Re: How many times must Apple make such DRASTIC architecture changes?

[Paul Schlyter <pausch@NOSPAMsaaf.se>]

In article <1OIpe.17401$QX1.14703@fe06.lga>, john.doggett@x-files.gov 
says...

>I believe this latest move to Intel was the 4th drastic change by Apple in
>their history.  Correct me if I am wrong but the first MAJOR architecture
>change was from the Apple II/IIgs or whatever to the Macintosh 68K.

Why don't you consider the introduction of the Apple Lisa (which predated
the Maciontosh) a major architecture change?  The Lisa was 68K based too.
Later the Lisa II was renamed to Macintosh XL.

>I believe at this time Apple II's and their software and possibly hardwrae
>would not work on a 68000 Mac without a a) Emulator, or b) Processor card.
>Today one can get a emulator (as I do on my ibook G4), but one cannot
>install a Apple IIgs CPU in a Mac.
>
>The second major architecture change came in 1994 when Apple moved from the
>68000 CPU to the IBM PPC CPU.  Hardware would still work in the PPC Macs,
>and over 90% of 68K apps would work on a PPC.  Even today I run many 68K
>apps on my ibook G4.
>
>The third major architecture change when they moved from their old World Mac
>to their New World Mac with OSX.  The new world macs are way different, as
>well as OSX.  OSX is based on Unix, and far more powerful than the classic
>mac os. But I have to wonder if Apple originally wanted Unix to be their OS,
>when the first Mac was designed. I have noticed that OS 8.1 can read Unix
>formatted disks, but I wonder about OS 7.  Was a Unix os part of apples
>original plan?
>
>And the last major change happened recently with this move to the Intel x86.
>Funny after all these years, PC's have remained x86, and  even a new PC
>being sold today can run many DOS applications.  Granted they cannot use all
>DOS apps, but certainly a much higher percentage of apps than what a OS
>Tiger user can of Apple II apps.  And for those that cannot use a DOS app,
>can crate a dual boot partition with DOS 6.22 or whatever on a newer Windows
>XP PC.

You can't really compare the Apple II DOS to MS-DOS.  Remember that the 
Apple II was an 8-bit computer while the early PC's running MS-DOS were
16-bit computers.

It's more fair to compare the Apple II to all those CP/M-80 machines from
the same period of time: all of them were 8-bit machines, with a 64K address
space, using all kinds of mutually incompatible disk formats, and sometimes
even a harddisk.

Still your remarks remain mostly valid.  How many applications for the
Apple Lisa can be run om the OS Tiger?  Any at all?

Obviously, the Apple computers are not for those who value backwards
compatibility highly.

>John

-- 
Paul Schlyter,  Grev Turegatan 40,  SE-114 38 Stockholm,  SWEDEN
e-mail:  pausch at saaf dot se
WWW:     http://stjarnhimlen.se/