Linked by Jeremy T. Fox on Fri 11th Jul 2003 16:55 UTC
A recent article by Tony Smith from The Register titled "Mac OS X 10.3 Panther will not be a 64-bit OS" caused a good deal of confusion with many people, including me. It is also caused a heated argument here on OSNews. The basic point of the article is that Mac OS 10.2.7 and 10.3 are not "true" 64-bit OSes, but the article does not clearly explain what a "true" 64-bit OS is. This had led to a lot of claims that the article is false or misinformed, rather than just unclear, which is certainly is.
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Which goes RIGHT BACK to a post I made earlier that Apple should have licensed AIX core off IBM and worked their GUI magic on it.
The reason Apple managed to produce OS X as quickly as they did is because they were starting from the NeXT codebase. Perhaps you haven't examined Cocoa and CoreFoundation in-depth but the Cocoa event model is based around Mach message ports.
Why would Apple use a kernel which isn't their own IP and doesn't support Mach messaging? Does that make any sense from a business or technical perspective?