top | item 46494061

NeXTSTEP on Pa-RISC

62 points| andsoitis | 2 months ago |openpa.net | reply

27 comments

order
[+] badc0ffee|2 months ago|reply
> NeXTSTEP itself, while revolutionary in aspects, did not have long commercial success. However some of its ideas and technologies live on in Mac OS, after corporate M&A and consolidation in the tech sector.

On the contrary, macOS is NeXTSTEP plus several years of development. It's what the NS means in NSLog.

[+] pipo234|2 months ago|reply
I guess it's a bit more subtle.

The point that the article makes is about opening up NeXT to other hardware platforms. So while from one perspective, you might argue it lives on inside Apple, you could also argue that's where nextstep died.

In the early 2000s I worked for a company that went all in on NeXTSTEP a decade earlier. The product was developed in a "4 GL" called 4D or 4th dimension.

We had to do a painful migration to windows nt/xp because NeXTSTEP was discontinued and apple actively fought to kill attempts to fork or open source the code base.

[+] pjmlp|2 months ago|reply
It used to be, Tahoe is generations away from NeXTSTEP.

NeXTSTEP drivers were written in Objective-C, originally OS X used C++ subset based on COM (IO Kit), now moved into userspace and called Driver Kit, in homage to the NeXTSTEP DriverKit name.

NeXTSTEP was focused on OpenGL and Renderman, OS X used OpenGL, macOS is now using Metal.

NeXTSTEP drivers were on kernel space, now everything is moving into userspace.

NeXTSTEP used Display Postscript, OS X moved into PDF subset, nowadays that is only part of the rendering stack.

NeXTSTEP had a X Windows Server as well, on macOS that is now gone.

macOS Finder is nothing like the NeXTSTEP file application.

NeXTSTEP supported a concept similar to OLE, it is nowhere to be seen on macOS.

[+] astrange|2 months ago|reply
There's plenty of differences. The device driver stack and window server are all totally different.
[+] erichocean|2 months ago|reply
And iOS of course is also derived from it.
[+] WillAdams|2 months ago|reply
I would really like for it to be easier to run NeXT/OPENSTEP on modern hardware --- somehow, since Mac OS X 10.6.8, Mac OS has gotten ever less comfortable (and I really miss the "Unix Expert" checkbox, as well as the repositionable main menu, tear off menus, pop-up main menu, Display PostScript, nxhosting, &c.

An educational copy of OPENSTEP 4.2 was the last thing I purchased for myself from Apple since they discontinued the Newton MessagePad.... and I'm sad my Cube quit booting, and that I never got it running on my ThinkPad.

[+] speed_spread|2 months ago|reply
What we really needed was NeXT on Alpha. So much cool tech lost to the Wintel juggernaut in the 90s.
[+] TMWNN|2 months ago|reply
>NeXT tried to get its own NeXT RISC workstation to market (chased a chimera) and looked at Motorola 88000 and PowerPC

Jobs made a huge mistake by going with the 68K in the first place. DEC would prove just a few months after NeXT's October 1988 launch the viability of a MIPS-powered workstation.

Even better, in the long term, would have been to go with the 80386.

[+] stmw|2 months ago|reply
In fairness, I think it wasn't obvious that Motorola would run into so much trouble with the 68k line, or that 80386 would be the far-away winner. Sun and many others were betting on 68k, too.
[+] antijava|2 months ago|reply
I used to have a NeXTStep HP workstation back in the day. Worldcom had hundreds of them running custom network monitoring. I think we were one of,the biggest NeXT installations outside of the NSA.