NeXT vs. MAC OS

Message

arion · #1 Post by **arion** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 11:05 am

On the show they use IBM ThinkPads and actually do real work with them. The only place you see Apple MACs is on TV show and they don't do anything becuase MAC OS is usless and if you see them doing actual work it is Linux running on them!

Bob Collins · #2 Post by **Bob Collins** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 2:33 pm

What do you mean Mac OS is useless? It is based on the Mach kernel from BSD, which is actually much more mature and closer to *REAL* Unix than Linux is. Linux is more multics based if you read Linus' early comments on the first Linux kernel.

And FWIW, the Mac OS can run almost any open-source software. The Mac OS now is very BSD but with a fantastic GUI.

Ever worked with them?

monty cantsin · #3 Post by **monty cantsin** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 3:40 pm

Bob Collins wrote:The Mac OS now is very BSD but with a fantastic GUI.

#4 Post by **AlphaKilo470** » Mon Dec 06, 2004 8:17 pm

monty cantsin wrote:
Bob Collins wrote:The Mac OS now is very BSD but with a fantastic GUI.
Actually MacOS X is even more a direct descendant of the fantastic NeXTstep/OpenStep, which was perhaps the most sophisticated OS ever. I like the original NeXTstep GUI and NeXT hardware much better than any current Mac, but that's of course just a matter of taste.

Well, you know who created NeXT, right? Well, if anyone does not know, I'll give you a hint, he owns Apple.

Bob Collins · #5 Post by **Bob Collins** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 7:22 am

monty cantsin wrote:
Bob Collins wrote:The Mac OS now is very BSD but with a fantastic GUI.
Actually MacOS X is even more a direct descendant of the fantastic NeXTstep/OpenStep, which was perhaps the most sophisticated OS ever. I like the original NeXTstep GUI and NeXT hardware much better than any current Mac, but that's of course just a matter of taste.

While it may be a direct descendant of NeXT, it has the Mach kernel which is a BSD product and would seem to make it more BSD than NeXT with the obvious exception of the look and feel. Seems to be a dip in the gene pool was taken between NeXT and OSX.

More sophisticated than OS/2 Warp?

I never got to play with, use, or see in-person any NeXT/OpenStep stuff, although I would like to!

monty cantsin · #6 Post by **monty cantsin** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 12:23 pm

AlphaKilo470 wrote:Well, you know who created NeXT, right? Well, if anyone does not know, I'll give you a hint, he owns Apple.

I guess you mean Steve Jobs, but he doesn't "own" Apple. Apple is a joint-stock company and as of January 2004, Jobs only holds 6.37% of the shares, according to Apple's latest Proxy Statement:

http://www.snl.com/interactive/html.asp ... S=1&V=DMZ3

Anyway, this doesn't change anything from the fact that MacOS X is basically a refined NeXTstep and doesn't have much to do with the prior versions of the Macintosh operating system up to the very first System, aside from the dated user interface that has been re-integrated and some compatibility layers for old software (the Blue Box and Carbon).

monty cantsin · #7 Post by **monty cantsin** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 1:44 pm

Bob Collins wrote:While it may be a direct descendant of NeXT, it has the Mach kernel which is a BSD product and would seem to make it more BSD than NeXT with the obvious exception of the look and feel.

No, the idea of having BSD with a Mach kernel at the core has already been the original concept of the very first NeXTstep.

http://next.z80.org/next/marketing/prod ... tstep_old/

http://next.z80.org/next/marketing/prod ... oose_next/

http://next.z80.org/next/marketing/prod ... _computer/

Bob Collins wrote:Seems to be a dip in the gene pool was taken between NeXT and OSX.

Nope. Basically, OSX is OpenStep with a license-free Display PDF (=Quartz) instead of Display PostScript and some compatibility layers for old Macintosh software. And, unfortunately, the old Mac-like user interface without all the nice NeXTstep peculiarities like tear-off menus etc.

"From NeXT to X"
http://braeburn.ath.cx/sites/articles/b ... 20history/

Has a nice screen shot...

http://braeburn.ath.cx/sites/articles/b ... Detail.jpg

...of an early Apple design study for the new Macintosh operating system now known as OSX that shows many similarities to a late OpenStep beta:

http://homepage.mac.com/troy_stephens/O ... esktop.jpg
http://homepage.mac.com/r3d/.Public/NS_ ... mo_Vid.mp4

"Steve Jobs and the History of Cocoa, Part One"
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2 ... y_one.html
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2 ... tml?page=2

"Steve Jobs and the History of Cocoa, Part Two"
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2 ... tml?page=1
http://www.macdevcenter.com/pub/a/mac/2 ... tml?page=2

Screen shots from Rhapsody DR2 for Intel (=Rhapsody 5.1):
http://www.pegasus3d.com/rhapsody/rhapsody_screens.html

The development of NeXTstep:
http://www.shawcomputing.net/rhapsody/home.html

Bob Collins wrote:More sophisticated than OS/2 Warp?

Definitely. For example, developers could generate so-called "fat binaries" that would run on any platform without modifications, be it NeXTstep/OpenStep for Intel, Motorola, SPARC or HP-PA systems. There was also an OpenStep "Yellow Box" in development which allowed to have OpenStep software running even on top of Windows.

I never got to play with, use, or see in-person any NeXT/OpenStep stuff, although I would like to!

