It's Been 20 Years Since the Launch of Mac OS X (arstechnica.com) 88
On March 24, 2001, Mac OS X first became available to users around the world. Ars Technica's Samuel Axon reflects on the OS and the many new features and technologies it brought that we now take for granted. From the report: Of course, Mac OS X (or macOS 10 as it was later known) didn't quite survive to its 20th birthday; last year's macOS Big Sur update brought the version number up to 11, ending the reign of X. But despite its double life on x86 and ARM processors and its increasingly close ties to iOS and iPadOS, today's macOS is still very much a direct descendant of that original Mac OS X release. Mac OS X, in turn, evolved in part from Steve Jobs' NeXT operating system -- which had recently been acquired by Apple -- and its launch was the harbinger of the second Jobs era at Apple.
[Mac OS X] enabled Apple's laptops to wake up from sleep immediately, and it introduced dynamic memory management, among other things. Mac OS X's greatest impact in retrospect may be in the role it had in inspiring and propping up iOS, which has far surpassed macOS as Apple's most widely used operating system. [...] Despite Apple's resounding success in the second Steve Jobs era, as well as in the recent Tim Cook era, the Mac is still a relatively niche platform -- beloved by some, but skipped by much of the mainstream. After 20 years, a lot has changed, but a whole lot has stayed the same.
[Mac OS X] enabled Apple's laptops to wake up from sleep immediately, and it introduced dynamic memory management, among other things. Mac OS X's greatest impact in retrospect may be in the role it had in inspiring and propping up iOS, which has far surpassed macOS as Apple's most widely used operating system. [...] Despite Apple's resounding success in the second Steve Jobs era, as well as in the recent Tim Cook era, the Mac is still a relatively niche platform -- beloved by some, but skipped by much of the mainstream. After 20 years, a lot has changed, but a whole lot has stayed the same.
Of course 10.0 was a hot mess (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't until later in the 10.2 cycle that things really settled down enough to be useable (in my opinion, anyway).
Re: (Score:2)
I think I got my first Mac at around 10.7, going off the default wallpaper. My main laptop was out for warranty work, and in the meantime I was stuck with my Dell Inspiron Mini, which had turned out to be thoroughly disappointing (at least it was cheap). So I was in the market for a super portable notebook to replace the Dell and tide me over until my main came back, and on a whim I bought a MacBook Air.
Having never owned a Mac before, it took me some time to get used to it, but I've enjoyed it and that lap
Still a vast improvement over 9.x (Score:5, Insightful)
It wasn't until later in the 10.2 cycle that things really settled down enough to be useable (in my opinion, anyway).
Whatever the mess of 10.0 relative to 10.2, 10.0 was still far better than the clusterf*ck that was 9.x (classic Mac OS).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Mac OS 8 was a stopgap after the collapse of Apple's Copland and OpenDoc initiatives, and OS 9 simply spread the Classic MacOS butter that much thinner.
But despite its technical limitations, there were aspects of the UI that are better than even modern MacOS. MacOS X introduced animations and transparency and other glitzy things, but the dock violated some of the basic UI principles that went back to the versions of MacOS. Yes, icons in the dock can jump around when they need to grab your attention, which
Re: (Score:1)
10.2 - the first usable version
10.4 - the first mature version
10.6 - the last thought through, coherent version
Re: (Score:2)
10.2 - the first usable version
10.4 - the first mature version
10.6 - the last thought through, coherent version
Agreed. I haven't felt like they had a real OS release since then. All the features added have just caused more bugs for me. I get that some of them are legit security features and that's fine, but at least make them mature...
I'm dreading Mac OS 11.
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Apple made it, NeXT didn't. Somewhere in there is a business lesson.
NeXT - quite the success story (Score:5, Insightful)
Apple made it, NeXT didn't. Somewhere in there is a business lesson.
Being acquired and having your technology save a company, to have your technology be their foundation for at least the next 20 years. is quite the success story.
Re: (Score:2)
We're all losers as long as we waste energy developing competing operating systems. First among losers is first place.
With that said, Windows is clearly first among losers (in the desktop market) by share. OSX is a distant second.
