Live data from Hacker News

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

cake.co

81–87 of 87 posts

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

#81

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…

Classic MacOS had multitasking (cooperative...), but it was missing memory protection. The same was true of earlier 68K-based OSes (Atari, Amiga.)

It wasn't unique to the 68K world.

Windows/286 (from long before Windows 3) could multitask too, but not very stably. No memory protection.

Acorn RISC OS -- the original ARM OS -- had _both_ cooperative and (for command-prompt windows) pre-emptive multitasking, but again, no memory protection.

A big part of the problem was that the 68000 had no MMU. Nor did the 68010 or the 68020. One only came onboard as standard with the 68030 -- analogous to Intel's 80386DX -- and then it was too late: to rework all the existing OSes would have been both a huge amount of work, and badly broken backwards-compatibility with the large existing software libraries.

Whereas the PC industry more or less rebooted the OS stack (eventually), with a new, graphical OS that could use the hardware multitasking features of the 386 if it got one, and do without if it didn't.

This was Windows 3, and it evolved into Windows 9x. Meanwhile in the background Microsoft frantically worked on turning OS/2 3, the CPU-independent version, into something saleable.

OS/2 3 became OS/2 NT became Windows NT and the rest is history.

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

#82
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree -- I like Gasee and BeOS but there's no chance he would have managed to do the same with Apple. The modern Apple, like the original Apple, is Job's creation. In a way that very very few CEOs (who get all the credit regardless) can say.

Indeed. BeOS would have made Macintosh as successful as the Amiga.

A good, pithy summary.

BeOS was a beautiful OS, my favourite ever x86 OS.

But the _other_ key thing most people miss is that NeXT also had amazing, industry-beating development tools. Be didn't.

Both BeOS and NeXTstep were amazing OSes, but NeXT offered 2 other things as well as a great OS:

• best-of-breed dev tools, including Interface Builder

• Steve Jobs.

No contest, I'm afraid.

Even if personally I preferred BeOS.

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

#83
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are there any engineers on HN who worked on Copeland? Because I've always found it astounding that while the stated reason for the NeXT aquisition and the transition to the OpenStep-based OS was that Copeland was still years away from completion -- but then after Jobs took over it was still 5ish years for OS X to finally be released... And in the meantime they continued to release OS 8 and OS 9 as updates, including…

I was in elementary school during Copland and the NeXT acquisition and so I wasn't there, but based on everything that I've read, the reason for the long gap between the purchase of NeXT in December 1996 and the release of Mac OS X 10.0 in March 2001 had largely to do with the inclusion of the Carbon API. The story goes as follows: after Copland was cancelled in 1996, Apple then pursued the idea of purchasing or lice…

You have most of the details right, but not in the right order.

Yes, Apple looked at buying in an OS after Copland failed. But all the stuff about Carbon, Blue Box, Yellow Box, etc. -- all those were NeXT ideas after the merger. None of it was pre-planned.

So, they bought NeXTstep, a very weird UNIX with a proprietary, PostScript-based GUI and a rich programming environment with tons of rich foundation classes, all written in Objective C.

A totally different API, utterly unlike and unrelated to Classic MacOS.

Then they had to decide how to bring these things together.

NeXT already offered its OPENSTEP GUI on top of other Unixes. OPENSTEP ran on Sun Solaris and IBM AIX, and I think maybe others I've forgotten. Neither were commercial successes.

NeXT had a plan to create a compatibility environment for running NeXT apps on other OSes. The idea was to port the base ObjC classes to the native OS, and use native controls, windows, widgets etc. but to be able to develop your apps in ObjC on NeXTstep using Interface Builder.

In the end, only one such OS looked commercially viable: Windows NT. So the plan was to offer a NeXT environment on top of NT.

This is what was temporarily Yellow Box and later became Cocoa.

Blue Box was a VM running a whole copy of Classic MacOS under NeXTstep, or rather, Rhapsody. In Mac OS X 10.0, Blue Box was renamed the Classic environment and it gained the ability to mix windows with NeXT windows.

But there still needed to be a way to port apps from Classic MacOS to Mac OS X.

So what Apple did was go through the Classic MacOS API and cut it down, removing all the calls and functions that would not be safe in a pre-emptively multitasking, memory-managed environment.

The result was a safe subset of the Classic MacOS API called Carbon, which could be implemented both on Classic MacOS and on the new NeXTstep-based OS.

Now there was a transition plan:

• your old native apps will still work in a VM

• apps written to Carbon can be recompiled for OS X

• for the full experience, rewrite or write new apps using the NeXT native API, now renamed Cocoa.

• incidentally there was also a rich API for Java apps, too

Now there was a plan.

Here's how they executed it.

