[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: congrats to ardi



>>>>> "John" == John  <johnpcw@bass.pcwnet.com> writes:
In article <Pine.SOL.3.91.960606085847.1352A-100000@bass> John <johnpcw@bass.pcwnet.com> writes:


    John> On Wed, 5 Jun 1996 randell@heinous.music.uiowa.edu wrote:
    >> Clifford T. Matthews <ctm@ardi.com> wrote:
    >> 
    >> >In a couple of weeks I'll be at MacHack '96 presenting a paper
    >> on >Executor internals and showing off Executor in general.  If
    >> we can't >wrangle a meeting with Apple out of that presentation
    >> we'll just have >to conclude that they don't want to have
    >> anything to do with us.
    >> 
    >> I'm going to say that although having Apple's backing would be
    >> nice and all, I believe that it might be a good thing *not* to
    >> have Apple involved with Executor. I personally would rather
    >> see Apple fail and people use Executor to run their Mac apps on
    >> a PC. I do not want to see Apple using Executor to try and
    >> steal the PC market. I don't

    John> Questions:

    John> 1. Is Apple a hardware company or Operating System company
    John> ???

Neither.  They're a "Systems" company.  They make complete computer
systems (that come with hardware and software) that can be used
straight out of the box.

    John> 2. Why should Apple support Executor and promote sales of
    John> x86 PCs. ??

x86 PCs are already being sold.  Mac ISVs know this and many have
jumped the ship.  If you read between the lines, it appears that Apple
realizes their OSes will have to run on a variety of platforms in the
future.  The big question is what should be done now.

If by using the PPC Apple can make machines with competitive
price/performance ratios than making it easier for people to be
exposed to their OS is a good thing.  Executor is a substitute for a
Mac, not a replacement.  If they can't make machines with good
price/performance they'll be eaten anyway.

    John> 3. What financial benefits will Apple receive by supporting
    John> Executor ??

Well, if we could use their code, we'd be paying them a royalty with
every copy of their code sold.  Developers would then be able to
develope using Mac API tools and be able to sell their software in a
much larger base.  Developer tools creators would be able to do the
same thing.  It would be possible to make a demo CD-ROM that would
allow generic PC user to get a glimpse of the Macintosh experience.
It would also be possible, if they chose to do so later, to make an
x86 based Mac that would run x86 binaries blazingly fast and also run
m68k code fairly fast and with a little help from the compiler tools
people (like Metrowerks) "Fat" binaries that ran time critical
portions in native x86 code would allow Mac apps to run blazingly
fast.  Clearly people at Apple think people want this dual capability,
they certainly push SoftWindows alot.

There is much more that I can say on this topic, but I'll probably do
it via one or more white papers.  Let's see what people think of
Executor at MacHack '96 (less than two weeks away).

    John> johnpcw@pcwnet.com

    John> John Wang

--Cliff
ctm@ardi.com


References: