I don't think they ever intended to port QuickDraw to the 6809. Raskin wanted a bitmapped machine, but it was Bud Tribble who saw what Bill Atkinson was doing with LisaGraf (later QuickDraw) and persuaded Burrell Smith to do a 68k Mac board. I don't think they had any graphics routines for the Mac at that point; they were still drawing stuff by hand in assembly.
Some of that comports with what I have read, too; but I swear I read the bit about no one wanting to port Atkinson's LisaGraf to the 6809 somewhere. Hang on while I try to dredge that up....
OK, I give up. It does seem that the decision to switch to the 68k was made long before QuckDraw was even an issue, and was made for different reasons (but I still know I read the other thing somewhere!)...
But I DID find a great article on the Mac's development that I never ran into before (part I of the article is linked near the top). I share it here for you of anyone else interested in Mac history. One of the more interesting things in the article, at least to me, was that it was obvious from some of Jobs' statements that he read a much better grasp of hardware design issues than I ever thought.
Um... IIRC, a southern state (Tennessee?) passed a law defining pi as exactly 3 because it made calculations easier. This explains a lot about the mental capacities of legislators.
WOW! The king of Apple shilling calls other's trolls and liars! Now I've seen it all. Apple does NOT design their own silicon. Never have. Never will.
I am an embedded developer with about 4 DECADES of paid experience. I do not shill. No need to. Not to brag; but to quote Todd Rundgren "Don't need to sling the scat, 'cuz my resume is too fat." But I digress...
Apple DOES develop their own "Silicon" (chip DESIGNS) "from scratch" (they do NOT "fab" it, however. And you obviously don't understand the difference. They (wisely!) rely on others to do that, such as Samsung, TSMC and others. They started that WAAAY back in the day, when they used VIA Technologies and others to "fab" their custom Glue Logic, Sound Processors, and GPUs (we're talking 1980s and '90s here). But even THEN, the DESIGNS were Apple's. They might have (probably did) contract some of the Design work out in those days; but they haven't even done that much at all in this Century.
For example, in the ARM space alone, they have the highest-level ARM License you can have, an ARM "Architectural License", (and I think they are like one of 15 companies in the WORLD that has that) (and oh, BTW, they are one of the ORIGINATORS of ARM; look it up). Their ARM license does NOT just let them play "cut n paste" with other ARM IP; but rather, they actually can (and do!) make changes to base-level ARM designs, as well as "roll their own".
To quote the Wikipedia Article:
"In addition to licenses for their core designs, ARM offers an "architectural licence" for their instruction sets, allowing the licensees to design their own cores that implement one of those instruction sets. An ARM architectural licence is more costly than a regular ARM core licence,[64] and also requires the necessary engineering power to design a CPU based on the instruction set.
Processors believed to be designed independently from ARM include Apple's (architecture license from March 2008[65]) A6, A6X, and A7[66] (used in iPhone 5, iPad and iPhone 5S) [as well as the A8 and A9 series developed after this article], and Qualcomm's Snapdragon[67] (used in smartphones such as the US version of the Samsung Galaxy S4). There were around 15 architectural licensees in 2013,[68] including Marvell, Apple, Qualcomm,[64] Broadcom[69] and some other."
So, FOAD, fuckhead. You have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you are talking about.
Honestly, I wouldn't stop at their win apps, below the bells and whistles they layer ontop of the same OS they release every damn year, you'll see a trend of half-assed-ness that's beyond disgraceful.
Have you ever watched a single WWDC Keynote? Apple typically announces HUNDREDS (and sometimes THOUSANDS) of new and updated APIs and Frameworks EVERY SINGLE VERSION of OS X and iOS. And many of those changes are ENTIRELY "under the hood". The typical User just sees better battery life, faster gaming, etc.
HARDLY just "bells and whistles", Hater.
And as you pointed out, that's typically about EVERY year.
