Service discovery happens at OSI layers 4-7, it can be done, in the application, presentation or session layers... I really cant see what service discovery has to do with the routed adderssing protocol. netBEUI can run atop tcp/ip...
Yes, and it is done, in Bonjour, as I pointed out, oh, several posts before.
But it isn't done per default, and Bonjour came many, many years after AppleTalk already offered this functionality. That's the entire point. Don't give me OSI layers because they don't matter to the user.
"Why can't I do?" ?_"Oh, because that has to do with a different layer." ?_"Gee, thanks, that helps?"
IPX, Appletalk, IBM Token, they were all fairly good at what they did...but they couldnt work together...hence the adoption of TCP/IP and IPv4
Umm, the Appletalk suite included Tokentalk as its layer 2 protocol for running over Token Ring. IPX/SPX, being a layer 3/4 protocol, ran just fine on Token Ring as well.
Your point is well taken though, the trend toward one unifying protocol suite doomed Appletalk and IPX since what was to become the Internet used TCP/IP.
I think you are thinking of NetBIOS? NetBEUI and TCP/IP exist at the same OSI layers so don't work to well together. NetBIOS is a layer 5 protocol and runs fine with TCP/IP.
Service discovery. AppleTalk and NetBEUI can do it; TCP/IP can't.
TCP/IP can. There are two principle methods, both used by Apple - SLP and Zeroconf. SLP was created by Apple to bring Appletalk-like service discovery to TCP/IP. It was then standardized by the IETF. SLP was used in OS 8.5 and OS X pre-zeroconf (Bonjour).
I do agree that Appletalk had some nice features for private networks including service discovery before TCP/IP. So did IPX/SPX. In part, this is due to the original purposes of each protocol.
There are two principle methods, both used by Apple - SLP and Zeroconf. SLP was created by Apple to bring Appletalk-like service discovery to TCP/IP. It was then standardized by the IETF. SLP was used in OS 8.5 and OS X pre-zeroconf (Bonjour).
Yes, I knew about SLP, and I pointed out Bonjour (ZeroConf) long ago.
Quote:
I do agree that Appletalk had some nice features for private networks including service discovery before TCP/IP. So did IPX/SPX. In part, this is due to the original purposes of each protocol.
The point is that, for the typical end user, AppleTalk had more relevant features out of the box.
I can rest easy now, safe with the knowledge that iCal and Address Book may not become one...
Yea out of all the things the guy could have come up with choosing something so freakin random as merging Address Book and iCal into a single application.... Sheech, that's something you might expect from the Windows world but certainly not from Apple.
It's quite clear Apple made a conscious choice NOT to merge Mail+AddressBook+iCal into a single PIM type application.
I think you are thinking of NetBIOS? NetBEUI and TCP/IP exist at the same OSI layers so don't work to well together. NetBIOS is a layer 5 protocol and runs fine with TCP/IP.
woops...thats what I get for posting too early on a Saturday morning
Windows Apps running side by side with Macintosh Apps?
Dear Lord... what have they done. This could be the final straw for native Applications on the Mac. Why should developers bother porting something over, if they can run the Windows Version.
Because many people will not want to install Windows on their machine, not to mention the ability to use OS specific functionality. As for me the only other OSes I would install on my Mac is Gentoo or FreeBSD and that is only because I would want to use GNUstep since I am learning Obj-C/Cocoa.
Anybody else besides me want the slick Ajaxian/Aperture and the Front Row UI extended further throughout the OS? I love the black and grey transparent windows with the dashes of colour and the cool CoreImage effects.
Why The HELL did the faker miss out on the DDR2 bit? After a pristine fake, the DDR detail is like, a big careless mistake. Weird. [/B]
I'd imagine, if it's not fake, that given the guy has posted screenshots of software that's under NDA, they'd quite possibly be running it on non-Apple hardware too.
edit: Oops. Must read rest of thread before posting - it is fake. Still, there was some nice ideas there. I'd be quite impressed if Apple got the seamless Windows integration working although a little worried for app developers.
Because many people will not want to install Windows on their machine, not to mention the ability to use OS specific functionality. As for me the only other OSes I would install on my Mac is Gentoo or FreeBSD and that is only because I would want to use GNUstep since I am learning Obj-C/Cocoa.
Why would you want GNUStep to learn Obective-C/Cocoa when you've MacOSX already ?
I'd imagine, if it's not fake, that given the guy has posted screenshots of software that's under NDA, they'd quite possibly be running it on non-Apple hardware too.
Since the guy has already admitted that
1) it's fake
2) he doesn't have an Intel Mac so he had to recreate the About This Mac box's contents tot his best of his knowledge,
and since he even provides a PSD file for people to see how he's done it, I'm not sure what further merit this discussion has.
