What version of Mac OS is this?

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

I was watching Office Space on my iPod and I took the following screenshots:







Not being a Mac person, I couldn't tell what version of Mac OS this was.  Does anyone know what version of Mac OS this is?

[Mnemonix]

Not being a Mac person, I couldn't tell what version of Mac OS this was.  Does anyone know what version of Mac OS this is?

Not a Mac person either, but this looks like Mac OS 9.

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

Ok, but when was Mac OS 9 released? Because the setting in Office Space is before the year 2000, and not knowing when Mac OS 9 was released, I was thinking it could be Mac OS 8, and also, if you have watched the movie, upon shutting down the computer, it brings you to a terminal, and with all my experiences using Mac OS 9, I have never experienced that.

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

ok, thats what I was thinking too.

[Mnemonix]

Ok, but when was Mac OS 9 released?

Wikipedia's History of Mac OS says it was released October 23, 1999. There's also a neat timeline near the end of the article. Maybe it was 8.5 or 8.1?

Need to see that Office Space movie...

[hyperlinked]

The flip up switch in the upper right window corner is a clue as to which version the OS is. I don't remember what that feature was called or when it appeared, but it only appeared in the later versions of the Mac Classic OS. Clicking that funky nub next to the "Full Screen Window" button made the window fold up so you could get it out of the way. The only thing left visible would be the window's header bar.

[hyperlinked]

BTW, you trying to win an obscure trivia contest or something? LOL.

[microsoft windows]

Windows is so much better...

[elservo]

That poor guy couldn't get his file to backup fast enough.  One of the 30 infuriating scenes in that movie.

[D-EJ915]

that's probably OS 8, OS 9 introduced the coloured scrollbars and everything else

[Mr.6502]

Looks like Mac OS 8.  The movie came out in '99, the same year that OS 9 came out (which didn't have the gray scrollbars).

Mac OS X Server 1.0 came out in '99 and it had the look of OS 8 with the gray scrollbars and everything.  So if Initech was a cutting edge Mac shop at the time, maybe it was that :-D

[microsoft windows]

Those old Mac OS's were absolutely horrible. I remember having to be subjected to Mac OS 9.2 for a long time.

[D-EJ915]

honestly I like it more than OS X

[Mental Hobbit]

Overall it looks like OS 8 to me. Last MacOS I used was 8.6, and that's been a while. That progress window looks totally unfamiliar though, I think it's fake. Also Macs never used the Windows-style hourglass, they had a little watch.

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

Thanks for the info people, very helpful.

[elservo]

Yeah if you look at the last screenshot you can see Windows stuff under the progress window.

[Computer-Lab in Basement]

Macs never used the Windows-style hourglass, they had a little watch.

Thats what MS Windows told me when I showed this to him.  He thought it was Windows at first, until I pointed out the Mac OS logo in the corner of the screen...

[Mr.6502]

The last screenshot has a Windows window in it.  Looks like Excel with the Windows chrome instead of OS 8's platinum.  

It seems like a joke.  But it surprises me they'd put this much effort into the joke considering how small a part of the movie it is.

[D-EJ915]

probably VirtualPC or something

[datamonger128]

I'm thinking OS 8.x.

[cheater1034]

OS 8.x, with the hour glass added for dramatic effect (in the movie it went down 1 piece of sand at a time) - a watch is a lot more boring - but it's probably not a live running OS at all, they planned it out.

Great movie too

[elservo]

Yeah the last screenshot is from a really quick shot.  All those windows are about to close really fast as he jumps up to flee from his workstation.

[ak_nala]

Mac OS 8.0 or 8.1 in all likelihood, with an outside chance at 8.5. Would need more pics to tell which as the differences were very subtle.

OS 8.6 came out a few months after the movie premiered and 8.5 didn't come out until October 1998, so OS 8.1 would have likely been the current OS version when the movie was actually in production (probably at least 6 mos. before the Feb. 1999 premiere date).  OS 8.1 was Mac OS from January 1998 until OS 8.5 came out in October.

All that said, if there is a shot of the CPU, that could be the deciding factor. If it's pre-Quadra, then it's OS 8.0; if a Quadra or Centris it could be 8.1, but no higher without a CPU upgrade; if PPC it could be as high as 8.5 if post-production was short and/or they had a developer's release.

