|
|
What do you get when you mix Apple, the topic of developer relations and an opinionated fellow who has a weblog called DrunkenBlog?
The result, Rhapsody in Yellow is quite lengthy and entertaining (if you're into that sort of thing). My only quibble would have been to identify what the author called 'OS9 Reloaded' as Copland. That was the real intention of the project, despite whatever other baggage was added.
I originally read the article on Sunday (while sitting around in a deadly still house during a power outage) and it's still getting comments today. There are lots of great comments (and lots of not so great comments whining about various things). I really liked this one from Paul R. Potts (I remember seeing him on mailing lists a long time ago) which includes this doozy:
If anything, I think your comments underestimated how frustrating it has been. We tend to get seasick a lot from the yawing and pitching of the good ship Macintosh (sorry about that...) After attending a WWDC that was all about MacOS 8 (Copland), it was very disheartening indeed to be told that the way to get learn how to develop software for the new MacOS X was to develop for Rhapsody, which initially meant having to buy... a PC.
In some ways, I don't think the Mac developer community moved on from the heartache that was inflicted in so many ways (this was one, but the whole situation was poorly focused for a long time and just about everyone had an incompatible opinion).
Posted by Dave at May 5, 2004 05:17 PMJust to clarify, as I could see how this would be a little confusing. :)
There were actually three projects:
Hope it clarifies. :)
Posted by: drunkenbatman on May 5, 2004 07:40 PM commLinkThe one you're talking about (copland, which I mentioned in a different area) which died... this had things like NuKernel.
Yep, Copland... a true death march. They were closer than many people think. and further away than anyone is comfortable saying in public. Backward compatibility was AFAIK, the killer.
The one I was talking about (os refactored, which would be essentially shoe-horning 'modern OS' features into the Classic OS.
I heard little about this and had really good contacts inside at the time.
My understanding was that it was investigated, but dropped by the wayside when the Rhapsody core proved itself. At that point, everyone who knew something and was not critical to one of the ongoing updates (I think we were at about 8.5 around that time -- Allegro?) or 9.0 was tossed into an OsX system group.
Still, as I said it's a minor quibble. I found your rant to be quite lucid, well informed overall and highly entertaining (always useful). Keep it up!
Posted by: Dave Ely on May 5, 2004 09:33 PM commLinkMy understanding was that it was investigated, but dropped by the wayside when the Rhapsody core proved itself. At that point, everyone who knew something and was not critical to one of the ongoing updates (I think we were at about 8.5 around that time -- Allegro?) or 9.0 was tossed into an OsX system group.
Yep! Didn't mean to say it was seriously on the table, just that it was an option that was looked into at the time... as were Be, WindowsNT kernel, etc.
Thanks for your other comments, its nice to hear to balance out the death threats (grin). Sorry for taking so long to reply, I'm a little slow getting around at the moment. :)
Posted by: drunkenbatman on May 8, 2004 04:11 PM commLink