OS 9 Team Reorganized

reyesmac

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2002
373
53
Central Texas
You knew this was coming NeXt

The Mac OS is dead! Long live the Mac OS!!!

Hope Jobs can make the New NeXt last longer than the old NeXt now that the Original Apple is no more.
 

P-Worm

macrumors 68020
Jul 16, 2002
2,045
0
Salt Lake City, UT
Re: You knew this was coming NeXt

Originally posted by reyesmac
The Mac OS is dead! Long live the Mac OS!!!

Hope Jobs can make the New NeXt last longer than the old NeXt now that the Original Apple is no more.
Wait, What? :confused:

I'm sorry, but that made absolutely no sense to me.

P-Worm
 

eric_n_dfw

macrumors 68000
Jan 2, 2002
1,507
55
DFW, TX, USA
Re: You knew this was coming NeXt

Originally posted by reyesmac
The Mac OS is dead! Long live the Mac OS!!!

Hope Jobs can make the New NeXt last longer than the old NeXt now that the Original Apple is no more.
Yeah - and it's about time that the original Apple DIES! ;)

(Yes, I'm kidding... sort of)
 

Jam

macrumors newbie
May 31, 2002
14
0
NoVA, USA
Yeah!
I fully support this move- I know, I know "no pro audio apps..."

Well, other than for that user group, OS X is awesome. I've been running it for a month at work and using Classic for quark (boo, hiss) with no problems- printing, fonts, PDFs, whatever. 10 is just a joy to use, just gotta convince them it's worth it to go to 10.2...

On that subject and alittle off topic: is there any reasonable way to upgrade to 10.2 server? We got 10.1 server in May, and there is no upgrade path to Jaguar- just like the desktop version... although, a $129 upgrade charge is easier to swallow than a $1200 or whatever it is for server.

oh well.
TiBook Rev. A is rockin' with my 10.2... love it.
 

Choppaface

macrumors 65816
Jan 22, 2002
1,187
0
SFBA
must be weird for them.... at this stage, OS 9.x must be like spaghetti. going from that to a fresh start...either it must be relieving to not have to deal with old messes, or very frustrating to start working on new messes created by other people :D
 

Mr Jobs

macrumors regular
Apr 7, 2002
188
0
London, England
Re: Re: You knew this was coming NeXt

Originally posted by P-Worm


Wait, What? :confused:

I'm sorry, but that made absolutely no sense to me.

P-Worm
it does one just has to know a bit about apple and steve jobs's history
 

reyesmac

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2002
373
53
Central Texas
Re: Re: You knew this was coming NeXt

Originally posted by P-Worm


Wait, What? :confused:

I'm sorry, but that made absolutely no sense to me.

P-Worm
What I meant by saying that the Mac OS is dead was that this was the end of an era. The Macintosh Operating System that made everyone here become a Mac Addict is no more. It has become less important than DOS was to Windows. That is AMAZING. We are now running an upgraded version of the NeXtStep OS. It is a completely different OS that was not even made by Apple employees. Yet Apple is making it work.

The problem however is that NeXtStep was kind of like the G4 Cube. It was loved by the people that could afford it but it ended up creating a noose around NeXtStep because of expensive hardware mostly. That and bad compatibility. So now, the SAME OS that caused Steve Jobs other company to fail, has basically TAKEN OVER Apple 100%. The Apple that existed back in 1995 is GONE. So, unless Apple increases its marketshare it will also need to be rehauled again.
Apple does make the best products, but you know that in a world that accepts junk like emachines and build your own windblows boxes Apple needs a real strategy to combat that. It has been proven by the PC side that ONLY PRICE AND SPEED matter. That is the noose that is around Apples neck right now and it was put on there by NeXt. And they don't seem to accept that fact, seeing as how their iMac line has become more and more expensive starting with the iMac DV. They are going the wrong way with their pricing policy. Only allowing people with OVER $2000 to even use the best that a Mac can offer. Everything else under $2000 is last years technology. Only the most expensive Macs use brand new technology, yet you can use the newest technology in a junky PC, that stinks because we have to pay more for even last years technology.
But thats a whole other thread.:rolleyes:
 

ibjoshua

macrumors 6502a
Jan 17, 2002
607
19
New Zealand
sounds credible.

the marklar reference is a bit ominous. still if i was Apple i'd be covering my arse with a similar project.

i_b_joshua
 

Cappy

macrumors 6502
May 29, 2002
386
2
Lets not get too over emotional in misleading folks that the "old Apple" is dead, etc, etc.

