OS Family Tree Theory

Started by Chocofreak13, March 13, 2009, 11:20:15 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Print
Go Down Pages 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8
User actions

Aurora Borealis

#30
March 23, 2009, 07:13:02 PM
Lisa-tan and Apple II-tan (that's the other blonde girl older than the Mac-tans) are not directly related to either branch of the Macintosh line but if I decide to extend the family tree to include all the Apple-tans I'll include them in. Though I certainly should add in Lisa-tan since the Mac OS was heavily influenced by the Lisa OS.

I'll add in the Classic Mac codenames too in the next revision.

Smokey

#31
March 24, 2009, 06:34:46 AM
But aren't Lisa and Mac System II hardware?
I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do... Bender the Great) :/
[Img disabled by Fedora-Tan]
Thanks Fedora-sama
Homer no function beer well without (Homer Simpson) ^_^

Aurora Borealis

#32
March 24, 2009, 03:52:35 PM
You're right but are getting some things mixed up here.

The Lisa is hardware but there is also the Lisa OS (Lisa-tan represents both). And once again you've gotten Apple II-tan (the blonde girl with braided pigtails) confused with another. Apple II-tan is a catch-all character representing the Apple II series hardware and its OSes. Mac System 2-tan is one of the Mac OS-tans, of course!

The thing is a lot of the vintage OS-tans mainly represent the hardware but assumed to also represent its OSes or version of BASIC it runs. These vintage-tans tend to blur the line between OS-tans and hardware-tans!

Smokey

#33
March 24, 2009, 06:49:10 PM
Ah, so the older the system, the more confusing it gets... ^_^
I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do... Bender the Great) :/
[Img disabled by Fedora-Tan]
Thanks Fedora-sama
Homer no function beer well without (Homer Simpson) ^_^

Chocofreak13

#34
March 24, 2009, 08:51:52 PM
AUGH, i'm gonna stick with windows on second thought, mac be too confusing.


except Kyourou-kyun. sou kawaii, Kyourou and Emuii 4eva!!!


lulz chatspeak xD
click to make it bigger

iamnothere900

#35
March 27, 2009, 06:47:52 PM
About early Macintosh version numbers...

In the beginning there were three separate pieces of software in a Mac: the Finder, System Suitcase (sometimes called just System), and ROM. The ROM stored code in a chip so it could be kept out of RAM, which was very expensive. The Finder was like Windows Explorer: it was the program that you used to launch other programs. The System Suitcase was everything else. The ROM chips were part of the motherboard and rarely upgraded. That leaves the Finder and System Suitcase.

At first each had their own version number, but that got confusing very fast. At some point certain Finder + System Suitcase combinations where discussed as "System Software x.y" were x and y had nothing to do with the System Suitcase or Finder version number. System Software 5.1 had System Suitcase 4.3, Finder 6.0 and MultiFinder 1.0 !

To fix this, System Software 6 brought all the version numbers together. Also called just "System 6", it was the best yet and lasted much longer than anything previous.

System 7 was a complete rewrite, and had many new features. Apple agreed to let other computer makers sell their computers (clones) with "System 7" for a fee.

Mac OS 7.6 was more trademarkable than System and allowed Apple to shutdown illegal cloners more effectively. Mac OS 8 was not part of the contract with clone makers; 8.0 was the end of legal Macintosh clones.

Apple continued making large and small updates to Mac OS until 9.2, when they dropped the old line completely for Mac OS X.

More info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_history

Hey, are there any OS-tans for A/UX ?

Aurora Borealis

#36
March 27, 2009, 08:08:25 PM
Quote from: "iamnothere900"About early Macintosh version numbers...

In the beginning there were three separate pieces of software in a Mac: the Finder, System Suitcase (sometimes called just System), and ROM. The ROM stored code in a chip so it could be kept out of RAM, which was very expensive. The Finder was like Windows Explorer: it was the program that you used to launch other programs. The System Suitcase was everything else. The ROM chips were part of the motherboard and rarely upgraded. That leaves the Finder and System Suitcase.
Thanks for clearing all of that that up! ;019 I didn't know how to explain all of that myself!

Quote
At first each had their own version number, but that got confusing very fast. At some point certain Finder + System Suitcase combinations where discussed as "System Software x.y" were x and y had nothing to do with the System Suitcase or Finder version number. System Software 5.1 had System Suitcase 4.3, Finder 6.0 and MultiFinder 1.0 !
I'm still baffled by those strange version numbers (who isn't?!), especially System 3.4 which doesn't even have a System Software version number!

Quote
To fix this, System Software 6 brought all the version numbers together. Also called just "System 6", it was the best yet and lasted much longer than anything previous.
System 6 brought the version numbers ALMOST completely together but it was close enough and a lot less confusing. :)

Quote
System 7 was a complete rewrite, and had many new features. Apple agreed to let other computer makers sell their computers (clones) with "System 7" for a fee.
That probably explains why many apps work with System 6 (and older) but not System 7! I thought that System 7 was good (except for System 7.5) though its advancements did have a few major trade-offs.

Quote
Mac OS 7.6 was more trademarkable than System and allowed Apple to shutdown illegal cloners more effectively. Mac OS 8 was not part of the contract with clone makers; 8.0 was the end of legal Macintosh clones.
That's right! But IIRC, most of those clones at the time were legal. Apple was losing a lot of money to the clones (legal or otherwise) and wanted to shut them all down.

Quote
Hey, are there any OS-tans for A/UX ?
Yes there is! Here's her article at the OSC Wiki:

Smokey

#37
March 28, 2009, 07:01:16 AM
Oy, Oy.. post that in your ZerOSanity thread... ;070
I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do... Bender the Great) :/
[Img disabled by Fedora-Tan]
Thanks Fedora-sama
Homer no function beer well without (Homer Simpson) ^_^

NejinOniwa

#38
March 28, 2009, 07:03:26 AM
Shameless self-advertising 101, smokey, yo. -w-
YOU COULD HAVE PREVENTED THIS

Chocofreak13

#39
March 28, 2009, 11:35:25 AM
uhm.........................yeah i think i'll go now.
click to make it bigger

Aurora Borealis

#40
March 28, 2009, 12:08:31 PM
I edited my last post to be less shameless.

Smokey

#41
March 28, 2009, 12:26:00 PM
nice, thanks...
But maybe you could toss in a link in your signature... Then you'll bring ZerOSanity under attention without the chance on OT...
I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do... Bender the Great) :/
[Img disabled by Fedora-Tan]
Thanks Fedora-sama
Homer no function beer well without (Homer Simpson) ^_^

Chocofreak13

#42
March 29, 2009, 09:43:01 AM
yesh. what smokey said. :]
click to make it bigger

Toki

#43
April 07, 2009, 05:50:41 PM
Wow everything got complicated so quickly... this will really help me make my game though! Cool! Also, I didn't know that 3.1-tan and I were the same age! I feel closer to her somehow.
CUTE IS JUSTICE!!

Smokey

#44
April 07, 2009, 06:17:58 PM
Quote from: "Toki"...3.1-tan and I were the same age...

;018

o_o

Wait, wut?!

You're too cute to be 19!
I dont tell you how to tell me what to do, so dont tell me how to do what you tell me to do... Bender the Great) :/
[Img disabled by Fedora-Tan]
Thanks Fedora-sama
Homer no function beer well without (Homer Simpson) ^_^
Print
Go Up Pages 1 2 3 4 5 ... 8
User actions