yes- and to think- Apple had networking since 1985 (AppleTalk) - I saw people simply connecting their Macs together with a cable connected to the AppleTalk port in the back. They didn't know anything about networking but the thing just worked. My GF at the time worked at a small publisher house- PageMaker, Macs and 2 AppleLaser printers. And I was running Lantastic on my PCs at home- IBM 386, DOS5.0/Windows 3.1 - then dumped Lantastic when Microsoft released the half based version of Windows for Workgroups. The Mac was way ahead of it's time. The XEROX Parc guys got it right.
Loved how they needed to have the obligatory DOS nerd to counteract all of the Macintosh goodness. Young people don't know there was a war on for your mind when it came to computers... Macintosh was not trendy or hip, pcs actually ruled. But the Macintosh was by far the superior platform in almost everything except open architecture. Now Mac is a Starbucks charm or a fashion accessory, what a shame.
Ah yes, I was there in the trenches, slaying as many Wintel worriers as I could. The kiddies with their stories of glory in the iOS v Android battles....ha!! They know nothing, these are mere dustups compared to the many bloodlettings on the hallowed battlefields of Cupertino and Redmond.
Armies of coders and IT professionals would beg to differ that modern Macs are "just a charm"; you literally have a Unix workstation (with all the built in toolchains and build utilities) running on a pile of open source software (including the kernel) that has wide compatibility with PC software. But hey, if you don't actually work in the industry, you probably don't know about any of that, and probably have to rely on the fact that you see them being used by everyday people because (shocker) they like the Apple environment. Also how do you know what they're working on? It seems *incredibly* petty to make that judgement call on someone drinking coffee and working on a laptop.
It’s a little thing, but as I rewatch these I’ve come to appreciate the warm opens Stewart did to explain the premise of the episode. Strictly speaking, probably unnecessary but it adds a lot to the production quality.
Me too. Man I miss those days. Most people on UA-cam or even watching this were born just as the show was ending or after it. They will NEVER know a world before social media and smartphones RUINED everything. Today you want to watch something like this to be informed, all you have is these chitty millennials or gen z m0rons on UA-cam begging for money and subscribers, but computer chronicles was free. And I wouldn’t mind the UA-camrs begging and being greedy if they had talent, charism, charm, spoke professionally, brought in actual educated experts and company founders/executives, now it’s just random ppl with a camera who want to make it “big”, and not really for the sake of informing the public and being professional. Sure you’ll find people with “passion” for their field on pooptube, however for most of them it’s secondary, what they care for is money and they don’t bother with quality because the gen z kids are too fkn stupid and have microscopic brains if they have brains at all to notice the obvious mistakes or greed or lack of talent or knowledge or experience, etc
I got my first classroom Macs in 1991, 4 classic iis with a Laserwriter NT. We bought them to teach Aldus Pagemaker in a printing and photography class. They came with 2 mgbs of RAM and a 40 mgb HD with system 7, and they wouldn't run Pagemaker because the new OS took more RAM than my local rep had figured. We had to spend $1600.00 additional to upgrade the RAM to 4 Megs. They were my first computers and I loved them, they were so easy to use, and they really changed my life. DOS and Windows would not have had the same effect, and I can't imagine how anyone would actually prefer DOS and Windows at that time over a Mac, as the doofus in this video. My supervisor had tried to get me to use IBM machines and Ventura Publisher, but luckily I got some good advice from Va. Tech professor, who told him the Mac was the Desktop Computer! I still love the Macs, and I am so excited about the new processor M1 and whatever follows. I think the Mac is going to finally take a huge chunk of market share in the PC industry.
Mac has had 5-10% of the desktop market for about 10 years. I don't see how it can grow any higher, though, because #1 it's *EXPENSIVE,* #2 Windows has been Good Enough since XP, and #3 application software: there's just so much on the PC side. (But I'm typing this on a Linux desktop...)
@@RonJohn63 I hate Windows. I've setup several PC networks for people and they are a pain in the ass. I hate the control panels and changing settings, the look and feel. Its like a plastic version of the Aluminum Mac OS. You may be right, but I don't care, as long as they keep making great Macs. But I really think they will gain a bunch of share, 20% or so with this incredible hardware advantage. Intel isn't going to catch up for years, if ever. Microsoft no longer has a stranglehold on the world with Windows and Office, and the Apple Hardware is cheap enough with the mini and Air.
@@mikekaylor1226 " Its like a plastic version of the Aluminum Mac OS. " I agree. Win7 was "peak UI". "the Apple Hardware is cheap enough with the mini and Air." Not for people with 5-figure incomes.
@@RonJohn63 The mini is $700.00, There are cheaper PCs, but nowhere near the performance per watt or per dollar.I have a 5 figure income, and I don't buy anything else. Win 7 was the peak Windows UI, but The Mac has always been king.
MS-DOS came in like a dinosaur with 640KB standard memory 'for my executables' in 1991, while the Mac had 8MB RAM, with 13MB+ after he turns on the swap file. He's also got MS Office running on the Mac, and sharing data over the network between documents dynamically. It's like Windows 98 in 1991.
@@TechRyze Actually, the Macintosh II supported up to 128MBs of RAM with 8 16MB SIMMs if you upgraded it to a 32-bit clean ROM. It had 6 NuBUS slots and native support for up to 6 monitors connected simultaneously (with desktop spanning and/or mirroring.) Windows didn't even get multiple monitor support until Windows 98 (although some interesting workarounds were available under DOS, but most were just for mirroring and not spanning.) For a brief time during the early 1990s, Apple was so ridiculously far ahead of the competition. It also explains why every laptop now adopted the features Apple introduced with the original PowerBook 100. That's another great Computer Chronicles to watch. You can see the poor PC guy dying inside, with his demo just cringe worthy.
