Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.mac.system > #133949 > unrolled thread

Trivia Pixar computers

Started byJF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
First post2020-08-10 04:52 -0400
Last post2020-08-17 08:59 -0400
Articles 20 on this page of 146 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.sys.mac.system


Contents

  Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-10 04:52 -0400
    Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-10 08:02 -0400
      Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-11 02:49 -0400
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-11 07:13 +0000
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-11 14:04 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-11 20:39 +0000
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-11 19:22 -0400
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-11 09:39 -0400
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-11 09:50 -0700
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-11 14:08 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-11 20:37 +0000
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-11 17:02 -0700
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-12 12:27 +0000
                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-12 08:09 -0700
                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-12 21:29 +0000
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-12 14:34 -0700
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-12 20:25 -0400
                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-12 22:23 -0400
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-12 22:43 -0400
                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-12 19:52 -0700
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-13 04:26 +0000
                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-13 02:44 -0400
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-13 08:10 +0000
                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-13 19:15 -0400
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-13 19:47 -0400
                                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-14 00:33 +0000
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-14 03:40 +0000
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Wolffan <akwolffan@zoho.com> - 2020-08-17 08:45 -0400
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-13 09:25 -0400
                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-13 13:39 -0700
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-13 19:19 -0400
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-13 23:21 +0000
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-13 19:47 -0400
                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-14 00:35 +0000
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-14 03:43 +0000
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-13 04:24 +0000
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-11 19:22 -0400
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-11 16:58 -0700
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-12 12:32 +0000
                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-12 08:10 -0700
                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-12 21:32 +0000
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-12 14:36 -0700
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-12 20:25 -0400
                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-12 22:29 -0400
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-12 22:43 -0400
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-13 04:29 +0000
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-12 08:44 -0400
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-16 08:25 -0400
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-16 17:11 +0000
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-17 09:14 -0400
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-17 17:43 +0000
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-16 14:17 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-16 19:00 +0000
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-16 21:09 +0000
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-17 01:14 +0000
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-17 07:10 -0400
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-17 21:45 +0000
                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-18 11:02 -0400
                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-18 21:01 -0400
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-19 01:30 +0000
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-18 18:39 -0700
                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-19 05:57 +0000
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-19 00:39 -0700
                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-19 10:00 +0000
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 06:34 -0400
                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-19 10:57 -0700
                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-19 20:29 +0000
                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-19 16:49 -0400
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 17:00 -0400
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-19 21:05 +0000
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-20 03:36 +0000
                                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-19 21:28 -0700
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-19 10:56 -0700
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 00:32 -0400
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Krzysztof Mitko <invalid@kmitko.at.list.dot.pl> - 2020-08-21 13:45 +0200
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-16 16:13 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-16 21:23 +0000
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-17 09:37 -0400
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-17 17:35 +0000
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-17 13:46 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-17 09:27 -0400
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-17 17:48 +0000
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-17 14:56 -0400
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-17 15:21 -0400
                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-18 18:05 -0400
                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 00:32 -0400
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-19 07:14 +0000
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 06:34 -0400
                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-19 05:58 -0400
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-19 10:11 +0000
                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-19 16:45 -0400
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 17:00 -0400
                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-19 18:38 -0400
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 18:58 -0400
                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-19 23:51 -0400
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-20 00:27 -0400
                                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-20 06:12 +0000
                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-20 08:25 +0000
                                      Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-22 21:39 -0400
                                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-22 21:55 -0400
                                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-22 23:06 -0400
                                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-22 23:48 -0400
                                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-23 22:36 -0700
                                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-23 06:22 +0000
                                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-23 04:41 -0400
                                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-23 06:42 -0400
                                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-23 11:24 +0000
                                                  Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-23 19:33 -0400
                                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-23 21:11 -0400
                                                    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-24 13:11 +0000
                                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-23 06:21 +0000
                                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-23 04:34 -0400
                                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-23 06:42 -0400
                                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-23 19:06 -0400
                                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-23 23:31 +0000
                                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-23 21:11 -0400
                                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-23 11:19 +0000
                                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-23 06:42 -0400
                        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 06:34 -0400
                          Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-19 19:24 +0000
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 16:35 -0400
                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-19 21:01 +0000
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 18:58 -0400
                            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-19 20:42 +0000
                              Re: Trivia Pixar computers Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2020-08-19 21:21 +0000
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-19 18:41 -0400
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-19 18:58 -0400
                                Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-20 03:31 +0000
      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-16 08:03 -0400
    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Calum <com.gmail@nospam.scottishwildcat> - 2020-08-10 14:16 +0100
      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com> - 2020-08-11 10:04 +1200
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-11 07:14 +0000
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-16 08:31 -0400
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-16 17:13 +0000
    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-10 08:20 -0700
      Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-11 03:07 -0400
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-11 17:12 -0700
          Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-12 00:59 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Alan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no> - 2020-08-11 22:23 -0700
              Re: Trivia Pixar computers JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2020-08-12 19:28 -0400
                Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-12 20:25 -0400
            Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-12 12:37 +0000
    Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-16 07:54 -0400
      Re: Trivia Pixar computers Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2020-08-16 17:06 +0000
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2020-08-16 14:17 -0400
        Re: Trivia Pixar computers Bud Frede <frede@mouse-potato.com> - 2020-08-17 08:59 -0400

Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →


#134151

FromJF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date2020-08-22 23:06 -0400
Message-ID<H2l0H.131192$TO4.58302@fx05.iad>
In reply to#134150
On 2020-08-22 21:55, nospam wrote:

>> Are you stating categorically that every productized version of OS-X
>> from Cheetah to Tiger was built on Intel with 100% of features that were
>> productized also included in the intel build?
> 
> correct, as well as everything before cheetah.

So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134152

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-22 23:48 -0400
Message-ID<220820202348513894%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134151
In article <H2l0H.131192$TO4.58302@fx05.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> 
> >> Are you stating categorically that every productized version of OS-X
> >> from Cheetah to Tiger was built on Intel with 100% of features that were
> >> productized also included in the intel build?
> > 
> > correct, as well as everything before cheetah.
> 
> So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
> on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?

what is 'rhapberry' ?

if you mean rhapsody, that did not include carbon on either platform,
because carbon did not yet exist.

<http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/4B800F78-0F75-455A-9681-
F186A4365805_files/droppedImage.png>

<http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/4B800F78-0F75-455A-9681-
F186A4365805_files/rhapsody.png>

blue box, what became classic, was powerpc only, for reasons that
should be obvious, except to you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134170

FromAlan Baker <notonyourlife@no.no.no.no>
Date2020-08-23 22:36 -0700
Message-ID<rhvjka$sla$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#134152
On 2020-08-22 8:48 p.m., nospam wrote:
> In article <H2l0H.131192$TO4.58302@fx05.iad>, JF Mezei
> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> 
>>
>>>> Are you stating categorically that every productized version of OS-X
>>>> from Cheetah to Tiger was built on Intel with 100% of features that were
>>>> productized also included in the intel build?
>>>
>>> correct, as well as everything before cheetah.
>>
>> So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
>> on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?
> 
> what is 'rhapberry' ?
> 
> if you mean rhapsody, that did not include carbon on either platform,
> because carbon did not yet exist.
> 
> <http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/4B800F78-0F75-455A-9681-
> F186A4365805_files/droppedImage.png>
> 
> <http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q1.07/4B800F78-0F75-455A-9681-
> F186A4365805_files/rhapsody.png>
> 
> blue box, what became classic, was powerpc only, for reasons that
> should be obvious, except to you.
> 

Seriously:  you are Daniel Dilger, aren't you?

:-)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134154

FromLewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Date2020-08-23 06:22 +0000
Message-ID<slrnrk42ps.1grp.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>
In reply to#134151
In message <H2l0H.131192$TO4.58302@fx05.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-08-22 21:55, nospam wrote:

>>> Are you stating categorically that every productized version of OS-X
>>> from Cheetah to Tiger was built on Intel with 100% of features that were
>>> productized also included in the intel build?
>> 
>> correct, as well as everything before cheetah.

> So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
> on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?

Hey dipshit, Rhapsody is not OS X.

-- 
O is for OLIVE run through with an awl
P is for PRUE trampled flat in a brawl

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134156

FromJF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date2020-08-23 04:41 -0400
Message-ID<5Zp0H.60517$RN.42880@fx13.iad>
In reply to#134154
On 2020-08-23 02:22, Lewis wrote:

>> So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
>> on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?
> 
> Hey dipshit, Rhapsody is not OS X.


