Re: MOSR on MOSX again

Kragen Sitaker (
Tue, 15 Dec 1998 19:05:29 -0500 (EST)

Tim, is this a joke?

On Tue, 15 Dec 1998, Tim Byars wrote:
> Symmetric Multiprocessing - It will be there. Every task will be able to
> be run across multiple processors.

Bullshit. Not even Apple can magically take an arbitrary
single-threaded program written in machine code and efficiently
parallelize it.

> Cluster Processing - Count on it. Wire up your Yosemite or Sawtooth
> machines with MacOS X, and you can automatically set one machine on the
> network to be the "Master" machine and the others to be the "Slaves". Every
> "Slave" machine will handle the instructions sent to it by the "Master".
> This way, you can connect 500 G4's and have all of them, say, rendering
> "Toy Story III: The Adult World". Whatever. Unlimited power. Unlimited
> scalability.

People are doing this already.

> Red Box - Apple hates emulation. It doesn't want emulation in its product.
> Emulation is slow. However, Apple is working on a hybrid method to bring
> seamless Windows comaptibility to the Macintosh. The first is a Win32 API
> set, part of the so-called Red Box. The other is a custom "DOS
> Compatibility Card".

Are we expected to believe that Apple will write a full implementation
of the Win32 API? It seems that even Microsoft can't quite do that --
they wrote NT, defined its API to be "Win32", and then implemented
Win95 -- which ended up with numerous portability problems.

We're talking about a truly massive effort here -- roughly comparable
to what Microsoft did to turn Win3.1 into Win95 (although Apple already
has the central part, memory protection and multitasking, free.)

> MacOS X and Linux - Apple is proposing a UNIX binary format and submitting
> it to the ISO later this month. This will eliminate one major hassle of
> UNIX -- having to download source and compile it.

Funny, System 6 UNIX had a format for binaries in 1976.

Or maybe this means a *portable* binary format. What machine code will
this binary format use? PowerPC code? Or perhaps Java bytecodes?
That'll really reduce hassles, won't it -- instead of having to
laboriously recompile things, I'll just run them at a tenth the speed
in an emulator! What joy Apple brings.

Unless this means a binary format portable between Unices for the same
architecture, like the iBCS stuff we've had for a few years.

> This is a major stride towards making UNIX - including Linux - more universal.


> Apple is also
> working to license Carbon APIs and YellowBox to all major UNIX versions...
> This doesn't mean that Apple is giving away MacOS X, just the support
> necessary to run MacOS X applications. No source code will be given.

a. Apple does not plan to give out source code.
b. Apple plans to require a license from anyone who
implements the Carbon or OpenStep APIs.

That would be frightening, except that it's blatantly illegal.

Tim, did you make this post up?

<>       Kragen Sitaker     <>
Silence may not be golden, but at least it's quiet.  Don't speak unless you
can improve the silence.  I have often regretted my speech, never my silence.
-- ancient philosopher Syrus (?) via Adam Rifkin, <>