The Mac System 7 line was up against the Windows 3.x line (Win 3.0 was released a year before Mac System 7), and later Windows 95. The period from 3.0 to 98 (in other words, the 1990s) represented the most commercially successful era for Windows, which overlapped significantly with the period between the end of production of the Apple II line to the launch of the iMac (which I consider Apple's dark ages). Windows also evolved from an operating environment that you needed DOS to launch to an operating system in its own right (although the Win 9x kernel OSes were still DOS-based) during the 1990s.
@@heartlandauthor It was really about two things at the time. 1. Nobody got fired for buying IBM (aka MSDOS) 2. Cost. Macs were much more expensive than IBM clones. Even though the Mac was superior in hardware and OS, people couldn't see spending that much on a Mac. Either because they couldn't afford one and/or didn't understand how much more the Mac was technically advanced over the PC.
Mr DOS was mixing the units of his free conventional memory a bit. He said to have "623K available out of a maximum of 640K" but since 1KB (or 1KiB, as the unit is nowadays) is 1024 bytes, he actually had 608KB of memory out 640KB. Still pretty good of course, and it was thanks to LOADHIGH that was added to MS-DOS 5.0 (originally introduced by DR-DOS) that he was using liberally, but I just felt the need to correct him 30 years later.
Your "old-fashioned" advice about searching and researching the purchase of a new computer still works wonders today, even in the year 2022. I am staying with Windows computer because I do business productivity at home. Also, I learned many techniques with using the application programs that I would unlikely learn in a job.
Virtual Memory, Speech Synthesis and recognition, QuickTime video, multimedia CD support, peer to peer file sharing .. it was a great system .. the only problem was no one I knew could personally afford one, but light years ahead of DOS and Windows at the time
As a vintage computer hobbyist user, that uses all sorts of vintage operating systems and platforms. Then I am really happy, that SD and CF cards can be used for both IDE and SCSI harddrive replacements. As the old drives are dying, then this is the best option. And the noise from back then. Oh my freaking. The heads writing and reading I can take, but the noise from the spinning platters. No way... Thanks but no thanks.
@@sontodosnarcos I would think so. But I would not want to do it. CF cards are not for tons of reading and writing like swapping and so on. But theoretically you can. CF cards can be used in IDE mode. I recommendation is SD cards instead. They are cheaper and still used in mobile phones and so on, making it more future proof.
Actually, today and the early 90s were the worst times of computing with a lot of stagnation. The early 80s, late 90s and the mid 0s saw incredible new things and new ways of using a computer and new things you could do. The period in this show was a time of stagnation where nothing exciting or new happened and we have been in a similar stagnation for many years now. Social media was the last major new frontier and we've been stagnant ever since. Hardware has been stagnant too.
+tarstarkusz "The period in this show was a time of stagnation where nothing exciting or new happened" The world wide web started in 1993, There was the race between Intel and PowerPC on CPU performance. Great improvements in 3D graphics, sound, laser en inkjet printing throughout the 90s. Multimedia and CD-Rom took off etc. etc... Wasn't all that stuff exciting enough? I certainly feel the 90s was a exciting time for computing!
No, this OS was a turd. Even Apple admitted it was when they got its replacement project going - Copland. Hence, the spiraling death cycle of Apple by the mid 90s.
It’s interesting to remember the days of MS-DOS versus Mac, which were two different universes. I’m glad that I dn’t ave to deal with those old command lines anymore.
The reality of DOS was most users spent their time in applications - so how to use DOS itself just wasn't that much of a difficulty. If the machine booted into Lotus 1-2-3 or Wordperfect (or whatever) that was what most PCs spent their life doing. DOS was perfect (and cheap) for that.
Ah, Publish and Subscribe. Apple had such high hopes for that feature, but it just never caught on. Mainly because very few software developers implemented it in their applications, and because most users didn't see any reason to use it.
Thats similar to how the Apple iWorks works today, that collaboration feature through iCloud. Edit one document, the other on someone else side changes.
Adobe uses something similar in its apps. For example, if you place an Illustrator file in In-Design, then edit the Illustrator file, it automatically updates in In-Design.
what ever MS gained with W95 to MS System 7, it all went bad with their touch screen.. even the above system 7 is still great simple and transparent pull down ... i can see why OSX is still great !
The 'Publish' and 'Subscribe' functions seemed very useful. I wonder if this was something that was regularly utilized by a large portion professionals within System 7's user base. After all, if someone were actively working on a file they received from a user who was sharing it, they otherwise would not be notified of real-time updates made on the host user's end. Of course, I suppose the aforementioned function would only have applied to cases wherein the document in question was part of a collaborative effort.
I don’t recall a lot of network use of this feature, outside of publishing environments, but it was widely used for intra-application communication, i.e. subscribing to an image, table, graph, etc., from a word processing document. It disappeared as a system service with the transition to Mac OS X, and the concept became almost ubiquitous in all operating systems long before that.
