Re: Possibility of open-sourcing GS/OS

["josephoswaldgg@hotmail.com" <josephoswald@gmail.com>]

madcrow.maxwell@gmail.com wrote:
> I was wondering if people think that we could convince Apple to open
> the source code to GS/OS. If they were to do that, it would mean that
> we could more easily enhance it to take advantage of new developments
> in hardware and possibly even produce ports to other 65816 systems (the
> SuperCPU accelerator available for the Commodore 64 and 128, for
> example)
>
> Do people think that it would even be worth starting a petion about
> this? I for one think it might be, as Apple no longer supports the
> software AND already distributes it as Freeware.

I agree with other posters that there is basically zero chance that any
of the (relatively few?) people at Apple today who remember the Apple
II would make any effort at all to open source the GS/OS. There is
absolutely *zero* gain for Apple to make any effort. The battle for
"Apple II forever" was lost a long time ago. Who knows if the source
even exists at Apple anymore?

Even *if* you could get a clone of the GS/OS running, the 65816 is a
dead end. 16 MB address space? Man, check your calendar. You need 32
bits of address today. Preferably 64. Anybody who would want to deliver
an app on a 32-bit GS/OS or something is already writing it in Java or
for Linux or Cocoa or Windows, each of which runs on *tons* more
machines than there are IIgs's in the world, which is *tons* more than
any IIgs-2005-remix someone might make in a basement. The Apple II
folks are happy where they are; if they were interested in *anything*
new to take its place, they would have found it already.

In any case, now that I've rained on your parade, almost everything you
would could do with a GS/OS "update" could just as easily be done by
hacking a GS emulator, or by disassembling GS/OS on your own and
patching in whatever improvements you might want to make. That's more
the Apple II style anyway.

Source is overrated. You need someone who *understands* the source and
is willing to work on it. Anybody who would understand GS/OS source
could just as easily participate in such hacking without the source.

Hacking like this is tremendous fun, and I've even had fun recently
with open-sourced Lisp Machine code, which is an even deader machine
than the IIgs. But realistically, I know that releasing that code will
be an entertaining diversion for a few crazy folks like me, and make
not the slightest noticeable difference otherwise. No real innovation
is being prevented by Apple keeping the GS/OS source locked up. Just
have fun with what you've got and don't wait for daydreams to come true.