-OS-Userspace-stillgelegt-lesen/forum-205855/
      msg-20536984/read/>

      [Very poor] English translation:
      http://is.gd/dPaLLm

      Additionally Apple has moved OS X to 64-bit. Rosetta was 32-bit.
      <http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2009/08/mac-os-x-10-6.ars/5>

      So, assuming that any licensing issues could be overcome, Rosetta
      would have to be re-written from scratch to run under Lion, and Apple
      would have to re-write Lion to work with Rosetta. Given that Apple
      has been telling developers to prepare for the demise of Rosetta for
      years now, it's unlikely that they would suddenly decide that they
      wanted to invest the time and expense to support it again.

      The sole reason for optimism comes from Intuit and Quicken. There
      have been rumors that Intuit has been investigating licensing Rosetta
      technology to bundle with Quicken to avoid having to upgrade Quicken
      for Lion. Even then the rumors have been that it might be as much as
      two years before this comes to fruition.
      http://www.macnn.com/articles/11/06/16/
      could.bring.new.life.to.older.versions.of.quicken/
      So a Lion version of Rosetta technology may be possible, but it is
      also possible that Intuit never got beyond the investigation stage.

      It may also be possible to come up with the equivalent of Sheepshaver
      for PowerPC applications. The thing is that, unlike Rosetta itself,
      which was an amazing technology that broke new ground because of its
      incredible speed, such an emulator would likely provide disappointing
      performance. I suspect that by the time that such a utility could be
      written, that there wouldn't be much demand for it as users will have
      already moved to alternate programs that are Lion-compatible. In any
      case, I haven't heard of any projects to create such an emulator
      program.

      ___________________________________________
      Randy B. Singer
      Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)

      Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
      http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
      ___________________________________________
    • Chad Smith
      Thanks everyone The news is quite disappointing, but I do appreciate the insight. Thank you for taking the time and effort to explain the situation so well.
      Message 2 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
        Thanks everyone

        The news is quite disappointing, but I do appreciate the insight. Thank you
        for taking the time and effort to explain the situation so well.

        It sounds like the best option, (although not great), is dual booting Lion
        and Snow Leopard. It's disappointing to have to do that. However, it's
        even more disappointing that because of Apple's desire to control
        everything, you can't emulate it on top of Lion, like you can with say Linux
        or Windows, (VMWare Fusion / Parallels Desktop / QEMU / Bochs / etc.).

        Thanks again, everyone. If anyone does have some better news, or better
        ideas, please share them.

        I just want to clarify something that Ed said - so brand new Macs that ship
        with Lion will not run other OSes? Even if I wipe the hard drive or put in
        a new hard drive, I can't install any other OS? Is that limited to just
        older versions of Mac OS X, or does that mean no Boot Camp, no Windows, no
        Linux, etc.? If so, that severely lowers my chances of ever buying a new
        Mac.

        Chad W. Smith
      • sardisson
        ... It s not clear from that article (at least not from the English translation), but even if Rosetta-the-process was able to run on 10.7, Apple removed the
        Message 3 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
          --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "Randy B. Singer" <randy@...> wrote:
          >
          > It turns out that others have wondered if Rosetta could be made to
          > run under Lion, and so they experimented with installing Rosetta in
          > Lion. It turns out that Apple was very serious about discontinuing
          > Rosetta when they created Lion. They didn't just remove Rosetta from
          > Lion, the modified the entire OS right down to the kernel so that
          > everything in the OS that Rosetta needed to hook into is gone.
          > Lion's kernel doesn't support Rosetta even if Rosetta is installed.
          >
          > See:
          > Rosetta does NOT run. Killed by OS kernel (in German):
          > <http://www.heise.de/mac-and-i/news/foren/S-rosetta-laeuft-NICHT-Im-
          > Kernel-und-im-OS-Userspace-stillgelegt-lesen/forum-205855/
          > msg-20536984/read/>
          >
          > [Very poor] English translation:
          > http://is.gd/dPaLLm

          It's not clear from that article (at least not from the English translation), but even if Rosetta-the-process was able to run on 10.7, Apple removed the PPC code from the OS libraries and frameworks in 10.7, so applications themselves couldn't run, because all the OS methods they call won't be found.