1. Copland was killed. A team looked at if anything could be salvaged.

2. They got to work porting NeXTstep to PowerPC

3. 2 main elements from Copland were extracted:

• The Appearance Manager, a theming engine allowing skins for Classic MacOS: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appearance_Manager

• A new improved Finder

The new PowerPC-native Finder had some very nice features, many never replicated in OS X... like dockable "drawers" -- drag a folder to a screen edge and it vanished, leaving just a tab, which opens a pop-out draw. Multithreading: start a copy or move and then carry on doing other things.

The Appearance Manager was grafted onto NeXTstep, leading to Rhapsody, which became Mac OS X Server: basically NeXTstep on PowerPC with a Classic MacOS skin, so a single menu bar at the top, desktop icons, Apple fonts and things -- but still using the NeXT "Miller columns" Workspace file manager and so on.

Apple next released MacOS 8, with the new Appearance control panel and single skin, called Platinum: a marginally-updated classic look and feel. There were never any official others, but some leaked, and a 3rd party tool called Kaleidoscope offered many more.

http://basalgangster.macgui.com/RetroMacComputing/The_Long_V...

So some improvements, enough to make it a compelling upgrade...

And also to kill off the MacOS licensing programme, which only covered MacOS 7. (Because originally 7 had been planned to be replaced with Copland, the real MacOS 8.)

MacOS 8 was also the original OS of the first iMac.

Then came MacOS 8.1, which also got HFS+, a new, more efficient filesystem for larger multi-gigabyte hard disks. It couldn't boot off it, though (IIRC).

MacOS 8.1 was the last release for 680x0 hardware and needed a 68040 Mac.

Then came the first PowerPC-only version, MacOS 8.5, which brought in booting from HFS+. Then MacOS 8.6, a bugfix release, mainly.

Then MacOS 9, with better-integrated WWW access and some other quite nice features... but all really stalling for time while they worked on what would become Mac OS X.

The _paid_ releases were 8.0, 8.5 and 9. 8.1, 8.6, 9.1 and 9.2 were all free updates.

In a way they were just trickling out new features, while working on adapting NeXTstep:

1. Rhapsody (Developer Release 1997, DR2 1998)

2. Mac OS X Server (1.0 1999, 1.2 2000)

3. Mac OS X Public Beta (2000)

But all of these releases supported Carbon and could run Carbon apps, and PowerPC-native Carbon apps would run natively under OS X without the need for the Classic environment.

Finally in 2001, Mac OS X 10.0 "Cheetah".

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

#84
post #46
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…

Oh not _this_ again.

IT WAS NOT AN INVESTMENT.

This is a widely-repeated lie.

Gates did not “save” Apple. Microsoft did not “invest” in Apple.

Microsoft stole Apple code. Apple sued. The companies settled out of court.

The famous US$150M payment from MS to Apple was not an investment. It was punitive damages. Microsoft Video for Windows contained code stolen from Apple QuickTime. The money was MS paying the penalty.

Citations:

• Stop the lies! The day that Microsoft 'saved' Apple | ZDNet https://www.zdnet.com/article/stop-the-lies-the-day-that-mic...

• San Francisco Canyon Company - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_Canyon_Company

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

#85
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.

I used BeOS. It had some great features, but it wasn't great the way NeXTStep was great. If it had been built on top of C++ 11 or later, instead of whatever C++9x they were using, maybe.

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

#86
post #77
post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apple would be dead if Steve Jobs had not come back. Nothing MS did would have saved Apple if Jobs hadn't come back and turned the company around. That's the end of the story.

It would be safer to say that history would certainly be different if that outcome happened. But you’re almost there on completing the actual story. You do realise that to turn the company around in the first place you still need cash / stock in the company? The time that Jobs joined, Apple was close to bankruptcy and couldn’t afford to lose anymore lawsuits. He had to compromise with Gates with a lawsuit settlement…

The money could have come from anywhere, and likely Jobs would have found it. It didn't have to come from MS.

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

#87
post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think bezos has to show continued dominance - but he's obviously up there. I don't know I'd you can call it for muak without a few decades to see whether his companies stick. Sure, he's changed the conception of electric cars and made low earth orbit really accessible, but as a CEO and leader it's still not clear whether he can lead that revolution long term or if some of his more erratic tendencies will bring thin…

”Bezos has to show continued dominance”....? Please say that is a typo, surely it should say... Bezos has shown continued dominance Amazon is a huge conglomerate on a huge scope and scale. Bezos has built a book store into a Japanese style mega-corp. AWS is killing it, Amazon.com is killing it, Prime is killing it, A9 is killing it, Whole is killing in.... So many subsidiaries: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amazon_…

It takes a while to become a legend. He's well on his way, but it's not something you really want to call till the end if their careers. Even then, might be too soon, look at how people viewed jack Welch at the end of his career versus now.
Post reply on HN