Great Article from the Other Side

synsyn
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
<a href="http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421"; target="_blank">http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421</a>;



Scott Hacker, ex-BeOS evangelist, has apparently gone OSX. Pretty good read, and brings up some good points.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 12
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Man, that is one long article...I liked his W2K anaology though "like working in a clip art factory." What a perfect description of crappy MS GUI design.



    :cool:
  • Reply 2 of 12
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    A good read.



    I just hope he realizes how very independent the Mac BU is from the rest of Microsoft.



    I love this bit regarding OS9 users: [quote]<strong>Note to the stubborn ones: You're a drag on us all. Get on board.</strong><hr></blockquote>Damn straight!!
  • Reply 3 of 12
    emaneman Posts: 7,204member
    Pretty good article. The only problem I had with it was that it was so long.
  • Reply 4 of 12
    frawgzfrawgz Posts: 547member
    Wow, is his name really Hacker?
  • Reply 5 of 12
    wafffffflewaffffffle Posts: 31member
    hey, does anyone know where to get a copy of BeOS for PPC? I'd like to try it out. . .
  • Reply 6 of 12
    mac gurumac guru Posts: 367member
    Note about the OS 9 comment. Some of us aren't stubborn about it... it's that we CAN'T use OS X untill we have 100% compatibility with ALL of our applications, for business purposes.



    And as far as BeOS for PPC, I beleive you can only get it for Pre-G3 macs as Apple didn't release the hardware specs to Be because it was OS competition they didn't want.



    Mac Guru
  • Reply 7 of 12
    anandanand Posts: 285member
    The one thing we must remember is that Be was an OS company. They sold the Be OS and it had to be fast. Apple is a hardware company. If OS X was just as fast on a 233 G3 as on a 867 G4 than why would anyone upgrade. Apple has to make you want to buy a faster, newer machine. That is there thing. You cannot compare the two.
  • Reply 8 of 12
    synsyn Posts: 329member
    except OSX is still slow on an 867MHz G4, so the point is moot...
  • Reply 9 of 12
    anandanand Posts: 285member
    The point is not moot in that when faster computers come out you will want to buy them to run OS X fast. And then, a year latter when new computers come out you will want to buy them...and a year latter........
  • Reply 10 of 12
    artman @_@artman @_@ Posts: 2,546member
    [quote]Originally posted by starfleetX:

    <strong>Note to the stubborn ones: You're a drag on us all. Get on board.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Sounds like what most of the Mac users out there are saying to Adobe and Quark...
  • Reply 11 of 12
    frawgzfrawgz Posts: 547member
    I actually have a copy of BeOS PR2 or something like that. I have a PowerBase 180, so it happens to be one of the supported machines for that build. Never got around to installing it, though..
  • Reply 12 of 12
    stephanestephane Posts: 51member
    Really interesting.



    It's true it's nearly too late for integrating to X some of Be innovations but I am sure there is plenty of room to implement good ideas from other sides, be they Be or Windows.

    The key is Apple ability to listen to developpers and users suggestions as it is still the case.

    When we see all the way OS X went from the Public beta to 10.1 in 1 year , I think we can be very hopefull for next major revision. I am glad that famous analysts like Hacker or 'Nix renowned users jumped in the Mac Os X wagon in time to bring their recommandations.



    The best observation is the end : Gassée could'nt finish his dream, Jobs just began his.

    Our system is in its prime youth : I imagine that when Classic will be no more useful for X, UFS can become the standard format and other Unix features will then become OS X ones.
Sign In or Register to comment.