And that last picture - if you look closely you can see that the Windows desktop and application windows are all INSIDE a Mac Platinum window, so definitely Virtual PC (though why on earth they would want to run Excel (if it is Excel) in Windows (95?) inside Virtual PC when there was a Mac native version is beyond me).

And Windows of that era sucked big time, so I wouldn't cast stones. IMO (and a lot of others' out there), Windows 98 was about equivalent (on a good day) to Mac OS 7.6.

Pardon me while I duck

[pikapika]

i'd say also 8.*
i worked with it too long, it was really crappy, slow, buggy, not much multitask

[D-EJ915]

Networking in 7 makes me want to punch someone in the nuts, it doesn't let you use supernetted addresses...unless you do no IP networking or have apps that require 7 I think 8 is a whole lot better.

[D-EJ915]

Nah W7 is the same as Vista in that regard.

[itlnstln]

Unless you mean Windows 7.
I hate everything, and I mean everything, about networking in that OS...but I don't think there are any addressing problems.

I hate the "Network and Sharing Center," as in the attempt to "dumb it down," they made it harder to use.  Once you get into the actual setup windows and stuff, it's the same as it has been for years.  Fortunately, I rarely ever have to **** around in there.

[datamonger128]

Networking is a pain in Windows regardless.  It takes me quite a while just to get it set up to where I can access a folder on one computer from another.  I do everything as it should be done, but it never wants to connect.  Then, by some chance, it connects.

[ch_123]

I hate the "Network and Sharing Center," as in the attempt to "dumb it down," they made it harder to use.

That's a pretty common theme with Microsoft in general. Word is a classic example of how you should not design a piece of software.

[itlnstln]

That's a pretty common theme with Microsoft in general. Word is a classic example of how you should not design a piece of software.

Actually, I like Word.  I love the Ribbon interface on Office 2007.  2010 will be even better as you can customize the Ribbon and more options are available in the context menu.

[ch_123]

Word has two big issues:

a) It tries to second guess what you want (admittedly this is nowhere near as bad as it used to be, but it still acts in some infuriating ways sometimes)

b) It favours quick use of basic features over consistent ease of use of all features. So the ribbon stuff allows you to do the most basic stuff, but have fun when you have to go and do more advanced things with it.

I tried some beta of Office 2010 a while ago. I went to print something, and hit CTRL P ENTER as I usually do... but some genius at MS decided that the 'Print' option should not be highlighted by default, so you have to move your mouse pointer and click the icon yourself. Fail.

[itlnstln]

Word has two big issues:
 
a) It tries to second guess what you want (admittedly this is nowhere near as bad as it used to be, but it still acts in some infuriating ways sometimes)
 
b) It favours quick use of basic features over consistent ease of use of all features. So the ribbon stuff allows you to do the most basic stuff, but have fun when you have to go and do more advanced things with it.
 
I tried some beta of Office 2010 a while ago. I went to print something, and hit CTRL P ENTER as I usually do... but some genius at MS decided that the 'Print' option should not be highlighted by default, so you have to move your mouse pointer and click the icon yourself. Fail.

a) I'll agree with this sometimes.  Most of the time, I have no problem with it as it does what I want and what I expect.  Sometimes, though, it does some stupid **** like reformatting a date I write as "1/4" (without the year) to "¼."   Autocorrect can be turned off, if you want.

b) The vast majority of stuff I need can be found on the Ribbon or in the context menu.  The more advanced stuff is still on the Ribbon in the expandable menu which, in many cases, is less clicks than it was before.  Usability of the Ribbon will be expanded in 2010.
 
Now, I don't print (really, I don't ever print), so I didn't check that out in the 2010 beta, but if Ctrl+P is no longer the hotkey for printing, that would royally suck.  I'm sure they'll get plenty of complaints on that one and fix it by the next beta (or RC, or whatever).

[whininggit]

The thing that bugs me with 'Print' in all of MS Office, not just Word, is with the Print icon in the toolbar - it sends a job straight to the default printer without prompting. I know it's meant to be a shortcut, but why oh why couldn't it produce the same behaviour as the Print menu item. I always remove this button from the toolbar to avoid accidentally printing something unintentionally.

[itlnstln]

The thing that bugs me with 'Print' in all of MS Office, not just Word, is with the Print icon in the toolbar - it sends a job straight to the default printer without prompting. I know it's meant to be a shortcut, but why oh why couldn't it produce the same behaviour as the Print menu item. I always remove this button from the toolbar to avoid accidentally printing something unintentionally.