Go back and read your history before calling people names.

Apple got the rights to NextStep (aka OpenStep for Mach).
Apple adopted this not only as the iunderlying OS kernel, but also as
the GUI framework (which became Cocoa).  All the NS subroutines on IS-X
come from...l wait for it.... NextStep.

Going from OpenStep for Mach to Rhapsody involved modifying the
NextStep code to make the GUI look more like a Mac, adding HFS support
(not sure if HFS+ was added right away or added later). At the time 5.3
was release (named OS-X Server 1.0) they also added Appletalk support
and a few othe things.

At that poimt, the OS and apps are all very much NextStep. textedit,
Preview, Mail, Dock and I beleive Finder had its roots in Nextstep
though rewritten.

Apple ditched the licenced software such as Sybase SQL server and Adobe
Display Postcript and replaced them.

It was only betwene OS-X Server and OS-X desktop/retail that a lot of
the ex MacOS classic stuff was moved at the last minute request from the
large software providers (eg: quick and distry Carbon port to NextStep.

The look and feel of the Mac was not ported from MacOS, it was written
natively in Nextstep/openStep for Mach/Rhapsody (which are all the same
OS).



[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134159

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-23 06:42 -0400
Message-ID<230820200642508426%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134156
In article <5Zp0H.60517$RN.42880@fx13.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> 
> >> So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
> >> on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?
> > 
> > Hey dipshit, Rhapsody is not OS X.
> 
> 
> Go back and read your history before calling people names.

take your own advice and stop making up your own history.



> 
> At that poimt, the OS and apps are all very much NextStep. textedit,
> Preview, Mail, Dock and I beleive Finder had its roots in Nextstep
> though rewritten.

you believe incorrectly. no surprise there. 

finder was carbon up until snow leopard, at which point it was cocoa.


> It was only betwene OS-X Server and OS-X desktop/retail that a lot of
> the ex MacOS classic stuff was moved at the last minute request from the
> large software providers (eg: quick and distry Carbon port to NextStep.

no.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134161

FromLewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Date2020-08-23 11:24 +0000
Message-ID<slrnrk4kg2.29e.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>
In reply to#134156
In message <5Zp0H.60517$RN.42880@fx13.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-08-23 02:22, Lewis wrote:

>>> So you are stating here that Carbon was available on Rhapberry and built
>>> on both PowerpC and x86 right from the start?
>> 
>> Hey dipshit, Rhapsody is not OS X.

> Go back and read your history before calling people names.

FACT: Rhapsody is not OS X.

I would not be at all surprised to you take out an inane and ignorant
position claiming that it was, somehow OS X, but it was not. At all.

> Apple got the rights to NextStep (aka OpenStep for Mach).
> Apple adopted this not only as the iunderlying OS kernel, but also as
> the GUI framework (which became Cocoa).  All the NS subroutines on IS-X
> come from...l wait for it.... NextStep.

What has nothing at all to do with your idiotic and entirely WRONG
statement that Rhapsody was OS X. It was not.

> It was only betwene OS-X Server and OS-X desktop/retail

You once again show your idiocy and ignorance,. Mac OS X Server was a
product that for many years and many versions was a slightly different
(and more expensive) build of Mac OS X.

> The look and feel of the Mac was not ported from MacOS, it was written
> natively in Nextstep/openStep for Mach/Rhapsody (which are all the same
> OS).

Rhapsody was not OS X.

-- 
Stomach in! Chest out! on your marks! get set! GO! Now, now that
	you're free, what are you gonna be? Who are you gonna see? And
	where, where will you go, and how will you know you didn't get it
	all wrong?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134167

FromJF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date2020-08-23 19:33 -0400
Message-ID<i1D0H.60522$RN.19424@fx13.iad>
In reply to#134161
On 2020-08-23 07:24, Lewis wrote:

> FACT: Rhapsody is not OS X.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhapsody_(operating_system)

Rhapsody Developper release -> Nextstep 5.0
Mac OS-X Server 1.0  Nextstep 5.3
1.01 => 5.6
1.02 => 5.5
1.2 => 5.6

You seem to be under the mistaken belief that OS-X is a new operating
system. It is merely Nextstep given a new skin. Apps sucha s Textedit,
Preview, Mail etc all came from NextStep.

Quicktime was ported from MacOS to Rhapsody. But not Carbon, nor Finder.

