| gabriel rosenkoetter on Sun, 29 Jun 2003 20:10:15 -0400 |
|
On Sun, Jun 29, 2003 at 07:54:05PM -0400, Bradley Molnar wrote: > I definitly think it was (or I did at least three years ago). 9 is > generally considered much more stable than 8.6. Stability's in the eye of the beholder. If 8.6 isn't causiny any problems and 9 doesn't provide any features you'd need, why switch? Near as I can tell, the big bonus to Mac OS 9 over Mac OS 8.x is proper CarbonLib interaction. But if you're not using any applications built to that spec (and I'm not so sure any body bothers any more, despite Apple's initial fanfare about that being a way to build applications to work on both Mac OS and Mac OS X), you probably don't care. With that out of the way, the main difference about 9 is that it'll want more memory. Doesn't seem like a win to me... -- gabriel rosenkoetter gr@eclipsed.net Attachment:
pgp7CdRLhXp8B.pgp
|
|