Re: (Score:2)
We're all losers as long as we waste energy developing competing operating systems.
I don't think I would enjoy living in a world where only one operating system was available. One size doesn't fit all.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think I would enjoy living in a world where only one operating system was available. One size doesn't fit all.
Yes, it frankly does. Linux fits all sizes except for the smallest embedded systems. It scales from portable devices all the way up to the largest servers, and it can look and feel differently on all of them while still being the same underneath. You can install a traditional userland on Android, for example, and have all the Linuxy goodness you're used to even though the included UI was only meant for point-and-stab interfaces.
If the energy wasted on producing operating systems whose primary goal is profit
Re: (Score:2)
You're suggesting that the operating system that has the highest amount of variation within itself is the best option, even though it has the lowest number of preexisting users for practical personal computing?
Re: (Score:2)
It's the best thing available now. Unfortunately, it's not the most popular thing for desktop computing, only for every other kind.
Re: (Score:2)
I use both Linux and MacOS/X every day, and although both are usable, I much prefer working under MacOS/X. YMMV.
Re: (Score:2)
I use both Linux and MacOS/X every day, and although both are usable, I much prefer working under MacOS/X.
What about it do you prefer? Because there's literally nothing that OSX has that Linux doesn't. In fact, you can even have the same look and feel if you want — or customize it to any degree. Using avant-window-navigator and compiz allows you to reproduce the deeply flawed Apple interface with its inferior-to-the-original dock, or the classic NeXT interface, or produce anything in between... or any other look and behavior you want, really.
Re: (Score:2)
No it is not. It is, at best, first among losers.
You judge success as whose company name is on the sign. I judge success by whose people run the company, whose technology goes into the products. NeXT essentially took over Apple.
Re:Aqua and the iMac saved Apple. (Score:5, Informative)
That statement makes no sense at all.
Steve Jobs lost his job at Apple.
Founded NeXT. Made NeXT create its BSD based OS.
Apple came into really trouble: they bought NeXT and hired Steve Jobs again.
And MacOs is now based on BSD and some NeXT remnants.
Sounds like a great success story for NeXT to me.
Re: (Score:2)
Conveniently leaving out a very big part of the hardware being a failure. Going into software, and partnering with SUN to create Openstep. It's all in Steve Jobs biography.
Re: (Score:2)
I rarely read biographies. Can't remember wich one I have read.
Did not know that Steve Jobs partnered with SUN. Or who made OpenSTEP.
But what hardware was a failure? SUN's? I hardly think so.
uh no dude (Score:1)
Re:Aqua and the iMac saved Apple. (Score:4, Interesting)
That statement makes no sense at all.
Steve Jobs lost his job at Apple.
Founded NeXT. Made NeXT create its BSD based OS.
Apple came into really trouble: they bought NeXT and hired Steve Jobs again.
And MacOs is now based on BSD and some NeXT remnants.
Sounds like a great success story for NeXT to me.
NeXTSTEP was based on BSD and OS X/macOS was based on NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP so it's a great success for BSD and UNIX in general. Especially since macOS is a certified UNIX : https://www.opengroup.org/open... [opengroup.org] which on top of making one an infuriating Apple user also comes with a license to be one of those scruffy bearded, suspender wearing smug and condescending UNIX computer users http://the.infiniteplane.com/i... [infiniteplane.com]
Re: (Score:2)
which on top of making one an infuriating Apple user also comes with a license to be one of those scruffy bearded, suspender wearing smug and condescending UNIX computer users http://the.infiniteplane.com/i [infiniteplane.com]...
Yes, just in time, only ten or twenty years after the world moved to caring about Linux instead of UNIX.
Re: (Score:2)
How you evaluate NeXTSTEP depends on how you evaluate object oriented OS design. It was very fashionable in the 90s, but most of that legacy has faded away now and been replaced by other models.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
If you're going to skip over literally everything that doesn't suit an absurd premise, how about Steve Jobs died of cancer so not a success story?
NeXT was a failure, some of its failed components and its CEO got resurrected to restore a separate failed business. The success story was Apple's comeback, not NeXT.
Re: (Score:2)
NeXT was by no means a failure. Sorry, have some bad memory or something?
