A Technical History of Apple's Operating Systems 244
An anonymous reader writes "As part of his 1680-page book Mac OS X Internals: A Systems Approach, Amit Singh of kernelthread.com wrote a very detailed technical history of Apple's operating systems. Since he had to cut down on the history chapter because of the book's already too-large size, most of this chapter didn't make it to the printed book. Singh has made available the history chapter as a free PDF. The file is 140 pages long, and is generously filled with figures and screenshots. It starts with the internals of the original Apple I and goes through a tour of all operating systems Apple dabbled with, including internals of A/UX, Lisa OS, and such. It even covers details of outside influences like the Xerox Alto, STAR System, Smalltalk, and Sketchpad, and closer to home things like Mach, NeXTStep, and OpenStep."
Apple ][ (Score:5, Insightful)
Despite how far we've come, there are time I really miss my old Apple ][.
I did (Score:5, Insightful)
Daring Fireball wrote about this recently [daringfireball.net]. Here's the most important quote of the article:
Yeah, I did use and like Mac OS 9, Mac OS 8 and System 7. I did smoke lots of weed, but that had nothing to do with it. There are two things to consider: First, it went up against crap like Windows 3.11 and Windows 95. Second, it was the prettiest, most easy-to-use OS, even with cooperative multitasking and lack of memory protection.
Mac OS X added a lot to what makes a Mac great, but Mac OS 9 had a lot going for it, too.
Learn concepts, not imlementations (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why you should always learn concepts instead of implementations. Concepts remain useful and can be used to judge new implementations, while implementations always go away eventually.
Re:Apple ][ (Score:5, Insightful)
And the reason that they do this is that they (and you) don't have to pay the real cost of disposing of the old TV. Instead of recycling the TV and reclaiming all the materials, you'll probably just toss the old TV in the trash. And the hazardous chemicals will leak into the soil. Our descendents will have to clean that shit up eventually, which will cost tons of money. But we don't have to pay that, so we just go get a new TV cheap.</rant>
Re:I did (Score:4, Insightful)
It's a rather misleading description, though. More accurately:
Re:Archeological dig (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Apple ][ (Score:2, Insightful)
Or they'll have developed pollution-eating bacteria and it'll cost about a nickel. We really don't know, do we?
Re:I did (Score:2, Insightful)
On most UNIX systems, if there is no more memory to give then malloc() fails (returns NULL) and you can then try freeing memory elsewhere and trying again, or go into some recovery mode (typically make sure everything is saved and then quit).
On Linux, if there is no more memory to give, then a random process is terminated.
Re:I did (Score:3, Insightful)
So your personal mantra would be "crashing is better than telling me if there's a memory problem"?
Re:No wonder the book is 1680 pages (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:I did (Score:3, Insightful)
Or reboot, because even though you might have had enough available free memory to run an application, it might not have been enough contiguous free memory.
Re:Apple ][ (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Being too greedy? (Score:4, Insightful)
From the time Copland died in the summer of 1996 until we got laid off in March of 1997, we waited for the Big Decision and learned a lot about UNIX-based operating systems because we knew that's where the company had to go. NeXt and Steve Jobs's return were complete surprises. Smartest move Gil Amelio made--just as was Steve's immediately getting Gil out of the way and resuming leadership. Apple's customers needed a reason to believe and Gil only provided silence. As one Rumor-Monger wag said, "he couldn't market pussy in a prison."