Mac OS Evolution: From System 1.0 to Snow Leopard | Hacker News Reader

Mac OS Evolution: From System 1.0 to Snow Leopard

blogof.francescomugnai.com

42 pointsanderzole39 comments

Go to http://www.guidebookgallery.org/screenshots if you want to see more (also: screenshots from many other operating systems of past times).

GUIdebook sadly only goes up to 10.3 Tiger – would be really great if someone would pick up the work.

(I especially like GUIdebook’s comparisons of different system components like here: http://www.guidebookgallery.org/screenshots/splash I would argue that it’s immediately obvious which is the classy OS :)

I feel old.

Up until a few years ago I had original, shrinkwrapped Copland (what was to be the new Mac OS, pre-Next acquisition) demo disks. That isn't to say it was working code or anything, it was more of a promo "here's what it's gonna look like".

I'm so glad Copland didn't work out. Funny thing is, I actually have owned only Windows machines since about Mac OS 7 or 8, so I essentially haven't gotten to use the Mac since it's actually had the more modern architecture.

I do have an iPhone, though, so I guess that counts. :)

The oldest Mac system that I remember using was System 7.0. The screenshots took me back to the good old days when I was child in elementary school, playing around with Kid Pix. I remember I used to love using the "explode" tool.

Apple sure has changed a lot since then.

Oh No!

(I love KidPix)

I'm slowly working on a similar app. It's not polished enough to even call it a beta yet, but you can check it out at [1]. I've got a nice tool plugin API, but my graphics system needs work. Improvements are in the works.

[1] http://www.steveasleep.com/splatterboard

It's been so long that recalling all the reasons KidPix made me happy would be impossible. But I can remember spending hours using that app, doodling, making little movies, and just enjoying everything about it. Little touches like the "Oh No!" sound effect made the app so much fun to use.

The app was bought (along with the rest of Broderbund's IP) and resurrected a couple years ago:

http://www.mackiev.com/kid_pix.html

Not sure if it lives up to the original.

That incarnation of Kid Pix looks like a bit of a monstrosity, lacking the spirit of the original.

That sounds like fun. I'll have to download it and try it out.

Oh man, major memory lane: "its not mu fault, replace existing file?".

Actually, the System lineage died with MacOS 9. Rhapsody and OSX are really direct descendants of NeXTSTEP and, thus, are a completely different family. OS 9 lived on, for some time, as a subsystem of OSX for PowerPC.

True, especially if you're looking at what's "under the hood". But visually, there are a lot of continuities between the two, and of course the user base largely transitioned as if 9->X were just another upgrade like going from 6.0.7 to System 7.

Why is this being voted down? It is correct.

Steve Jobs in his first meeting with execs after he came back said Apple products had lost their sex appeal. Take a look at the leap Mac OS made after he returned.

This is a great reminder of what's stayed the same more than what's different. Or, at least, how gradual the change has been. The jump from 9.x to 10.0 is surprisingly subtle compared to the jump from 9.x to Snow Leopard.

Great point. Apple seemed to take the NeXT OS and try and mask it to resemble the visual functionality of OS 9 as much as possible.

Anyone remember the OS X beta with the blue apple in the middle of the menu bar? Yikes.

Wouldn’t be if they had the same wallpaper.

Wow, that was really a trip down memory lane. The first mac I ever owned (a Mac Plus) was System 6... inits and cdevs. I had a lot of fun learning to program on one.

I went to art school and was a designer for a short stint, where Macs completely ruled supreme. I learned and completely grocked the living hell out of OS7, 8 and 8.5. Despite their incredibly archaic architecture under the hood, they are still probably my favorite operating system. Interface wise, OSX has actually been a step back in a lot of ways.

Really? The menu bar at the top is basically the same, albeit squishier than before. They added a dock, and a ton of chrome. I'm not seeing how anything was "a step back" by any means. The only irk I really have is lack of keyboard navigation on dialog boxen. I should be able to hit tab or arrow keys or something to switch between buttons on dialogs (example: the shutdown menu) - but that's always been the case, it's nothing new. Care to elaborate, or even take to task some of my assertions?

Control+F7 (or System Preferences > Keyboard Shortcuts > Full Keyboard Access: All Controls). Then use Tab and Shift+Tab.

Also, for shutdown dialog (and other) navigation is not needed at all: Return = default button (Shut Down), Space = alternate (focused) button (Cancel).

That tip on full keyboard access is pure win. If I could up-mod this comment a dozen times, I would! Many thanks! This has pestered me for about a decade now.

I'm in art school right now, and OS X was my first Mac. Would you mind telling me what you liked about older OS's that OS X doesn't have? I probably missed a generation of great ideas and I'd like to know what they were.

See for example http://arstechnica.com/apple/reviews/2003/04/finder.ars

While OS X may be prettier than earlier MacOSes, conceptually, it's much closer to Windows than to the MacOS spirit.

How so?

This really drives home how bad the space-based ("Aurora"?) theme of 10.5 and 10.6 is: when we look at this in ten years, I think the screenshots of 10.5 and 10.6 will have aged the worst.

There's something timeless about the earlier Mac OS versions. 10.5 and 10.6 are just kitschy.

Really? I have the exact opposite reaction. Every development in OS X has made itself more subtle. Gradients are lighter, windows are softer... The unified 10.5 theme got rid of what I felt was a kitschy plastic feel in the system, and it created a much more intuitive menu set-up where buttons are a part of the top bar. 10.6 takes steps even further — I love the new Dock menus and hope that's the standard from which Apple develops its new look. Some things moved backwards — the new iTunes got more gradient-y and that's an issue — but in general Apple's design is growing more and more subtle.

The default backgrounds are a little silly, yes, but I think when we look back we'll view it like we view 60s typography — perhaps a bit gaudier than we needed, but it was done in a sense of fun rather than a sense of self-importance. The space-age design feels to me like a wink.

I don't know, I don't really feel like an OS needs to look timeless. It seems strange to me to judge an OS's appearance based on how it will look in 10 years, when hardly anyone will care anyway.

Agreed, but it's mostly in that awful background---I ditched that first thing, and everything else is pretty well in continuity with the previous versions.

According to Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Mac_OS#System_1.2C_2...), System 2.0 is from 1985, not 1987 as listed.

At least one of those images (http://winmac.emuunlim.com/Images/Screenshots/OS8.jpg) is a terrible Photoshop job.

It's WinMac (as evidenced by the URL) - some hacks that let your windows machine look like various flavors of the classic MacOS

Aha... so, yes, a terrible Photoshop job. :) The progress bars are particularly galling - they don't even line up with the frame properly.

Because of the pixels? This OS was before my time so I can't really see your objection here.

*I exaggerate a little, but I really didn't have a computer until right around this time, and it wasn't a mac.

Probably because it is running on a Pentium? Perhaps it is an emulator or a Linux theme?

Check out the root of URL for this image (http://winmac.emuunlim.com/).

Dead giveaway: the dotted line around the folder name for "Apple Extras". That's some Windows UI right there.

Wow, that brought back some memories. I wrote a commercial app for the Mac in 1984/85 but I had forgot how the original Mac screen looked.

Looking over these things, I realized why the Mac platform is not properly metal. Its volume only goes up to 7.

Gads! Those shots of Explorer 5 gave me some horrible flashbacks. My first mac, Mac II System 7, fond memories

Reply on news.ycombinator.com