Xref: utzoo comp.sys.apple:23762 comp.sys.mac:50956 comp.sys.apple2:281 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!sun-barr!decwrl!ucbvax!NISC.SRI.COM!cwilson From: cwilson@NISC.SRI.COM (Chan Wilson) Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.apple2 Subject: Re: Accepting the Mac (was Re: More Macweek Rumors) Message-ID: <14437@fs2.NISC.SRI.COM> Date: 20 Mar 90 07:56:07 GMT References: <1848@crash.cts.com> <18491@boulder.Colorado.EDU> <12667@thorin.cs.unc.edu> <1990Mar17.105403.17776@spectre.ccsf.caltech.edu> Reply-To: cwilson@NISC.SRI.COM (Chan Wilson) Followup-To: comp.sys.apple Organization: Network Info Systems Ctr., SRI Intl., Menlo Park, CA. Lines: 114 In article <2595@unocss.unomaha.edu> dent@unocss.unomaha.edu (dent) writes: > >The appeal of the Mac, (at least back in 1984, when Apple had DAMN GREAT ads.. >[anyone got 1984 on VHS, btw?] :-) is not (at first), the hardware, but the >user interface. In fact, the Macintosh User Interface has had such a huge >impact on the entire industry (by virtue of actually being sucsessful >at it), that nearly all of the functionality of it has been copied to other, >sometimes radically different, archtechtures. If you have been asleep for Interesting point here. While the Apple ][ was the personal computer that defined the term "personal computer", the Macintosh was the computer that defined the term "graphical user interface." Much in the same way that the Model T define the term "automobile." But anyway... >System 7.0 for the Mac can just barely be seen on the horizon now, and some >of the major developments for it weren't entirely for the Mac. Apple and [slurp] >AU/X 2.0 is on the horizon as well, and with it, MacX. This is perhaps one >of the most exciting developments of all, IMHO. From the rumors, MacX allows >X Windows applcations to display on the Mac, which is what you would expect. >What it additionally does is provide those X Windows applications with the >"Mac Look". The implications of this are that the industry without a >standard interface may get one, if MacX can be expanded to "MacWM" (for lack >of a better name). If this is done, the Mac Interface could be used on >even more dissimilar architectures. Well, that's a close description. From a quick scan of the latest issue of Unix world (or whatever it's called), what Apple has done is merged the power of unix with the ease of the Mac GUI. From what it looks like, you'll start up your mac ii[fc][xi] into A/UX 2.0, which starts up Multifinder. You'll be able to run 32bit clean Mac applications from the finder, and run Unix programs from a shell window. You want X? Start up MacX, a modified version of X windows that runs concurrently with the Mac GUI. So, there's the screen shot they had. A standard Macintosh (color) screen, running multifinder. A couple finder windows were open, an X window with a graph was open, and a standard terminal window was open, speaking to A/UX. Wow. That's impressive. What they've just done is eliminate the last major obstacle for Mac workstations. Not that I'm a macintosh fanatic, but I can see the enormous appeal this has. Why buy a SparcStation, when for approximately the same amount you can buy a Mac IIfx running A/UX, MacX, and Mac GUI? It's one of those 'have your cake and eat it too' scenarios. >abandoned. The Mac /Interface/ can run on /any/ architecture. Sure, >assembly language programmers will be a little upset :-), but C and Pascal >programmers should be able to just link with a new library, tweak a little, >and go. [Yes, this is oversimplifying the case dramatically, I realize.] Hmm. One wonders how hard it would be to write a converter betwixt 65K and 68K assembler. >The entire point of this rambling article is that the "Macintosh" is really >more than simply the hardware by the same name that does the work. (Kind Ah. Good point. Hmm... I wouldn't be too all amazed if Apple came up with a translator library of some such that lets (for example) a sparcstation run Macintosh programs. [slurp] >for considerably less I hope!!). The //gs will also be replaced, but not by >a "Low Cost Mac" in the Hardware sense. An "enhanced" //gs that runs the >Mac-like Interface is really enough. There's no need for over-engineered >Apple-II compatibility boards in every Mac. There /is/ a need for the Mac >functionality on the Apple II architecture, so the two lines can merge in >that sense. Well, it's getting there. [slurp] >identical. Only by making the Macintosh Toolbox the standard programmers' >interface to hardware, can the same source code be used to generate machine >code for various kinds of architectures. Programmers shouldn't really need >to know what specific machine their program is going to run on. (well, >the ones writing the toolboxes obviously should, but.. :-) I can see it now: "MacC, the portable graphical programming language." Although, I'd prefer a different name.. >designed to be generalized. You can have any size display you want on a Mac; >it makes no difference to your applications. This same generality needs to >be perfected, and expanded to the other areas... what we'll wind up with >is the "Macintosh Virtual Machine", and if /only/ toolbox calls are used to >access hardware, and dynamic linking could be used to link in the machine- >specific implementations of the toolbox, the same applications /will/ run >on different architctures, and not even know it. ...opening the door for "Mac-in-the-Cray" :) >The preliminary steps have been made; file transfer has almost become trivial, >and hopefully future support for Foreign File Systems will make it moreso. speaking of such, where's our FSTs? >I know I'm asking for a lot here, but I don't think I'm asking for the >/impossible/. I suppose we'll have to wait around to see if /any/ of this >occurrs (what a let-down ;-)... but it should be fun to watch if nothing >else. (It'd be even more fun to participate in, but what do I know. I /liked/ >the Apple ///+. :-) Hoh yes! If we can't join the party, at least we've got a front row seat... >-/ Dave Caplinger /--------------------------------------------------------- > dent@zeus.unomaha.edu ...!uunet!unocss!dent DENT@UNOMA1 --Chan ................ Chan Wilson -- cwilson@nisc.sri.com I don't speak for SRI. Janitor/Architect of comp.binaries.apple2 archive on wuarchive.wustl.edu "And now, the penguin on top of the television set will explode." ................