Unfortunately, without wading through Keynotes, or tons of Developer docs, it is hard to come up with citations to these changes; but if you challenge me, I will find some examples.
QuickDraw was the original graphics toolkit built into the Mac system software from its birth, so that's at least back to 1984.
Before that, actually. QuickDraw was originally written for the Lisa, which began development in 1979. In fact, the reason that the Mac was fitted with a 68K CPU is that no one wanted to port QuickTime to the 6809 that was originally going into the Mac (which began Development in 1981, BTW).
Oh, wow! I had a feeling I'd see you on this article, here to defend the fruit of Steve Job's loins. Once again I must say, GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE. Macs4all? No thank you. They've been making computers for hipster faggots before hipsters even existed. Gimping non-apple software on apple devices? Personally I have no idea. I don't touch apple shit, but it sounds exactly like something they would do. Just like when they gimped Bluetooth so you couldn't receive send/receive files to non-apple devices. But, I guess when you're getting rammed up the poop-chute by Tim Cook, everything is OK with you.
Such erudite discourse. I'm not sure I can keep up...
So, IOW, you ARE just talking out your ASS, Anonymous COWARD.
QuickTime does power a lot of professional video workload, perhaps Apple tried to say that they are dropping the browser plugin via removing it in an update which is seriously overdue. Apple wasted a great technology but whatever, days of plugins are long gone.
If there is no misunderstanding, that should be a final wakeup call to creative professionals.
I just got a QuickTime for Windows Update for my Win 7 laptop offered to me by Apple's Software Update Service like less than a month ago; so it's not dead yet.
I am a Linux proselytizer and I have to call bullshit on you. Apple is very good about fixing updates that bork devices, and they support devices for a very long time (although it'd be nice if they were more clear about which ones are EOL...). And how exactly are they "deliberately protecting the communication of known terrorists" any more than anybody who uses the Internet?
The both of them engaged in play acting. The FBI wanted to oblige Apple to respond to thousands (or tens of thousands) of FISA requests a year. Also, Apple was happy to have a PR image of being secure while the FBI was happy if dumb criminals thought the iPhones were safe to store incriminating information on.
Perhaps it's time to farm out design and coding, and stick to icon design and repackaging other companies' off the shelf components.
You're so full of shit, it's pathetic.
To be sure, just like every other tech company, Apple uses many off-the-shelf components.
However, UNLIKE most other tech companies (e.g. Lenovo, Dell and HP), Apple designs many, many custom components for their products, e.g. sound processors, memory controllers, I/O controllers and much, much more. And that doesn't even touch on their custom cases, power supplies, plus a boatload of custom cables, connectors and adapters; this list goes on and on.
There are many examples over the years (most of which are very hard to find references for); but even if we restrict the list to JUST their mobile SoCs, you are easily shown to be quite the liar. Or fool. Take your pick.
Quicktime's been around several years longer than any Microsoft "Direct" family products, which were introduced starting with Windows 95. QuickTime Media Player has been around since 1991.
The problem for the FBI comes the next time they want Apple to do something. Apple could reasonably request them to explain why the method they used before is not applicable now.
Yay, totally filled with executive types that have no actual clue about computer security. Maybe if there were actual security researchers, hackers, and programmers working on the problem... Wait, we already are working on it, and still no silver bullets.
Yeah, no shit.
Notice that Apple wasn't invited to the party, but Macroshaft was. That oughta tell ya something...
Sovereign Immunity is not a blank check. The FBI (or any other agency) cannot have the legal authority to trump the legal process by contract. That would allow them to trump discovery in any court case by constructing contracts that prevent disclosure.
"Your Honor, your order to produce the basis for the evidence against the plantiff is trumped by our contract with party X to not disclose that." Nope.
It would work if they actually don't have that information, not if they 'promised' not to disclose it.
You either work for the government and/or have never sued the government.