Carbon and Finder were ported in 2000-2001 for release of 10.0/Cheetah.
The original plan was to use Nextstep's file manager but in porting
both, Apple responded to feedback.

There is no statement to say that both Carbon and Finder were x86 clean
from initial port at Cheetah.  It doesn't mean that OS-X can't be built
without them.  Similarly, there is no info on when they became buildable
on x86. Could be a few months, could be a few years. But we know that by
2005, everything had been cleaned up and bootable on x86 because by 2006
Apple shipped Tiger 10.4.4 with Intel support.

And consider the work on Rosetta. Because it interfaces PowerPC calls to
various OS-X APIs, (ap calls subroutine using PowerpC calling standard,
Rosetta converts argument (including endianness) and then calls the
corresponding Intel API). This means that Rosetta would have needed all
APIs present, including Carbon, so building Carbon on Intel would have
happened prior to Rosetta work.


> What has nothing at all to do with your idiotic and entirely WRONG
> statement that Rhapsody was OS X. It was not.

So, pray tell, where did OS-X come from? Where did the NS frameworks
come from? Where did TextEdit, Preview, Dock , Mail etc all come from?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134169

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-23 21:11 -0400
Message-ID<230820202111315197%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134167
In article <i1D0H.60522$RN.19424@fx13.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:


> Carbon and Finder were ported in 2000-2001 for release of 10.0/Cheetah.
> The original plan was to use Nextstep's file manager but in porting
> both, Apple responded to feedback.

before that.

> There is no statement to say that both Carbon and Finder were x86 clean
> from initial port at Cheetah.

yes there was, which you keep ignoring.

> It doesn't mean that OS-X can't be built
> without them.  Similarly, there is no info on when they became buildable
> on x86. Could be a few months, could be a few years. But we know that by
> 2005, everything had been cleaned up and bootable on x86 because by 2006
> Apple shipped Tiger 10.4.4 with Intel support.

everything had been building on intel *in* *secret* all along.

> And consider the work on Rosetta. 

no.

rosetta, which was licensed from transitive, is entirely irrelevant.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134171

FromLewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Date2020-08-24 13:11 +0000
Message-ID<slrnrk7f3k.1aai.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>
In reply to#134167
In message <i1D0H.60522$RN.19424@fx13.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-08-23 07:24, Lewis wrote:

>> FACT: Rhapsody is not OS X.

> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhapsody_(operating_system)

> Rhapsody Developper release -> Nextstep 5.0
> Mac OS-X Server 1.0  Nextstep 5.3
> 1.01 => 5.6
> 1.02 => 5.5
> 1.2 => 5.6

Version 1 of Mac OS-X Server. Not OS X and not every other version of
Mac OS X Server. (versions 10.0 through 10.9) nor Server 5.0-5.10
covering the period from 2001-2020.

Stop lying,

-- 
Who is General Failure and why is he reading my disk?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134153

FromLewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Date2020-08-23 06:21 +0000
Message-ID<slrnrk42mv.1grp.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>
In reply to#134149
In message <pNj0H.421697$DO2.66524@fx45.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-08-20 04:25, Lewis wrote:

>> Yes it does because a WORKING INTEL BUILD WAS MAINTAINED THE ENTIRE
>> TIME. EVERY FUCKING VERSION OF OS X RAN ON INTEL HARDWARE. EVERY SINGLE
>> ONE.

> Are you stating categorically that every productized version of OS-X
> from Cheetah to Tiger was built on Intel with 100% of features that were
> productized also included in the intel build?

That is exactly what numerous sources have said.

> The fact that someone had to demonstrate to an Apple exec that a build
> on Intel was _still_ possible means that Apple did not ALWAYS intend to
> keep the Intel port active otherwise that conversation wouldn't have
> happened.

And that is relevant, how? The fact remains, OS X was buitl agains Intel
hardware all along.

> And it also does not state that at that point, ALL of OS-X was buildable
> on Intel. That demo was done to give Apple the indication it would be
> worth it to ensure all components were made Intel compatible and could
> have been what prompted the rewrite of Carbon to better integrate into
> NextSTEP (aka OS-X);

Fuck you. You've been given ample evidence and you continue to fuck
around in a desperation attempt to somehow delude yourself into claiming
you were right all along.

