[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(Omitting all foregoing discussion)
As one of the Rhapsody developers on this list--in the Apple Technology
Seeding program, which is free with a $250.00 membership in the Apple
Developer Program, which allows you to get developer releases of
Rhapsody for PPC and Intel, both of which have shipped--
I can say:
Rhapsody as shipped in developer release runs on the Mach (Not "Mach 5",
which is not a Mach release, AFAIK, but Mach < 3), _not the Windows NT
kernel_. This is, effectively, the NextStep architecture. There are
new features for running MacOS programs in a VM called the "Blue Box".
Next runs on Mach microkernels, which have nothing specific in common
with NT's "microkernel", AFAIK. A Mach server depends on a tasking
model and virtual memory model which do not exist in Windows NT at the
kernel level, and does not require services which in NT _are_ in the
kernel. A Rhapsody machine could be thought of as a next-generation
GUI, hosted on a UNIX base, hosted on Mach.
Much as I worry about just what "cooperation" between Apple and M$
engineers actually means for developers and customers, I do NOT worry
that Apple has anything to gain from M$ "microkernel technology."
I more worry about M$ buying/stealing much of what is unique and
valuable from the Next system, and encorporating it in the NT gaping