You say that that Sovereign Immunity doesn't trump Discovery? Well, technically that is true; but as soon as you file a Discovery Request, the Gummint WILL immediately file two Motions (well, they will probably have already filed a Motion To Dismiss based on that Sovereign Immunity), but they will DEFINITELY file for a "Stay" of your Discovery Request "Until the Motion To Dismiss is Adjudicated." They will trot out two metric tons of case law in support of their position that Immunity ALSO means "Immunity from the 'burden' of Discovery."
To absolutely NO ONE'S surprise, the Court will Grant this Motion. And it will do ABSOLUTELY no good to argue that you need that Discovery to "Pierce" their Immunity in the first place.
Then, since you can't produce evidence to overcome their Motion To Dismiss...
So, don't tell me it can't happen; I had the unpleasant experience of falling victim to EXACTLY THAT TACTIC when I attempted to sue my State about 3 years ago.
Slashdot Mirror
I don't think they ever intended to port QuickDraw to the 6809. Raskin wanted a bitmapped machine, but it was Bud Tribble who saw what Bill Atkinson was doing with LisaGraf (later QuickDraw) and persuaded Burrell Smith to do a 68k Mac board. I don't think they had any graphics routines for the Mac at that point; they were still drawing stuff by hand in assembly.
Some of that comports with what I have read, too; but I swear I read the bit about no one wanting to port Atkinson's LisaGraf to the 6809 somewhere. Hang on while I try to dredge that up....
OK, I give up. It does seem that the decision to switch to the 68k was made long before QuckDraw was even an issue, and was made for different reasons (but I still know I read the other thing somewhere!)...
But I DID find a great article on the Mac's development that I never ran into before (part I of the article is linked near the top). I share it here for you of anyone else interested in Mac history. One of the more interesting things in the article, at least to me, was that it was obvious from some of Jobs' statements that he read a much better grasp of hardware design issues than I ever thought.
There was a phony news story back in 1998 saying that Alabama did this, but it's been debunked.
And it looks like the Indiana bill was never passed, so your Hoosier integrity is intact! :)
Maybe for that particular gaffe; but there are so, so many other examples... ;-)
Hello, I have wonderful news for you. It was just a bill, it was never made into a law.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indiana_Pi_Bill
I know. But the mere fact that it even found a Sponsor is a testament to the scientific ignorance of most politicians.
Are you fucking dense? How about the walled garden that is iOS?
You Haters will stop at nothing to demonstrate your ignorance, paranoia and disingenuousness.
Um... IIRC, a southern state (Tennessee?) passed a law defining pi as exactly 3 because it made calculations easier. This explains a lot about the mental capacities of legislators.
It was Indiana.
And being an Indianan, I hang my head in shame.
WOW! The king of Apple shilling calls other's trolls and liars! Now I've seen it all. Apple does NOT design their own silicon. Never have. Never will.
I am an embedded developer with about 4 DECADES of paid experience. I do not shill. No need to. Not to brag; but to quote Todd Rundgren "Don't need to sling the scat, 'cuz my resume is too fat." But I digress...
Apple DOES develop their own "Silicon" (chip DESIGNS) "from scratch" (they do NOT "fab" it, however. And you obviously don't understand the difference. They (wisely!) rely on others to do that, such as Samsung, TSMC and others. They started that WAAAY back in the day, when they used VIA Technologies and others to "fab" their custom Glue Logic, Sound Processors, and GPUs (we're talking 1980s and '90s here). But even THEN, the DESIGNS were Apple's. They might have (probably did) contract some of the Design work out in those days; but they haven't even done that much at all in this Century.
For example, in the ARM space alone, they have the highest-level ARM License you can have, an ARM "Architectural License", (and I think they are like one of 15 companies in the WORLD that has that) (and oh, BTW, they are one of the ORIGINATORS of ARM; look it up). Their ARM license does NOT just let them play "cut n paste" with other ARM IP; but rather, they actually can (and do!) make changes to base-level ARM designs, as well as "roll their own".
