From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system



35 years ago, the Mac got an era-defining upgrade
-------------------------------------------------
System 7 is mostly forgotten today, but we're all still using
many of its innovations.

A lot of Mac users don't remember a time before Mac OS X (or
macOS, or OS X, depending on the era), but before OS X arrived
on the scene, the Mac ran on an entirely different operating
system, the classic Mac OS, which was with us from the Mac's
launch in 1984 through the funeral Steve Jobs held for
Mac OS 9 in 2002.

The original Mac OS evolved a lot across those 18 years. And
perhaps its single most important update, System 7, arrived
35 years ago this month, in May of 1991.

It seems like a footnote now, but so much of what we take for
granted on the Mac today was introduced in System 7. Take it
from someone who was there - I wanted System 7 so badly,
I downloaded a load of floppy disk images across my college
computer network so I could install it. And I wasn't
disappointed by what I got. System 7 really did show the way
to the future of the Mac.

Long article continues at: <https://www.macworld.com/article/3136937/35-years-ago-system-7-era-defining-upgrade.html>



--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <10u3pci$3ib0u$[email protected]>,
Your Name <[email protected]> wrote:

35 years ago, the Mac got an era-defining upgrade
-------------------------------------------------
System 7 is mostly forgotten today, but we're all still using
many of its innovations.

A lot of Mac users don't remember a time before Mac OS X (or
macOS, or OS X, depending on the era), but before OS X arrived
on the scene, the Mac ran on an entirely different operating
system, the classic Mac OS, which was with us from the Mac's
launch in 1984 through the funeral Steve Jobs held for
Mac OS 9 in 2002.

The original Mac OS evolved a lot across those 18 years. And
perhaps its single most important update, System 7, arrived
35 years ago this month, in May of 1991.

It seems like a footnote now, but so much of what we take for
granted on the Mac today was introduced in System 7. Take it
from someone who was there - I wanted System 7 so badly,
I downloaded a load of floppy disk images across my college
computer network so I could install it. And I wasn't
disappointed by what I got. System 7 really did show the way
to the future of the Mac.

Long article continues at: <https://www.macworld.com/article/3136937/35-years-ago-system-7-era-defining-u
pgrade.html>

It really can't be understated how pivotal System 7 was to the world of computing at large. Those major updates along the way, especially when
you have the chance to tinker around with the differences on a retro
piece of hardware via a BlueSCSI or similar, really felt like wholly
different OSes.

System 7 was, by far, the longest supported Macintosh Operating System
(not even just Classic MacOS): 6+ years, with MacOS 8 replacing it for a relatively short jaunt in the late 90s before MacOS 9 came on the scene
and stole the show.

People love to talk about Snow Leopard as the greatest of the Mac OS
Xes, but to equivocate it with System 7 it would've had to come on the
scene in late 2009 and started being replaced only in 2015! By 2015
Apple had released Lion, Mountain Lion, Mavericks, Yosemite, AND El
Capitan - that's a world of difference for the same length of time.

I think it also says something to the versatility of System 7 that, by
and large, unless you've got a PowerPC Mac capable of running the
(phenomenal) MacOS9Lives! version of 9.2.2... everyone on retro hardware
seems to be running something on the System 7 spectrum (with due honor
and respect to those repping MacOS 8).
--
*~~a blonde may be fair~~*
*~and a brunette upscale~*
*~~but as my name hints~~*
*~~~I prefer a red ale~~~*
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

In article <enjoyasmithwicks-862FB4.02525719052026@news.eternal-september.org>,
Smithwicks <[email protected]> wrote:

I think it also says something to the versatility of System 7 that, by
and large, unless you've got a PowerPC Mac capable of running the (phenomenal) MacOS9Lives! version of 9.2.2... everyone on retro hardware seems to be running something on the System 7 spectrum (with due honor
and respect to those repping MacOS 8).

I fully agree. It's just a well-rounded classic operating system with a myriad of great software to pick from. If I see what owners of 68k Amigas or Atari STs
suggest as productivity software on their systems and then I look at Word 5.1, WriteNow, Excel, Photoshop, Apple Works, BBEdit (the list goes on) I can barely
hold back a smile.

Yeah, they may have more and better (action) games but that's about it. System 7
is awesome and also very reliable if you stick with certain versions.
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 2026-05-30 08:27:18 +0000, Sebastian P. said:

In article <enjoyasmithwicks-862FB4.02525719052026@news.eternal-september.org>,
Smithwicks <[email protected]> wrote:

I think it also says something to the versatility of System 7 that, by
and large, unless you've got a PowerPC Mac capable of running the
(phenomenal) MacOS9Lives! version of 9.2.2... everyone on retro hardware
seems to be running something on the System 7 spectrum (with due honor
and respect to those repping MacOS 8).

I fully agree. It's just a well-rounded classic operating system with a myriad
of great software to pick from. If I see what owners of 68k Amigas or Atari STs
suggest as productivity software on their systems and then I look at Word 5.1,
WriteNow, Excel, Photoshop, Apple Works, BBEdit (the list goes on) I can barely
hold back a smile.

Yeah, they may have more and better (action) games but that's about it. System 7
is awesome and also very reliable if you stick with certain versions.

The Commodore Amiga and the Atari ST were good computers technically
(barring the silliness of different RAM types on the Amiga), but they
were let down by clunky knock-offs of the Mac OS, although they were
still much better than Microsloth Windoze. The Amiga was also let down
by Commodore management having no clue what to do with it and
constantly changing their tiny minds.

--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2

From Newsgroup: comp.sys.mac.system

On 30/05/2026 23:54, Your Name wrote:

The Commodore Amiga and the Atari ST were good computers technically (barring the silliness of different RAM types on the Amiga), but they
were let down by clunky knock-offs of the Mac OS, although they were
still much better than Microsloth Windoze.

Other than the fact it used windows, a menu bar and a mouse, Workbench
was about as different from MacOS as it was possible to be, not least
because it supported preemptive multitasking before any other consumer operating system. (One thing I still miss from Workbench is the way it
allowed you to check or uncheck multiple items in a menu at once,
without the menu disappearing after you clicked the first one.)
--- Synchronet 3.22a-Linux NewsLink 1.2