Anything that did not build in OS X on x86 had bugs filed against it.
Very carefully written bugs that did not leak the existence of the

> You are blinded by your love of Apple and refuse to read carefully

You are blinded by your abject stupidity and refusal to read for
comprehension and your insistence that not only did Apple LIE (for no
reason at all) but that multiple people at Apple lied and continue to
lie even years after leaving Apple. Again, for no reason.

-- 
"Real stupidity beats artificial intelligence every time."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134155

FromJF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date2020-08-23 04:34 -0400
Message-ID<ISp0H.171920$zX4.23251@fx41.iad>
In reply to#134153
On 2020-08-23 02:21, Lewis wrote:

> Fuck you. You've been given ample evidence and you continue to fuck
> around in a desperation attempt to somehow delude yourself into claiming
> you were right all along.

You are the one making the baseless claim that all of OS-X was available
on Intel all the time. I am merely stating that parts that came from
MacOS may not have been made Intel-clean right off the bat, in
particular Carbon.  This does not mean that the rest of OS-X (NextSTEP)
didn't continue to built on Intel as it had for many years before.

> Anything that did not build in OS X on x86 had bugs filed against it.
> Very carefully written bugs that did not leak the existence of the

So you admit that some parts did not built on Intel and work orders were
then made to get to these parts and eventually make them work. Or do you
now deny exactly what you just said?

> You are blinded by your abject stupidity and refusal to read for
> comprehension and your insistence that not only did Apple LIE 

I never said Apple lied.  After Apple created Rhapsody with an Apple
look/feel and decided to build only PowerPC, someone did a demo to upper
managemenmt saying it still built on Intel.  Presumably after that demo,
upper managegenet issued guidelines that all scode should be made
bi-endian so it could compile on Intel.

Upper management issuing this policy doesn't magically make all code
bi-endian within 1 hour. Carbon was rewritten after its initial port to
NEXtSTEP (aka: OS-X). This points to the first pport having been made
quick and dirty so it could work and allow APple to get the product out.
UYes a "big report" likely filed "Carbon needs to be made bi-endian",
but that doesn't mean that it held up release on PowerPC.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134158

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-23 06:42 -0400
Message-ID<230820200642488356%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134155
In article <ISp0H.171920$zX4.23251@fx41.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> > Fuck you. You've been given ample evidence and you continue to fuck
> > around in a desperation attempt to somehow delude yourself into claiming
> > you were right all along.
> 
> You are the one making the baseless claim that all of OS-X was available
> on Intel all the time. 

nope. he's repeating the factual claim apple has made.

> I am merely stating that parts that came from
> MacOS may not have been made Intel-clean right off the bat, in
> particular Carbon.  

as usual, you're wrong.

carbon is an integral part of mac os x and has always run on intel
since day one.

> This does not mean that the rest of OS-X (NextSTEP)
> didn't continue to built on Intel as it had for many years before.

what part of everything built and ran on intel is not clear? why do you
keep arguing about things you know nothing about?

> > Anything that did not build in OS X on x86 had bugs filed against it.
> > Very carefully written bugs that did not leak the existence of the
> 
> So you admit that some parts did not built on Intel and work orders were
> then made to get to these parts and eventually make them work. Or do you
> now deny exactly what you just said?

no, that's not what the above means.

> > You are blinded by your abject stupidity and refusal to read for
> > comprehension and your insistence that not only did Apple LIE 
> 
> I never said Apple lied. 

yes you did and continue to do so.

apple clearly stated that they kept an intel build in secret. 

you claim they are lying and did not.

> After Apple created Rhapsody with an Apple
> look/feel and decided to build only PowerPC, someone did a demo to upper
> managemenmt saying it still built on Intel.  Presumably after that demo,
> upper managegenet issued guidelines that all scode should be made
> bi-endian so it could compile on Intel.

stop making up shit. nobody did a demo. 

> Upper management issuing this policy doesn't magically make all code
> bi-endian within 1 hour. Carbon was rewritten after its initial port to
> NEXtSTEP (aka: OS-X). This points to the first pport having been made
> quick and dirty so it could work and allow APple to get the product out.
> UYes a "big report" likely filed "Carbon needs to be made bi-endian",
> but that doesn't mean that it held up release on PowerPC.

stop making up more shit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134165

FromJF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca>
Date2020-08-23 19:06 -0400
Message-ID<QDC0H.164083$r25.78368@fx08.iad>
In reply to#134158
On 2020-08-23 06:42, nospam wrote:

> carbon is an integral part of mac os x and has always run on intel
> since day one.