@@dwm1156 Yeah, I suppose that real-time remote collaboration was not necessarily the aim of this feature. The concept is so well integrated into today's workflows, I must have had it influence my perspective on that feature. I appreciate hearing your experience with it. (P.S. - interestingly, I believe it was around the time Apple had launched System 7 that Jobs was experimenting with ways in which users of NeXTSTEP could meaningfully and effectively share a workflow - if but not necessarily in real time and/or to the extent to which that was possible in the early 1990s. Apple's new system boasted lots of features, but the concepts demonstrated with NeXTSTEP sure appeared to be light years ahead by comparison. I know NeXT was not ultimately successful, but it sure was impressive.)
@Joseph I agree. Desktop operating systems are antiquated at this point, but it's still amazing to consider how much more advanced NeXT and its derivatives are than the operating system whose name shall not be mentioned.
@@icantgivecredit871desktop operating systems aren't the new hotness anymore but it's insane to say they're antiquated. To quote Apple and Microsofts own joint user survey, even with heavy business cloud use, not only is the majority of use *not online* but the majority of users *want* their work to be less online. Theres a reason that Microsoft designing the surface around being a powerful offline apple competitor has made it the most successful Microsoft made computer ever. People want power that isn't online. It's super shortsighted to think desktop OS is a thing of the past.
It does look very good for it's day. A very modern looking/feeling OS in 1991. I think at this point though, the Amiga had fallen behind, after being so ahead of it's time in 1985 when it launched, by 1991 it was starting to look a little clunky compared to the competition.
@@DavePoo2 This is true, largely because of the video resolutions and colors. Only 640x200 flicker free video was passe by then as 1024x768 @ 72Hz was standard fare. Business users demanded high resolution flicker free video even earlier, but by '91 the home market was not going to settle for 1985 technology in their home.
“Dos 5.0 is pretty great, it now has the un-delete command.” Quite a contrast to all the system 7 graphical and networking wizardry. The intel super computer (“with computing power that is hard to comprehend”) was also amusing, with performance 50% of an old iPhone X. Wild how things have advanced over the years.
I think it's interesting that he was saying 32 bit addressing enabled the use of more then 8MB of ram. 2^24 = 16MB. I assume the processors they were using in earlier mac's only supported 24 bit addresses. I wonder why they could only address 8MB of memory. Was the MSB used for something special? Was 8MB reserved specifically for the kernel thus only leaving 8MB of memory for user space applications (assuming the hardware had the required facilities to do that)? Also had they switched to Power PC by this point?
You're so wrong. System administrators like me frequently use the command line, even on Windows. (Microsoft created PowerShell because we admins love Linux and how easy it is to automate repetitive tasks.)
@@RonJohn63 Having command line as an option is nice (hey, even Macintoshes have unix shells these days), but having it as your ONLY option, such as with DOS, is painfully inferior to the graphical System 7 of this comparaison. So I'd say that @dcjlove is far from being wrong!
@@jonathanvanier the flaw in your argument is that I never wrote that sysadmins should *ONLY* have the command line, and nothing I wrote even hinted at it.
@@RonJohn63 Since your reaction ("you're so wrong") was in response to a comment that stated that a DOS command line system looked like "a joke" next to System 7, it is well within reason for me and others to have assumed that you meant that a command line OS is not, in fact, inferior (or "a joke") compared to the graphical System 7. To finesse around that by saying that you did not actually wrote the very words isn't particularly convincing. However, I will accept that you have now clarified your comment and that you did not mean that, after all.
@@jonathanvanier "System administrators like me" is what I wrote. If you're not a system administrator, then my comment isn't relevant to you. But *if you are* a sysadmin then you know how much easier it is to apply the same script to 35 different systems rather than point and click, point and click, point and click, point and click, a dozen times on 35 different machines.
Pre-System 7 the OS really just looked like an OS that could work someday, but System 7 actually worked how it looked. Hard to use System 7 and later and then go back to the earlier ones. Much like Windows 3.11 had little to do with Windows 2 or 3.
Never did like using one button to select things and , I hated Finder , I did like a lot of features in System 7 , I have the Software and I have upgraded a few Mac's to System 7 , Win 95 and Two buttons was the way to go for me , I like Right Clicking and being able to save my Target , Cut , Copy , Paste that way much better , I still like the System though :) QC
@@TechRyze Yup, I find it hilarious that all the PC fan boys are sneezing on System 7 by comparing it to Windows 95, that came out nearly 5 years LATER...
Hilarious same-episode comparison of Mac OS 7 compared to MS-DOS 5. In DOS, we did not see networking, alias/shortcut, file-sharing, publish-subscribe/object-linking-embedding, customizable menus, multitasking, virtual memory, true-type fonts, kerning, word wrap, anything like HyperCard, anything like AppleScript, a “desktop,” finding files…
Ahh here for the comment section regards to the OS war or the 90s. I was camp Mac, all my jobs were at DOS/Windows shops. The features of sys7 I could use just destroyed the MS fanboys. But, alas was always a minor player in the big leagues. Jumped into another underdog team (Unix/Linux). That would work out
Crow: Oh, yeah? Well, what about System 7? Tom Servo: It's coming!! It's coming!! Okay?! There were a few bugs in it!! Gosh!... ua-cam.com/video/ixQE496Pcn8/v-deo.html
They were talking Megabytes (MB) of RAM on the Mac and talking Kilobytes (K) of RAM on DOS. 640K is not even 1 MB on DOS and the Mac had 8MB up to 13MB. And the kid thought Windows running on top of DOS was better. Funny he never mentions the features that Windows supposedly had that the Mac didn't.
