Quote:
Originally Posted by
mdriftmeyer 
No they couldn't. We had 3 months of capital before closing the doors. Copland was joke to all internal engineering staff. Taligent was another broken dream.
Really? Then how did Apple come up with $400 M - and then take another couple of years before they were able to release OS X?
Apple clearly had enough to get by for some time. Maybe with some tough decisions, but the fact that they survived for years before releasing OS X shows that they had more than 3 months of capital.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mdriftmeyer 
BeOS was nowhere near the robust nature and quality APIs of NeXTSTEP. Sorry, but one of the reasons NeXT was quickly agreed to by all parties interested was the massive amount of IP that NeXT had both mature and simmering which actually never was made to market at the time Apple bought the company.
I never said BeOS was as robust as NeXTSTEP. I said that Apple had a number of options they could have chosen from. They could have built their next OS on Linux. Or any other Unix. Or BeOS. Or Copland.
In retrospect, it seems clear that NeXT was the best choice. That doesn't mean it was the ONLY choice.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
mdriftmeyer 
Sorry, but being on the inside gives one a perspective you cannot fathom.
The Apple Campus was divided into a couple factions. Within the first year it was clear the deadwood was dragging the company into the ground. The canceling of the sabbatical program was another key move by Steve that protected the company from collapsing in cost.
There were a lot of technically limited folks who were scared out of their minds with UNIX when we arrived.
That's essentially what I said. Someone said that NeXT simply started using the Apple name. That is grossly incorrect. There were a lot of technologies brought from the Apple side, as well. And the biggest problem was the lack of proper management - which is what I said. WIth proper management, you don't have a campus with multiple factions and deadwood dragging the company into the ground.
Apple today is what it is because of a combination of 3 major things:
1. NeXT and NeXT people
2. Steve Jobs
3. Apple technologies and people
It is a mistake to ignore any of those three.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Steven N. 
Apple had lots of interesting stuff going on. From Copland to OpenDoc to Newton. Some cool, disconnected stuff. They had no direction (even less than Google has now). They were a collection of little fiefdoms controlled by people of "power" each having a different vision. The problem was, that vision was all they had. There were no plans on how to actually achieve any of the ideas they had.
NeXT not only provided people that had "vision" they also provided people that had a deep understanding of the art of software design and architecture. Be never had this IMO. Apple had lost it.
NeXT provided people with insight, vision, drive, ambition and some amazingly high technology. It is no accident within 6 months all but 1 of Apple's top 15 manegers were "previously of NeXT".
All you have to do is look at the primary tech:
OS X - NeXT based tech with added goodness.
iPhone - NeXT based tech. You still have all those amazing foundation classes but the GUI classes have been renamed and re-thought out.
XCode - NeXT based tech. PB preceded it for several years but it was headed by many NeXT based guys/OpenStep developers.
QuickTime - OK, you got me. Apple.
iPad - NeXT based tech
iTunes - OK, Another Apple based tech.
It's pretty disingenuous to claim that iPhone and iPad are NeXT-based technologies. They are based on OS X - which is a clear hybrid of NeXT and Apple.
I really love how you claim OS X is 'NeXT based tech with added goodness'. Essentially, it's a pure hybrid. The core is heavily NeXT and the UI is heavily Apple. Neither company by itself could have produced OS X.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Steven N. 
But the point is, NeXT brought much more than Steve Jobs. They brought FILE EXTENSIONS!!!
Adding/promoting File Extensions helped the Mac gain acceptance more than any single other change OS X made.
Probably far less than the transition to Intel.
But the point is that it is wrong to say that Apple today is solely NeXT. It is a hybrid of NeXT, Steve Jobs culture, and Apple stuff.