From: bgrubb@dante.nmsu.edu (GRUBB)
Subject: Re: Mac OS on PC
Organization: New Mexico State University, Las Cruces, NM
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 15:02:38 GMT

erics@infoserv.com (Eric S. Smith) writes:
>Nazedgi@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu (nazedgi) writes:

>>Microsoft has declared the war on Macs from the moment they released
>>Windows. Apple sued to no avail and Windows sales are skyrocketing. Now
>>they have released Windows for workgroups and Video for windows (A
>>quicktime competitor) Why doesn't Apple port the OS to the PC world?
>>I understand that it may hurt some of their hardware sales, but what
>>would hurt more, the MAC OS running on a PC or Windows machines?

>1. It wouldn't cut into sales of Apple hardware, it would devastate
>   them. A great many people would buy cheap PCs if they could run the
>   Mac OS plus DOS/Windows.
Who said that Mac 7.0 would RUN dos program by itself? That is a feature
of PowerOpen(AU/X 4.0) and even it will use emulators or even other
OSes to run software (Like SoftPC does for the Mac).
This minor point was left out of Mac & IBM Info-Version .9 but will
be in Version 1.0.

>2. Apple could not possibly support all the PC clones and weird combinations
>   of third party hardware found in the PC world. Half the people who
>   bought the Mac OS for their PC would end up screaming about how it
>   doesn't work and how Apple's a piece of crap. If you think flames
>   about Apple are bad now ...
This is a good point, BUT the same could be said about Apple and IBM's
joint project PowerOpen and Taligent.  I think Apple has a good idea on
how to handle this because AU/X 4.0 is a year ahead of scedule.
This was pointed out in Mac & IBM Info-Version 0.9.

>3. The current Mac OS has probably been written specifically for the
>   68K processor, and porting to an x86 base would probably mean an
>   entire rewrite. No way is Apple going to derail their software
>   development effort in such a way; their future plans lie in a different
>   direction.
Sounds like Eric S. Smith missed my Mac & IBM Info-Version 0.9 so
here is the sections relevent to the issue as it should appear in Version 1.0
(out in January){Even has article citations :)}
Points 1) & 2)
The CPUs
[...]
PowerPC: The chip is out and rumor has it that IBM may build its PowerPC 601 
EARLY 1993 (InfoWorld June 8 and 15, 92; MacWeek July 13, 92) It is also 
rumored that the 601 machine will be four times as fast as a 50 MHz 486dx 
running Windows.{Since both the PowerPC and the OS (PowerOpen) for it are a 
year ahead of schedule it could give the Pentium chip a run for the money.  
Apple and IBM hope that programs from five OSs (DOS, Windows 3.x, OS/2, Mac 
OS, & UNIX {PowerOpen-AU/X 4.0} will run on this. They plan emulators to run 
on top of PowerOpen and later Taligent OS to run the other OS's programs and 
if necessary the OSes themselves (Like SoftPC does on the Mac.)}
Point 3)
OSes {assumes full installation [print drivers, fonts, Multifinder, etc.]
and multiple application use.}
[...]
Mac
[...]
PowerOpen(AU/X 4.0): Rumor is that it is ahead of schedule to the point it 
 COULD be out by early 1993.  Planned to run on 386, 486, 68030,  
 68040, and PowerPC chips. [MacWeek 13 July] 32-bit OS.
IBM
[...]
Mac 7.0: {Maybe} Apple has System 7.0 running off Intel Chips and is looking 
 at making this version available for IBM. {Another wait & see.  Maybe a 
 testing of an Intel emulator for PowerOpen} (ComputerWorld November 2, 1992) 
PowerOpen(AU/X 4.0): Rumor is that this could be the OS for IBM's PowerPC 601 
 due out in early 1993 (Apple's PowerPC 601 is not due out until Jan 1994.)  
 {Supports the theory of Apple planning to be both a hardware and software 
 company.}
SO, porting has ALREADY been done and Apple is looking making the OS availble
to IBM machines in Mac 7.0 AND PowerOpen.  Oh, forgot to mention that
Mac 7.0 needs an emulator/interpetor to use DOS programs {not a feature of 
the OS.) {Apple's not making that a builtin feature of PowerOpen so why expect
it to be a feature of Mac 7.0?}
In short Apple's port of their OS will not hurt their hardware sale because
the OS will not directly run DOS/Windows programs without an OS emulator.
Since IBM has had a hand in the development of PowerOpen I suppect that it will
run OS/2 programs without an OS emulator.
These are the facts as they were known on 12/23/92 and may be changed by new 
developments, anouncements, or corrections.

"Eliminate the impossible and what ever remains, no matter how improbable,
is the truth" -- Sir Arthur Conan Doyle through Sherlock Holmes