          Smokey
        • em315
          ... Of course you can run Boot Camp in new machines, and anything else that is NOT OS X but which you can run in a separate partition. However, you absolutely
          Message 4 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
            --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Chad Smith <chad78@...> wrote:

            >
            > I just want to clarify something that Edward said - so brand new Macs that ship
            > with Lion will not run other OSes? Even if I wipe the hard drive or put in
            > a new hard drive, I can't install any other OS? Is that limited to just
            > older versions of Mac OS X, or does that mean no Boot Camp, no Windows, no
            > Linux, etc.? If so, that severely lowers my chances of ever buying a new
            > Mac.

            Of course you can run Boot Camp in new machines, and anything else that is NOT OS X but which you can run in a separate partition. However, you absolutely cannot boot an EARLIER version of OS X than the one that the new machine was designed for. So the 2011 MacBook Air that I'm writing this on (I wish I owned it) will NOT boot Snow Leopard. But any Mac first released BEFORE July 2011 will boot Snow Leopard. That's the way Apple has built all its machines for the past ten years. There's an earliest OS version for each machine, and you can't go back beyond the earliest.
          • Chad Smith
            I never knew that. I wonder what the thinking is. I mean I know most people wouldn t ever want to install an earlier version of OS X - but why make the
            Message 5 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
              I never knew that. I wonder what the thinking is. I mean I know most
              people wouldn't ever want to install an earlier version of OS X - but why
              make the effort to actively prevent it from happening?

              I mean it sounds like it's not just a matter of "oh, well the old software
              won't work because the hardware is new" - the impression I'm getting is that
              Apple is locking it out on purpose. Which confuses me.

              The only thing I can think of is if it is related to the liscencing of
              Rosetta, that they are making sure it won't work for contractual reasons.
              But from what you just said, it sounds like it is standard procedure for
              Apple - not something unique to Lion. Again, such a practice is weird to me.

              Chad W. Smith

              On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 12:55 PM, em315 <em315@...> wrote:

              > However, you absolutely cannot boot an EARLIER version of OS X than the one
              > that the new machine was designed for. So the 2011 MacBook Air that I'm
              > writing this on (I wish I owned it) will NOT boot Snow Leopard. But any Mac
              > first released BEFORE July 2011 will boot Snow Leopard. That's the way Apple
              > has built all its machines for the past ten years. There's an earliest OS
              > version for each machine, and you can't go back beyond the earliest.
            • Bob Stern
              ... Apple s end user license agreements for Snow Leopard and Lion do not preclude installing Snow Leopard in a virtual environment, i.e., as a guest OS. They
              Message 6 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
                >Chad Smith wrote:
                >
                >it's even more disappointing that because of Apple's desire to
                >control everything, you can't emulate it on top of Lion, like you
                >can with say Linux or Windows, (VMWare Fusion / Parallels Desktop /
                >QEMU / Bochs / etc.).


                Apple's end user license agreements for Snow Leopard and Lion do not
                preclude installing Snow Leopard in a virtual environment, i.e., as a
                guest OS. They merely require that you purchase as many copies as
                you install.
                http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

                The Lion end user license agreement has an additional clause
                permitting installation of *extra* copies of Lion in a virtual
                environment, but this clause does state or imply that it negates your
                basic right to install one copy of Snow Leopard in a virtual
                environment.

                A member of another list reported success running Virtual Box in Lion
                and installing Snow Leopard client as a guest (virtual) OS. He said
                Virtual Box displays a warning about Apple's license agreement, but
                it then allows you to proceed with the installation. However,
                Virtual Box apparently wants to avoid responsibility for interpreting
                and enforcing the OS X license agreements, so it officially refuses
                to support installation of any OS X client in as a guest OS.
                https://forums.virtualbox.org/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=31104
                --

                Bob Stern
              • em315
                ... This is unfortunately incorrect. See, for example: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3187252?start=0&tstart=0 or any of a dozen other discussions of
                Message 7 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
                  --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Bob Stern <bob_stern@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > Apple's end user license agreements for Snow Leopard and Lion do not
                  > preclude installing Snow Leopard in a virtual environment, i.e., as a
                  > guest OS.