Why would you want GNUStep to learn Obective-C/Cocoa when you've MacOSX already ?
He did mention Gentoo and FreeBSD. I guess his idea is that, once you write in Cocoa, it will mostly run in GNUstep as well.
Realistically, it's not easy to accomplish that, and it usually isn't worth the effort. Your application will obviously not be able to take advantage of the plethora of Cocoa-specific APIs GNUstep hasn't implemented.
Give me Win 98 2nd edition over OS 8 any day any time.
Same here. MacOS might have looked better on the front end but the OS underneath was a mess of badly handled 68K interrupts that should have been junked a decade earlier.
I'd rather have had Windows NT though given the choice of MS operating systems. Even NT3.1. Both 98 and MacOS crashed far too often to be useful and multi-tasked like drunken slugs if you even attempted to run more than a couple of things at once. Useless as a developer.
I used to run MacOS on my Amiga as it was more stable than my SE/30 at the time, and that's saying something given that AmigaOS didn't have protected memory.
In the OS7/8 days, I was working in a company that did set-top boxes and most of the graphics guys ran on Macs while us programmers were using Windows NT. I've never seen people go for coffee so often because of hangs, reboots and crashes.
If these screenshots were real Apple Legal would have had their say by now.
I can't wait for next month. It would be nice to have an updated Finder and maybe safari. And what was this talk about resolution independence? That would be nice since I have a 12" powerbook...not exactly huge screen real estate.
And it would be nice to run a few windows apps for us engineers out here. Unless we can get a decent version of matlab (not the X11 version), maybe fluent, and of course solidworks, i'll take a virtualization solution.
Comments
Originally posted by a_greer
Service discovery happens at OSI layers 4-7, it can be done, in the application, presentation or session layers... I really cant see what service discovery has to do with the routed adderssing protocol. netBEUI can run atop tcp/ip...
Yes, and it is done, in Bonjour, as I pointed out, oh, several posts before.
But it isn't done per default, and Bonjour came many, many years after AppleTalk already offered this functionality. That's the entire point. Don't give me OSI layers because they don't matter to the user.
"Why can't I do?" ?_"Oh, because that has to do with a different layer." ?_"Gee, thanks, that helps?"
Originally posted by a_greer
IPX, Appletalk, IBM Token, they were all fairly good at what they did...but they couldnt work together...hence the adoption of TCP/IP and IPv4
Umm, the Appletalk suite included Tokentalk as its layer 2 protocol for running over Token Ring. IPX/SPX, being a layer 3/4 protocol, ran just fine on Token Ring as well.
Your point is well taken though, the trend toward one unifying protocol suite doomed Appletalk and IPX since what was to become the Internet used TCP/IP.
Originally posted by a_greer
netBEUI can run atop tcp/ip...
I think you are thinking of NetBIOS? NetBEUI and TCP/IP exist at the same OSI layers so don't work to well together. NetBIOS is a layer 5 protocol and runs fine with TCP/IP.
Originally posted by Chucker
Service discovery. AppleTalk and NetBEUI can do it; TCP/IP can't.
TCP/IP can. There are two principle methods, both used by Apple - SLP and Zeroconf. SLP was created by Apple to bring Appletalk-like service discovery to TCP/IP. It was then standardized by the IETF. SLP was used in OS 8.5 and OS X pre-zeroconf (Bonjour).
I do agree that Appletalk had some nice features for private networks including service discovery before TCP/IP. So did IPX/SPX. In part, this is due to the original purposes of each protocol.
Originally posted by hmmfe
TCP/IP can.
With extensions, sure.
There are two principle methods, both used by Apple - SLP and Zeroconf. SLP was created by Apple to bring Appletalk-like service discovery to TCP/IP. It was then standardized by the IETF. SLP was used in OS 8.5 and OS X pre-zeroconf (Bonjour).
Yes, I knew about SLP, and I pointed out Bonjour (ZeroConf) long ago.
I do agree that Appletalk had some nice features for private networks including service discovery before TCP/IP. So did IPX/SPX. In part, this is due to the original purposes of each protocol.
The point is that, for the typical end user, AppleTalk had more relevant features out of the box.
I can rest easy now, safe with the knowledge that iCal and Address Book may not become one...
Originally posted by Chucker
With extensions, sure.
Yes, I knew about SLP, and I pointed out Bonjour (ZeroConf) long ago.
The point is that, for the typical end user, AppleTalk had more relevant features out of the box.
