🚀 go-pugleaf

Mel Martinez (mem@jhu.edu) wrote:
: ] Like I said originally, Copland is a Win95-ish upgrade. Win95 has new
: ] 32-bit pre-emptive multitasking but old 16-bit graphics code (among other
: ] things) that handicaps the system. Copland is in a similar situation since
: ] it is using old code also. In Copland, the Mach microkernel does not
: ] realize its full potential as it does in other OSs.

: This is simply not true, according to the information released so far
: about Copland by Apple.  Copland will indeed by a micro-kernel based OS,
: with fully-preemptive and protected processes...

For the kernel, not all the various software components (like QuickDraw).

: ... One of these processes
: (currently referred to as 'The Blue Box' will act as an environment within
: which all 'old-style' Mac software apps as well as the user-interface
: toolbox environment will run. Thus old apps and the interface, while not
: protected from each other any more (or less) than they are today in Sys
: 7.5.1) ...

Which is what I mean by a "kludgy Win95-ish upgrade".

: The only place Copland fails to meet the process model of an OS such as NT
: is that even newer, Copland - ready, applications will run the
: user-interface part of the application in the Blue Box...

IMHO a big handicap, and why I don't consider copland to be in the same 
league as NT.

I agree copland is a big improvement, but so was Win95. I am only arguing
that in terms of OS technology, Apple still has a way to go in order to
catch up to Microsoft NT. Like I've said, I'm excited about gershwin, not
copland. 

Tony
-- 
------------------
Tony Tribelli
adtribelli@acm.org