From: UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.advocacy
Subject: Re: Will the real Taligent please stand up? (was Re: PowerPC or Mac???)
Date: 15 Dec 92 22:18:49 GMT
Organization: University of Missouri

In article <1992Dec15.110712.10929@cubetech.com>
andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern) writes:
 
>
>In article <168BD8E6D.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
>>In article <1992Dec14.050708.1488@cubetech.com>
>>andrew@cubetech.com (Andrew Loewenstern) writes:
>>
>>>
>>>In article <168BBDAAD.UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu> UC525655@mizzou1.missouri.edu (Mark Eaton) writes:
>>>>Hmm. I guess the combined resources of Apple and IBM won't be any
>>>>help to Taligent? Yeah, NeXT could easily stay ahead of two giants,
>>>>especially now that they'll be supporting two platforms. Don't
>>>>expect NS 3.0 for awhile now that they'll be worrying over NS486.
>>>
>>>Hello??
>>>
>>>First, NS 3.0 has been out on NeXT computers for over three months now.
>>
>>Sorry. I guess I meant 4.0. In any case, the next NextStep for Nexts,
>>but I bet you knew what I meant. ;)
>
>NeXTSTEP for NeXT Computers and NeXTSTEP for the 80x86 and NeXTSTEP
>for god knows what else uses the same code for everything except the
>device drivers and certain discrete parts of the window-server.  The
>AppKit team is distinct from the people doing device drivers for 486.
>Many of the people doing device drivers do not work at NeXT.  They
>work for PC OEMs and use DriverKit (an object-oriented device-driver
>toolkit.  what a neat idea, eh?).
>
Yeah, sure. One team works on one thing, and the others work on
something else. This is nothing new. But now some of those guys
that were on development teams are on bug fix teams for the new
NS486. And some might be on tech consulting, and whatnot. Dont
kid yourself, Next cant just bring out a new OS for a completely
new hardware platform and not lease manpower to the effort.
 
>>Yeah, sure. Apple and IBM may not got along, they may even split off,
>>but the point is, Apple already had a significant amount of work done
>>on an OOP OS. If the taligent thing breaks apart, apple can still bring
>>out Pink sans IBM, and run it on PowerPC, or any other processor.
>
>Why waste your time trying to work with someone if you are capable of doing
>it by yourself?  It would certainly avoid the multitude of legal
 
All those wonderful corporate distributors?
 
>hassels that will arise should IBM and Apple have a falling out.
>Perhaps that's what Apple really wants - a mega lawsuit with IBM.
>Heck, it's almost the same thing they did with Microsoft.
>
>
>andrew
>--
>andrew@cubetech.com      |  "C++'s runtime sucks shit!  Virtual functions
>Andrew Loewenstern       |   can go straight to hell!"  - Ron Pomeroy
>Cube Technologies, Inc.  |                   ForYourEyesOnly public key:
>0000000701B61D1ADF0DFC9C16185CEA055200000007EB4A9FEB1922065D471A89E905B5
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mark Eaton                    | Opinions? We're not allowed to have
UC525655@MIZZOU1.MISSOURI.EDU | opinions at Mizzou... get back to me
                              | in '94 when I graduate... ;)