Truth be told though is that much of Mac OS X was very much developed by Apple employees and that is what is making it as successful as it is. The following technologies did not come from NeXT.

Aqua
Carbon
Classic Environment
Rendevous
Quartz Extreme
CUPS
Sherlock

I'm sure there are others I'm missing but those are pretty significant technologies(yes, some are new) that were not just some package picked up in the deal with NeXT. Now if you're one of those who considers the OS to be the kernal and that's about it,well, it's time to join the 21st century. No one really cares anymore in the grand scheme of things. It's the technologies on top that come with the OS package that make up the OS.

So lets not be getting all emotional and look at it more as Apple evolving. No one has died.
 

reyesmac

macrumors 6502
Jul 17, 2002
373
53
Central Texas
Tell me if I am wrong but.....

Originally posted by Cappy
The following technologies did not come from NeXT.

Aqua
Carbon
Classic Environment
Rendevous
Quartz Extreme
CUPS
Sherlock
I think you should come up with other technologies for your example because most of them did not come from Apple either.

Aqua - The guy who wrote alot of the Apple UI guidlines had lots to complain about Aqua because it was designed by NeXt employees that didnt use many Mac OS UI elements. The original OS X is not as Mac-like as Jaguar and it still has a few upgrades to go. Conclusion, not made entirely by the Old Apple.

Carbon & Classic Environment - Created by Apple to keep OS 9 alive long enough to get everybody to switch to the NeXt Mac OS.

Rendevous - Also known as ZeroConf, an open source standard that nobody owns and Apple did not invent, they just thought of what to use it for and they thought of a cool name for it.

Quartz Extreme - Made by Apple because they want to use more quartz effects and the current hardware can't cut it by itself.

CUPS - Open source printing standard adopted but not developed by Apple.

Sherlock - Sherlock 3 is to Watson what Windows XP is to Mac OS X, a nice copy of the original which was a copy of the original.:confused:

Bluetooth - Open standard


Technologies that Apple has developed recently would be:

All the iApps
ADC monitor connector
iPod
.Mac

Apple is more into refining open standards to work seemlessly with their computers. Taking something new and making it much better. Or taking last years Powermac technology and repackaging it and calling it an iMac.

All of this is fine because they are only one company and cannot be expected to produce a computer for every kind of computer user. But I will say that this new Apple is very cool but they still need to get their hardware as advanced as their software is. They made a deal with NeXtstep to give us the future of Operating systems, I hope they are making a deal with IBM to give us the future of hardware.

As far as weeping over OS 9, I don't think many people will once they get their hands on some new equipment. But until the majority of Mac users which are made up of people with G3's and less get that new gear, it is going to feel kind of strange knowing the machine you love to use everyday and does most of what you need to do is really obsolite. At least Microshaft is kind enough to show you how useless your PC is when you try to run the lates MS OS by making your PC run as slow as cold syrup.
:D
 

RogueLdr

macrumors regular
Jul 22, 2002
119
0
People's Republic of Ann Arbor
Originally posted by Cappy
The following technologies did not come from NeXT.

Aqua
Carbon
Classic Environment
Rendevous
Quartz Extreme
CUPS
Sherlock
reyesmac, it looks here like all Cappy was saying is that these technologies did not come from NeXT. Isn't that what your quote from Cappy said?

The only technology that seems to have had a NeXT influence, from your post, is Aqua. And you are right, few of the other technologies are Apple ideas, but neither are they NeXT ideas. Several of them are open source, standardized technologies, such as Rendezvous, Quartz Extreme(Apple's implementation is not standardized, but the core of Quartz is), and CUPS.

I think all Cappy is saying is that NeXT is only a small part of what Apple is today. Apple has taken the best of numerous ideas and bent them to best suit the Apple aesthetic, which is elegent software solutions on hardware purpose built for these solutions.

Feedback?

RL
 

biscuit

macrumors newbie
Jul 17, 2002
28
0
London, UK
Re: Tell me if I am wrong but.....

Originally posted by reyesmac

Sherlock - Sherlock 3 is to Watson what Windows XP is to Mac OS X, a nice copy of the original which was a copy of the original.:confused:
Nice analogy, but that would imply OS X was originally a copy of XP. However you look at it, that is simply not true.

