Originally posted by blakespot
What is odd is that OS X truly is "revolutionary," and Apple's current position has rarely held this much promise.
As much as I love OSX (I argue its merits fervently whenever I can, and use it exclusively), I do have to argue with your calling it 'revolutionary'.
It is 'evolutionary' development at its best. It is BSD based, with Aqua being the best window manager EVER. It is like Linux, in that it is a GUI on top of UNIX, albeit well done, and easy to use. There's some NeXT in there, and some Apple too...
I am not agreeing with Dvorak here, but moving to file extensions, and a command line (both things which make my life alot easier) is assimilating to some degree. To be a 'revolutionary' step forward, OSX would be so simple you could obtain a file from anywhere, and the FS would journal it, and Macify it, yet so robust, that you could do anything we do with a UNIX based OSX. Instead of being the best execution of the best ideas of other OSes, it would be execution of new and unheard of ideas.
'Revolutionary' would have been something entirely new. It would have redefined computing, instead of setting a standard. It would have been shockingly different, and would have had a much slower adoption curve. It would have been the GUI all over again. And it just may have killed Apple...
Mac OSX, when you get down to it, is an incredible Window Manager, on a solid core, very well executed, but hardly 'revolutionary'.
Anyway, that's too much typing over one little 'r'.