You are wrong. Read up. NextStep/OpenSTEP for Mach did not include Carbon.
Carbon is a MacOS concept.

Apple rebadged OpenStep for Mach as Rhapsody, modified the look and feel
to give it s Macintosh look, but otherwise it remained Openstep for
Mach.  OS_X Server was released only on PowerPC and did NOT include
Carbon. It included the blue box (boot and app running MacOS 8.6 at the
time)

Carbon was ported from MacOS to OS-X (aka Rhapsody aka OpenSTep for Mach
aka NextSTEP) between OS-X Server 1.0 and OS-X 10.0 Cheetah.

Apple was told in no unequivocal terms by large developpers that they
would no go to OS-X unless Carbon was available on the new OS so
existing MacOS apps  could easily be ported.

So a quick and dirty port of Carbon made from MacOS to OS-X prior to
Cheetah (10.0).  Remember that OS-X For Server (Nexstep 5.3) was only
productized on certain PowerPC machines. (though without the Blue Box
boot of OS 8.6, would built on x86 since this is where it originated)

OS-X Cheetah came with the Blue box booting 9.0 of MacOS.


> what part of everything built and ran on intel is not clear? why do you
> keep arguing about things you know nothing about?

YOU say everything built and ran on Intel. The statements I saw from
Apple was that an intel build continued.  It saw mention of skunkworks
to to work on code that wasn't compantible to make it compatible. If
they needed skunkworks to modify code, it means that there was code that
was not compatible with Intel. aka: Carbon.

Thes eguys would have also worked on moving from BIOS to EFI/UEFI when
Intel firmed up plans to make 8086s support EFI instead of BIOS such
that the Tiger January 2006 updated included EFI support for the then
new Apple x86 computers. (as well as GPT partitioning support for HFS+).

Between Rhapsody and Tiger 10.4.4, it is not clear how much work was
done to support new x86 chips and new wintel hardware (video cards etc)
in terms of driver support.  Obviously, driver support was added to
support the Intel Macs that were released in early 2006. But for all we
know, the skunkworks worked with the drivers and hardare they inherited
from NeXT till the "official" project to build Intel Macs.

Apple did not specify that the GPUs used in the PowerPC macs between
Chetah and Tiger all had drivers made for the Intel skunkworks version
of OS-X.



> apple clearly stated that they kept an intel build in secret. 
> 
> you claim they are lying and did not.


I do not challenge that assertion. And did not. Apple inherited an OS
that built on x86. (as well as other platforms). OS-X is that OS, so the
vast majority of it could built on x86 as it did before. It was aready
bi-endian.

What I challenge is your assertion that the software ported from
big-endian only MacOS to OS-X was made bi-endian right from the start.

The various articlea that were put up here showed that at one point, an
Apple exec was shown that OS-X could still boot on Intel. It was not
said that ALL of it could still boot on Intel. This is what allegedly
started the skunkworks to ensure all fo it could boot and to maintain an
intel version in parralel.


YOu assert there was never a gap between Rhapsody (supported on both
PowerPC and Intel) and the time when the skunkworks went through all the
code to ensure 100% of the productized OS-X was bootable on Intel.

I assert there was a gap of time during which the portion that
originated from NExtSTEP continued to build just find on Intel, but
portions ported from MacOS may not.


This does not counter the argument that a build was always made. It just
means that a build on Intel would not have included all of the
components present on the PowerPC build.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134166

FromLewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Date2020-08-23 23:31 +0000
Message-ID<slrnrk5v2t.2foa.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>
In reply to#134165
In message <QDC0H.164083$r25.78368@fx08.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-08-23 06:42, nospam wrote:

>> carbon is an integral part of mac os x and has always run on intel
>> since day one.

> You are wrong. Read up. NextStep/OpenSTEP for Mach did not include Carbon.
> Carbon is a MacOS concept.

NextStep/OpenStep is not the subject. Stop being a fucking moron for once
in your life.

> Apple rebadged

No. That is bullshit. Made up bullshit.

