5 ms·

There's (perhaps apocryphal) stories that Gates was terrified of what a Unix with a decent UI might do to upend Windows.

zitterbewegung 9y ago
It’s weird that Linux won as a platform on mobile and it was partially due to Apple making it so that phone carriers had less influence on phones so the carriers needed something to claw it back with .
- Yetanfou 9y ago
  Linux 'winning' on mobile has nothing to do with Apple doing anything at all. It 'won' mostly because it was chosen as the base for Android as well as several other mobile platforms (Intel's Moblin, Nokia's Maemo, the combined offspring called Meego, Samsung's Tizen, etc). Android 'won' for the same reason that Windows 'won', it was available for all to use in more or less any way they saw fit. The carriers had nothing to do with Android 'winning', that is mostly due to the availability of affordable unlocked devices from a multitude of sources, a market which Apple can not and does not want to touch as the profit margins and opportunities for lock-in are too low.
eesmith 9y ago
If so, that would have been NeXTStep. BeOS was (mostly?) POSIX compatible, but was less of a Unix than Linux. John Perry Barlow described it: "I have a NeXT machine -- I expect a boo or two -- that's as close to UNIX as I've been able to get, and that's kind of like UNIX with training wheels by Armani." http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781565929920.do http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781565929920.do
- dragonwriter 9y ago
  Yeah, but Apple solved the NeXTStep problem by buying NeXT and discontinuing Next step for commodity hardware. While it revived Apple, it also neutralized any serious threat NeXTStep might have posed to Microsoft.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    My argument is that if Gates was "terrified of what a Unix with a decent UI might do to upend Windows" then NeXTStep must have been more terrifying than BeOS. In the 1990s I worked in places where NeXT machines were in frequent use, including as the main desktop machine for a number of people. We also had NexT machines available for making presentations. There was never anything like that for BeOS. And FWIW, I was a registered BeOS developer. Remember too that Apple's A/UX was also a "Unix with a decent UI".
IncRnd 9y ago
I remember that Microsoft described Windows as “Windows IS POSIX,” when discussing other operating systems that could be competitors… Windows had a POSIX layer back in the day, similar to the win32 or NT layers, but for federal sales. Of course, the POSIX subsystem was replaced with Windows Subsystem for UNIX, which was too scary of an idea to ever actually use. And, Microsoft has now come full-circle back to having a bash shell. This bash shell does far less, though, not interacting with the rest of the system...
- int_19h 9y ago
  > This bash shell does far less, though, not interacting with the rest of the system... If you mean WSL, then it actually does (the name "Bash for Windows" is really a misnomer). Not only you get full access to the filesystem, but you can e.g. pipe output of a Win32 binary into a Unix one. It's really much more powerful than WSU.
  - IncRnd 9y ago
    Has WSL been “upgraded” since it was first introduced? When I first looked at it, you needed X forwarding to get a gui and couldn’t launch a windows executable, for example.
    - strmpnk 9y ago
      It's been steadily and continuously improved. Some of the latest improvements still require an insider build but win32 process interaction just works now (in my experience).
      - IncRnd 9y ago
        That's very good.
    - int_19h 9y ago
      You still need to jump through hoops with GUI. I don't think that's going to change anytime soon, since their focus is mainly on developer command line scenarios. Still, when you need UI, XRDP or Xming work adequately.

zitterbewegung 9y ago

It’s weird that Linux won as a platform on mobile and it was partially due to Apple making it so that phone carriers had less influence on phones so the carriers needed something to claw it back with .

Yetanfou 9y ago
Linux 'winning' on mobile has nothing to do with Apple doing anything at all. It 'won' mostly because it was chosen as the base for Android as well as several other mobile platforms (Intel's Moblin, Nokia's Maemo, the combined offspring called Meego, Samsung's Tizen, etc). Android 'won' for the same reason that Windows 'won', it was available for all to use in more or less any way they saw fit. The carriers had nothing to do with Android 'winning', that is mostly due to the availability of affordable unlocked devices from a multitude of sources, a market which Apple can not and does not want to touch as the profit margins and opportunities for lock-in are too low.

eesmith 9y ago

If so, that would have been NeXTStep. BeOS was (mostly?) POSIX compatible, but was less of a Unix than Linux. John Perry Barlow described it: "I have a NeXT machine -- I expect a boo or two -- that's as close to UNIX as I've been able to get, and that's kind of like UNIX with training wheels by Armani." http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781565929920.do http://shop.oreilly.com/product/9781565929920.do

dragonwriter 9y ago
Yeah, but Apple solved the NeXTStep problem by buying NeXT and discontinuing Next step for commodity hardware. While it revived Apple, it also neutralized any serious threat NeXTStep might have posed to Microsoft.
- eesmith 9y ago
  My argument is that if Gates was "terrified of what a Unix with a decent UI might do to upend Windows" then NeXTStep must have been more terrifying than BeOS. In the 1990s I worked in places where NeXT machines were in frequent use, including as the main desktop machine for a number of people. We also had NexT machines available for making presentations. There was never anything like that for BeOS. And FWIW, I was a registered BeOS developer. Remember too that Apple's A/UX was also a "Unix with a decent UI".

IncRnd 9y ago

I remember that Microsoft described Windows as “Windows IS POSIX,” when discussing other operating systems that could be competitors… Windows had a POSIX layer back in the day, similar to the win32 or NT layers, but for federal sales. Of course, the POSIX subsystem was replaced with Windows Subsystem for UNIX, which was too scary of an idea to ever actually use. And, Microsoft has now come full-circle back to having a bash shell. This bash shell does far less, though, not interacting with the rest of the system...

int_19h 9y ago
> This bash shell does far less, though, not interacting with the rest of the system... If you mean WSL, then it actually does (the name "Bash for Windows" is really a misnomer). Not only you get full access to the filesystem, but you can e.g. pipe output of a Win32 binary into a Unix one. It's really much more powerful than WSU.
- IncRnd 9y ago
  Has WSL been “upgraded” since it was first introduced? When I first looked at it, you needed X forwarding to get a gui and couldn’t launch a windows executable, for example.
  - strmpnk 9y ago
    It's been steadily and continuously improved. Some of the latest improvements still require an insider build but win32 process interaction just works now (in my experience).
    - IncRnd 9y ago
      That's very good.
  - int_19h 9y ago
    You still need to jump through hoops with GUI. I don't think that's going to change anytime soon, since their focus is mainly on developer command line scenarios. Still, when you need UI, XRDP or Xming work adequately.