Mac OS X patch faces scrutiny

TalkBack 13 of 69:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

Apple and NeXT's philosophical differences

This whole problem arose because Steve Jobs didn't support his NeXT engineers in the internal debates between them and the existing Apple engineers. Apple's engineers insisted on keeping things the way they were pre-OSX, thereby allowing things like creator codes and resource forks to carry over and polute the BSD security. Also, keeping HFS was a mistake according to RixStep:

"Apple's file system HFS - properly called 'HFS Extended' - is an upgrade of the originally released Macintosh file system. It is not compatible with Unix. NeXTSTEP did not run HFS.

HFS has been kept because of all the legacy 'beige box' applications running on 'MacOS' in the past that were dependent on it. These applications were supposed to be phased out; it's been almost ten years now and they're still around.

HFS is not POSIX compliant, as has been demonstrated ad nauseam at this site for years. The NeXTSTEP Steve Jobs brought with him from Redwood City was. But then began the battle to keep the beige box alive - and in partly winning that battle, the diehards in and around Cupertino have only managed to destroy all they were given.

Apple's OS X is increasingly incompatible with Unix. OS X users experience greater and greater difficulties sending and receiving files with others who run Unix. And as of OS X 10.4 Tiger, Apple have begun committing the ultimate crime - namely corrupting open source FreeBSD Unix code to accommodate their resource forks.

Switchers from Unix were initially optimistic: NeXTSTEP represented the single most powerful adversary to Windows. Signs and hints that things were going 'the beige box way' were dismissed as being only 'temporary'. Apple's all-wise Human Interface Group, initially tasked to 'dumb down' the sophisticated NeXTSTEP to accommodate 'the rest of us', were predicted to soon reverse this trend and restore NeXTSTEP - and Unix - to its former glory.

Tiger with its unforgivable attack on open source Unix should have been the writing on the wall academia were waiting for; with Oomp-A, that writing becomes a direct insult."

Here's the link to one article, the web site is peppered with mistakes that Apple has made to the safe core BSD OS. http://rixstep.com/2/20060216,00.shtml

Posted by: Amberhawk   Posted on: 03/07/06 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Five Steps to Determine When to Virtualize YourServers VMware Server virtualization isn't just for big companies. Entry-level ... Download Now
• CDW Services Overview: Unified Communications CDW Businesses that utilize unified communications solutions empower employees ... Download Now
• Using the Dell 2161DS Remote Console Switch to Control Data Center Servers Dell The Dell 2161DS Remote Console Switch combines local and remote access ... Download Now