It works... slowly. They forgot to mention that if you did start to page out to disk, it's monumentally slow. Virtual memory was both a blessing and a curse.
I miss Adobe/Adlus PageMaker. Still have my 6.5 CD's. I would've upgraded to InDesign had Adobe not gotten greedy and charged full price for the upgrade.
Computer (PC & Laptop) Operating System Market Share Worldwide as of January 2021: Windows 76.26%, OS X 16.91%, Chrome OS 1.91%, Linux 1.91%. I guess WINDOWS still rules until now.
No mention of AppleScript? At the time it was revolutionary, but required applications to publish an API that other apps could comprehend. Very few did so, resulting in its demise.
Tymnet and telenet were essentially commercialized closed-off versions of what we call the internet today in terms of connectivity. There were junctures where you could bridge to different networks, even make outcalls on dialup to remote bbs systems. Services like Compuserve used these to allow local dialup numbers, it all ended up being routed to their server network.
As someone who's always had PC's and never Mac, I can say that I literally have zero thoughts of wanting to switch to apple. Even with my phone which is Android, I don't want to switch to Apple. I've had however, 2 separate experiences with Apple, once in 1990 with the Apple II when I was 5 and in 2010 on a friends Mac computer. I think that there's a certain complexity with Apple products that leaves me out of my comfort zone. It's not that I'm not good at working on computers but, I just always have worked on Windows and that's what I'm most comfortable with. I do find it interesting though that many people veer towards Apple products because, that's what you do today if you want to "fit in"
Amazing. I can’t wait for system 7 to be released!
Is this a joke or no?
@BoovAnimates Yea
@@boovproductions8515 glad you finally figured that out, and it only took you nearly a year lol
in a few years, WinD'oH!! will be only a few years behind MacOS
I have system 7.0 on about a half dozen 3.5" floppies in a storage tote in the basement 🙂
Mac OS was light years ahead of it's time. Looking at these two OSes side by side is like looking at an astronaut beside a caveman.
This is basically what Windows 95 was a year before windows 3.1
It is amazing how far ahead Mac System OS was
yes- and to think- Apple had networking since 1985 (AppleTalk) - I saw people simply connecting their Macs together with a cable connected to the AppleTalk port in the back. They didn't know anything about networking but the thing just worked. My GF at the time worked at a small publisher house- PageMaker, Macs and 2 AppleLaser printers. And I was running Lantastic on my PCs at home- IBM 386, DOS5.0/Windows 3.1 - then dumped Lantastic when Microsoft released the half based version of Windows for Workgroups. The Mac was way ahead of it's time. The XEROX Parc guys got it right.
Windows 3.1 felt like it was made in MS Paint, System 7 felt like it was made in PhotoShop.
Loved how they needed to have the obligatory DOS nerd to counteract all of the Macintosh goodness.
Young people don't know there was a war on for your mind when it came to computers... Macintosh was not trendy or hip, pcs actually ruled. But the Macintosh was by far the superior platform in almost everything except open architecture.
Now Mac is a Starbucks charm or a fashion accessory, what a shame.
Ah yes, I was there in the trenches, slaying as many Wintel worriers as I could. The kiddies with their stories of glory in the iOS v Android battles....ha!! They know nothing, these are mere dustups compared to the many bloodlettings on the hallowed battlefields of Cupertino and Redmond.
@@cameraman655 rivers of blood and fields of dead martyrs to the cause of greater computing
Armies of coders and IT professionals would beg to differ that modern Macs are "just a charm"; you literally have a Unix workstation (with all the built in toolchains and build utilities) running on a pile of open source software (including the kernel) that has wide compatibility with PC software. But hey, if you don't actually work in the industry, you probably don't know about any of that, and probably have to rely on the fact that you see them being used by everyday people because (shocker) they like the Apple environment.
Also how do you know what they're working on? It seems *incredibly* petty to make that judgement call on someone drinking coffee and working on a laptop.
i guess I am kinda off topic but do anyone know a good site to stream newly released tv shows online?
@Alijah Franklin flixportal :D
It’s a little thing, but as I rewatch these I’ve come to appreciate the warm opens Stewart did to explain the premise of the episode. Strictly speaking, probably unnecessary but it adds a lot to the production quality.
Me too. Man I miss those days. Most people on UA-cam or even watching this were born just as the show was ending or after it. They will NEVER know a world before social media and smartphones RUINED everything. Today you want to watch something like this to be informed, all you have is these chitty millennials or gen z m0rons on UA-cam begging for money and subscribers, but computer chronicles was free. And I wouldn’t mind the UA-camrs begging and being greedy if they had talent, charism, charm, spoke professionally, brought in actual educated experts and company founders/executives, now it’s just random ppl with a camera who want to make it “big”, and not really for the sake of informing the public and being professional. Sure you’ll find people with “passion” for their field on pooptube, however for most of them it’s secondary, what they care for is money and they don’t bother with quality because the gen z kids are too fkn stupid and have microscopic brains if they have brains at all to notice the obvious mistakes or greed or lack of talent or knowledge or experience, etc
I got my first classroom Macs in 1991, 4 classic iis with a Laserwriter NT. We bought them to teach Aldus Pagemaker in a printing and photography class. They came with 2 mgbs of RAM and a 40 mgb HD with system 7, and they wouldn't run Pagemaker because the new OS took more RAM than my local rep had figured. We had to spend $1600.00 additional to upgrade the RAM to 4 Megs. They were my first computers and I loved them, they were so easy to use, and they really changed my life. DOS and Windows would not have had the same effect, and I can't imagine how anyone would actually prefer DOS and Windows at that time over a Mac, as the doofus in this video.
