Showing posts with label steve jobs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label steve jobs. Show all posts

Thursday, March 24, 2011

Mac OS X beginnings: NeXTSTEP

Now a decade after its first release, now’s the time for some nostalgic Mac OS X goodness. Let’s take a look at the Mac’s most far-reaching and advanced operating system from inception and infancy to its now very adult-like capabilities and features.

OS X beginnings: NeXTSTEP

NeXTSTEP screenshot thanks to kernelthread.com
If you weren’t aware, the OS X Snow Leopard we know and love today was actually birthed from an operating system developed during the late-1980s to mid-1990s called NeXTSTEP. NeXTSTEP, from the Steve Jobs-owned company, NeXT, was an more modern multitasking operating system and well ahead of its time. However, bundled with capable though very expensive hardware, NeXTSTEP struggled to gain marketshare with competing “workstation” computers, and eventually Microsoft Windows became the preferred platform in both business and consumer markets.

Apple, then a competing company for Steve Jobs, also faced the same struggles. And by the mid- to late-1990s, Apple was desperate for a solution, as their main product line, the Macintosh, was no longer as competitive because of its aging, single-user and single-tasking operating system, OS 9.

An agreement was made. Apple bought NeXT, and with it all the advanced technologies within the NeXTSTEP operating system. With Steve Jobs back at Apple as an interim-CEO, and with NeXTSTEP in tow, Apple got to work on the next generation of OS called OS X. That’s “X” for “ten.”

Next post, we'll look at the brainchild of these efforts, OS X 10.0—aka Cheetah.

Here's a video of Steve Jobs demoing NeXTSTEP 3, the last major iteration of the operating system software:

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Perspective: T-Mobile can be bought for $39B, Apple has over $50B in cash.

Pending all the necessary government approvals, AT&T announced today their plans to buy US GSM competitor T-Mobile for $39 billion. Without going into all the politics as to whether or not this is overall a good idea or benefit to consumers, I felt it was worth mentioning just what $39 billion dollars can actually purchase.

Though a follower of all things tech, I have a not-so-unique fascination with Apple, that company which sells those i-Thingies. Pretty much everyone is just as fascinated as I when Apple steals headlines for each shiny new toy. And one thing that most people know as of late is just how quickly Apple's cash reserves seem to continuously build. Last reports have their cash piles weighed in at a cool $51 billion. That's a heck of a lot of money. What drives journalists even crazier than the mind-boggling number alone is that nobody knows for sure what Apple plans to do with it. There have been some guesses; however, most of us sit and wait for them to take over the world.

But let's take another look at that number: $51 billion. In pure cash. No debt. A market valuation soon to pass Exxon to be the most valuable company in the world. And unlike the animosity most have toward Exxon, Apple and Steve Jobs have been named the most admired and loved company and CEO of last decade. What does all this mean? It means that that pile will continue to grow, and all the while Apple seems to have the highest restraint not to impulse-buy any thing they like, say, a leading wireless provider...

Of course, that's not their bag, being a carrier, but it does offer some perspective as to just what they're capable of doing with that money. Maybe they could buy Microsoft?

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Steve vs. Steve (Jobs vs. Ballmer)

Two Steves, two CEOs of major techonology corporations, two very different thinkers...

Steve Jobs, considered a saint by many Apple "cult" followers, has a coolness, sleekness about his style, friendly yet fierce when he needs to be.

Steve Ballmer, intelligent in business and markets, enthusiastic about the product he sells, wearing a business suit and tie, can run a great business yet sometimes seem a little out of his element.

Either way, they both are funny:

Jobs likes "Boom"

Ballmer is "coming" way too much...

Ballmer compliation:


Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Yay! Apple holding a Mac event Oct. 20!

Alright! I get excited about new Apple events. Especially when they have to do with the Mac.

For a while now, folks in the Mac community have been upset about all the attention and focus on iOS, as Apple seemed to neglect their firstborn, the Mac, for the past year. But it made sense, however, because iOS devices now make up the largest portion of Apple's revenue. Either way, being a Mac evangelist -- it was my first love -- its great to finally hear something out of Cupertino, that they haven't forgotten us.

Apple event is scheduled for Oct. 20, and the tagline reads, "Back to the Mac." A graphic promoting the event depicts a 3D Apple logo with tiny sliver of a lion on the back of the Apple. So, I surmise they will be discussing the next version of the Mac OS operating system, 10.7.

The current Macintosh operating system, called Mac OS X 10.6 Snow Leopard, was released Sept. 2009. And Apple generally releases a new version of the OS at least every other year. I would guess the event might make some announcements about their Mac business, provide some updates and details on the sales and landscape of the desktop operating system, describe some new features planned on in the next release, and if we're lucky, might even announce a few hardware updates.

As it stands in the current lineup, the Mac most neglected would be the MacBook Air. Never considered a supreme player among laptop elites, its price tag and lack of features make it, while an extraordinary design, not fit for most of the laptop-toting market. However, those that find a place for the MacBook Air in their lives, say like a college student or traveling businessman, generally love the device for the sleekness, slimness, and the ability to carry around the capabilities of Mac OS X in such a tiny package.