Apple is more into refining open standards to work seemlessly with their computers. Taking something new and making it much better. Or taking last years Powermac technology and repackaging it and calling it an iMac.
Open standards are definitely a good thing for Apple. Proprietary stuff has always been a milstone round Apple's neck IMHO. Taking existing stuff and giving it the Apple treatment is the way to go.

As far as weeping over OS 9, I don't think many people will once they get their hands on some new equipment. But until the majority of Mac users which are made up of people with G3's and less get that new gear, it is going to feel kind of strange knowing the machine you love to use everyday and does most of what you need to do is really obsolite. At least Microshaft is kind enough to show you how useless your PC is when you try to run the lates MS OS by making your PC run as slow as cold syrup.
:D
Yep, I hear ya. My iBook is less than a year old but felt a little left-behind from day 1. Don't get me wrong, I love it and OS X, but I could really do with AltiVec and QE.

biscuit
 

AmigaMac

macrumors member
Jul 18, 2002
43
0
Actually when Steve Jobs started NeXT, he did gain some former Apple engineers/employees to work for NeXT, so the work done on NeXTstep was done by some of Apple's old fruit of labor! When Apple bought NeXT, it basically rehired some of the same staff it had before (including Steve Jobs himself)!
 

ajkandy

macrumors newbie
Apr 18, 2002
11
0
pro audio?

Originally posted by Jam
Yeah!
I fully support this move- I know, I know "no pro audio apps..."

Well, other than for that user group, OS X is awesome.
Uh, I think ProTools users are really the only ones left out of the party at this moment.

Emagic launched Logic Platinum for OS X just the other week- 'cos they're owned by Apple, right? - and Cubase SX / SL for OS X is due 'real soon now' according to Steinberg i.e. before Xmas. I presume Nuendo will come shortly after.

I'm running Propellerheads Reason 2.0 in OS X just fine...

BIAS Peak, a 2-track editor, is OS X native...and Deck is supposed to be available....BitHeadz Unity, another software synth, is native....and there are loads of utilities and freeware apps...
 

Cappy

macrumors 6502
May 29, 2002
386
2
Re: Tell me if I am wrong but.....

Originally posted by reyesmac

Aqua - The guy who wrote alot of the Apple UI guidlines had lots to complain about Aqua because it was designed by NeXt employees that didnt use many Mac OS UI elements. The original OS X is not as Mac-like as Jaguar and it still has a few upgrades to go. Conclusion, not made entirely by the Old Apple.
I think I know who you're referring to but I question the accuracy of any of his statements. They're always been one sided and I know I've seen in the past where many of his statements were heavily exagerated or flat out disproven by others. Can't remember where unfortunately.

Originally posted by reyesmac
Carbon & Classic Environment - Created by Apple to keep OS 9 alive long enough to get everybody to switch to the NeXt Mac OS.
Uh no kidding. These are arguably two of the most significant technologies in Mac OS X. Mac OS X would flat out be a failure without them. I find it funny that you seem to not want to give credit where it's due.

Originally posted by reyesmac
Rendevous - Also known as ZeroConf, an open source standard that nobody owns and Apple did not invent, they just thought of what to use it for and they thought of a cool name for it.
Apple has done alot of repackaging of technology and then marketed it as their own in some form. My understanding of Rendevous though is that it was based off of ZeroConf. It is Apple who is submitting it into open source. If you have info stating otherwise, I'd like to read it.

Originally posted by reyesmac
Quartz Extreme - Made by Apple because they want to use more quartz effects and the current hardware can't cut it by itself.
Correct.

Originally posted by reyesmac

CUPS - Open source printing standard adopted but not developed by Apple.
And not from NeXT.

Originally posted by reyesmac
Sherlock - Sherlock 3 is to Watson what Windows XP is to Mac OS X, a nice copy of the original which was a copy of the original.:confused:
Lets alter this to "Developed by Apple". I take it you're in the boat that considers Apple to have stolen this. Lots of products are built off of the same ideas and due to practical functionality they in turn tend to operate the same.


Originally posted by reyesmac

Bluetooth - Open standard
If you're going to bring up Bluetooth, you might as well throw in Airport(802.11b) or why not ethernet?

Originally posted by reyesmac
Technologies that Apple has developed recently would be:

All the iApps
ADC monitor connector
iPod
.Mac
Some of this would be incorrect. Some of iapps like imovie were purchased from other companies. I believe idvd was as well. Almost forgot about itunes.

