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."
Thread beginning with comment 175382
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
helf
Member since:
2005-07-06

SO they could have spent millions trying to get their not-so-great older OS proper memory protection, SMP support, preemptive multitasking etc etc or purchase a very nice, already completed OS and add a VM that would run a version of the older os for backwards compatibility?

I think NeXT was a MUCH better choice. They would have had to completely rewrite classic and still had to use a VM (most likely) to be properly compatible with older apps.

or maybe im totally wrong.. who knows...

Reply Parent Score: 1

Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

Erm, it is not as if OSX is NeXT 2.0. They used components and ideas from NeXT.

I think that in the end, either way would've succeeded. Personally, I would've preferred they bought Be, since I like BeOS more than I do UNIX or UNIX-like systems.

Reply Parent Score: 1

helf Member since:
2005-07-06

Thats good! Since the versions were up to Openstep 4.2! ;)

And, OSX is more Openstep than you think.

Reply Parent Score: 2

galvanash Member since:
2006-01-25

Erm, it is not as if OSX is NeXT 2.0. They used components and ideas from NeXT.

Having actually used NeXT for a while back in the day, saying OSX uses components of NeXT is silly. It is not a fundamentally different OS, OSX IS NeXT. It is heavily modified under the hood and has a spiffy new paintjob, but it is still NeXT. OSX is NeXT with components of System 9 in it, not the other way around.

Reply Parent Score: 1

TheBadger Member since:
2005-11-14

"I think NeXT was a MUCH better choice. They would have had to completely rewrite classic and still had to use a VM (most likely) to be properly compatible with older apps."

Indeed. Apple's operating system rewrite projects were just tar pits, and the infighting and politics that make up 90% of the Apple story would have made the whole strategy unviable. If you have to credit Steve Jobs with one thing it's cutting right through all that and giving the Mac the operating system it should have had all along.

Reply Parent Score: 1