Well, then I guess you can also say that Appletalk can't do service discovery without the NBP extension. Semantics, I guess.
edit: typos
Originally posted by danielctull
I can rest easy now, safe with the knowledge that iCal and Address Book may not become one...
Yea out of all the things the guy could have come up with choosing something so freakin random as merging Address Book and iCal into a single application.... Sheech, that's something you might expect from the Windows world but certainly not from Apple.
It's quite clear Apple made a conscious choice NOT to merge Mail+AddressBook+iCal into a single PIM type application.
Dave
Originally posted by hmmfe
I think you are thinking of NetBIOS? NetBEUI and TCP/IP exist at the same OSI layers so don't work to well together. NetBIOS is a layer 5 protocol and runs fine with TCP/IP.
woops...thats what I get for posting too early on a Saturday morning
Originally posted by Denmaru
Windows Apps running side by side with Macintosh Apps?
Dear Lord... what have they done. This could be the final straw for native Applications on the Mac. Why should developers bother porting something over, if they can run the Windows Version.
Because many people will not want to install Windows on their machine, not to mention the ability to use OS specific functionality. As for me the only other OSes I would install on my Mac is Gentoo or FreeBSD and that is only because I would want to use GNUstep since I am learning Obj-C/Cocoa.
Quote:
[i]Originally posted by Dr. X
After a pristine fake, the DDR detail is like, a big careless mistake. Weird.
Maybe the '2' was photoshopped out to make it "look" faked.
Originally posted by sunilraman
Why The HELL did the faker miss out on the DDR2 bit? After a pristine fake, the DDR detail is like, a big careless mistake. Weird. [/B]
I'd imagine, if it's not fake, that given the guy has posted screenshots of software that's under NDA, they'd quite possibly be running it on non-Apple hardware too.
edit: Oops. Must read rest of thread before posting - it is fake. Still, there was some nice ideas there. I'd be quite impressed if Apple got the seamless Windows integration working although a little worried for app developers.
Originally posted by troberts
Because many people will not want to install Windows on their machine, not to mention the ability to use OS specific functionality. As for me the only other OSes I would install on my Mac is Gentoo or FreeBSD and that is only because I would want to use GNUstep since I am learning Obj-C/Cocoa.
Why would you want GNUStep to learn Obective-C/Cocoa when you've MacOSX already ?
Originally posted by aegisdesign
I'd imagine, if it's not fake, that given the guy has posted screenshots of software that's under NDA, they'd quite possibly be running it on non-Apple hardware too.
Since the guy has already admitted that
1) it's fake
2) he doesn't have an Intel Mac so he had to recreate the About This Mac box's contents tot his best of his knowledge,
and since he even provides a PSD file for people to see how he's done it, I'm not sure what further merit this discussion has.
Originally posted by aegisdesign
Why would you want GNUStep to learn Obective-C/Cocoa when you've MacOSX already ?
He did mention Gentoo and FreeBSD. I guess his idea is that, once you write in Cocoa, it will mostly run in GNUstep as well.
Realistically, it's not easy to accomplish that, and it usually isn't worth the effort. Your application will obviously not be able to take advantage of the plethora of Cocoa-specific APIs GNUstep hasn't implemented.
Originally posted by Chucker
Since the guy has already admitted that
1) it's fake
2) he doesn't have an Intel Mac so he had to recreate the About This Mac box's contents tot his best of his knowledge,
and since he even provides a PSD file for people to see how he's done it, I'm not sure what further merit this discussion has.
yeah, just corrected myself whilst you were posting.
Originally posted by a_greer
Give me Win 98 2nd edition over OS 8 any day any time.
Same here. MacOS might have looked better on the front end but the OS underneath was a mess of badly handled 68K interrupts that should have been junked a decade earlier.
I'd rather have had Windows NT though given the choice of MS operating systems. Even NT3.1. Both 98 and MacOS crashed far too often to be useful and multi-tasked like drunken slugs if you even attempted to run more than a couple of things at once. Useless as a developer.
I used to run MacOS on my Amiga as it was more stable than my SE/30 at the time, and that's saying something given that AmigaOS didn't have protected memory.
In the OS7/8 days, I was working in a company that did set-top boxes and most of the graphics guys ran on Macs while us programmers were using Windows NT. I've never seen people go for coffee so often because of hangs, reboots and crashes.
I can't wait for next month. It would be nice to have an updated Finder and maybe safari. And what was this talk about resolution independence? That would be nice since I have a 12" powerbook...not exactly huge screen real estate.
And it would be nice to run a few windows apps for us engineers out here. Unless we can get a decent version of matlab (not the X11 version), maybe fluent, and of course solidworks, i'll take a virtualization solution.
-David