>
>Two days ago I have just helped some Japanese chap to get OSX Server up
>and running and we were going through all the Japanese TIL articles on
>Apple Japan's web site.
>
>We found something that looked like an OSX mini-FAQ which was derived
>from an English Apple document and it said ...
>
>"Q: Is MacOS X the same as Rhapsody ?
>
>A: No, MacOS X is not Rhapsody."
>
>That is Apple who said that.
Then it's wrong. OS X _is_ derived from Rhapsody. PERIOD. It's not
the absolute original concept, but Rhapsody = NextSTEP+MacOS. The only
real diff from the original Rhapsody to OS X is Carbon.
>I tried to find the article again, but because we went through so many
>articles, I simply can't recall exactly which one it was. I make no
>promises but I will keep looking and if I find it I'll post the link.
AHA! You can't find it because your memory is wrong. Because that simply
is NOT the facts.
You probably saw "Copland" and now remember it as "Rhapsody". They are
NOT the same thing. COPLAND was the MacOS redesign project that Apple
abandoned when they bought NeXT.
>As far as your comments on the architecture go, there are some things
>that look alright to me, but others raise suspicion. For example, I
>remember to have read about Rhapsody, even with an architecture diagram
>of it in a MacWorld or MacUser or MacSomethingElse magazine well
>*before* Steven Jobs rejoined Apple and well before Apple even
>considered to use OpenStep as a base.
Then your memory is wrong. What you are thinking of is Copland, NOT
Rhapsody. They are not even remotely the same thing. Copland was the
MacOS X redesign that Apple abandoned before/when Apple bought NeXT's
tech.
Copland was before Steve Jobs return
Rhapsody and OS X are after.
Those are the facts. Parts of the work done on Copland may have shown up
in Rhapsody/OS X though.
I'm sure parts of the MacOS emulator they had that ran on Unix years and
years ago went into the Classic emulator in OS X. That was a product
that Apple sold for Unix boxes for a number of years. Most people don't
even remember or know that that existed too.
>Before Apple decided they would go
>with OpenStep, they were in talks with Be to use BeOS as a base for the
>new OS to come.
That was the rumor, but there was never a public announcement of any such
thing.
>So, clearly, Apple didn't always have OpenStep on their
>mind, an impression one might get reading your comments. In reality,
>Apple was running around like a headless chicken trying to come up with
>something but even if they had good ideas they could never agree on a
>direction. Steven Jobs changed that and it was only then that OpenStep
>became the direction. Work on Rhapsody had been done long before that.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. COPLAND, something TOTALLY different than
NeXTStep/OpenStep/Rhapsody/OS X came before Steve Job's return. It was
a totally different OS design, although certain parts of Copland showed
up in OS 9 and probably even in OS X (possibly even in OS 8.)
>I clearly remember that Jobs announced that Rhapsody was to be abandoned
>for something else.
Again, you are WRONG. Your memory is just plain wrong. The only change
Steve announced re: Rhapsody was the introduction of Carbon due to the
developers complaining abouy being forced to rewrite their current apps
in Cocao (OpenStep/NextSTEP/Project Builder) to make use of OS X's
features. Carbon allows OS X native apps without a total Cocoa rewrite.
> Sure, there will have been some level of publicity
>stunt behind that, but I also seem to remember that it was also stated
>that some work that had gone into Rhapsody was to be salvaged for OSX.
Again, you're memory is wrong. It was the work on COPLAND that went into
Rhapsody/OS X.
>Besides, it is Apple who owned whatever was Rhapsody
Again, COPLAND, not Rhapsody.
>and it is Apple who
>bought OpenStep. They are the owners of all this stuff and as such they
>have the ultimate owenership rights which means it is up to them to say
>what it is and what it not is. That's what the law in the US says anyway.
>
>If Apple says Rhapsody is not OSX, I'll go with that.
Apple never said that, despite what you say you read. And if a
translation of an FAQ said that on an Japanese web page, then the
translation was incorrect. PERIOD.
Rhapsody IS OS X. Or rather, OS X is the final form of Rhapsody + Carbon
+ a bit of Copland.
- Bill
-- This is the Newtontalk mailinglist - http://www.newtontalk.net To unsubscribe or manage: visit the above link or mailto:newtontalk-request_at_newtontalk.net?Subject=unsubscribe
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat Dec 01 2001 - 20:03:56 EST