home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- id m0uTxEo-0007u1a; Wed, 12 Jun 96 15:14 MDT
- Sender: owner-executor
- Received: from ardi.com by ftp.ardi.com
- (Smail3.1.29.1 #3) id m0uTxE4-0007tvn; Wed, 12 Jun 96 15:13 MDT
- Path: sloth.swcp.com!usenet
- From: Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com>
- Newsgroups: comp.emulators.mac.executor
- Subject: Re: congrats to ardi
- Date: 12 Jun 1996 15:11:18 -0600
- Organization: ARDI
- Lines: 54
- Message-ID: <uflohsohhl.fsf@ftp.ardi.com>
- References: <4p1fel$hit@litecuno.ecse.rpi.edu> <ufu3wqfeil.fsf@ftp.ardi.com>
- <4p4ap1$1014@flood.weeg.uiowa.edu>
- <Pine.SOL.3.91.960606085847.1352A-100000@bass>
- <kevin-1106960822050001@shs.pr.mcs.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: 204.134.3.198
- In-reply-to: kevin@shsmedia.com's message of Tue, 11 Jun 1996 08:22:05 -0500
- X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.0
- To: executor@ardi.com
- X-MailNews-Gateway: From newsgroup comp.emulators.mac.executor
- Sender: owner-executor@ardi.com
- Precedence: bulk
-
- >>>>> "Kevin" == Kevin Killion <kevin@shsmedia.com> writes:
- In article <kevin-1106960822050001@shs.pr.mcs.net> kevin@shsmedia.com (Kevin Killion) writes:
-
-
- >> Questions: 1. Is Apple a hardware company or Operating System
- >> company ??? 2. Why should Apple support Executor and promote
- >> sales of x86 PCs. ?? 3. What financial benefits will Apple
- >> receive by supporting Executor ??
-
- Kevin> Answers:
-
- Kevin> 1. In its entire history, Apple has made only two products
- Kevin> that have been resounding popular successes: the Apple ][,
- Kevin> and the MacOS operating system. The ONLY reason people buy
- Kevin> Macintosh computers is to run MacOS.
-
- I think that characteristic is a little harsh. Macintoshes are
- computer systems, which have a hardware component and a software
- component. The original Macintosh hardware was fairly important
- because Apple had the foresight to use a chip that had a linear
- address space and hardware that had good resolution bitmapped
- graphics. Initially the MacOS just *couldn't* run on alternative
- hardware, so the fact that they developed cool hardware and a cool OS
- simultaneously is a little more impresive than the idea that the MacOS
- itself was a resounding popular success.
-
- However, as time went by and the alternative machines *could* run
- MacOS, it was a shame that people weren't given a chance to.
-
- Kevin> 2 and 3. The certain way to kill MacOS and Macintosh is to
- Kevin> allow developers to slip over to Windows and stop writing
- Kevin> for Mac. Right now, all the financial inducements (not to
- Kevin> mention social pressure, development tools, and rational
- Kevin> future vision) are lopsided in favor of Windows, as pained
- Kevin> as I am to say that. Isn't it clear what Executor really
- Kevin> could mean for Apple? Executor allows a developer to stay
- Kevin> loyal to Mac, work with the Mac APIs, and still be able to
- Kevin> sell into the lucrative Windows market!
-
- Yes. I think that for the Mac to be successful with end users, the
- Mac API has to be successful with programmers. Restricting the Mac
- API to only run on a particular set of machines, when Microsoft is
- actively going the opposite way (NT can run on PPC machines as well as
- the Alpha and x86) is a very bad move.
-
- There's more to the argument than that, but I do agree that your
- insight is a key one.
-
- Kevin> ----------------------------------------------------------------
- Kevin> Kevin Killion kevin@shsmedia.com Stone House Systems, Inc.
- Kevin> http://www.mcs.net/~shs/
-
- --Cliff
- ctm@ardi.com
-
-