|
gil didn't hire steve before apple bought next but there was a shootout between be and next for the final decision and JLG didn't bother presenting anything
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
also the beos ceo was like "I'll sell it for 100 billion dollars" and apple told him to gently caress off
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
jlg is good because he made that verge guy meltdown about his spikey bracelet
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 03:41
|
|
|
could've sworn that steve was brought on as a consultant before apple bought next but IIRC gassee wanted $275 million for be (apple offered $200 million), so apple told him to eat poo poo and then bought next for ~$415 million instead 
Doc Block fucked around with this message at 03:58 on Jan 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 03:43
|
|
|
graph posted:jlg is good because he made that verge guy meltdown about his spikey bracelet probably the best thing gassee has done since his famous (rumored), "Oh, I guess they're for the emotionally handicapped too." line when he saw steve jobs park in a handicapped parking spot. Doc Block fucked around with this message at 03:50 on Jan 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 03:45
|
|
|
Doc Block posted:edit: in fairness, NextStep/OpenStep was a far better operating system and was actually complete instead of being a work in progress like BeOS. it was also the system with the best overall architecture including kernel out of anything that was being considered especially since Mach 3.0 and extensions and 4.4 BSD were available to greatly improve the implementation without really affecting the design Mach ports rule
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 06:38
|
|
|
next was also a "real company" with $50m in revenues and had WebObjects which seemed like a good idea at the time
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 06:52
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:next was also a "real company" with $50m in revenues and had WebObjects which seemed like a good idea at the time and turns out it was, since even shaggar's favorite framework implements basically the same architecture
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 07:08
|
|
|
IIRC wasn't Craig Federighgihi the head WebObjects guy at NeXT, but then when Apple switched it from Objective-C to Java he noped the gently caress out and quit, only to get rehired later? edit: according to Wikipedia, basically. He quit in 1999 when Apple made WebObjects Java-only, then came back in 1999 to work on OS X. Doc Block fucked around with this message at 07:19 on Jan 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 07:13
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:next was also a "real company" with $50m in revenues and had WebObjects which seemed like a good idea at the time i don't think the failure of WO had much to do with WO itself apple didn't have a lot of legs as a company hawking middleware to developers. it was just not even close to on-brand. no credibility then, later, the bottom dropped out of the market. when was the last time you heard someone ask his boss for tuxedo / websphere / jboss licenses?
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 16:00
|
|
|
Doc Block posted:IIRC wasn't Craig Federighgihi the head WebObjects guy at NeXT, but then when Apple switched it from Objective-C to Java he noped the gently caress out and quit, only to get rehired later? the webobjects java stuff started in 1996 the objectiveC crap wasn't dumped until 2001 timeline doesn't work also objC had precisely 0 advantages for a web application. they dropped objC support because it was unwanted. nobody was gonna learn a new language for no benefit.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 16:01
|
|
|
hey wanna hear something funny? here it is: telescriptquote:Telescript programs used a modified C-like syntax known as High Telescript, and were compiled to a stack-based language called Low Telescript for execution. Low Telescript ran within virtual machine interpreters, or "Telescript engines", on host computers. quote:Telescript was modelled on the concept of small programs known as agents that would interact with computing services known as places all of which would run on a cluster of one or more servers that hosted what was called a Telescript cloud. The user's handheld device was one such place, albeit one with limited capabilities. The model assumed that most information and services would be provided by places running on larger server computers hosted by the communications providers like AT&T. "hey let's make the user upload software and run it on a remote server to do accomplish any task, this sounds like a great idea. then they can get the software back and run it themselves when they're done"
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 17:45
|
|
|
one of my favorite computers, the HP 50g graphing calculator. it came out ten years ago, so its not "old" in an age sense, but its old in usefulness. why would you use this thing if you have a modern computer? i don't have a good reason for you other than :sperg: anyways, this thing is sick. look at the features this bad boy boasts,
 they're discontinued now, and really undervalued in my opinion. $57 fuckin dollars, i bought a backup one just now http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000GTPRPS
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
gotta love that godawful mid-00s hp branding and font
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:10
|
|
|
yeah a hp50g with the enter key in the right place and the right kind of keys and hp48sx style case would have been too perfect for this world. while i'm calc sperging, the hp 35s is a very good calculator, and is actually a lot more usable than the 50g. its keys feel nice, its enter key is in the correct position, and it also comes in a case that lets everyone know just how much of a dork you are.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 18:18
|
|
|
i wonder why the graphing calculators didn't end up in the agilent side of the business if they had, they would probably still be in production. and $500 apiece
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:09
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:the webobjects java stuff started in 1996 WebObjects was a descendent of Enterprise Objects, an Objective-C framework meant to make it easy for enterprise desktop apps to connect to databases and such. WebObjects kept the Objective-C stuff initially but also added Java support. Supposedly, a lot of the things that made WebObjects great for the time were made possible by Objective-C's dynamism, and apparently when they made it Java from top to bottom they removed things even Java WebObjects people liked. Or so I've been told, I never used WebObjects. According to Wikipedia, Federighi was head of Enterprise Objects at NeXT, and stayed on after the Apple buyout until 99. So about the time Apple stopped caring about WebObjects.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:16
|
|
|