Ctrl+P is the ultimate shortcut.  It's fast (obviously) and it brings up the full print menu.  You are absolutely right, though.  The print icon is pretty much worthless.

[ch_123]

CTRL + P brings up the print menu, but the issue is that you can't just press Enter to print the page. Im not sure if it has been fixed on newer builds though.

[datamonger128]

The last good version of Office for Windows was whatever the last version was before the Ribbon interface.  That's why I like Office 2008 for Mac.  No Ribbon.

[ch_123]

I heard that MS gave a different team the job of writing one of the Mac versions than the usual crowd. This release was so good that various people got in **** for making the Mac Office better than the Windows one. Ever since they have made sure that only one of their teams works on Office for everyone.

[whininggit]

I prefer the ribbon over the traditional toolbars, but I don't like that the ribbon replaces the toolbar AND menubar. I prefer to select menus with the keyboard, rather than clicking, and the ribbon slows that down.

I have just noticed however, that if you press the ALT key, a handy overlay appears on the ribbon with the keyboard shortcuts. I suppose that if you used Word 2007 all day, you'd quickly learn the new shortcuts and it's probably even quicker (with the keyboard shortcuts) than using traditional menu bars.
Edit: Yup, I think once you memorize the sequence, this will be very quick. Hold down ALT and press the Ribbon group shortcut and then the ribbon button shortcut and it jumps straight to it.

In my case however, I use Office 2003 at work and Office 2007 at home. As such, 2003 gets a lot more use and I find myself much quicker.

The new interface in Access 2007 drives me mad.

Amazing - how many GH threads have stayed on topic beyond the first couple of posts? :smile:

[ricercar]

Microsoft Word is like one of those fat Swiss army knives with everything from a spoon to a wood-saw. It will do everything you ask, sort of, but it won't do anything as well as a dedicated tool ... and you can't even possess it without wondering why you wanted such a lump weighing you down.


The transition from a normal Windows interface to Vista's steaming pile of **** interface was so patently moronic that no one takes credit. When one asks within the MS community who worked on that interface team, people cringe (or laugh) and point their finger at the next guy.

[ak_nala]

Ah, but Leathermen prove a multi-tool can work, really, really well.

[ricercar]

Have you ever tried to drive a wood screw with a Leatherman? Not my definition of "really, really well." Works about like MS word.

[vyshane]

I heard that MS gave a different team the job of writing one of the Mac versions than the usual crowd. This release was so good that various people got in **** for making the Mac Office better than the Windows one. Ever since they have made sure that only one of their teams works on Office for everyone.

The Mac Business Unit is responsible for doing MS Office for Mac.

Their blog: http://www.officeformac.com/blog/

[ak_nala]

Have you ever tried to drive a wood screw with a Leatherman? Not my definition of "really, really well." Works about like MS word.

Never said it didn't have its limitations.

Virgin wood, no - but unscrewing and re-screwing in wood and metal, yep, along with a dozen other things, all far more conveniently than digging out a tool chest. But major construction, no, I'd definitely go with dedicated tools, but kinda difficult to drag a big toolbox on long hikes or on a mountain bike.

Point being, there are many situations where a multi-tool, whether hardware or software, is a very handy thing (just ask MacGyver).

Mind you, Office is NOT such a tool, IMO. It bears more resemblance to that big toolbox you have to drag around everywhere, but when you really need a tool and open it up it often either lets you down or you spend hours looking for the right tool (or the lid slams down on your fingers while you're reaching for the tool you finally did find).

That said, it too has its uses.

[AndrewZorn]

per OP question: the OS is fake, they said they designed it to mimic the bore genericness of the office environment.  it is not mac, obviated by the "C:/" (emphasis on forward slash) file path and C:> prompt at shutdown (which i just verified on my personal copy).  i looked this up a while ago when wondering the same thing after noticing the C: references.

[hyperlinked]

per OP question: the OS is fake, they said they designed it to mimic the bore genericness of the office environment.  it is not mac, obviated by the "C:/" ...

And also obviated by that there's no Apple logo in the upper left corner... duh, I totally missed that.

[D-EJ915]

MovieOS!

[AndrewZorn]

this is unix... i know this...

[Mr.6502]

Coincidentally...Hollywood's Computers: Telling A Story In A Flash