> OS-X (aka Rhapsody aka OpenSTep for Mach aka NextSTEP)

No. That is bullshit. Made up bullshit. OS X was not Rhapsody and was
not NextStep and was not OpenStep.

-- 
'Nothing works against magic. Except stronger magic. And then the
	only thing that beats stronger magic is even stronger magic. And
	the next thing you know...' 'Phooey?' --Sourcery

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134168

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-23 21:11 -0400
Message-ID<230820202111295040%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134165
In article <QDC0H.164083$r25.78368@fx08.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> 
> > carbon is an integral part of mac os x and has always run on intel
> > since day one.
> 
> You are wrong. Read up. NextStep/OpenSTEP for Mach did not include Carbon.
> Carbon is a MacOS concept.

i did not say nextstep/openstep included carbon. 

read what i wrote again, this time for comprehension.

> Apple rebadged OpenStep for Mach as Rhapsody, modified the look and feel
> to give it s Macintosh look, but otherwise it remained Openstep for
> Mach.  OS_X Server was released only on PowerPC and did NOT include
> Carbon. It included the blue box (boot and app running MacOS 8.6 at the
> time)

mac os x server 1.0 was rhapsody. nobody said rhapsody included carbon.
you made that up.

> Carbon was ported from MacOS to OS-X (aka Rhapsody aka OpenSTep for Mach
> aka NextSTEP) between OS-X Server 1.0 and OS-X 10.0 Cheetah.

carbon is not a port. it's *new* and always ran on intel, as did all
other components of mac os x.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134160

FromLewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies>
Date2020-08-23 11:19 +0000
Message-ID<slrnrk4k6e.29e.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>
In reply to#134155
In message <ISp0H.171920$zX4.23251@fx41.iad> JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> On 2020-08-23 02:21, Lewis wrote:

>> Fuck you. You've been given ample evidence and you continue to fuck
>> around in a desperation attempt to somehow delude yourself into claiming
>> you were right all along.

> You are the one making the baseless claim that all of OS-X was available
> on Intel all the time.

No, I never once said it was available, you dumbass lying shit. It was
NOT available. There were a handful of people who new about the project
and one of them had forgotten about it entirely.

> I am merely stating

No, you are MAKING SHIT UP.

>> Anything that did not build in OS X on x86 had bugs filed against it.
>> Very carefully written bugs that did not leak the existence of the

> So you admit that some parts did not built on Intel 

During the beta process on a new version> Sure. That has nothing to do
with anything, you FUDpacker.

> and work orders were then made to get to these parts and eventually
> make them work. Or do you now deny exactly what you just said?

You are a moron.

>> You are blinded by your abject stupidity and refusal to read for
>> comprehension and your insistence that not only did Apple LIE 

> I never said Apple lied.

Yes you have, MANY times. Apple has stated that mac OS X was maintained
on Intel all along. You deny this.

-- 
'Charity ain't giving people what you wants to give, it's giving
	people what they need to get.'

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134157

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-23 06:42 -0400
Message-ID<230820200642478275%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134153
In article <slrnrk42mv.1grp.g.kreme@ProMini.lan>, Lewis
<g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> wrote:

> >> Yes it does because a WORKING INTEL BUILD WAS MAINTAINED THE ENTIRE
> >> TIME. EVERY FUCKING VERSION OF OS X RAN ON INTEL HARDWARE. EVERY SINGLE
> >> ONE.
> 
> > Are you stating categorically that every productized version of OS-X
> > from Cheetah to Tiger was built on Intel with 100% of features that were
> > productized also included in the intel build?
> 
> That is exactly what numerous sources have said.

namely apple itself.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134094

Fromnospam <nospam@nospam.invalid>
Date2020-08-19 06:34 -0400
Message-ID<190820200634263441%nospam@nospam.invalid>
In reply to#134089
In article <TI6%G.94055$355.57871@fx27.iad>, JF Mezei
<jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:

> 
> > obviously, classic could not exist on the intel platform without a
> > shitload of additional effort, 
> 
> Sheepshaver could have been improved with tighter integration in the
> file system.

sheepshaver has absolutely nothing to do with classic or apple.

> The advantage is that Booting "classic" in it is self
> contained and not dependent on classic libraries existing and being
> updated on OS-X so less maintenance needed by Apple.

false.

