> OS 6->7, OS 7->8, OS 8->9, CISC->RISC.... NONE of these changes took >this long to implement,
None of these changes were as radical. System 7 was based entirely off System 6 code. Same with 8 and 9. And the CISC to RISC move was slated for disaster. Original plans were to just release RISC based Mac's and you either ran RISC, or CISC, but not both. Apple didn't like that idea, and one of their one staff miricle men managed to come up with a CISC emulator that ran in RISC (that's right... 68k running on a PPC is a first generation "Classic"). Heck even with OS 9, there are some parts of the system that are STILL 68k code and run in CISC emulation. Much like original OS X plans were to tell people to F-Off... run OS X, or don't, not both... but Apple was smart enough to realize that was a BAD idea... and came out with Carbon and Classic Mode. >none of these changes have had as many problems, >none of these changes have had the overall lack of acceptance by the >users. Apple's own numbers - of Mac computers purchaed in the past year, >only 75% of them (Apple touts this number) are willing to use X. This reminds me of the arguments that raged from 1983 to about 1995, regarding... why would you use a GUI in the first place... what's wrong with a command line. PC's were shipping consistantly thru the late 80's and early 90's with Windows pre-installed, yet very few people opted to use it. It wasn't until the massive advertising campaign in late 94 and 95 that MS put out for Win95 that most users really accepted a GUI. But we on the Mac end had been doing it since 1983 with the release of the Lisa. And we Apple fans remember the fights that happened then (including inside Apple... half the camp wanted to stay with the Apple II line, the other half "saw the future". OS X is just another evolution, and fights will ensue between those that want it and don't want it... it reaslly becomes pointless to argue (have you ever had a successful arguement with a die hard PC person? Did either side win?) >*THIS* point alone should make Apple (and it's users) look long and hard >at what X is and whether to 'stay the course' and continue to use/support >Apple and X. Apple has looked at this, and has looked at the future of computing... and let me tell you, there are some VERY strong advantages to OS X in terms of Apple's hardware future. Those that follow Apple's technical releases, and have a basic understanding of *nix's multi-user abilities, and can read between the lines... might already be smiling like me at what they hope is coming down the road (because it is VERY VERY possible, possible enough that I am AMAZED Apple hasn't already done it). >CPU requirements (almost entirely for the >UI), are excessive [BSD can/does run on a 486, Next Step ran on a 486 or >68040], This is true of ALL X-Windows UI's. Go for it, run Linux on a 486 and try to get good performance from KDE or Gnome. Have a blast. Darwin does in fact run on significantly lower hardware requirements (I was just helping someone the other day get it running on a 7200). You do loose the ability to run the GUI and all the eye candy that comes with it. >IMO - a more 'intelligent change' design would have, instead of >reinventing the wheel (the UI), grafted the exiting UI onto BSD instead - >with 2 primary advantages: I think the #1 reason that you have the UI you have in OS X is because it is an evolution of NeXTStep. This was for two reasons IMHO... 1: Need to get the OS out the door prevented early versions from having a massive UI overhaul (notice each version of OS X gets more and more like OS 9... those that have toyed with Rhapsody, and the "original" OS X should be nodding in agreement), 2: The "Jobs Ego". He needed to assert himself back in Apple... and that meant NeXT items would win over Apple items. The reality is, all these nice UI features people have grown to love in OS 9 are not something that Apple tossed together in 6 months, or even a year... they are the culmination of work that started before the release of the Lisa. I don't know exactly what date Apple stared work on the GUI OS, but figure at least 1981. That means, the OS 9 UI was developed over the course of 20 years. And most of the great features that were added weren't an Apple invention, they were made by 3rd party people, and Apple either ripped them off or (more often) licensed the code. But people want a RADICALLY different OS (one that is SO different, that you can basically throw out the ENTIRE OS 9 code base and start over), to have all the OS 9 features added in under 2 years. Get a grip. They did what they could, as fast as they could. They used the NeXTStep UI and warped it into the Mac OS UI as best they could without completely breaking it. Yes, in some points they opted to mac bold new moves, but heck, this was a bold new OS. It isn't the first time Apple made big moves only to repeal them later. Each version of OS X has added back more and more of the features... some of them do seem like no brainers to begin with, since everyone loved them so much (or took them for granted)... things like seeing how much drive space you have listed in the Finder windows. That was missing until 10.2. Window Shade is still missing, but I am sure it too will return. The thing of it is... do you have any idea how hard it is to add these features? Or how about what other features they are busy working on that might be more important (or need to be handled first in order to even consider other things). I don't know the answers... but I'm sure it isn't as easy as most people assume. People tend to forget that behind each of these things was someone working long hard hours pulling their hair out trying to get it to work just right. They get into the thought pattern that all this is "magic" because it just appeared for them in the past, so why not again? And... because they didn't know they NEEDED it in the past until it DID arrive... they don't spend any time thinking about how long it took to MAKE that feature in the first place. Now that they miss it... they get impatient and want it NOW. I for one think Apple is going in the right direction. I don't think OS X is perfect... far from it... but I am observing trends towards bringing it up to snuff with what I want and expect. Meanwhile, since it IS the future, and it DOES already bring me some advantages... I am embracing it now. This was not the case prior to 10.1... prior to that, I was not happy enough with it to move to it. The little I have toyed with 10.2 I am even HAPPIER and am getting anxious to get it installed on my home computer. -chris <http://www.mythtech.net> ___________________________________________________________________________ To unsubscribe send a mail message with a SUBJECT line of "unsubscribe" to <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> or <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
