ryan brooks wrote: >>The team at Apple predicted this result as far back as 1999 (maybe a >>little earlier ... that's when I became involved in the effort) and >>much of Mac OS X's inner workings were architected to provide a good >>degree of processor independence and a reasonable schema for moving >>forward through a processor change. The results of my five/six years >>of effort along with that of several thousand other people are >>producing the Apple systems, Mac OS X and the third party >>applications of today and into the foreseeable future. >> > > > 90% of the portability work was done at NeXT, not Apple. >
That's not actually true. While OS X is very definitely a version of NeXTSTEP/OPENSTEP, it has fairly significant additions, all of which complicated the portability work. There was massive work on the kernel, and an entirely new UNIX subsystem along with the Carbon API and the Classic Emulation environment were added. Ryan, note that Godfrey worked on the team involved. He knows exactly what happened. -Adam -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
