NET, meaning that any developer wanting to exploit the latest and greatest OS features would have to venture into this brave new world. The plans became quite aggressive in the OS that was to succeed Windows XP, new functionality would be accessed not through Win32 but through. It was certainly promoted as such.NET was pushed as the future, the way all Windows development would occur in the future. It could have been a way out of the quagmire that is Win32. It could have provided salvation-an environment free of 16-bit legacy decisions, with powerful APIs on a par with what Apple had developed. It could have been clean and consistent and orthogonal and with a clear design and powerful concepts. It was designed and implemented from the ground up. NET story deserved a more thorough examination. NET, and observant readers will have noticed that I didn't mention it in part one. The core Windows platform didn't change between 2001 and late 2006.Īlthough XP itself was essentially unchanged, Microsoft did try to produce a modern, appealing platform for future development. Apple released a series of updates in quick succession, strengthening the platform with new features like Core Audio, Core Image, Core Data, and Quartz Extreme, and providing high-quality applications that exploited these abilities. It wasn't until early 2002 that Apple even made Mac OS X the default OS on new Macs for the first few months of its life, XP was up against "Classic" Mac OS 9.įurther Reading From Win32 to Cocoa: A Windows user’s would-be conversion to Mac OS Xīut OS X didn't stand still. Performance was weak, there were stability issues, and version 10.0 arguably wasn't even feature complete. The first two or three versions of Mac OS X were troublesome, to say the least. In 2001, when XP was released, this was not such a big deal. Although technically sound, it was shot through with the decisions made more than a decade earlier for 16-bit Windows. Meanwhile, Microsoft was lumbering along with Windows XP. The purchase of NeXT gave Apple a buzzword-compliant OS with a healthy ecosystem of high-quality third-party applications. Last time, I described how Apple turned its failure to develop a modern OS into a great success. Part two ran on May 4, 2008, and it appears unedited below. Mac OS?!? While our staff hopefully enjoys a less stressful Memorial Day this year, throughout the weekend we're resurfacing this three part series that doubles as an existential operating system dilemma circa 2008. Could this lifelong PC user really have been pushed to the brink? Was he considering a switch to. Ten years ago around this very time-April through June 2008-our intrepid Microsoft guru Peter Bright evidently had an identity crisis.
0 kommentar(er)