My supervisor had tried to get me to use IBM machines and Ventura Publisher, but luckily I got some good advice from Va. Tech professor, who told him the Mac was the Desktop Computer! I still love the Macs, and I am so excited about the new processor M1 and whatever follows. I think the Mac is going to finally take a huge chunk of market share in the PC industry.
Mac has had 5-10% of the desktop market for about 10 years. I don't see how it can grow any higher, though, because #1 it's *EXPENSIVE,* #2 Windows has been Good Enough since XP, and #3 application software: there's just so much on the PC side.
(But I'm typing this on a Linux desktop...)
@@RonJohn63 I hate Windows. I've setup several PC networks for people and they are a pain in the ass. I hate the control panels and changing settings, the look and feel. Its like a plastic version of the Aluminum Mac OS.
You may be right, but I don't care, as long as they keep making great Macs. But I really think they will gain a bunch of share, 20% or so with this incredible hardware advantage. Intel isn't going to catch up for years, if ever. Microsoft no longer has a stranglehold on the world with Windows and Office, and the Apple Hardware is cheap enough with the mini and Air.
@@mikekaylor1226 " Its like a plastic version of the Aluminum Mac OS. "
I agree. Win7 was "peak UI".
"the Apple Hardware is cheap enough with the mini and Air."
Not for people with 5-figure incomes.
@@RonJohn63 The mini is $700.00, There are cheaper PCs, but nowhere near the performance per watt or per dollar.I have a 5 figure income, and I don't buy anything else.
Win 7 was the peak Windows UI, but The Mac has always been king.
@@RonJohn63 your just a hater of Mac OS go away
Wow. MacOS 7.0 versus MS-DOS 5.0.
MacOS kicks ass.
MS-DOS came in like a dinosaur with 640KB standard memory 'for my executables' in 1991, while the Mac had 8MB RAM, with 13MB+ after he turns on the swap file.
He's also got MS Office running on the Mac, and sharing data over the network between documents dynamically.
It's like Windows 98 in 1991.
@@TechRyze Actually, the Macintosh II supported up to 128MBs of RAM with 8 16MB SIMMs if you upgraded it to a 32-bit clean ROM. It had 6 NuBUS slots and native support for up to 6 monitors connected simultaneously (with desktop spanning and/or mirroring.)
Windows didn't even get multiple monitor support until Windows 98 (although some interesting workarounds were available under DOS, but most were just for mirroring and not spanning.)
For a brief time during the early 1990s, Apple was so ridiculously far ahead of the competition. It also explains why every laptop now adopted the features Apple introduced with the original PowerBook 100. That's another great Computer Chronicles to watch. You can see the poor PC guy dying inside, with his demo just cringe worthy.
@@olepigeon
Which one is another great Computer Chronicles to watch?
I absolutely didn't state the maximum potential RAM, also 😉
Keep in mind this is the first Mac OS with colour, DOS has had colour from the beginning.
It's amazing what Apple could do when they didn't have Steve Jobs breathing down their necks.
Feels weird to see a really advanced system like 7.0 and DOS at the same time period.
... and yet it didn't sell and the company nearly didn't survive.
The Mac System 7 line was up against the Windows 3.x line (Win 3.0 was released a year before Mac System 7), and later Windows 95. The period from 3.0 to 98 (in other words, the 1990s) represented the most commercially successful era for Windows, which overlapped significantly with the period between the end of production of the Apple II line to the launch of the iMac (which I consider Apple's dark ages). Windows also evolved from an operating environment that you needed DOS to launch to an operating system in its own right (although the Win 9x kernel OSes were still DOS-based) during the 1990s.
@@heartlandauthor
It was really about two things at the time. 1. Nobody got fired for buying IBM (aka MSDOS) 2. Cost. Macs were much more expensive than IBM clones. Even though the Mac was superior in hardware and OS, people couldn't see spending that much on a Mac. Either because they couldn't afford one and/or didn't understand how much more the Mac was technically advanced over the PC.
@@fredflintstone505 Outside USA they were often prohibitively expensive. A non-branded IBM PC clone could be trimmed down to one's pocket.
You gotta figure lots of rich people were getting sick to, (AIDS).
Love system 7 one of the best OS’s in the 90s other than Mac OS 8.
Except when it freezes.
Holy cow!!!
1 teraflop super computer in the 90s.
That's almost 1/10 the speed of my PC.
Mr DOS was mixing the units of his free conventional memory a bit. He said to have "623K available out of a maximum of 640K" but since 1KB (or 1KiB, as the unit is nowadays) is 1024 bytes, he actually had 608KB of memory out 640KB.
Still pretty good of course, and it was thanks to LOADHIGH that was added to MS-DOS 5.0 (originally introduced by DR-DOS) that he was using liberally, but I just felt the need to correct him 30 years later.
I waited 31 years, but it ok 👍.
I miss DR-DOS 😥
Your "old-fashioned" advice about searching and researching the purchase of a new computer still works wonders today, even in the year 2022. I am staying with Windows computer because I do business productivity at home. Also, I learned many techniques with using the application programs that I would unlikely learn in a job.