Doc Block posted:So about the time Apple stopped caring about WebObjects. apple still uses webobjects. they only stopped selling it in the recent past. i wouldn't say apple stopped caring, it's just that the outside world never gave a poo poo at any point
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:26
|
|
|
what I meant was that Apple stopped caring about selling it to people
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
this is kind of a chicken/egg problem which started first: apple's indifference to enterprise sales, or enterprise customers' disinterest in apple software products
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
Notorious b.s.d. posted:i wonder why the graphing calculators didn't end up in the agilent side of the business by Keysight and they'd be worth every goddamn penny (still have and use the HP48SX I got in 1991 or so)
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:06
|
|
|
Doc Block posted:WebObjects was a descendent of Enterprise Objects, an Objective-C framework meant to make it easy for enterprise desktop apps to connect to databases and such. p close, WebObjects is actually a peer to AppKit, a couple people at NeXT realized in 1992-3 that the same techniques used to interact with databases and bind objects to native UI could be used for request-response web stuff too quote:WebObjects kept the Objective-C stuff initially but also added Java support. this was feasible as of Java 1.1, which added the necessary support to the runtime to instantiated classes and invoke methods by name quote:Supposedly, a lot of the things that made WebObjects great for the time were made possible by Objective-C's dynamism, and apparently when they made it Java from top to bottom they removed things even Java WebObjects people liked. Or so I've been told, I never used WebObjects. that's what a lot of ObjC partisans were afraid of and claimed quite loudly but it's not actually the case in the ground-up WO5 reimplementation in Java, all of the dynamism was retained, new dynamic stuff like the awesome rule system was added, and we got the huge advantage of being able to deploy without any sort of special runtime beyond a couple jar or war files (no native libraries required) quote:According to Wikipedia, Federighi was head of Enterprise Objects at NeXT, and stayed on after the Apple buyout until 99. Craig left to start a company that basically created "B2B," based on WO, and it was rather successful I believe we shipped WebObjects through Snow Leopard and Xcode 3.2 in 2009 (if not then we last shipped it in Leopard and Xcode 3.0 in 2007, maybe with Xcode 3.1 in 2008)
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
Doc Block posted:what I meant was that Apple stopped caring about selling it to people there were two stages of this first was the price drop to $699/license from around that for development and Oracle-scale prices for deployment then we stopped selling it entirely as of Xcode 2, the dev tools were just included with Xcode and deployment included with Mac OS X Server I don't recall if there was a period where you had to pay for a deployment license on another platform if you didn't want to deploy on Server, I think once we made it free-with-Xcode you could actually deploy for free too you can actually still download and use Xcode 3.0 or 3.1 free and get WebObjects and do whatever with it, there's a whole community still even publishing bug fixes and enhancements (since it's not obfuscated), it's just no longer supported e: looks like the last public release was WebObjects 5.4.3 for Xcode 3.1 and Mac OS X 10.5, and which can be downloaded separately without having to grab all of Xcode too (it says it's an update but it has the full frameworks) eschaton fucked around with this message at 21:04 on Jan 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
an open source webobjects would be really cool
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 20:58
|
|
|
LOL
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
a rare dell 
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 22:30
|
|
|
even though precisions are the beefiest, nicest made dells outside of servers, lol at charging more than scrap value for that
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
Both hard drives have been wiped. Has Windows NT... [more] ... sticker on the front.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
at my first job I had the P4 version that that tower christ it was bad especially the front usb ports at a 45 degree angle
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
I just realized that there are now adults who were born after USB was an implemented thing.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
Citizen Tayne posted:I just realized that there are now adults who were born after USB was an implemented thing. that feel when there's only a 25 pin serial port available and your 9<-->25 pin adapter is a null modem and you dont wanna rewire it, but you can, if radio shack is closed already.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
should I run mac os 8 or 9 when I get this ibook or X I guess
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 03:58
|
|
|
~Coxy posted:especially the front usb ports at a 45 degree angle and upside-down, because extra-gently caress-you! i dont care what anyone says those style of dell towers were loving garbage
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:25
|
|
|
I forgot about that what garbage iirc the optiplexes at the place I used to work also had upside down front ports
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:37
|
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:should I run mac os 8 or 9 when I get this ibook iirc you can go up to os x 10.4 but idk (if u mean the firewire clamshells) you can only have a maximum of 576 MB of ram and its kinda slow running 10.4 but u can try it i think only a very few early production ibooks can run anything less that os9 anyway just go w/ os 9.22
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:48
|
|
|
when I was using my no-firewire clamshell as a daily driver I think I had some kind of linux on it. I want to say gentoo
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:55
|
|
|
you know how power drivers are hosed up on x86 linux? suspend/resume not working half the time etc? ppc linux was rock solid in that regard
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
I also daily drove a g4 powerbook for a while. one of the titanium ones. I also had verizon for mobile data tethering through my phone. I had to run mac-on-linux to run the verizon program to connect to the phone, then use internet connection sharing to get the connection out to linux.
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:57
|
|
|
a sweet addition to my useless old computer poo poo collection, i'm spurtin here
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 04:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 25, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
Silver Alicorn posted:when I was using my no-firewire clamshell as a daily driver I think I had some kind of linux on it. I want to say gentoo i remember yellow dog linux being a thing for those ibooks i think the local compusa had it on one of their display ibooks back in the day
|
|
#
?
Jan 31, 2016 05:01
|
|