> I agree completly. Apple needs Be. Someone should take
> Be to the masses. It's about time we have an operating
> system designed in this decade.
This is one way to say it. Another way to say it is that the NeXT OS has been tested for a decade and the BeOS has never been fully tested.
Mach (the NeXT core OS) is a lean, mean, modern OS written to support real multi-tasking, multi-threading, multiple processors, virtual memory, and all those other goodies. Much of the work has already been done to port it to PowerPC and Motorola 88K architectures.
The BeOS theoretically has many of these features, but the operative word is "theoreteically". They have never shipped to a mass market, only to developers, and only for about a year. They are a long way from tried and true, nor are they well tested or robust. If Apple were to accept them, the burden would be on them to finish the product and move it forward in the future.
And you have to ask yourself -- if Apple was willing to pay $400M for NeXT, what was the offer from Be that they turned down? It must have been pretty high.
I'm not a NeXT zealot, and it's worth noting that as great as their technology is, NeXT hasn't really ever made any money. But the technology really is pretty good and it's been out there in real production environments for more than 5 years.
> Windows, Mac OS, Next just isn't that exciting
You'd be hard pressed to pick 3 more different environments! I don't think you can lump them together... it's really like comparing apples and, well, you get the point :-).
Randy |