Virtual Memory, Speech Synthesis and recognition, QuickTime video, multimedia CD support, peer to peer file sharing .. it was a great system .. the only problem was no one I knew could personally afford one, but light years ahead of DOS and Windows at the time
As a vintage computer hobbyist user, that uses all sorts of vintage operating systems and platforms. Then I am really happy, that SD and CF cards can be used for both IDE and SCSI harddrive replacements. As the old drives are dying, then this is the best option. And the noise from back then. Oh my freaking. The heads writing and reading I can take, but the noise from the spinning platters. No way... Thanks but no thanks.
Is it true you can replace e.g., the PowerBook G3's internal HDD with a CF card + an IDE adapter?
@@sontodosnarcos I would think so. But I would not want to do it. CF cards are not for tons of reading and writing like swapping and so on. But theoretically you can. CF cards can be used in IDE mode. I recommendation is SD cards instead. They are cheaper and still used in mobile phones and so on, making it more future proof.
Ah single channel audio we meet again.
I thought my earbuds were faulty
Better than Windows 8.
not
OS 7 crashed constantly.
Multitasking was awful.
It was feature rich though.
They should have went with AUX,
Actually, today and the early 90s were the worst times of computing with a lot of stagnation. The early 80s, late 90s and the mid 0s saw incredible new things and new ways of using a computer and new things you could do. The period in this show was a time of stagnation where nothing exciting or new happened and we have been in a similar stagnation for many years now. Social media was the last major new frontier and we've been stagnant ever since. Hardware has been stagnant too.
+tarstarkusz "The period in this show was a time of stagnation where nothing exciting or new happened"
The world wide web started in 1993, There was the race between Intel and PowerPC on CPU performance. Great improvements in 3D graphics, sound, laser en inkjet printing throughout the 90s. Multimedia and CD-Rom took off etc. etc... Wasn't all that stuff exciting enough? I certainly feel the 90s was a exciting time for computing!
No, this OS was a turd. Even Apple admitted it was when they got its replacement project going - Copland. Hence, the spiraling death cycle of Apple by the mid 90s.
We are just now reaching teraflops on high end PC servers using XEON chips.
now you can do that using an ordinary ryzen chip.
It’s interesting to remember the days of MS-DOS versus Mac, which were two different universes. I’m glad that I dn’t ave to deal with those old command lines anymore.
It is funny, because the command line has made a comeback. What is new is old again!
I had a copy of Pagemaker, it came with a runtime version of Windows :)
The reality of DOS was most users spent their time in applications - so how to use DOS itself just wasn't that much of a difficulty. If the machine booted into Lotus 1-2-3 or Wordperfect (or whatever) that was what most PCs spent their life doing. DOS was perfect (and cheap) for that.
That vintage ADOBE logo, tho...
If he thinks DOS 5 is amazing, just wait until 6.22 comes out... Combine it with the crazy madness of WFWG 3.11 and it's like living in the future.
My left hear enjoyed this. Right one, not so much.
Anyways, that was a blast from the past
This comment made me realize I was wearing my headphones backwards...
LMAO
I thought my speaker went bad until I saw this
Nice to see Scott Baio in this.
Ah, Publish and Subscribe. Apple had such high hopes for that feature, but it just never caught on. Mainly because very few software developers implemented it in their applications, and because most users didn't see any reason to use it.
Thats similar to how the Apple iWorks works today, that collaboration feature through iCloud. Edit one document, the other on someone else side changes.
Adobe uses something similar in its apps. For example, if you place an Illustrator file in In-Design, then edit the Illustrator file, it automatically updates in In-Design.
@@fredflintstone505given how close Adobe and Apple used to be, I think that feature is left over from the days of publish and subscribe.
the engine of a car is nothing like a operating system.
CPU is the engine. OS is more like the Engine Management system.
You dare question Stewart Chiefet.....HEATHEN!!!
you're being literal he was being allegorical
dont copy that floppy
COPY!
what ever MS gained with W95 to MS System 7, it all went bad with
their touch screen.. even the above system 7 is still great simple and
transparent pull down ... i can see why OSX is still great !
The 'Publish' and 'Subscribe' functions seemed very useful. I wonder if this was something that was regularly utilized by a large portion professionals within System 7's user base. After all, if someone were actively working on a file they received from a user who was sharing it, they otherwise would not be notified of real-time updates made on the host user's end. Of course, I suppose the aforementioned function would only have applied to cases wherein the document in question was part of a collaborative effort.
I don’t recall a lot of network use of this feature, outside of publishing environments, but it was widely used for intra-application communication, i.e. subscribing to an image, table, graph, etc., from a word processing document. It disappeared as a system service with the transition to Mac OS X, and the concept became almost ubiquitous in all operating systems long before that.
@@dwm1156 Yeah, I suppose that real-time remote collaboration was not necessarily the aim of this feature. The concept is so well integrated into today's workflows, I must have had it influence my perspective on that feature. I appreciate hearing your experience with it.
(P.S. - interestingly, I believe it was around the time Apple had launched System 7 that Jobs was experimenting with ways in which users of NeXTSTEP could meaningfully and effectively share a workflow - if but not necessarily in real time and/or to the extent to which that was possible in the early 1990s. Apple's new system boasted lots of features, but the concepts demonstrated with NeXTSTEP sure appeared to be light years ahead by comparison. I know NeXT was not ultimately successful, but it sure was impressive.)
@Joseph I agree. Desktop operating systems are antiquated at this point, but it's still amazing to consider how much more advanced NeXT and its derivatives are than the operating system whose name shall not be mentioned.
