Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

cake.co

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 87 posts

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#51

Post by sjwright »

ISL wrote: post #5
cmacaskill wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks! The fascinating thing is I had been a geophysicist for 10 years before joining NeXT, so all my instincts were to approach this as a scientist. When I see Dr. Fauci speaking the best known truths despite the political winds, it resonates with all I know of science -- speak the truth as best you know it and history will forgive you later.

The truth is immutable -- that's what makes it so successful.

The challenge is to ensure that what you say is the truth. It’s often difficult to talk about science casually without erroneously confusing factual evidence with our best, tentative conclusions.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#52

Post by smallstepforman »

chrislund wrote: post #30
munificent wrote: post #29

It's crazy to think that if: 1. Apple had bought Be instead of Next. 2. Then OS X would have been based on BeOS instead of OpenStep. 3. Which in turn means it would have been written in C++ instead of Objective-C. 4. Which means iOS wouldn't have chosen Objective-C. 5. Which means Swift would never have been created to address its shortcomings. Maybe there would have been some alternate-universe Swift to deal with C+…

I wonder then if iOS would’ve ever happened. Probably not, unless they still somehow got Steve Jobs. Apple at least incidentally got some of the benefit of BeOS, or really, the talent behind it: Dominic Giampaolo, who contributed significantly to BeFS, has been with Apple for some time now working on their file systems. I think he is/was a principal on APFS. I’m sure there are others! Also, muni! From robot frog!

The Newton team ended up becoming the BeInc team. iPhone might have happened earlier. BeInc in 1999 focus shifted to internet appliances and had tablets on their minds. The iOS revolution would have happened 5 years earlier.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#53

Post by watertom »

After Steve left, and Apple was floundering I wanted Sun to buy Apple. I was working with Wall Street Companies at the time and I tried my best to make it happen.

I also worked with Scott McNealy here and there and brought it up to him a couple of times. Once he said to me, “Apple’s not worth having without Jobs, and Apple doesn’t need anyone else if they have Jobs.”

So I knew Sun would never buy Apple.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#54

Post by pjmlp »

icedchai wrote: post #42
btilly wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with cooperative multitasking is that a SINGLE poorly behaved process in the background locks up the whole operating system. This leads to a horrible user experience. As a user of the old Mac OS 8 I had no idea what the cause was. I just knew that once I ran into the spinning wheel of doom I was likely to have to reboot. Again. Preemptive multi-tasking is worse in every way except that one. I mean that yo…

Yes, the Amiga had preemptive multitasking, but no memory protection, and the situation wasn't really any better. A single rogue process could bring down the whole system by overwriting parts of the OS.

Guru Meditation :)

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#55

Post by WalterBright »

agloeregrets wrote: post #15
jhbadger wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic MacOS was a disaster once multitasking became a needed feature, and Copland (its in-house replacement) wasn't going anywhere. The only other option would have been to buy Be, to get BeOS. That could have worked too, BeOS was great (and its modern clone Haiku is fun too), but it was clear Apple needed something from outside.

Multitasking was needed and Be could have filled the Darwin gap but what they really needed was a leadership kick in the head. Steve was hired, almost immediately led a coup that ended up with Gil gone, the board disbanded and him with near pure control over the company. He fired, chopped, focused, and brought operations to the point where they were not lighting their cash on hand on fire. The business turnaround sto…

Proof that a good CEO is worth the money.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#56

Post by baebeegeezus »

watertom wrote: post #53

After Steve left, and Apple was floundering I wanted Sun to buy Apple. I was working with Wall Street Companies at the time and I tried my best to make it happen. I also worked with Scott McNealy here and there and brought it up to him a couple of times. Once he said to me, “Apple’s not worth having without Jobs, and Apple doesn’t need anyone else if they have Jobs.” So I knew Sun would never buy Apple.

Imagine if Oracle ended up owning Apple. Unthinkable.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#57

Post by jki275 »

rvz wrote: post #46
jki275 wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple would not exist if they had bought Be instead. Buying Next brought Steve back, and that's the only thing that kept Apple alive.

Well regardless of whether if Be or NeXT was chosen, Apple was very close to becoming bankrupt in 1997 and without the Microsoft $100M investment in Apple shares, I'm not sure if Apple would be here anyway without it even with Jobs being on board. Apple lost their lawsuits against Microsoft and had to compromise with a deal with Bill Gates to save themselves. It was at that point Microsoft could have refused at the t…

That’s a different discussion.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#58

Post by raverbashing »

jhbadger wrote: post #10
coldcode wrote: post #7

I think the main long term benefit of buying NeXT was getting Steve back. I left Apple a year or so before this happened (I remember Gil being all excited talking about Apple to the staff right before he realized what a disaster it was and we never saw him again around Infinite Loop) but I left because I was sure doing what they were doing would be the end of Apple. The OS and kernel were nice, the smart people from…

Classic MacOS was a disaster once multitasking became a needed feature, and Copland (its in-house replacement) wasn't going anywhere. The only other option would have been to buy Be, to get BeOS. That could have worked too, BeOS was great (and its modern clone Haiku is fun too), but it was clear Apple needed something from outside.

What I really don't get was how even Windows 3.1 had better multitasking than MacOS. Really.

I get the multiple issues with MS and Windows, but at that time, they had the better system for Home/SME users. Ok maybe not for Graphical Designers, but still.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#59

Post by usefulcat »

WalterBright wrote: post #55
agloeregrets wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Multitasking was needed and Be could have filled the Darwin gap but what they really needed was a leadership kick in the head. Steve was hired, almost immediately led a coup that ended up with Gil gone, the board disbanded and him with near pure control over the company. He fired, chopped, focused, and brought operations to the point where they were not lighting their cash on hand on fire. The business turnaround sto…

Proof that a good CEO is worth the money.

Now all we need is a reliable way to identify a 'good' CEO without the benefit of hindsight.

Re: A secret call to Andy Grove that may have helped Apple buy NeXT (2018)

#60

Post by nicoburns »

pathseeker wrote: post #12
mullingitover wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tim Cook arguably made Apple what it is today. Without him, Apple might've had great products but failed miserably in the supply chain management side of the business. It's telling that after Jobs, Apple didn't slide into irrelevance but instead continued to thrive. Tech aficionados (myself included) might have qualms about their product strategy, but overall the business continues to be wildly successful with regula…

How much of that is staying power because of the ecosystem and just enough incremental improvements to keep consumers happy? I agree that Tim Cook made all of the logistics work to turn the dream into reality but now that Jobs is gone it just feels like the dream stopped evolving and lots of blemishes and complexity are slipping into the operating systems that Jobs wouldn't have allowed.

I wondered that, but they've made at least a couple of good product decisions in the post-jobs era. Most notably in my mind: the AirPods, and the iPad Pro (with pencil, and more powerful iOS).
Post reply on HN