151–160 of 223 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dude, shut up, the Amiga is totally better. Cooperative multitasking is lame. Have you seen HAM mode??
No, Amiga sucks, it can’t even run UNIX! Do you even know what it is? My dad uses it for work.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Apple would have died. I love BeOS. I love BeOS more than you. I love BeOS more than Jean-Louis Gassée. BeOS wasn't ready. I was there I used BeOS as my daily driver on a maxxed-out Power Macintosh 6400. I have, today, that machine still running BeOS. I also have a second dual-PII running BeOS. BeOS wasn't ready. Apple was making a decision in 1996 for a deal that had to be struck and struck fast (1997). I started us…
The C++ API bound forever to the gcc 2.95 ABI IIRC was also an "interesting" choice. Sure with success they would certainly have engineered a way forward, out of necessity, but if I would have had to give my opinion about that for Apple at the time...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is it a derivative? I'd say it's the latest version of Windows NT.
It’s the same codebase that was my point. Whether it’s still called Windows NT or whether that name died in the 90s can probably be argued either way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Exploring the walled-off corridors of prep and chirp? Maybe this will enable OS/2 PPC to run? More reading on NT & PPC: https://virtuallyfun.com/wordpress/2020/08/02/the-lost-histo...
This is specifically for NT4 on Macintosh PowerPCs. Not OS/2; not AIX; not NetBSD; not . Not some random other PPC variant.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A/UX runs on 68k NuBus machines, not PowerPC PCI ones.
Unix itself does—seems like a short porting effort compared to the other choices. They had emulation available as well.
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…
> License Windows NT from Microsoft and bolt a Mac-like interface onto it. Gosh, am I glad that that didn't happen. I wonder how serious of an option that really was, it seems wildly out of place compared to the other propositions, which are all reasonable.
When Mac OS X was eventually released it looked utterly different.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I suspect that without Jobs, Apple is dead by 2002. Turned into an arm of, like, RIM. Then Google comes out with the Android phone and it's all over for everyone including Microsoft.
I suspect if Apple and NeXT never "merged", the phone market would be RIM vs (a very different) Android, but we'd be worse off. Blackberries were OK at the time, but my god RIM was so culturally conservative and Google at the time had no design sense that we'd probably be 10 years behind where we are now - and if we even had software keyboards they'd be terrible.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hard to say why. Windows NT was something pretty interesting though. It was meant for a corporate environment but was well known as a much more "stable" version of Windows than 95 and 98. All happening in parallel, with the Power Macintosh even!
NT4 was more stable, to a point. But it had it's serious annoyances. IP address change? Reboot. I can't remember other scenarios, but there was a lot of in NT4. Graphics and print drivers? Moved from user space (NT 3.5, 3.51) to kernel space -- and oh boy, graphics card vendors SUCKED at writing drivers (printer manufactures never improved to this day, hence the elimination of vendor print drivers). BSOD city. NT4 wa…
This is just me going down memory lane, but my aunt gave me her corporate Toshiba laptop with NT4 back in 1996 since she hated the idea of working from home back then. I made friends with a kid who brought his dad's work laptop to school with similar specs and it always ran blazingly faster, always wondered why. I remember my aunt's laptop had 16mb of RAM. Thanks for clearing this up :)
That Terraserver wiki article has my head spinning a bit. Crazy how time flies.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Multi-user would have likely been bolted on one way or another at some point, as had happened when other OSes gained fundamental new features.
Was any operating system actually able to go from single-user to multi-user so easily? Windows NT and OS X were totally rewritten from the ground up relative to their single-user predecessors Windows 9x and classic Mac OS.