To quote the Wikipedia Article:
"In addition to licenses for their core designs, ARM offers an "architectural licence" for their instruction sets, allowing the licensees to design their own cores that implement one of those instruction sets. An ARM architectural licence is more costly than a regular ARM core licence,[64] and also requires the necessary engineering power to design a CPU based on the instruction set.
Processors believed to be designed independently from ARM include Apple's (architecture license from March 2008[65]) A6, A6X, and A7[66] (used in iPhone 5, iPad and iPhone 5S) [as well as the A8 and A9 series developed after this article], and Qualcomm's Snapdragon[67] (used in smartphones such as the US version of the Samsung Galaxy S4). There were around 15 architectural licensees in 2013,[68] including Marvell, Apple, Qualcomm,[64] Broadcom[69] and some other."
So, FOAD, fuckhead. You have ABSOLUTELY no idea what you are talking about.
Honestly, I wouldn't stop at their win apps, below the bells and whistles they layer ontop of the same OS they release every damn year, you'll see a trend of half-assed-ness that's beyond disgraceful.
Have you ever watched a single WWDC Keynote? Apple typically announces HUNDREDS (and sometimes THOUSANDS) of new and updated APIs and Frameworks EVERY SINGLE VERSION of OS X and iOS. And many of those changes are ENTIRELY "under the hood". The typical User just sees better battery life, faster gaming, etc.
HARDLY just "bells and whistles", Hater.
And as you pointed out, that's typically about EVERY year.
Unfortunately, without wading through Keynotes, or tons of Developer docs, it is hard to come up with citations to these changes; but if you challenge me, I will find some examples.
Windows has supported PDF out of the box since 8.
Wow. Only took them what, like THIRTY YEARS? Color me Unimpressed...
QuickDraw was the original graphics toolkit built into the Mac system software from its birth, so that's at least back to 1984.
Before that, actually. QuickDraw was originally written for the Lisa, which began development in 1979. In fact, the reason that the Mac was fitted with a 68K CPU is that no one wanted to port QuickTime to the 6809 that was originally going into the Mac (which began Development in 1981, BTW).
With well over a MEELION Apps in the Play Store, don'tcha think that this great revelation by Google comes about FIVE YEARS too late?
Parts of Quicktime may have indeed been "stolen" from Apple, but I wouldn't trust that site to supply meaningful facts.
Ok, so you don't trust Roughly Drafted? Howabout Wikipedia?
Ok, so you don't trust Wikipedia? the IT Law Wiki?
Ok, so you don't trust the IT Law Wiki? Howabout The Register.com?
Ok, so you don't trust The Register (don't blame you)? Howabout the U.S. Courts?
Idiot.
Oh, wow! I had a feeling I'd see you on this article, here to defend the fruit of Steve Job's loins. Once again I must say, GO FUCK YOURSELF YOU FUCKING ASSHOLE. Macs4all? No thank you. They've been making computers for hipster faggots before hipsters even existed. Gimping non-apple software on apple devices? Personally I have no idea. I don't touch apple shit, but it sounds exactly like something they would do. Just like when they gimped Bluetooth so you couldn't receive send/receive files to non-apple devices. But, I guess when you're getting rammed up the poop-chute by Tim Cook, everything is OK with you.
Such erudite discourse. I'm not sure I can keep up...
So, IOW, you ARE just talking out your ASS, Anonymous COWARD.
QuickTime does power a lot of professional video workload, perhaps Apple tried to say that they are dropping the browser plugin via removing it in an update which is seriously overdue. Apple wasted a great technology but whatever, days of plugins are long gone.
If there is no misunderstanding, that should be a final wakeup call to creative professionals.
I just got a QuickTime for Windows Update for my Win 7 laptop offered to me by Apple's Software Update Service like less than a month ago; so it's not dead yet.
I am a Linux proselytizer and I have to call bullshit on you. Apple is very good about fixing updates that bork devices, and they support devices for a very long time (although it'd be nice if they were more clear about which ones are EOL...). And how exactly are they "deliberately protecting the communication of known terrorists" any more than anybody who uses the Internet?
