Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sam Scrutchins who wrote (13441)	5/11/1998 9:58:00 PM
From: rhet0ric	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

Re: MacOS, Rhapsody, and Intel Apple seems to be presenting us with a riddle: if Road A and Road B converge, what's the name of the new road? The answer seems to be: the name that the most people are familiar with. In other words, they decided that in converging Rhapsody and MacOS, it made more sense to give the new OS the name that is most familiar to Mac developers and users, namely MacOS. Makes perfect sense from a marketing standpoint. What's confusing us, I think, is that because the new OS will be largely Rhapsody, the naming scheme doesn't make sense from a technical standpoint. If Rhapsody is becoming MacOS, then why can't the code technology that allows the Red Box to sit on top of MacOS work? Or to put it the other way around: if MacOS is becoming Rhapsody... I understand that, technically, Red Box (MacOS on Intel, at least I think this is what you mean) should be possible. Whether Apple pursues it or not is a different matter. Indeed, is MacOS simply a new Rhapsody relying on MAC x.x code in lieu of new Rhapsody code for the baseline system. No, Rhapsody will still be the baseline system. (But again, we may be confusing names because of the above riddle). The base of the system is the Mach kernel, which is portable across many platforms. On top of that will be Yellow Box APIs (mostly the former OpenStep) and certain MacOS APIs (Carbon). Could not developers now write for the MacOS like Apple wanted them to right for Rhapsody, so that all MacOS-written applications would also run in the Intel arena? Just wondering? Technically, yes, I gather this is possible. My sense is that Steve still has some tricks up his sleeve, and he's waiting to pull them out when the time is right. The biggest question is the cross-platform one, and how Apple plans to licence software or build hardware if (or more likely, when) their OS runs on multiple plaforms. Currently they are putting a lot of effort into spreading the word that PPC is the best platform. That would seem to indicate that they will leave the non-PPC hardware for others to build. Time will tell. rhet0ric

To: Sam Scrutchins who wrote (13441)	5/12/1998 1:25:00 PM
From: BillHoo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

<<Could not developers now write for the MacOS like Apple wanted them to right for Rhapsody, so that all MacOS-written applications would also run in the Intel arena?>> The only hint to that that I could discern is found in the listing of features for OSX found in Macintouch: 1.protected memory 2.virtual memory 3.pre-emptive multitasking 4.multi-threading 5.very fast networking 6.fast file I/O 7.PowerPC native/only 8.Open Transport networking 9."There will be no ROM in Mac OS X" 10."Mac OS X will not support traditional extensions" NOTICE feature number 9. No ROM. Does this mean that it is not tied to the Apple ROMs? -Bill_H

To: Sam Scrutchins who wrote (13441)	5/12/1998 2:34:00 PM
From: HerbVic	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213177

Let me see if I can draw you (and me) a picture. ->-> Mac OS8.1 ->-> Mac OS 8.5 ->-> Mac OS 8.6? -> into Rhapsody (Parallel development) ->->->->->->->->-> Rhapsody ->-> OS X Direction of Technologies in Rhapsody: Yellow Box for PPC ------ Rhapsody kernal ---- OS X Yellow Box for Intel ---- Rhapsody kernal ---- (?) Blue Box for Mac OS 8.1 - Layer for 8.1 ------ OS X Blue Box for "95/NT ----- Layer for '95/NT --- (?) The YB for Intel may dry up due to the time line, since Intel will be trying to create a mass migration to Merced. However, there is the possibility (even probability) that Apple will be working on a Yellow Box for Merced. In that case, the Blue Box for '95/NT will live on. This will give companies a choice when making the leap to millennium 2000 technologies. 1> They can leap to PPC platform with OS X. It's unclear if they will be able to use '95/NT software here, but it's possible, even likely. 2> They can leap to Merced platform with OS X. Use of OS X and legacy '95/NT 3> They can leap to Merced platform with Microsoft Win.X. Use of legacy '95/NT. If I have stated anything wrongly, someone please correct me! Hope this helps! HerbVic