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

Windows NT for Power Macintosh

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 223 posts

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#31

Post by faefox »

stahi wrote: post #22

Nostalgia reminds me of this: https://lowendmac.com/2014/next-openstep-and-the-triumphant-... Amelio and the rest of his senior staff began searching for a way out. They needed a new operating system to buoy their attempts to compete with the Wintel juggernaut. The same search had taken place several times before, but now the company was desperate. Limited Options Ultimately the list of possible targets was narrowed…

What I'd give for a glimpse of the timeline where Apple bought Be instead of NeXT.

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#32

Post by [deleted] »

runjake wrote: post #24

It's been mentioned here before, but Dave Plummer's YouTube interview[1] with Dave Cutler[2] (NT lead architect) is a must-watch with never revealed before history about Windows NT. 1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxmZPMg7vIs&list=PLF2KJ6Gy3c... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Cutler

[deleted]

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#33

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

nullindividual wrote: post #19
FMecha wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because desktop PowerPC was unpopular for anything other than Mac, and PPC NT wasn't designed for Open Firmware. Though you can blame Microsoft's monopoly tactics - in which loyalty to x86 was the prime directive, alternative OSes on PPC Macs were not a widely accepted idea either - people stuck around with classic Mac OS, in (ultimately) vain hopes that Copland/Taligent would deliver.

Where are you getting this information? The PReP/CHRP was a venture by Apple, IBM, and Motorola (but primarily IBM) to allow companies to build OSes for a common platform. Apple didn't want to participate in the end. But like other ports of NT to MIPS and Alpha (Alpha enjoyed much more support until Compaq dropped support), the popularity was well beneath the dirt cheap in comparison x86 platform. https://en.wikipedi…

> AIX isn't exactly a desktop OS.

If so, only artificially; AIX was born on a workstation and seems to still support running a graphical desktop environment.

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#34

Post by scelerat »

faefox wrote: post #31
stahi wrote: post #22

Nostalgia reminds me of this: https://lowendmac.com/2014/next-openstep-and-the-triumphant-... Amelio and the rest of his senior staff began searching for a way out. They needed a new operating system to buoy their attempts to compete with the Wintel juggernaut. The same search had taken place several times before, but now the company was desperate. Limited Options Ultimately the list of possible targets was narrowed…

What I'd give for a glimpse of the timeline where Apple bought Be instead of NeXT.

I can’t think of a better acqui-hire than NeXT + Steve Jobs

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#35

Post by nullindividual »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #33
nullindividual wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where are you getting this information? The PReP/CHRP was a venture by Apple, IBM, and Motorola (but primarily IBM) to allow companies to build OSes for a common platform. Apple didn't want to participate in the end. But like other ports of NT to MIPS and Alpha (Alpha enjoyed much more support until Compaq dropped support), the popularity was well beneath the dirt cheap in comparison x86 platform. https://en.wikipedi…

> AIX isn't exactly a desktop OS. If so, only artificially; AIX was born on a workstation and seems to still support running a graphical desktop environment.

Just like NT4 Server :-)

Intended use vs. potential use.

And yeah, NT4 Server was just NT4 Workstation with some registry fiddly bits flipped.

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#36

Post by nullindividual »

mepian wrote: post #30
stahi wrote: post #22

Nostalgia reminds me of this: https://lowendmac.com/2014/next-openstep-and-the-triumphant-... Amelio and the rest of his senior staff began searching for a way out. They needed a new operating system to buoy their attempts to compete with the Wintel juggernaut. The same search had taken place several times before, but now the company was desperate. Limited Options Ultimately the list of possible targets was narrowed…

They did end up releasing salvageable bits and pieces of Copland as Mac OS 8.

Similar story to Cairo with Microsoft [0].

Both visionary, both only partial successes.

WinFS :-(

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairo_(operating_system)

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#39

Post by nine_k »

faefox wrote: post #31
stahi wrote: post #22

Nostalgia reminds me of this: https://lowendmac.com/2014/next-openstep-and-the-triumphant-... Amelio and the rest of his senior staff began searching for a way out. They needed a new operating system to buoy their attempts to compete with the Wintel juggernaut. The same search had taken place several times before, but now the company was desperate. Limited Options Ultimately the list of possible targets was narrowed…

What I'd give for a glimpse of the timeline where Apple bought Be instead of NeXT.

Some other company would release the iPhone then!

Re: Windows NT for Power Macintosh

#40

Post by alsetmusic »

mepian wrote: post #30
stahi wrote: post #22

Nostalgia reminds me of this: https://lowendmac.com/2014/next-openstep-and-the-triumphant-... Amelio and the rest of his senior staff began searching for a way out. They needed a new operating system to buoy their attempts to compete with the Wintel juggernaut. The same search had taken place several times before, but now the company was desperate. Limited Options Ultimately the list of possible targets was narrowed…

They did end up releasing salvageable bits and pieces of Copland as Mac OS 8.

I saw Copland at MacWorld Expo Boston at Apple’s booth. It kernel panicked. We didn’t get to use it.

But wow do I remember how exciting it was the first time I read about it in MacUser magazine. Basically some GUI mockups and promises of cool under-the-hood improvements, possibly the first time I was excited about future computing. Thank goodness they bought NeXT instead. They had no ability to manage projects at scale at the time.

Too bad TimApple has no sense of how to do anything other than chase growth; we need another product person at the helm. Oh well.

Post reply on HN