@@icantgivecredit871desktop operating systems aren't the new hotness anymore but it's insane to say they're antiquated.
To quote Apple and Microsofts own joint user survey, even with heavy business cloud use, not only is the majority of use *not online* but the majority of users *want* their work to be less online.
Theres a reason that Microsoft designing the surface around being a powerful offline apple competitor has made it the most successful Microsoft made computer ever. People want power that isn't online. It's super shortsighted to think desktop OS is a thing of the past.
0:47 thank you for reminding me, software publishers association! i will keep that in mind the next time i crack the adobe suite
'We have sophisticated balloon-help.' 😅
System 7 looked so much better than DOS/Windows at the time, but Amiga and OS/2 were probably still even better.
It does look very good for it's day. A very modern looking/feeling OS in 1991. I think at this point though, the Amiga had fallen behind, after being so ahead of it's time in 1985 when it launched, by 1991 it was starting to look a little clunky compared to the competition.
@@DavePoo2 This is true, largely because of the video resolutions and colors. Only 640x200 flicker free video was passe by then as 1024x768 @ 72Hz was standard fare. Business users demanded high resolution flicker free video even earlier, but by '91 the home market was not going to settle for 1985 technology in their home.
"Don't Copy that Floppy" :) Just download it from Bittorent
6:27
It took Apple seven years to realise that the Finder needs to find things lol
“Dos 5.0 is pretty great, it now has the un-delete command.”
Quite a contrast to all the system 7 graphical and networking wizardry.
The intel super computer (“with computing power that is hard to comprehend”) was also amusing, with performance 50% of an old iPhone X. Wild how things have advanced over the years.
Stewart's EPIC combover!
how did kodak not keep up
25:41 - awesome quote from the pre-internet (www) world
"Government systems like Internet". Now, we just use it for Tik Tok videos
@@LarrySybrandt talk for your self bro
I think it's interesting that he was saying 32 bit addressing enabled the use of more then 8MB of ram. 2^24 = 16MB. I assume the processors they were using in earlier mac's only supported 24 bit addresses. I wonder why they could only address 8MB of memory. Was the MSB used for something special? Was 8MB reserved specifically for the kernel thus only leaving 8MB of memory for user space applications (assuming the hardware had the required facilities to do that)? Also had they switched to Power PC by this point?
I'd expect that 68030 was available by 1991, but not Power PC.
I'd have to check, though.
"Was 8MB reserved specifically for the kernel thus only leaving 8MB of memory for user space applications"? Probably.
@@RonJohn63 No, System 7 on Motorola 68k didn't have a kernel.
Yes, it's a RIDICULOUS comparison!! DOS looks like a joke next to the MacOS. "edit autoexec.bat" etc etc etc. Jesus, how far we have come.
You're so wrong. System administrators like me frequently use the command line, even on Windows. (Microsoft created PowerShell because we admins love Linux and how easy it is to automate repetitive tasks.)
@@RonJohn63 Having command line as an option is nice (hey, even Macintoshes have unix shells these days), but having it as your ONLY option, such as with DOS, is painfully inferior to the graphical System 7 of this comparaison. So I'd say that @dcjlove is far from being wrong!
@@jonathanvanier the flaw in your argument is that I never wrote that sysadmins should *ONLY* have the command line, and nothing I wrote even hinted at it.
@@RonJohn63 Since your reaction ("you're so wrong") was in response to a comment that stated that a DOS command line system looked like "a joke" next to System 7, it is well within reason for me and others to have assumed that you meant that a command line OS is not, in fact, inferior (or "a joke") compared to the graphical System 7. To finesse around that by saying that you did not actually wrote the very words isn't particularly convincing. However, I will accept that you have now clarified your comment and that you did not mean that, after all.
@@jonathanvanier "System administrators like me" is what I wrote. If you're not a system administrator, then my comment isn't relevant to you.
But *if you are* a sysadmin then you know how much easier it is to apply the same script to 35 different systems rather than point and click, point and click, point and click, point and click, a dozen times on 35 different machines.
Pre-System 7 the OS really just looked like an OS that could work someday, but System 7 actually worked how it looked. Hard to use System 7 and later and then go back to the earlier ones. Much like Windows 3.11 had little to do with Windows 2 or 3.
Never did like using one button to select things and , I hated Finder , I did like a lot of features in System 7 , I have the Software and I have upgraded a few Mac's to System 7 , Win 95 and Two buttons was the way to go for me , I like Right Clicking and being able to save my Target , Cut , Copy , Paste that way much better , I still like the System though :) QC
My Dell does all of that too, Charlie, and I love it. Plus, I've been a right-clicker since I discovered it on win95, lol.
Shame that was 1991, and you weren't right-clicking anything in DOS 5.0!
@@TechRyze Yup, I find it hilarious that all the PC fan boys are sneezing on System 7 by comparing it to Windows 95, that came out nearly 5 years LATER...
Hilarious same-episode comparison of Mac OS 7 compared to MS-DOS 5. In DOS, we did not see networking, alias/shortcut, file-sharing, publish-subscribe/object-linking-embedding, customizable menus, multitasking, virtual memory, true-type fonts, kerning, word wrap, anything like HyperCard, anything like AppleScript, a “desktop,” finding files…
Long Live System 7!!!
jesus, was CRT geometry really that bad back then or is it just something funky with the camera they used
IDK if Windows is here to stay. System 7 is the future. @16:10
Ahh here for the comment section regards to the OS war or the 90s.