NeXT was not as successful as Apple later, but thats it.
Re: (Score:2)
Did Apple bought NeXT or NeXT bought Apple?
I think Apple bought NeXT, then NeXT CEO becomes Apple CEO and NeXT operating system becomes Apple OS (the personal computers were the bread, butter and crown jewels of Apple at that time).
Or maybe it was the other way around?
Re: (Score:2)
The reality was that there was always going to be a very l
Re: (Score:2)
I was excited as well! The Mac finally getting display postscript was a dream come true.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I was excited as well! The Mac finally getting display postscript was a dream come true.
I loved DPS, but it was a security nightmare. I was pretty hesitant about Quartz, but I quit worrying about it after having a talk with Mike Paquette about it.
-jcr
You know I like accuracy, jcr, but I hate correcting you. Quartz 2D uses the PDF rendering model. There is no Display PostScript in any of the Mac OS X family window server, because DPS requires licensing fees, so Quartz uses "Display PDF," and not the "Display PostScript" used by OpenStep/NeXT.
But one could argue PDF is, in fact, PostScript because it is a subset of PostScript. The important detail is PostScript is not free, but PDF is.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know what you think you're correcting, but I'm quite aware of where DPS existed and where it didn't.
Perhaps the OP
There is no Display PostScript in any of the Mac OS X family window server,
DPS was still present in Mac OS X Server 1.0, which you may not remember. It was essentially NeXTSTEP with a Mac Platinum look.
Touché. Yet Mac OS X Server 1.0 didn't use Aqua, and Aqua didn't use Display PostScript.
Quartz 2D uses the PDF rendering model.
PDF is a document format that uses the Postscript rendering model. Quartz can produce PDF output, but it's not limited to PDF, and not everything that Quartz can do can be expressed as PDF.
The important detail is PostScript is not free, but PDF is.
There's a myth that Apple just didn't want to pay Adobe for DPS, but if NeXT could afford it, so could Apple. The reason for Quartz 2D is that DPS didn't meet Apple's needs, and Adobe had pretty much given up on DPS by that time, preferring to concentrate on their printer software and apps.
-jcr
Pretty sure choosing a free display model had less to do what could be afforded, and more to do with developers not having to pay for PostScript.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Third-party developers didn't have to pay for DPS on NeXTSTEP, why would they have to pay for it on the Mac if Apple had kept it?
-jcr
Right, NeXT paid Adobe for a PostScript license for DPS. Developers using PostScript (not DPS, but yet still possibly for the purposes of display) in their code (such as with pswrap), and then selling or distributing it, would be required to pay for the non-free PostScript license (not all NeXTSTEP devs). This necessity is avoided by switching the display model to free PDF.
But you've convinced me. Apple was just being cheap and should have used Display PostScript, because they could have afforded it, and
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nor PowerPC, which was original base for the new era OS/X. It's not before 2006, that Intel shows up, making it triple life, speaking of processors.
I still work on a non-glare iMac from 2006, upgraded though to the professional grade 10.6.8, adding memory, snappier CPU, SSD. My first PowerPC Mac mini has further served my daughter as her first computer, while M1 mini has recently landed by my side to cover shortcomings, that do grow with my main station - at a reach of remote display, the most modern platfo
this had been a game changer. (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, I used MachTen, too!
It was superb on my upgraded Mac SE (second party 68030 with 16MB memory).
Totally backwards (Score:3, Interesting)
may be in the role it had in inspiring and propping up iOS
Well that's totally backwards. I own two Macs, and both were purchased for the express purpose (due to Apple's stringent requirements) of developing iOS apps. I have only used them for that purpose (and the occasional "This doesn't work right in Safari" debugging). iOS has propped up and caused purchases of OSX devices, not the other way around. Not at all. I can't imagine a single person who said "I like my Mac so much I need to try one of these iPhone thingys".
Actually, many said that (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't imagine a single person who said "I like my Mac so much I need to try one of these iPhone thingys".
Anyone who has ever used a trackpad on a Mac laptop after using one on a Windows laptop would say exactly that.