And what of ical? I've yet to see anyone dispute that Apple didn't license or steal this product essentially away from Brown Bear Software.

http://www.brownbearsw.com/

Oh, and the ipod? Think again. Read this:

http://www.designchain.com/coverstory.asp?issue=summer02

Originally posted by reyesmac
Apple is more into refining open standards to work seemlessly with their computers. Taking something new and making it much better. Or taking last years Powermac technology and repackaging it and calling it an iMac.

All of this is fine because they are only one company and cannot be expected to produce a computer for every kind of computer user. But I will say that this new Apple is very cool but they still need to get their hardware as advanced as their software is. They made a deal with NeXtstep to give us the future of Operating systems, I hope they are making a deal with IBM to give us the future of hardware.
You're talking pure performance when talking about hardware. Otherwise they're hardware is topnotch and much has been innovative. Xserve was the first 1U server with dual processors. Look at the case designs of all of the PowerMacs since the B&W G3's for ease of maintenance. The adjustable display of the lcd imac. Integration of the antenna into all of the products for 802.11b. I'm sure there are more. You're really talking more about implementation and not really repackaging. Do you criticize car manufacturers also for still giving us 4 wheels to have to drive on? ;)

Originally posted by reyesmac
As far as weeping over OS 9, I don't think many people will once they get their hands on some new equipment. But until the majority of Mac users which are made up of people with G3's and less get that new gear, it is going to feel kind of strange knowing the machine you love to use everyday and does most of what you need to do is really obsolite. At least Microshaft is kind enough to show you how useless your PC is when you try to run the lates MS OS by making your PC run as slow as cold syrup.
:D
Lets not spread false information. I've supported in a heavily used lab environment P5-133's with 80MB and 2GB HD's that were equipped with Win2k to do nothing but browse the web and take notes on. They worked fine for their intended use and never crashed. I don't see anyone doing the same with Mac OS X on 133Mhz 601's or 603's.

As for obsolete machines there are only two ways to look at it. Everything is obsolete right after you buy it or it's not obsolete until it is no longer of any practical use. Most follow the first while I stick with the latter. I love technology but keeping up with the Jone's is too unproductive and costly. That is a big part why Classic and Carbon came to be...it wasn't just for the developers. Software is expensive to keep updating.

At any rate I still feel your trying to put a slant on this whole era thing that doesn't fit. This is merely an evolution. Even you are providing those facts by stating that Jaguar has become more "Mac-like". Apple isn't stupid...at least not like they used to be. ;)
 

Cappy

macrumors 6502
May 29, 2002
386
2
Originally posted by RogueLdr


reyesmac, it looks here like all Cappy was saying is that these technologies did not come from NeXT. Isn't that what your quote from Cappy said?

The only technology that seems to have had a NeXT influence, from your post, is Aqua. And you are right, few of the other technologies are Apple ideas, but neither are they NeXT ideas. Several of them are open source, standardized technologies, such as Rendezvous, Quartz Extreme(Apple's implementation is not standardized, but the core of Quartz is), and CUPS.

I think all Cappy is saying is that NeXT is only a small part of what Apple is today. Apple has taken the best of numerous ideas and bent them to best suit the Apple aesthetic, which is elegent software solutions on hardware purpose built for these solutions.

Feedback?

RL
You said that very well. Apple received engineers from NeXT but they were a dwarf compared to what Apple had and has been stated some were from Apple originally. Much of the NeXT technology is what's in the limelight and that's because of the technologies that Apple needed to move on. A car can't get anywhere without wheels yet that's a small part of the vehicle when you look at it all.
 

kenohki

macrumors regular
Apr 26, 2002
136
0
There are some more core Apple technologies that have made the move to Mac OS X...

QuickTime
ColorSync
Inkwell (Newton's Rosetta recognizer - I still use a MP 2000)
Keychain
Many (but not all) UI elements
 

petee

macrumors newbie
Aug 23, 2002
19
0
Asheboro, North Carolina
I agree with you reyesmac...

Apple does make the best products, but you know that in a world that accepts junk like emachines and build your own windblows boxes Apple needs a real strategy to combat that. It has been proven by the PC side that ONLY PRICE AND SPEED matter. That is the noose that is around Apples neck right now and it was put on there by NeXt. And they don't seem to accept that fact, seeing as how their iMac line has become more and more expensive starting with the iMac DV. They are going the wrong way with their pricing policy. Only allowing people with OVER $2000 to even use the best that a Mac can offer. Everything else under $2000 is last years technology. Only the most expensive Macs use brand new technology, yet you can use the newest technology in a junky PC, that stinks because we have to pay more for even last years technology.
But thats a whole other thread.



