A small but funny digest.
Can anyone recommend to me any sites that still offer software for Mac classic OS, like OS 9?
http://www.versiontracker.com
They have info on Mac OS 8/9 apps.
Edwin also replies, quoting some old posts from other Mac advocates saying that OS9 is obsolete, presumably trying to jab at those posters for some odd reasons unknown to any other person. Alan replies to Edwin and they go back and forth about how Alan thinks Edwins post was useless to the OP whereas his reply was useful. In another thread, the subject comes up again (as it usual does in full Snit-style with Edwin). Now Edwin makes this claim:
You gave what you assumed contained what the poster wanted. You had no idea if any 0S 9 software was really on that site or not.
And there you have it. Edwin is now explicitly claiming that Alan, upon giving the OP the address to the versiontracker site - which is probably the biggest site about mac software - didn't actually know whether it actually contained information about OS9 software. This was merely an assumption on Alans part, according to Edwin. Presumably, in this Edwin-version of Alans action, Alan just wrote the first URL he could think of that could be remotely considered to have information about OS 9 software, assumed it did and then wrote it. Alan didn't actually KNOW if it had this information, nor did Alan (who, I'm assuming in this Edwin-version of reality, never actually had visited the site prior to this thread) Go to the site before hitting send to look up whether it contained the aforementioned information.
I think this gives us a tiny insight in the reason why so many links Edwin posts doesn't contain the support he claims they do, or are in direct contradiction to the claims he is making. He is just randomly selecting web page addresses and then *assuming* that they contain the information which he claims they do.