                  This is unfortunately incorrect. See, for example:

                  https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3187252?start=0&tstart=0

                  or any of a dozen other discussions of this subject. I asked an Apple executive whether Apple would now remove the restriction on virtualizing the consumer version of Snow Leopard, and he said no. (Snow Leopard SERVER may still legally be virtualized on Apple hardware, but not ordinary Snow Leopard.)
                • Randy B. Singer
                  ... It isn t a conspiracy. Apple doesn t actively prevent Macs from running older versions of the OS. New Mac models have new firmware. The OS that they
                  Message 8 of 29 , Oct 21, 2011
                    On Oct 21, 2011, at 11:01 AM, Chad Smith wrote:

                    > I never knew that. I wonder what the thinking is. I mean I know most
                    > people wouldn't ever want to install an earlier version of OS X -
                    > but why
                    > make the effort to actively prevent it from happening?

                    It isn't a conspiracy. Apple doesn't "actively prevent" Macs from
                    running older versions of the OS.

                    New Mac models have new firmware. The OS that they come with
                    supports that firmware, earlier versions of the Mac OS were written
                    before that firmware existed, so they don't support it. It's that
                    simple.

                    It isn't entirely true that if you purchase a current brand-new Mac
                    that, of course, comes with Lion, that you can't install Snow Leopard
                    on it and have it work. If your new Mac was on the market prior to
                    the introduction of Lion, it will run Snow Leopard just fine. Snow
                    Leopard was written with that model's firmware in mind, and, in fact,
                    that model was previously offered with Snow Leopard. Apple doesn't
                    cripple their Macs so that they can no longer run versions of the OS
                    that they were previously offered with.

                    ___________________________________________
                    Randy B. Singer
                    Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)

                    Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                    http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                    ___________________________________________
                  • em315
                    ... The VMware and Parallels legal department came to a different conclusion, and my conversations with Apple executives suggest that they also agree that you
                    Message 9 of 29 , Oct 22, 2011
                      --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Bob Stern <bob_stern@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >
                      > Apple's end user license agreements for Snow Leopard and Lion do not
                      > preclude installing Snow Leopard in a virtual environment, i.e., as a
                      > guest OS. They merely require that you purchase as many copies as
                      > you install.
                      > http://www.apple.com/legal/sla/

                      The VMware and Parallels legal department came to a different conclusion, and my conversations with Apple executives suggest that they also agree that you can't legally virtualize Snow Leopard or any earlier version (although it's perfectly legal to virtualize any version of Lion and the SERVER versions of Leopard and Snow Leopard).

                      See, for example,

                      https://discussions.apple.com/thread/3195457?start=0&tstart=0

                      VMware and Parallels include code that prevents you from installing Snow Leopard. I've tried it - they both popped up messages explicitly saying that they will not install the version of OS X that I tried to install. But they both will install Snow Leopard SERVER.

                      Someone whose reliability I trust experimented with Snow Leopard in VirtualBox (the open-source counterpart of VMware and Parallels) under Lion. VirtualBox did, more or less, complete the installation of Snow Leopard, but the result was unusable. It mostly never booted, and when it did, it needed twenty minutes to reach the desktop, and then locked up afterward.
                    • em315
                      ... As of October 22, 2011, any MacBook Pro, iMac, or Mac Pro that you buy now can boot into Snow Leopard or Lion That will change as soon as new versions of
                      Message 10 of 29 , Oct 22, 2011
                        --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Chad Smith <chad78@...> wrote:
                        >

                        > I just want to clarify something that Ed said - so brand new Macs that ship
                        > with Lion will not run other OSes? Even if I wipe the hard drive or put in
                        > a new hard drive, I can't install any other OS? Is that limited to just
                        > older versions of Mac OS X, or does that mean no Boot Camp, no Windows, no
                        > Linux, etc.? If so, that severely lowers my chances of ever buying a new
                        > Mac.
                        >

                        As of October 22, 2011, any MacBook Pro, iMac, or Mac Pro that you buy now can boot into Snow Leopard or Lion That will change as soon as new versions of those machines are released. They will boot only into Lion or later.

