| Hello,
To expand on AdmiralAK's quote...
Several years ago Apple was three months from calling it quits or being the resourceless lacky of some other company. In a desperate move they purchased Next (alternatives were BeOS, liscence NT, Amiga, or do nothing). The Jobster was part of the package :->
Next was and is a complete OS with its own UI and some pretty amazing services. Apple had and still has the difficult task to repackage Next as its own. How to do that?
Most applications are developed top-down. Meaning you prototype a UI that fits the business logic and then you program the busness logic. Operating Systems require a bottom-up approach. Too many dependencies on the lower level exists.
The "bottom" was written at Next and worked. The "bottom" is why Apple purchased Next. They failed at least three times to create a "modern" OS on their own (Taligent, intent of System 7, and Copeland). Apple kept trying to shoe horn in a new "bottom" into the existing "top" - top-down.
So what does this rant of mine mean? Simply many of the behaviors, organization, and UI widgets in MacOS9 do NOT make sense in X. Design is an iterative process. The only way to do X justice is to let it evolve over time - not to stick in MacOS9 stuff in willy-nilly because some people fight change. The Stevenote at MacWorld showed they actually did :-(
Starting from scratch was necessary and did not mess things up. Starting from scratch is doing for the software what the iMac did the hardware.
I'm done.
Jove
PS
gradic, what exactly don't you like about X? Have you seen the latest builds of X? Big differences!
 |