Win95 was a proprietary system under Microsoft's control. It was in MS' interests to shut other things out. Read the legal history.
Linux is a non-proprietary system under collective control. There is no obvious way that OS X, if it took on the ability to run Linux binaries, could ever lose that ability in the future.
True, there's a risk that developers might choose to target Linux only and not OS X specifically. Just as there's a risk that developers might target Linux on x86 only and forget about ports to *BSD. But I still think that an OS X with poorer developer support that can run Linux too is in a stronger position than an OS X which can't.
Leaving Windows emulation aside, here is what OS 9 can run:
Classic 68K Mac apps Classic PPC Mac apps Carbon (PPC) Mac apps. Some not very up-to-date Java.
Here is what OS X can run:
the first three above Full Java numerous gnu and unix tools, because of the BSD foundation ported UNIX apps, whether done by apple or a la fink X apps, locally or remotely hosted Cocoa apps, including ports from Next
Why would adding Linux support undermine these capabilities. Surely it would enhance them?
GWW
On 17 Dec 2003, at 09:44, Mendel Baker wrote:
Linux on Mac OS X isn't about function, it's about credibility. Even if
OS X were to develop a Linux binary compatibility layer (and so far,
none of you have said the notion is *technically* flawed) I doubt it
would see much use. But what it would do is send a strong message of
compatibility to the community at large, especially the business
community. "All this, and Linux apps too".
So if Apple aren't working on this, they surely ought to be.
I'm just being devil's advocate here... Anyone recall a product for the PC
market called OS/2? It became highly compatible with another product...
Microsoft Windows. It's binary compatability was so good, it frequently ran
Windows applications better than Windows did. Developers noticed... They
stopped bothering to write apps for OS/2, because they could just write them
for Windows. Then Windows 95 came out, and OS/2 couldn't run all of the apps
for it anymore. It no longer had it's edge and it basically died.
Do you really want developers to stop being bothered to write apps for OS X?
I'm NOT saying it would happen now... simply that it has happened before.
- Mendel
This message has been scanned for viruses by the VEI Internet
Automatic Email Spam and Virus Scanner, and is believed to be free of spam or viruses.
Please report spam to [EMAIL PROTECTED] If you would like 98.9 % spam blocked from your
E-mail then go to VEI Internet for details. Anti-spam/Anti-virus is FREE with every account.
http://www.vei.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Unsupported OS X is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/>
Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html>
Unsupported OS X list info <http://lowendmac.com/lists/unsupported.html>
--> AOL users, remove "mailto:";
Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Archive <http://www.mail-archive.com/unsupportedosx%40mail.maclaunch.com/>
Using a Mac? Free email & more at Applelinks! http://www.applelinks.com
-- Unsupported OS X is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/>
Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html>
Unsupported OS X list info <http://lowendmac.com/lists/unsupported.html> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For digest mode, email: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subscription questions: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Archive <http://www.mail-archive.com/unsupportedosx%40mail.maclaunch.com/>
Using a Mac? Free email & more at Applelinks! http://www.applelinks.com