                        The MacBook Air and Mac Mini models on sale now will boot only into Lion.
                      • J.J. McVeigh
                        ... It is a matter not only of firmware, but of how the OS is constructed. When Apple introduced OS X, it was possible to acquire OSX and to install it on Macs
                        Message 11 of 29 , Oct 22, 2011
                          Randy B. Singer wrote:

                          >It isn't a conspiracy. Apple doesn't "actively prevent" Macs from
                          >running older versions of the OS.
                          >
                          >New Mac models have new firmware. The OS that they come with
                          >supports that firmware, earlier versions of the Mac OS were written
                          >before that firmware existed, so they don't support it. It's that
                          >simple.

                          It is a matter not only of firmware, but of how the OS is constructed.

                          When Apple introduced OS X, it was possible to acquire OSX and to
                          install it on Macs that already had OS9 installed. It was then
                          possible to boot either into OS9 or into OS X, at the user's option.

                          The dual-boot Macs included many G3s and G4s. Apple did not support
                          OS X on 604e PowerPC machines that had third-party G3 processor
                          daughter cards installed.

                          For some time after that, Apple sold Macs that would not boot into
                          OS9, but could run OS-9-flavored Classic.

                          Eventually, Apple began selling Macs that could not/would not run
                          Classic, and an OS that did not support Classic (OS 10.5).

                          These were design decisions by Apple.
                          --

                          J.J. McVeigh
                        • Randy B. Singer
                          ... Well, yes, Apple has decided at certain points to cut off backwards compatibility for some technology. But only after, as you pointed out, allowing for a
                          Message 12 of 29 , Oct 22, 2011
                            > Randy B. Singer wrote:
                            >
                            > >It isn't a conspiracy. Apple doesn't "actively prevent" Macs from
                            > >running older versions of the OS.

                            On Oct 22, 2011, at 3:05 PM, J.J. McVeigh wrote:
                            >
                            > These were design decisions by Apple.

                            Well, yes, Apple has decided at certain points to cut off backwards
                            compatibility for some technology. But only after, as you pointed
                            out, allowing for a transition period.

                            That's more or less what happened with Rosetta. With Rosetta Apple
                            allowed for quite an extended transition period.

                            That's different than the fact that Snow Leopard can't run on many
                            new Macs. In general, OS X these days is specific to the current
                            firmware that Apple sells.
                            http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2681

                            Neither situation is a conspiracy.

                            ___________________________________________
                            Randy B. Singer
                            Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)

                            Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                            http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                            ___________________________________________
                          • Chad Smith
                            I get the decision to stop supporting OS 9. I even understand licensing issues with Rosetta. But since Apple designs the hardware and the software ...
                            Message 13 of 29 , Oct 23, 2011
                              I get the decision to stop supporting OS 9.

                              I even understand licensing issues with Rosetta.

                              But since Apple designs the hardware and the software ... including the
                              firmware... they could easily make it possible - if they wanted to - to
                              install whatever flavor of OS X you wanted. As has been pointed out, you
                              can still install Windows or Linux. It *HAS TO* be a purposeful action by
                              Apple to limit user choice. There's no way around it. Windows XP is over
                              10 years old, and it runs on any Intel Mac. Any "Firmware issue" i created
                              by Apple - on purpose.

                              And that decision is one I am 100% against. It doesn't even make sense to me
                              if I look at Apple as nothing but a greedy corporation. If I have bought a
                              brand new Mac, I have, included in that price, paid the license fee for
                              Lion. Whether or not I use that OS is up to me. They got their money. And
                              it is very likely I paid for the license for the older OS X as well. But by
                              limiting the choice, they prevent even the possibility of anyone buying a
                              license of Snow Leopard from Apple to run on my late 2011 Mac. It's just
                              stupid no matter how I look at it.

