[Am-info] Re: adopting alternative OSes

[Sujal Shah]

and, for what it's worth, knowing the kernel wouldn't help you do 
anything else with the system (unless you want to write drivers)... 
it's Mach surrounded by a BSD layer and a Cocoa layer.  Cocoa is based 
on NextSTEP, so if you're familiar with THAT, it will help you out.  
Since I didn't see that listed in your (rather obnoxious and 
self-righteous) list of OS's you're familiar with, you might have 
slightly more work ahead of you.  That doesn't even begin to address 
using the UI, knowing about how system preferences are stored, the 
NetInfo database, etc., etc., etc.  My point is that a kernel does not 
an OS make.

Also, speaking from experience here, lots of people say that they can 
do a better job at marketing something than another company with 
billions or even just millions of dollars for their product of choice.  
I've worked with groups that have said, if we only had the marketing 
dollars.  Often, it doesn't matter... the product itself can get a 
temporary boost from improved marketing, but in the end it's about the 
product or some social/business/non-technical issue.

WARP had the marketing dollars.  What it didn't have was OEM deals.  I 
would suggest that some manufacturers might have been nervous having 
their operating system (which is as critical to the computer as it's 
CPU, maybe more so from a consumer or business user's standpoint) come 
from their largest competitor in the hardware market.

And (putting my flame retardant suit on), Warp wasn't that special.  It 
was, from a user's perspective, the same damn thing as Windows.  I know 
I spent most of my time in games, WordPerfect, or connected to a 
mini-computer in college, so I lived in DOS and was perfectly happy.  
What made people choose OS's is the same thing that makes people choose 
today... Word ran best in windows and it came with their computer.   
That was the reason why OS/2 never even came up on the radar screen on 
my campus, and in my private life.





On Sunday, April 27, 2003, at 12:31 PM, Mitch Stone wrote:

> I don't question for a moment doubt IBM's mismanagement of Warp -- in 
> fact from what I have heard (mainly on this list), this seems to be 
> one of the great missed opportunities in recent technology history. My 
> point being still that it takes much more than a few millions and a 
> good product to crack the Microsoft hegemony in the OEM market (ask 
> Jean Louis Gasse). You can't say that IBM did not try at all -- they 
> had the product, the PC manufacturing arm, the cash, and most 
> importantly, the brand name. Their failure to put all of these 
> elements together suggests that the problem of succeeding in this 
> market is greater then you may assume. Rightly or wrongly, IBM 
> calculated that they were not likely to succeed.
>
> MacOSX is not a "derivative" of the Mach kernal, it uses the Mach 
> kernal. A point of order, for whatever it's worth...
>
> On Saturday, April 26, 2003, at 10:41 PM, mike wrote:
>
>> Well then.  Perhaps I should have made the point clearer for you.  I 
>> think I could have done a thousand times better at 
>> marketing/supporting Warp than IBM ever did..   And unlike many who 
>> did nothing, I was involved with Warp at the time with IBM.  I did 
>> what I could but I was limited by management.  If we would have been 
>> let loose to do what we wanted in 1992 and 1993/94, I am sure Warp 
>> would have passed the 25% market share....  and at that point it 
>> would have surpassed critical mass. Akers wanted to split the company 
>> up and let the software division go on its own, much like the Lexmark 
>> experience.  However Gerstner came in and put a stop to it.  In 
>> hindsight that was a big mistake on Gerstner's part.
>>
>> But yes I think if I had a few millions and the Warp development 
>> team, I could put something together.....  At least as good as the 
>> Linux stuff that is around.  And at least as good as the Mac 
>> alternative.  and without the burdon of IBM I think it could be sold 
>> to OEM suppliers.
>>
>> But of course you are more knowledgeable about operating systems than 
>> I am....  I am limited to knowledge of Dos, CPM, CPM86, PCMos, MUFO, 
>> Windows, OS/2, BEos, SCO Unix, And Linux.  I am not too familiar with 
>> the MAC's system 10.  But since it is derivitive of the Mach kernal, 
>> I suspect I could become familiar with it in a few weeks.
>>
>> Anyhow it is fruitless to be skeptical of another persons dreams.   
>> Unless you are prepared to change it to a reality and write the 
>> cheque....
>
>   -----------
>   Mitch Stone
>   mitch@accidentalexpert.com
>
>   In America you can go on the air and kid the politicians, and
>   the politicians can go on the air and kid the people.
>   -- Groucho Marx
>
> _______________________________________________
> Am-info mailing list
> Am-info@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info
>
------ sujal shah ------ sujal@sujal.net -----

                  http://www.sujal.net