The orginal iMac was so successful in part because of its price point. While it wasn't the speediest machine on the block, what it did have seemed to match the expectations for that price. The new iMac is very cool, but some key components are very obsolete and and people have a hard time justifying that kind of money for what they are getting.

If Apple wants to get more market share maybe they should they need to get more machines in the hands of the people (I know that is so obvious). But how do they do that? Make their computers more cheaper? Lower the cost of the operating system and other applications? During the Nineties there was a combination of factors that caused the proliferation of computers... good economy and very low prices. Yes, the computers were, for the most part, crap. But Wintel got people to buy their first computer. After that they were hooked. What can Apple do to replicate that? They have to lower their prices and make their hardware competitive... especially their consumer liines. (Warning: Broad generalization is coming) When people buy a computer, even if they are buying it for word processing, email, and internet use, they don't want last year's components. They want something going to fulfill their needs for a few years. They may perceive that outdated components equals limited useage in a year.

So com'n Apple, give the Masses their opiate.
 

Snowy_River

macrumors 68030
Jul 17, 2002
2,518
0
Corvallis, OR
Re: Re: Tell me if I am wrong but.....

Originally posted by Cappy

Lets not spread false information. I've supported in a heavily used lab environment P5-133's with 80MB and 2GB HD's that were equipped with Win2k to do nothing but browse the web and take notes on. They worked fine for their intended use and never crashed. I don't see anyone doing the same with Mac OS X on 133Mhz 601's or 603's.
Now, this isn't a fair comparison. Win2K is better compared to MacOS 9, not MacOS X (the WinXP competitor). I've only worked with a few machines running WinXP, and some of them were older. (I don't think that any were as old as a P-133, though.) On the older machines, it was just torturous to try to do anything. (Actually, to a degree, I found using WinXP at all torturous, but in a different sense....)

So, do we see 601s or 603s running MacOS 9? Yes. But we also see them running MacOS 8.x, and System 7.x. Now, that would be like seeing an old PC running Win3.1. How often do you see that?

I guess my point is, while it's true that MacOS X may have more limited backward compatibility, but the older Mac operating systems are so good, that it isn't nearly as much of an issue for us.

My two cents, anyway...
 

Cappy

macrumors 6502
May 29, 2002
386
2
Re: Re: Re: Tell me if I am wrong but.....

Originally posted by Snowy_River


Now, this isn't a fair comparison. Win2K is better compared to MacOS 9, not MacOS X (the WinXP competitor). I've only worked with a few machines running WinXP, and some of them were older. (I don't think that any were as old as a P-133, though.) On the older machines, it was just torturous to try to do anything. (Actually, to a degree, I found using WinXP at all torturous, but in a different sense....)

So, do we see 601s or 603s running MacOS 9? Yes. But we also see them running MacOS 8.x, and System 7.x. Now, that would be like seeing an old PC running Win3.1. How often do you see that?

I guess my point is, while it's true that MacOS X may have more limited backward compatibility, but the older Mac operating systems are so good, that it isn't nearly as much of an issue for us.

My two cents, anyway...
I'm not quite sure where you're heading with these comparison statements. I was merely pointing out that MS does not always make things run as slow as cold syrup when a new version comes out. That's just MS bashers spouting off.

You point out that its more due to backward compatibility but you forget that there's value in that. Also there are those who I've supported in the past who had dual 200Mhz 604e Macs with Mac OS 9.x and 160MB of ram which I replaced with a P5-100 with 128MB of ram and Win2k. Guess which system they felt was faster and more stable over a 6 mth period for basic email and web browsing? If you guessed Mac, you better guess again.

I haven't tried it yet but I know support folks who put WinXP on lowend PII's with 256MB. They're *very* useable.

All I'm saying is that MS bashers need better arguments if they're going to point out negatives about their OS's. Of those people I replaced Macs with Windows systems, they didn't like the inconsistency of interfaces between applications. They preferred the Mac. Things made more sense to them even after 6 months of use of only being on Windows products. One might think that a user's way of thinking and comfort level would have fell to the Windows side after a few months but it didn't. The OS and user interfaces of the Windows world while useable are not near as comfortable as those in the Mac world.