As far as other updates, I'm really hoping on the announcement of a new version of iLife, which now that I think about it, must come along with some type of hardware announcements, seeing as how iLife is considered a free software for new Macs (that makes sense, right?). Of course you can purchase iLife as a standalone product for older machines, but that doesn't seem like Apple's style to make newer software not also available with newer hardware. Or maybe I'm just crazy...

Some people have pondered on the possibility of seeing some iPhone stuff, like even the notion that we might hear something about a Verizon iPhone. But usually, when Apple and Steve Jobs say their keynotes will cover a specific topic, they rarely go off course, declining to mention really anything else in their product lineup. Look at the past couple of keynotes: iPad was all about iPad and nothing else, iPhone 4 was all about iPhone 4 and nothing else new, and the September keynote was, as usual, all about iPods and Apple TV, and nothing else. So, Macs will prevail at this upcoming event, I believe, as it should, given the fact that other than quietly updating their Macintosh products, we haven't heard much out of Cupertino about their plans for Mac.

What features will the new OS contain? There's not much a Mac user can complain about, at least nothing I can think of off hand. I only see good things coming, so keep your eyes and ears open for whats next...

It's like my Mac is a baby, and Apple is the school system, and all I want is to send my Mac off to school so it can grow up big and strong and learn a whole bunch of new tricks. Come on, OS X Lion!

Tuesday, October 12, 2010

Windows Phone 7 is cool, just a couple years too late

In New York this Monday, Microsoft finally held its Windows Phone 7 event, officially introducing the new operating system along with 10 different handsets that will run it. The entire time I watched the keynote, however, as excited as I was for a product that looked to be extremely tight and polished, I also couldn't help but kinda pity Microsoft for one main reason: they needed this platform and these devices two years ago.

After watching the hour-long, slow-going keynote, which, while not an Steve Jobs presentation, was at least as informative as it was entertaining, I found myself continually nodding my head. Microsoft really has something here with Windows Phone 7. And having used Windows Mobile in the past, everything I saw up on that small stage was a complete rework of a struggling mobile strategy that now has the fit and finish to slide in among the big names already in the field. If only this event was held a couple of years ago, where would the industry be now?

There's no doubt that Microsoft is late to the game. While remaining somewhat relevant among smartphones, Windows Mobile 6 just didn't have the vigor to compete against the shine of the iPhone and iOS, as well as the slew of phones coming from handset makers adopting the Android platform.

So, why has it taken Microsoft this long to get on the bandwagon, to put something on the market that actually has a chance? They are a big cat in the industry -- they make freaking Windows for heaven's sake. How can the makers of the most popular software in the world not create something on the cellphone to turn consumer heads?

You might say the Redmond-based software giant suffers from managerial issues. Hell, when the iPhone was first announced, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer laughed at the notion of the iPhone becoming popular, ignoring not only how drastically different it was, but also how the iPhone was exactly what the industry needed: a jumpstart on serious mobile computing design and applications, and a handset-to-carrier relationship that worked for the consumer. I have no idea what's really going with Microsoft's board of directors, but I imagine their meetings might look like a scene from "12 Angry Men."

From my perspective, instead of having a clear mindset of "We need to make a better product now," the ideas around the heads of Microsoft decision makers, or lack thereof, were seemingly fruitless. For too long, waiting on the market and riding on WinMo 6, they appeared to not be able to make a decision about anything. All the while, iPhone was having one hell of a party. Vision and motivation in taking an idea, even those outlandish, is what was lacking from the spirit of leaders. Numbers and figures in the face of art, business suits in the face of fashion, maybe... As Chris Ziegler of Engadget writes about Microsoft senior vice president Andy Lees, "Lees -- like most Microsoft execs -- is a no-nonsense numbers guy" (Link). Maybe they only felt comfortable playing a sure thing.

Lack of vision and leadership. Case and point: Two Windows Phones, which were doomed from their conception, somehow made it to market only to be discontinued in less than two months. The Kin One and Kin Two, called project "Pink" before they were released, apparently had the same problem with project management: too many chiefs, not enough indians. Or maybe more appropriately: too little chiefs with vision, plenty of indians. This is an excellent story by Ziegler of Engadget on the whole Kin debacle: Life and death of Microsoft Kin: the inside story.

The point is, if Windows Phone 7 was ready and released this time in 2008, the time when phone manufacturers really started to get behind and drive the market share for Android (the only other viable touchscreen smartphone platform -- sorry Blackberry Storm), I do believe that Microsoft would be next to, if not overtaking, the iPhone in terms of market share. But, alas, when Steve Jobs introduced the iPhone to the world, though the Android platform had already been conceived, most companies in technology had their thumbs up their butts wondering what to do next.

So with the worst days hopefully behind Microsoft on the mobile front, lets imagine a world without Windows. Or not.. that'll never happen. But well see just how Microsoft fares on their new offering, and if it will gain any traction. I predict by this time 2011, Microsoft will have regained a good position in terms of both mindshare and market share, but not enough to constitute overtaking the market any time soon.