                              *- Chad W. Smith*
                              *"I like a man who's middle name is W."*
                              President George W. Bush - February 10, 2003 bit.ly/gwb-dubya


                              On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Randy B. Singer <randy@...>wrote:

                              > **
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > > Randy B. Singer wrote:
                              > >
                              > > >It isn't a conspiracy. Apple doesn't "actively prevent" Macs from
                              > > >running older versions of the OS.
                              >
                              > On Oct 22, 2011, at 3:05 PM, J.J. McVeigh wrote:
                              > >
                              > > These were design decisions by Apple.
                              >
                              > Well, yes, Apple has decided at certain points to cut off backwards
                              > compatibility for some technology. But only after, as you pointed
                              > out, allowing for a transition period.
                              >
                              > That's more or less what happened with Rosetta. With Rosetta Apple
                              > allowed for quite an extended transition period.
                              >
                              > That's different than the fact that Snow Leopard can't run on many
                              > new Macs. In general, OS X these days is specific to the current
                              > firmware that Apple sells.
                              > http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2681
                              >
                              > Neither situation is a conspiracy.
                              >
                              >
                              > ___________________________________________
                              > Randy B. Singer
                              > Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)
                              >
                              > Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                              > http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                              > ___________________________________________
                              >
                              >
                              >


                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            • Patrick Sheffield
                              The problem is that the newer hardware - say the gfx card - will not have existing drivers in the older OS. Sometimes this can be worked around by installing
                              Message 14 of 29 , Oct 24, 2011
                                The problem is that the newer hardware - say the gfx card - will not have existing drivers in the older OS. Sometimes this can be worked around by installing the proper drivers into the older OS, but sometimes it's CPU support that is built into the kernel.

                                Patrick Sheffield
                                Sheffield Softworks

                                On Oct 23, 2011, at 9:43 AM, Chad Smith wrote:

                                > I get the decision to stop supporting OS 9.
                                >
                                > I even understand licensing issues with Rosetta.
                                >
                                > But since Apple designs the hardware and the software ... including the
                                > firmware... they could easily make it possible - if they wanted to - to
                                > install whatever flavor of OS X you wanted. As has been pointed out, you
                                > can still install Windows or Linux. It *HAS TO* be a purposeful action by
                                > Apple to limit user choice. There's no way around it. Windows XP is over
                                > 10 years old, and it runs on any Intel Mac. Any "Firmware issue" i created
                                > by Apple - on purpose.
                                >
                                > And that decision is one I am 100% against. It doesn't even make sense to me
                                > if I look at Apple as nothing but a greedy corporation. If I have bought a
                                > brand new Mac, I have, included in that price, paid the license fee for
                                > Lion. Whether or not I use that OS is up to me. They got their money. And
                                > it is very likely I paid for the license for the older OS X as well. But by
                                > limiting the choice, they prevent even the possibility of anyone buying a
                                > license of Snow Leopard from Apple to run on my late 2011 Mac. It's just
                                > stupid no matter how I look at it.
                                >
                                > *- Chad W. Smith*
                                > *"I like a man who's middle name is W."*
                                > President George W. Bush - February 10, 2003 bit.ly/gwb-dubya
                                >
                                > On Sun, Oct 23, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Randy B. Singer <randy@...>wrote:
                                >
                                > > **
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > > Randy B. Singer wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > >It isn't a conspiracy. Apple doesn't "actively prevent" Macs from
                                > > > >running older versions of the OS.
                                > >
                                > > On Oct 22, 2011, at 3:05 PM, J.J. McVeigh wrote:
                                > > >
                                > > > These were design decisions by Apple.
                                > >
                                > > Well, yes, Apple has decided at certain points to cut off backwards
                                > > compatibility for some technology. But only after, as you pointed
                                > > out, allowing for a transition period.
                                > >
                                > > That's more or less what happened with Rosetta. With Rosetta Apple
                                > > allowed for quite an extended transition period.
                                > >
                                > > That's different than the fact that Snow Leopard can't run on many
                                > > new Macs. In general, OS X these days is specific to the current
                                > > firmware that Apple sells.
                                > > http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2681
                                > >
                                > > Neither situation is a conspiracy.
                                > >
                                > >
                                > > ___________________________________________
                                > > Randy B. Singer
                                > > Co-author of The Macintosh Bible (4th, 5th, and 6th editions)
                                > >
                                > > Macintosh OS X Routine Maintenance
                                > > http://www.macattorney.com/ts.html
                                > > ___________________________________________
                                > >
                                > >
                                > >
                                >
                                > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                >
                                >