I was camp Mac, all my jobs were at DOS/Windows shops. The features of sys7 I could use just destroyed the MS fanboys.
But, alas was always a minor player in the big leagues. Jumped into another underdog team (Unix/Linux).
That would work out
Conversion to software version 7.0, looking at life through the eyes of ...
MS-DOS 5.0 looked like a worn out stone age axe compared to System 7
Crow: Oh, yeah? Well, what about System 7?
Tom Servo: It's coming!! It's coming!! Okay?! There were a few bugs in it!! Gosh!...
ua-cam.com/video/ixQE496Pcn8/v-deo.html
They were talking Megabytes (MB) of RAM on the Mac and talking Kilobytes (K) of RAM on DOS. 640K is not even 1 MB on DOS and the Mac had 8MB up to 13MB. And the kid thought Windows running on top of DOS was better. Funny he never mentions the features that Windows supposedly had that the Mac didn't.
I always wondered how virtual memory worked!
Tiny parts are written to disk when not in use, it will be read from disk when needed.
It works... slowly. They forgot to mention that if you did start to page out to disk, it's monumentally slow. Virtual memory was both a blessing and a curse.
Jeff Guillet loves his mother.
System 7...it's coming!!
I like that monitor at 4:34
Can someone tell me what kinjd of monitor it is? I am curious.
A Radius Two-Page display.
why is this left mono only? :|
I miss Adobe/Adlus PageMaker. Still have my 6.5 CD's. I would've upgraded to InDesign had Adobe not gotten greedy and charged full price for the upgrade.
Mac OS 7 and OS 8.1 were awesome, much better than today`s windows 10 crap
Computer (PC & Laptop) Operating System Market Share Worldwide as of January 2021: Windows 76.26%, OS X 16.91%, Chrome OS 1.91%, Linux 1.91%. I guess WINDOWS still rules until now.
@@normanvaliao Yeah, Stockholm Syndrome really is powerful stuff... I pity the 75% stuck with it.
I miss pre-Jobs Apple. There I said it.
This was the post-Jobs, pre-NEXT buyout Apple 🍏
Is there a modern variant of Publish/Subscribe in today’s macOS?
No, as those are implemented within the software suite itself and there is no more system level integration like this
No mention of AppleScript? At the time it was revolutionary, but required applications to publish an API that other apps could comprehend. Very few did so, resulting in its demise.
10:45 this is similar to office 365
Amazing, back then peoples trying making a "pdf" editor so powerfull, not like stupid linux nowdays
Nothings changed!
Ballons = Tooltips
25:40 “the hackers used commercial systems like TYMNET to access government systems like Internet.”
Tymnet and telenet were essentially commercialized closed-off versions of what we call the internet today in terms of connectivity. There were junctures where you could bridge to different networks, even make outcalls on dialup to remote bbs systems. Services like Compuserve used these to allow local dialup numbers, it all ended up being routed to their server network.
11:18 Macs don’t create desktop shortcuts the way Windows installers do. I think to this day most users don’t use aliases on their Macs.
Well, these days everything is installed into the Applications folder and comes up in Launchpad, so you don't really need to create aliases.
Peter Tuttle aka Stanford Pirate
Dos 5.0 was the best OS ever released (for its time) for x86 computers.
What was S.A.M? Listed as in the top ten software. A Google search doesn't help me.
Symantec Anvirus for Macintosh I'm guessing
Right ear raging
My right ear wants a divorce.
I used 7.5!
Windows 95 4 years earlier
I am going to wait before I upgrade. Motorola won't keep the 68k for much longer, rumour has it they are working on a new CPU.
I'll copy that floppy and you cant stopme
24:50 - loled, my country :D
did it work?
MrJeffFairlight Yes, SAD is still a Apple reseller in Poland.
www.sad.com.pl/
Did they ever do an episode about Mac OS X or Next Computers?
2002 Operating System and Browser Updates or something like that if I remember correctly
A 2001 episode talked a little about OS X 10.1 Puma.
Pause at 3:22 . Now look at the Chooser. See Sierra? :) YEARS before Apple actually came out with the UNIX revision of the same name. :D
Typicality of the 90s in terms of phrasing such as 'techies', these days its more like 'douchebags'
Huh?? Not really getting your meaning.
"douchebags" write the code that allow YOU to access the internet and leave comments.
Word perfect for $499 WTF its free nowadays LOL
When a product is free, you are the product
@@jcfawerd Yeah thats why they ask all about you and provide those awful ads lol
As someone who's always had PC's and never Mac, I can say that I literally have zero thoughts of wanting to switch to apple. Even with my phone which is Android, I don't want to switch to Apple. I've had however, 2 separate experiences with Apple, once in 1990 with the Apple II when I was 5 and in 2010 on a friends Mac computer. I think that there's a certain complexity with Apple products that leaves me out of my comfort zone. It's not that I'm not good at working on computers but, I just always have worked on Windows and that's what I'm most comfortable with. I do find it interesting though that many people veer towards Apple products because, that's what you do today if you want to "fit in"
They're just different from what you're used to, that's not a problem.
You can thank Apple for the technology in your shitty android device fuck tard.
John Ward that was not necessary. If you want to win friends and influence people don't be doing that 2nd grade name calling.
@@Jwdude123 are you 8 years old?
You are just not Apple's target audience. You're the pawn on a chessboard, and you're happy with it.
MS-DOS was such garbage with a shit interface