Why does this matter to you at all? It's funny to see all the Mac apologizer comments having to clarify that "oh no, but that Mac was so different". As if the modern incantation is any better; we just had a thread two days ago of how absolutely botched it is from a UI/UX perspective, and the hardware is the most anti-hacker, anti-consumer, DRM-riddled thing in existence if you watch any of that Ross boy's channel.
> If I can convince apple to do a good hardware accelerated OpenGL in rhapsody
Yeah, that comment aged well. Mac users are still waiting for full OpenGL 4.6 compliance and that spec is already ten years old.
Edit: of course, I will get down-voted despite laying out very basic facts. Happens every time you poke the dogma bee's nest.
Edit edit: I am still genuinely curious why the man's opinion from 30 years ago apparently matters to you that much. I'd like to understand the psychology behind it if you would care to write a response.
I wonder what he'd say today, if he were to give his updated opinions on modern operating systems. I didn't even exist when this was written, but as far I know, OSes are extremely different today. This was still before MS was even hinting at having NT take over as the mainline Windows OS. And then, the macOS of today probably has a lot more in common with NeXTSTEP than classic MacOS, so I'm curious if he changed his opinion on it after OS X came out.
The most timeless thing here is Linux retaining its "highest hacker to user ratio".
> It has an achingly elegent internal structure, but a user interface that has been asleep for the past decade. [...] I was writing a civilized window manager for it in my spare time
Brutal, but the window manager is probably one of the three big things hurting plan9 adoption (along with the lack of common editors like emacs/vim, and the lack of modern web browsers)
in 1997 i had a windows nt 4.0 machine (might have been a beta) on my desk and a next turbo mono slab. visual studio wasn't terrible for development (and was a great place to get good at c++ and multithreaded), and they managed to bring all the directx stuff over. it was like windows 95, but serious and stable.
it replaced a slackware machine and a sgi indy. the indy was cool because it played a little song when you started it up and it had a novel ui with lots of cool color gradients, but otherwise it was kinda buggy. (the "objectserver" would frequently crash inexplicably. what objects did it serve? i have no idea.)
This makes me wonder if Carmack's feelings on NeXTSTEP had anything to do with the decision to release the first publicly available release of Quake 3 on OS X only at first.
At the time, I remember the ATI Rage128 chipset being the big deal and reason for why Q3's beta came out first on Mac... but gosh now I wonder if it was the feelings for NeXTSTEP.
10 comments
[ 3.9 ms ] story [ 34.7 ms ] thread> If I can convince apple to do a good hardware accelerated OpenGL in rhapsody
Yeah, that comment aged well. Mac users are still waiting for full OpenGL 4.6 compliance and that spec is already ten years old.
Edit: of course, I will get down-voted despite laying out very basic facts. Happens every time you poke the dogma bee's nest.
Edit edit: I am still genuinely curious why the man's opinion from 30 years ago apparently matters to you that much. I'd like to understand the psychology behind it if you would care to write a response.
The most timeless thing here is Linux retaining its "highest hacker to user ratio".
(but yes, year added above!)
Sounds like the weighs and considers everything very carefully
Brutal, but the window manager is probably one of the three big things hurting plan9 adoption (along with the lack of common editors like emacs/vim, and the lack of modern web browsers)
in 1997 i had a windows nt 4.0 machine (might have been a beta) on my desk and a next turbo mono slab. visual studio wasn't terrible for development (and was a great place to get good at c++ and multithreaded), and they managed to bring all the directx stuff over. it was like windows 95, but serious and stable.
it replaced a slackware machine and a sgi indy. the indy was cool because it played a little song when you started it up and it had a novel ui with lots of cool color gradients, but otherwise it was kinda buggy. (the "objectserver" would frequently crash inexplicably. what objects did it serve? i have no idea.)
See https://web.archive.org/web/20000229083216/http://macweek.zd... .
At the time, I remember the ATI Rage128 chipset being the big deal and reason for why Q3's beta came out first on Mac... but gosh now I wonder if it was the feelings for NeXTSTEP.