Previous | Next | (P-PDF) Acrobat 6.0

Topic: Re: What? No Reader 6 for Mac OS 9? (Via Email)
Conf: (P-PDF) Acrobat 6.0, Msg: 88731
From: isaacs
Date: 6/2/2003 07:51 AM

There were several factors in the decisions (I didn't make them) with regards to which versions of operating systems got continuing support.

In the case of Windows, for the most part other than for Windows'95 (which is NOT supported), the issue is that of a the cost of fully testing under that platform variant weighed against the number of users continuing to use that platform variant. Windows'98SE was the most stable and by far the most popular of the Windows'9x/Me variants including use in commercial environments, much more so than Windows Me which was an end-of-life kicker product released AFTER Windows 2000. Although the most recent of the Windows'9x/Me variants, Windows Me is considered by many to be the most unreliable of the breed.

The Macintosh is a different story, though. Forgetting about the testing issues in terms of cost and resources, programming for MacOS X is a different beast than programming for the earlier MacOS versions. The compromises required to produce a single executable that attempts to do both are unacceptable. There are features that can be supported in "native mode" of MacOS X that cannot be supported in "classic mode" under MacOS X. To make matters worse, Apple's support for MacOS 9.x is nill. Whatever bugs are in MacOS 9.x and "classic mode" are pretty much there to stay. Bottom line is that support for old and new MacOS for any particular product version is a development, testing, and support nightmare at best.

You make a good point with regards to PDF 1.5 acceptance on the Mac. However, the reality is that NOW with the release of Acrobat 6 and PDF 1.5, we are only starting to see the beginnings of significant PDF 1.4 acceptance. Furthermore, the all the predefined joboptions for Acrobat 6 in fact are PDF 1.4-based (except for the two PDF/X joboptions in Acrobat 6 Professional which are current PDF 1.3-based). Given that historically it takes about two years of more before new PDF versions "take" in real world usage AND that in that timeframe all new Macintoshes (except special order for a short time remaining) cannot even boot anything less than MacOS X AND that the last of major "classic only" applications (you know which) supposedly will release a MacOS X-only version this summer, the problems should be minimal.

- Dov

PS: Whether we like it or not, there are probably many more remaining users of the Windows'98 SE variant than there are in the entire Macintosh system population.


At 6/1/2003 11:32 AM, p-pdf-acrobat6 Listmanager wrote:
>From: "Sandee"
>
>OK, I admit that sometimes I'm really dense, and don't get these
>things when they are first announced, but this is not right.
>
>OK, I get that Acrobat 6 Standard and Pro only run on OS X. I
>understand why Adobe would cut off the OS 9 platform from
>development.
>
>But why have they cut off READER from OS 9 support? Given the
>poor adoption rate of OS X, why would any content developer issue a
>PDF 1.5 document when well over 50% of the Macintosh platform
>does NOT use OS X.
>
>Oh, perhaps it is too difficult to create a Reader for long ago operating
>systems?
>
>Then why did Adobe decide to support Windows 98SE. We're talking
>about a Windows product that is FIVE YEARS OLD. Five years ago the
>Mac was on version 9.1? 9.0? 8 point something?
>
>This makes it very hard for me to recommend that anyone create
>Acrobat 1.5 documents.