3 ms·

I like that the author acknowledges the incredible success Apple has had with their software development, and the debt they owe to NeXT. NeXT came in because o

I like that the author acknowledges the incredible success Apple has had with their software development, and the debt they owe to NeXT. NeXT came in because of the failure of Apple over many years to develop a new operating system. After the acquisition of NeXT they developed a lot of really successful updates to that OS, and some good products and some bad products. Maybe they have gotten to the place where they were in 1996, where they need a major change to revitalize their thinking. I don't think there is a great example of thirty years great years of continuous software development.

btschaegg 9y ago
But do you think another NeXT-Situation would be actually possible? As in: We'll scrap our biggest product for something developed more or less from scratch? I know sunk cost is a fallacy, but in this case, I suspect the sunk costs to be rather substantial. And catching up with OSX development from the beginning sounds like almost an undoable task to me... Or do you think other parts than the main OS should be the target of the next NeXT incident? If yes, I'd be interested in which ones. User-facing software only?