If you are going for a device that relies on good finger input, the trackpad tells you a lot about the quality you can also expect from an iPhone.
Re: Actually, many said that (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
"If you are going for a device that relies on good finger input, the trackpad tells you a lot about the quality you can also expect from an iPhone."
No it doesn't, and it never did. "Good finger input" is not a distinguishing feature of the iPhone, and back in the earliest days when it was, it was because Apple had bought out a multi-touch company and had not yet brought those ideas mainstream. There were no such users you speak of until "good finger input" was no longer a differentiator.
People wanted the
Re: (Score:1)
No it doesn't, and it never did. "Good finger input" is not a distinguishing feature of the iPhone
After having used a lot of Android and iOS phones I can say that you are 100% wrong on this point. In fact I would go so far as to say that the quality of finger tracking on an iPhone is the core reason why it has enjoyed so much success.
Re: (Score:1)
Anyone who has ever used a trackpad on a Mac laptop after using one on a Windows laptop would say exactly that.
My $300 windows laptop has a trackpad that does the same shit as the mac trackpad, including multi-finger touches and scrolling. It's functionally the same shit, except I didn't have to buy a computer costing several times as much to get one.
Maybe if you were qualified to use a computer that had more than one button you'd have something relevant to say here.
Bad comparison (Score:1)
My $300 windows laptop has a trackpad that does the same shit as the mac trackpad,
Just like a raft made out of an old shipping pallet floats as well as a 20ft fishing boat... yeah they both "float".
Re: (Score:2)
Since when does Microsoft control the hardware that manufacturers install? If you had paid three times what a normal decent Windows laptop cost you probably could have had "good finger input" on that as well. In addition you would have had otherwise superior hardware, interoperability with networks of all types, and the ability to install almost every piece of software ever written. Instead you fell for the marketing and got mediocre hardware with a good touch pad and screen, your system admins hated you
Re: (Score:2)
If you had paid three times what a normal decent Windows laptop cost you probably could have had "good finger input" on that as well
I've used a lot of high end Windows laptops. The answer is a big Nope.
Microsoft is partially responsible because some of the way the trackpad functions is inherently integrated into Windows.
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine a single person who said "I like my Mac so much I need to try one of these iPhone thingys".
I now hundreds of them. And don't forget: Android did not exist that time.
Re: (Score:2)
'I can't imagine a single person who said "I like my Mac so much I need to try one of these iPhone thingys".'
Then you have no imagination. Literally every Mac user back then said that, and they still do. Who do you think formed all the lines waiting to buy iPhones in the earliest days? Do you pay any attention at all?
Re: (Score:2)
Steve Jobs will be remembered as one of the greatest marketing geniuses in history. I thank all the gods he never went into politics or religion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I can't imagine a single person who said "I like my Mac so much I need to try one of these iPhone thingys".
I fit that description -- I bought my first iPhone because I liked using MacOS/X and figured the company that designed that would provide a good user experience on a phone as well; which (generally speaking) it has.
When is it a new OS? (Score:1)
OS X was a massive amount of NeXt -- was it a new OS or a big revision of the prior one?
Is OS 11 really a new OS when it's a slight incremental change over the previous OS? simply adding new hardware support justifies this? (reality is iOS is largely the same OS and so the hardware support was already there... plus it's an OS designed from the beginning to run multi-platform.) OS X 10.4 added intel support, 10.6 dropped PPC; big change there but still considered the same OS.
I don't know how much the NeXt
Major version increase for new hardware arch? (Score:3)
Is OS 11 really a new OS when it's a slight incremental change over the previous OS?
iOS 11 is a major milestone in the sense that this is where support for ARM based Macs begins. Sure macOS 11 made it to the public first but internally targeting the new architecture was a huge "feature".
Keep in mind that NeXTSTEP, the precursor to Mac OS X 10.0, already supported various processors including Intel. This greatly facilitated Apple's move from PowerPC to Intel. So while the hardware transition was a big deal on the software side it was comparatively minor for Apple. Yes, you can argue that
Re: (Score:2)
'...but internally targeting the new architecture was a huge "feature".'
What does "internally targeting the new architecture" mean beyond something magical in your head? You think older versions didn't run on ARM? You think anything changed architecturally at all?
"Keep in mind that NeXTSTEP, the precursor to Mac OS X 10.0, already supported various processors including Intel."
Maybe you need to keep that "in mind".
"...on the software side it was comparatively minor for Apple. "
You need to listen to your ow
Re: (Score:2)
'...but internally targeting the new architecture was a huge "feature".'
What does "internally targeting the new architecture" mean beyond something magical in your head? You think older versions didn't run on ARM? You think anything changed architecturally at all?
IF older versions ran under ARM it would not have been in a consumer ready fashion. To go from tech demo to consumer ready takes a bit of work.
"Keep in mind that NeXTSTEP, the precursor to Mac OS X 10.0, already supported various processors including Intel."
Maybe you need to keep that "in mind".
ARM was not among those supported processors.
"...on the software side it was comparatively minor for Apple. "
You need to listen to your own arguments. Everyone agrees that adding ARM support was nothing new, hardly a "huge feature".
Yes, people ignorant of the low level details think it is as simple as a new compiler and it automagically runs and is consumer ready.
Re: (Score:2)
The difference between reference and point releases was blurred long ago so they could retain the X branding and not end up with Jobs having to announce Mac OS XVII.
The only real reason I can see today for a branded release is where enough has changed to warrant some care in installing. The move to APFS, the system/data volume split, and dropping 32 bit support would be examples they handled as reference releases, for good reasons. Major UI changes also. People generally donâ(TM)t like having an update
Ten (Score:1)
>"It's Been 20 Years Since the Launch of Mac OS X"
MacOS 10. Not MacOS 10 version 10. Amazingly, it followed MacOS 9.
Who's a harbinger of what? (Score:2)
Mac OS X [...] was the harbinger of the second Jobs era at Apple.
That's backward. The second Jobs era began in the late 90s, and then for years under Jobs' lead Apple was working to bring MacOS X to release. Jobs was a harbinger of OSX, not vice versa.
Re: (Score:2)
I think you forgot the PowerPC there, hoss. (Score:2, Insightful)
But despite its double life on x86 and ARM processors
I think you forgot the PowerPC there, hoss.
Re: (Score:2)
But despite its double life on x86 and ARM processors
I think you forgot the PowerPC there, hoss.
And if you're thinking ARM, think ARM6 for iPhone2G-3G, ARM7 for iPhone 3Gs-iPhone 5, ARM8/AARCH64 for iPhone 5S+. NextSTEP and OpenSTEP were also available for M68k (as used by Next), SPARC & PA-RISC.
I was always curious on the "secret double life" aspect of MacOS X. How was it a secret when you could always download Darwin x86 from the Apple Website. It was MacOS X without the Window Server and the Graphical Applications. Same kernel, mostly the same libraries and daemons, different set of application
Re: (Score:2)
No mod points as usual, mod parent +1 informative. It's something that happened only 20 years ago and some people already forgot about it. This makes me afraid not only for future generations, but also for the current one.
OS X Gave me a break (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I recently reinstalled Red Hat Linux 7.2 with Ximian Desktop on a period accurate K6-2 system with a Voodoo Banshee and a Sound Blaster Live!. I was surprised to see that the setup was easier than I remembered it and how many things mostly worked.
Re: OS X Gave me a break (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: OS X Gave me a break (Score:2)
Waiting for Mac OS 11 (Score:3)
Twenty years for the next release? That's getting crazy. I suppose I can't complain that much, I've been using X11 for longer than that, and there's still no talk of X12.
Better than the alternative and that's all (Score:2)
I ended up as a Mac user and I can't remember the first MacOS X version I used. The reason was that I found Windows to be most hostile environment to developers ever invented. If what you needed to do worked within an IDE then fine. Otherwise you were in hell. Cygwin or its alternatives were good but not good enough.
Also at that time the Mac hardware was superior to all the Windows OEMs. That isn't true anymore but Apple still has a lot of tribal knowledge on how to make hardware that is attract
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Propping up? I think not (Score:2)
The iPhone totally destroyed the flip phone and Blackberry market. It didn't need propping up.