Which was the better UI? Mac OS 9? Mac OS X? Windows? Nobody can agree. Tim O'Reilly didn't like Mac OS 9. He gets OS X. Traditional Mac users are a bit annoyed by OS X. They think it's a bit too much like Windows.

What about Intel hardware? Jordan can't say (of course). A lot of folks are willing to pay for the extra Mac hardware. But in the larger world, people worry about pricing, Morotola, and so on.

Existing Mac users need Quark on OS X. It's supposed to be coming someday.

An audience member asks about performance improvement. Jordan says they're still working quite hard on it. They need to catch up with Linux. Mac user's don't buy new hardware every year. They keep their boxes *forever*. So the software really does have get faster.

Jordan: "One of the benefits of going with Morotorla is that we don't assume the hardware will get faster."

Lots of laughter. :-)

Discussion about what might be tuned. How to keep the foreground processes faster. Scheduling is very tricky.

What about having X installed by default?

Jordan thinks it *could* happen someday. Or at least bundle the client libraries, etc. Or maybe put it on the developers CD if not installed by default.

Notice how Apple has made sure that normal Mac users NEVER have to open the terminal if they don't want to.

DarwinPorts stuff coming soon. Stay tuned for news. Watch DaemonNews for more info.

There are Open Source developers still don't trust Apple yet. What if their whims change? Might developers be stranded--even a concern for in-house corporate development. What can be done?

Tim says that corporations often do orphan products. That's life. But in the Open Source world, folks can pick it up and keep it alive. Might Apple give products away when they orphan them? Jordan will take it back to Apple.

OS X is a safe bet. Apple is all over it. They are being very consistent, focused, and determined. They're in it for the long-haul.

Lots of talk about iApps. Will they be more open? Plugins and scriptability? The development teams seem very responsive.

Nat brings up the "culture shock" involved in coming from the Unix world. Things like, "wow, I have to pay for all my software." What can Apple do to help ease the transition. The other is that you can' fix apps, but you can usually talk to someone who can. That can be frustrating.

Jordan stressing sending in feedback. Don't be so cynical. Apple is not Sun or IBM.

MacDevCenter.com agrees.

Complainers need to register as developer and FILE BUG REPORTS, just like in the Open Source world.

Linux switchers want cheaper hardware.

Someone asks Jordan what it was like as an Open Source guy at Apple. He got there late enough that he didn't have to fight a lot of battles. He got lucky.

Ack! TiBook power is low. Must submit and go off-line soon. Should have charged it last night.

Posted by jzawodn at October 02, 2002 10:09 AM

Reader Comments
# jeremy w said:

No, we don't *need* Quark on OS X, some people just think we do. Those who have made the jump over to InDesign will most likely agree with me -- I've not regretted switching to InDesign. ID has superior type handling, ability to work with native Illustrator and PSD files (layered files, no need for TIF or EPS), strong support for PDF, transparency, etc. Quark is in the same boat as UMAX -- no OS X support, no Mac future.

on October 2, 2002 01:24 PM
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here are mine and mine alone. My current, past, or previous employers are not responsible for what I write here, the comments left by others, or the photos I may share. If you have questions, please contact me. Also, I am not a journalist or reporter. Don't "pitch" me.


Privacy: I do not share or publish the email addresses or IP addresses of anyone posting a comment here without consent. However, I do reserve the right to remove comments that are spammy, off-topic, or otherwise unsuitable based on my comment policy. In a few cases, I may leave spammy comments but remove any URLs they contain.