Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 25th Oct 2006 19:29 UTC
Mac OS X Apple co-founder Steve Wozniak says that Apple did not need NeXT, the company that provided the foundation for Mac OS X; he argues that System 7 wasn't nearly as bad as it was made out to be. Wozniak also says that Mac OS 9 was more secure than OS X is now: Mac OS X is built in Unix and is therefore more prone to attacks because people are familiar with the holes in Unix, explained Woznaik. "Some of the holes in Unix are well known. So keeping Firewalls on is more important. And we keep announcing, even our own security fixes, not as many as Microsoft but still we never really had those in the OS 9 days."
Permalink for comment 175354
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Frankly, his point is moot..
by NicolasRoard on Wed 25th Oct 2006 20:30 UTC
NicolasRoard
Member since:
2005-07-16

There is (and there was) much more to OPENSTEP than preemptive multitask..

Of course, it provided proper multitask, obviously an improvement on OS9. But the main advantages of NeXT's OPENSTEP were the absolutely incredible development tools (InterfaceBuilder and the OpenStep framework), the really object-oriented environment (sadly, OS X tonned that down -- all the capacities are here but aren't as exposed to the user as they were on OPENSTEP) full vector display (DisplayPostScript), true multiuser, etc.

OS X is an evolution of these concepts. In addition to that, beeing based on PostScript, OPENSTEP provided a perfect environment for DTP -- one of the big Apple markets.

BeOS was a very cool OS, indeed, with excellent ideas. But OPENSTEP was pragmatically better (if only because it supported printer, pantone colors, was more robust, had a proved track record, etc), and really a better choice in the end. The BeOS toolkit was nice, but Cocoa is quite a few steps above (beside Objective-C > C++ .. but hey).

Edited 2006-10-25 20:32

Reply Score: 5