Someone please mod this up!
The both of them engaged in play acting. The FBI wanted to oblige Apple to respond to thousands (or tens of thousands) of FISA requests a year. Also, Apple was happy to have a PR image of being secure while the FBI was happy if dumb criminals thought the iPhones were safe to store incriminating information on.
Citation, please, or STFU.
No one forces you to use it. What's up with you fucktards who cry about something that you're not forced to use? Is that all you got in your life?
Yep. You must be new here...
purposefully gimping non apple software on apple devices
Citation, please?
Perhaps it's time to farm out design and coding, and stick to icon design and repackaging other companies' off the shelf components.
You're so full of shit, it's pathetic.
To be sure, just like every other tech company, Apple uses many off-the-shelf components.
However, UNLIKE most other tech companies (e.g. Lenovo, Dell and HP), Apple designs many, many custom components for their products, e.g. sound processors, memory controllers, I/O controllers and much, much more. And that doesn't even touch on their custom cases, power supplies, plus a boatload of custom cables, connectors and adapters; this list goes on and on.
There are many examples over the years (most of which are very hard to find references for); but even if we restrict the list to JUST their mobile SoCs, you are easily shown to be quite the liar. Or fool. Take your pick.
Quicktime's been around several years longer than any Microsoft "Direct" family products, which were introduced starting with Windows 95. QuickTime Media Player has been around since 1991.
And don't forget, Microsoft's video standards and players were originally based on STOLEN QuickTime Source Code.
So in a very real sense, QuickTime for Windows will continue to live on.
That is the normal hire for all of these commissions, mostly because nepotism would be too obvious if done too often.
Yeah, because Apple has SUCH a reputation for being a Government Toadie. (Rollseyes)
Nevermind Appke: I guess that must be why REAL security experts like Bruce Schneier aren't on the Commission, either.
The problem for the FBI comes the next time they want Apple to do something. Apple could reasonably request them to explain why the method they used before is not applicable now.
Yeahrightsure.
Yay, totally filled with executive types that have no actual clue about computer security. Maybe if there were actual security researchers, hackers, and programmers working on the problem... Wait, we already are working on it, and still no silver bullets.
Yeah, no shit.
Notice that Apple wasn't invited to the party, but Macroshaft was. That oughta tell ya something...
Sovereign Immunity is not a blank check. The FBI (or any other agency) cannot have the legal authority to trump the legal process by contract. That would allow them to trump discovery in any court case by constructing contracts that prevent disclosure.
"Your Honor, your order to produce the basis for the evidence against the plantiff is trumped by our contract with party X to not disclose that." Nope.
It would work if they actually don't have that information, not if they 'promised' not to disclose it.
You either work for the government and/or have never sued the government.
You say that that Sovereign Immunity doesn't trump Discovery? Well, technically that is true; but as soon as you file a Discovery Request, the Gummint WILL immediately file two Motions (well, they will probably have already filed a Motion To Dismiss based on that Sovereign Immunity), but they will DEFINITELY file for a "Stay" of your Discovery Request "Until the Motion To Dismiss is Adjudicated." They will trot out two metric tons of case law in support of their position that Immunity ALSO means "Immunity from the 'burden' of Discovery."
To absolutely NO ONE'S surprise, the Court will Grant this Motion. And it will do ABSOLUTELY no good to argue that you need that Discovery to "Pierce" their Immunity in the first place.
Then, since you can't produce evidence to overcome their Motion To Dismiss...
So, don't tell me it can't happen; I had the unpleasant experience of falling victim to EXACTLY THAT TACTIC when I attempted to sue my State about 3 years ago.
I don't think that the FBI should be above the law (even contract law)
Apparently you are not familiar with the concept of Sovereign Immunity?
It was the first thing I searched. It was more than a zero result.
Still don't care. Never did.
Then why waste all of our time with your post?