                                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                              • J.J. McVeigh
                                ... With respect, I do not believe that anyone has used the word conspiracy, other than you yourself. I used the phrase design decisions. Chad Smith
                                Message 15 of 29 , Oct 24, 2011
                                  Randy B. Singer wrote:

                                  > > Randy B. Singer wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >> >It isn't a conspiracy. Apple doesn't "actively prevent" Macs from
                                  >> >running older versions of the OS.
                                  >
                                  >On Oct 22, 2011, at 3:05 PM, J.J. McVeigh wrote:
                                  >>
                                  >> These were design decisions by Apple.
                                  >
                                  >Well, yes, Apple has decided at certain points to cut off backwards
                                  >compatibility for some technology. But only after, as you pointed
                                  >out, allowing for a transition period.
                                  >
                                  >That's more or less what happened with Rosetta. With Rosetta Apple
                                  >allowed for quite an extended transition period.
                                  >
                                  >That's different than the fact that Snow Leopard can't run on many
                                  >new Macs. In general, OS X these days is specific to the current
                                  >firmware that Apple sells.
                                  >http://support.apple.com/kb/HT2681
                                  >
                                  >Neither situation is a conspiracy.

                                  With respect, I do not believe that anyone has used the word
                                  "conspiracy," other than you yourself. I used the phrase "design
                                  decisions." Chad Smith asked, "... why make the effort to actively
                                  prevent it from happening?"

                                  The decision, after a certain point, not to include in the firmware
                                  an instruction set providing the ability to boot into OS 9 was a
                                  design decision by Apple.

                                  The decision not to include code in the release of OS 10.6 that would
                                  allow Power PC machines to run that OS was a design decision by Apple.

                                  The decision not to include code in the release of OS 10.7 that would
                                  allow Intel machines to run programs originally written to run on
                                  Power PC Macs was yet another design decision by Apple.

                                  Please note that I am not necessarily disagreeing with each of
                                  Apple's design decisions. Apple had its reasons, in each instance.
                                  In each instance, Apple could have taken another tack. Apple chose
                                  not to do so, and had its reasons for choosing not to do so.





                                  --

                                  J.J. McVeigh
                                • em315
                                  Perhaps you might want to take this up in one of the Apple forums, where someone at Apple might read it? There s not much anyone here can do about it, no
                                  Message 16 of 29 , Oct 24, 2011
                                    Perhaps you might want to take this up in one of the Apple forums, where someone at Apple might read it? There's not much anyone here can do about it, no matter how much anyone might agree with it.

                                    --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Chad Smith <chad78@...> wrote:
                                    >
                                    > I get the decision to stop supporting OS 9.
                                    >
                                    > I even understand licensing issues with Rosetta.
                                    >
                                    > But since Apple designs the hardware and the software ... including the
                                    > firmware... they could easily make it possible - if they wanted to - to
                                    > install whatever flavor of OS X you wanted. As has been pointed out, you
                                    > can still install Windows or Linux. It *HAS TO* be a purposeful action by
                                    > Apple to limit user choice. There's no way around it. Windows XP is over
                                    > 10 years old, and it runs on any Intel Mac. Any "Firmware issue" i created
                                    > by Apple - on purpose.
                                    >
                                  • Chad Smith
                                    Again, Apple controls the hardware and the software. So they had to write / have written the drivers for the new hardware on the new OS. It would stand to
                                    Message 17 of 29 , Oct 24, 2011
                                      Again, Apple controls the hardware and the software. So they had to write /
                                      have written the drivers for the new hardware on the new OS. It would stand
                                      to reason that if they so chose, they could port those same drivers to the
                                      older OS.

                                      We're not talking about incapable OSes - in fact I haven't heard of any
                                      "Lion Only" applications. The only incompatibility is Lion can't run
                                      everything Snow Leopard can run - not the other way around (I'm talking
                                      about the PPC apps).

                                      It is 100% Apple choice. And one I completely fail to see the logic in, and
                                      do not appreciate.

                                      However, since Snow Leopard Server will run on VMWare / et. al. - There is a
                                      work around. So I will live it.