For the beginning, you could try out the GNUstep live CD, it gives a good idea of the original GUI's look&feel. GNUstep is an open source project that aims at implementing the OpenStep guidelines on top of Linux:

http://www.linuks.mine.nu/gnustep/

The original OpenStep 4.2 and NeXTstep 3.3 versions are also still for sale at Blackhole Inc., and applications like the famous Lighthouse apps have become available for free in the meantime:

http://www.blackholeinc.com/specials/survey.shtml
http://www.blackholeinc.com/specials/op ... rder.shtml
http://blackholeinc.com/specials/nextstep33_order.shtml
http://blackholeinc.com/specials/Lighthouse.html

Compatibility guides for...

OpenStep 4.2 and NeXTstep 3.3 (x86):
http://www.shawcomputing.net/rhapsody/h ... des_1.html

Rhapsody DR 2 (x86):
http://www.shawcomputing.net/rhapsody/h ... ist_1.html

Bob Collins · #8 Post by **Bob Collins** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 2:16 pm

WOW! I thought I had a minor clue, but just learned tons. Cool, thanks for all the info. I only know that what I have used of current Mac stuff, has been very nice and much more stable than the Macs I have used in the past.

And just in case it was not obvious, I mentioned OS/2 Warp to keep a pinch of IBM/Thinkpad topic.

monty cantsin · #9 Post by **monty cantsin** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:26 pm

Bob Collins wrote:And just in case it was not obvious, I mentioned OS/2 Warp to keep a pinch of IBM/Thinkpad topic.

Then you could also have mentioned "Pink", the cooperative effort of Apple and IBM to mimick NeXTstep and write the ultimate next-generation OS:

"Surrender the Pink!
Are Apple and IBM Holding Back the Operating System That Will Obsolete Their Current Products?"
Issue 1.02 | May/Jun 1993

http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.02/taligent.html
http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/1.02 ... g=2&topic=

The parents are Apple and IBM. The child is Taligent, a company formed by the two in 1991 to produce a new operating system called Pink. Pink's destiny: to eventually destroy the existing technologies of both parent companies - Macintosh and OS/2.

In the meantime, IBM and Apple keep their monstrous child chained and bound deep in the dungeons of Silicon Valley - where an ever-growing number of programmers churn out lines and lines of top-secret code.

http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... rame_6.gif
http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... rame_8.gif
http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... ame_13.gif
http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... rame_1.gif
http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... ame_44.gif
http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... ame_59.gif
http://pcroot.cern.ch/TaligentDocs/Tali ... rame_5.gif

Looks quite NeXTish, doesn't it?

For some more balanced and up-to-date information, also see:

"What was the deal with Taligent ?"
http://next.z80.org/forum2/viewtopic.ph ... 5a34a5c14e

"A Brief Taligent History"
http://www.wildcrest.com/Potel/Portfoli ... y/WW87.htm

Taligent was founded in early 1992 as part of a historic agreement between IBM and Apple Computer to develop the next generation microcomputer operating system. This new OS was to run on any hardware platform. It was also to be completely object-oriented from the ground up. Both companies had been committed to object-oriented technology for quite some time and it made sense to bring their knowledge together for a common cause. The core team of 150 software engineers came from the original "Pink" project started by Apple in 1988 to develop the next generation Macintosh operating system.

As time went by, priorities shifted as the industry and the partners changed. It was decided that people didn't really want a new operating system, but that rapid application development was still important. The Taligent OS became a layer that could sit on top of any modern operating system and provide numerous services to applications software, thereby shortening the development cycle. This layer consisted of more than a hundred object-oriented frameworks and well over a thousand classes. It ran on top of AIX, HP-UX, OS/2, Windows NT, and a new Apple OS kernel, and it was called CommonPoint.

"A brief history of Taligent"
http://www.wildcrest.com/Potel/Portfoli ... y/WW11.htm

Apple and IBM joined forces to form Taligent because they shared an interest in catalyzing the development of a new generation of applications, based on object-oriented technology, that would work the same way across an entire organization, regardless of the underlying hardware platforms. In early 1994 Hewlett-Packard decided that it could also benefit from this approach and became Taligent's third major investor and partner.

Wikipedia articles:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copland
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taligent

monty cantsin · #10 Post by **monty cantsin** » Tue Dec 07, 2004 4:57 pm

monty cantsin wrote:No, the idea of having BSD with a Mach kernel at the core has already been the original concept of the very first NeXTstep.

Forgot to mention that also Avadis Tevenian, who helped to develop the mach kernel, was hired by NeXT and now works for Apple after the merger:

http://www.apple.com/pr/bios/tevanian.html

Before joining Apple, Tevanian was vice president of Engineering at NeXT and was responsible for managing NeXT’s industry renowned engineering department. Tevanian started his professional career at Carnegie Mellon University, where he was a principal designer and engineer of the Mach operating system upon which NEXTSTEP is based.

Tevanian joined NeXT as an engineer on the NEXTSTEP team in January 1988. He quickly moved up the ranks and managed the operating system, responsible for NEXTSTEP development and technology advances. Tevanian then managed a team responsible for porting NEXTSTEP to RISC-based systems and development of Portable Distributed Objects, the NeXT technology that made it possible to develop software on multiple operating systems. He was vice president of NeXT engineering from March 1995, reporting directly to Steve Jobs.

NeXT vs. MAC OS

Going religious on OS

Re: Going religious on OS

Re: Going religious on OS

Re: Going religious on OS

Re: Going religious on OS

Re: Going religious on OS

Re: Going religious on OS

Who is online