> But as the Mac picked up momemtum and mreo and mreo applicatiosn were
> returning to the platform, the need to maintain "classic" went away.

that part is true. 

at the time intel macs were introduced, classic was no longer needed.

> >> Openstep on Mach (aka: Nextstep with updated API from the Openstep
> >> developments) had 0 compatibility with existing Mac applications.
> > 
> > nobody said it did.
> 
> One of the apologists stated that Rhapsody had everything on both intel
> and powerpc.

which it was.

> I had to point out that some of the MacOs classic stuff
> (such as Carbon) was ported after that point when OS-X Server was only
> on PowerPC as a product.

only classic was not on intel, for obvious reasons. 

everything else was on both powerpc and intel, the latter being done in
secret.

do you not understand what in secret means?

> >> However. while you claim it was always there, developped in secret, the
> >> "always" is not proven.
> > 
> > apple has publicly stated that's exactly what they did.
> 
> One needs to parse these PR statements with a legal eye.

it wasn't a pr statement, and it's exactly correct. 

..snip..


> 
> What Apple has NOT said is that  it ported all the MacOS bits to Intel
> from day 1. 

yes they have, and did.

> The original port of Carbon to NextSTEP was hard and
> required a second major update.

lots of things were hard. that doesn't mean they didn't do it.



> 
> Cheetah, Puma, Jaquar, Panther and Tiger (initial) did not have
> productized Intel support. (Tiger got it midway in its lifetime)

yes the did, all done *in* *secret*. only a handful of people knew.

> I think you are being way too gullible if you think that 199% of OS-X
> was available on both platforms all along. there are costs to porting
> old M'acOS Classic software to OS-X (Nextstep) and it doesn't mean an
> automatic update of code to be bi-endian.

they didn't port classic.

> What I am curious though is that at that time, x86 booted from ancient
> BIOS. Apple would have had to find a way to get BIOS to recognize HFS as
> being bootable. (from what I read, it look at first block on volume).

no they wouldn't.

> So when Apple created Rhapsody, it would have had to do actual work to
> support the combination of Intel, BIOS and HFS boot drive. (work that
> had to be reviewed for the official launch on Intel when chips then
> worked on EFI and required GPT partitions.

also wrong.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#134097

FromSnit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com>
Date2020-08-19 19:24 +0000
Message-ID<hq5cjtFpb2eU6@mid.individual.net>
In reply to#134094
On Aug 19, 2020 at 3:34:26 AM MST, "nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <TI6%G.94055$355.57871@fx27.iad>, JF Mezei
> <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> wrote:
> 
>>  
>>  > obviously, classic could not exist on the intel platform without a
>>  > shitload of additional effort, 
>>  
>>  Sheepshaver could have been improved with tighter integration in the
>>  file system.
> 
> sheepshaver has absolutely nothing to do with classic or apple.
> 
>>  The advantage is that Booting "classic" in it is self
>>  contained and not dependent on classic libraries existing and being
>>  updated on OS-X so less maintenance needed by Apple.
> 
> false.

Human interaction tip: if you think he is wrong then explain what you think is
the correct view. You might even show evidence, but for a quick comment that
is not really needed. You will come off as far less arrogant, far less focused
on your own insecurities, and far more knowledgable about tech if you do so.

And you might find you learn more about tech, too... such as the example where
you thought Apple did not care about virtualization even though their last
update included fixes for virtualization. While I was patent enough to help
educate you about your error, others might not be so kind. 

> 
> 
>>  But as the Mac picked up momemtum and mreo and mreo applicatiosn were
>>  returning to the platform, the need to maintain "classic" went away.
> 
> that part is true. 
> 
> at the time intel macs were introduced, classic was no longer needed.

Well, you can argue many things are not NEEDED, but there were many who could
still benefit from it and still want it. Heck, I used Classic Mac the other
day to show you a feature that was pretty much universal on it, of which you
showed little understanding (and never did show any contrary examples):

	https://youtu.be/IouS4iDvsOQ

This was a pretty cool feature common in Classic Mac -- the norm -- which is
not generally seen, if ever, in modern macOS. There are alternate solutions,
such as profiles, that do much the same. 

...

I snipped several other examples where you just declare someone else wrong but
offer nothing about tech. That makes the conversation be about YOU... and your
insecurities. Do you see this yet?

-- 
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


Page 6 of 8 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6] 7 8  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.sys.mac.system


csiph-web