                                      My statement about "seriously questioning ever buying a new Mac" was if no
                                      other OS would run on it. Since Linux / Windows / etc. are still
                                      compatible, I'm ok. When I bought my first new Mac, (Original White MacBook
                                      mid-2006) - I justified the cost by telling myself "It can run Mac, Window,
                                      and Linux - all at the same time... So it's like getting 3 computers - but
                                      only better, because they are all in the same portable, stylish box!" I
                                      rarely use Windows, and only really "play with" Linux - but they are still
                                      installed on my MacBook Pro - just in case.

                                      The suggestion to put this on an Apple Forum is a good one. I'll put my
                                      thoughts together and do so.

                                      Thanks to everyone for their insight and information.

                                      *- Chad W. Smith*
                                      *"I like a man who's middle name is W."*
                                      President George W. Bush - February 10, 2003 bit.ly/gwb-dubya


                                      On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 11:22 AM, Patrick Sheffield <
                                      psheffield@...> wrote:

                                      > **
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > The problem is that the newer hardware - say the gfx card - will not have
                                      > existing drivers in the older OS. Sometimes this can be worked around by
                                      > installing the proper drivers into the older OS, but sometimes it's CPU
                                      > support that is built into the kernel.
                                      >
                                      > Patrick Sheffield
                                      > Sheffield Softworks
                                      >


                                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                    • Rick Albright
                                      I m sorry. I mean no disrespect, but I m having difficulty understanding the relevance of this topic to WordPerfect. Does this mean that
                                      Message 18 of 29 , Oct 24, 2011
                                        I'm sorry. I mean no disrespect, but I'm having difficulty understanding the relevance of this topic to WordPerfect. Does this mean that SheepShaver/WordPerfect will not run under Lion? If not, why are we debating this?

                                        ===========================================================
                                        Rick Albright
                                        logres@...

                                        Writing the Past, Writing the Future: Time and Narrative in Gothic and Sensation Fiction
                                        http://www.powells.com/biblio/72-9780980149647-0
                                      • TradleyS
                                        If we can t use PowerPC software, we cannot use SheepShaver. And that s not good in my book. What s lame about this is I have several applications I ve used on
                                        Message 19 of 29 , Nov 6, 2011
                                          If we can't use PowerPC software, we cannot use SheepShaver. And that's not good in my book.
                                          What's lame about this is I have several applications I've used on Snow Leopard (one good example being Plants VS. Zombies) and they just suddenly stop working here on Lion. And it's not like I can just update it like that (I didn't get it from the App Store).
                                          We definitely should find a way to overcome this.
                                          Yeah, I understand that we are trying to move forward. But it's also good to experience the past too.
                                          Is there anything anyone can do?


                                          --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Rick Albright <logres@...> wrote:

                                          > I'm sorry. I mean no disrespect, but I'm having difficulty understanding the relevance of this topic to WordPerfect. Does this mean that SheepShaver/WordPerfect will not run under Lion? If not, why are we debating this?
                                        • Joseph Bush
                                          The following discussion is verbose in places, but is on the whole encouraging: http://www.emaculation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7202 Joe ... [Non-text
                                          Message 20 of 29 , Nov 7, 2011
                                            The following discussion is verbose in places, but is on the whole encouraging:

                                            http://www.emaculation.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=20&t=7202

                                            Joe

                                            On Nov 6, 2011, at 4:22 PM, TradleyS <tradley11@...> wrote:

                                            > If we can't use PowerPC software, we cannot use SheepShaver. And that's not good in my book.
                                            > What's lame about this is I have several applications I've used on Snow Leopard (one good example being Plants VS. Zombies) and they just suddenly stop working here on Lion. And it's not like I can just update it like that (I didn't get it from the App Store).
                                            > We definitely should find a way to overcome this.
                                            > Yeah, I understand that we are trying to move forward. But it's also good to experience the past too.
                                            > Is there anything anyone can do?
                                            >
                                            > --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Rick Albright <logres@...> wrote:
                                            >
                                            > > I'm sorry. I mean no disrespect, but I'm having difficulty understanding the relevance of this topic to WordPerfect. Does this mean that SheepShaver/WordPerfect will not run under Lion? If not, why are we debating this?
                                            >


                                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                          • Chad Smith
                                            Actually, SheepShaver is still usable under Lion, thankfully. Which I assume means it must be a Universal Binary, running under PPC and Intel chips. I was
                                            Message 21 of 29 , Nov 7, 2011
                                              Actually, SheepShaver is still usable under Lion, thankfully. Which I
                                              assume means it must be a Universal Binary, running under PPC and Intel
                                              chips.

                                              I was bummed about PvZ as well, since I bought it a long time ago, and not
                                              only had to buy it again, but now lost all my progress and have to start
                                              over.

                                              *- Chad W. Smith*

                                              On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 8:22 PM, TradleyS <tradley11@...> wrote:

                                              > If we can't use PowerPC software, we cannot use SheepShaver. And that's
                                              > not good in my book. [....]
                                            • em315
                                              As you say, John s SheepShaver-WordPerfect Install setup and my WPMacApp Installer setup (both available here in the Links/SheepShaver and Basilisk folder)
                                              Message 22 of 29 , Nov 7, 2011
                                                As you say, John's SheepShaver-WordPerfect Install setup and my WPMacApp Installer setup (both available here in the Links/SheepShaver and Basilisk folder) work perfectly well under Lion, and both are based on SheepShaver.

                                                --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Chad Smith <chad78@...> wrote:
                                                >
                                                > Actually, SheepShaver is still usable under Lion, thankfully. Which I
                                                > assume means it must be a Universal Binary, running under PPC and Intel
                                                > chips.
                                              • John R
                                                SheepShaver is a universal binary, which means it will run under Lion. See message #6948. Thus WordPerfect should run as well under Lion and current hardware
                                                Message 23 of 29 , Nov 7, 2011
                                                  SheepShaver is a universal binary, which means it will run under Lion. See message #6948.

                                                  Thus WordPerfect should run as well under Lion and current hardware as it did under system 6.02 and a Mac II.

                                                  Just ten times faster.

                                                  That said, I'd be happy to see reports from users of SS and Lion.

                                                  John R.



                                                  --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, "em315" <em315@...> wrote:
                                                  >
                                                  > As you say, John's SheepShaver-WordPerfect Install setup and my WPMacApp Installer setup (both available here in the Links/SheepShaver and Basilisk folder) work perfectly well under Lion, and both are based on SheepShaver.
                                                  >
                                                  > --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Chad Smith <chad78@> wrote:
                                                  > >
                                                  > > Actually, SheepShaver is still usable under Lion, thankfully. Which I
                                                  > > assume means it must be a Universal Binary, running under PPC and Intel
                                                  > > chips.
                                                  >
                                                • Chad Smith
                                                  I use SS under Lion. Works fine, other than I can t get it to go full screen. Which apparently is a known issue. *- Chad W. Smith*
                                                  Message 24 of 29 , Nov 7, 2011
                                                    I use SS under Lion. Works fine, other than I can't get it to go full
                                                    screen. Which apparently is a known issue.

                                                    *- Chad W. Smith*

                                                    On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 7:37 PM, John R <johnrethorst@...> wrote:

                                                    > SheepShaver is a universal binary, which means it will run under Lion. See
                                                    > message #6948.
                                                    >
                                                    > Thus WordPerfect should run as well under Lion and current hardware as it
                                                    > did under system 6.02 and a Mac II.
                                                    >
                                                    > Just ten times faster.
                                                    >
                                                    > That said, I'd be happy to see reports from users of SS and Lion.
                                                  • em315
                                                    With my WPMacApp Appliance setup, you can hold down the Command key while launching the application, and it opens in a quasi-full screen mode (no visible dock,
                                                    Message 25 of 29 , Nov 7, 2011
                                                      With my WPMacApp Appliance setup, you can hold down the Command key while launching the application, and it opens in a quasi-full screen mode (no visible dock, OS X menubar hidden until you move the mouse to the top of the screen, only a Sheepshaver title bar at the top). If you ever want to restore windowed mode, you can do that by holding down Option when launching the application.

                                                      --- In wordperfectmac@yahoogroups.com, Chad Smith <chad78@...> wrote:
                                                      >
                                                      > I use SS under Lion. Works fine, other than I can't get it to go full
                                                      > screen. Which apparently is a known issue.
                                                      >
                                                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.