Skip to main content

You are not logged in. Your edit will be placed in a queue until it is peer reviewed.

We welcome edits that make the post easier to understand and more valuable for readers. Because community members review edits, please try to make the post substantially better than how you found it, for example, by fixing grammar or adding additional resources and hyperlinks.

11
  • 8
    Mac OS X isn't a rewrite of the classic Mac OS at all — it's based on NeXTSTEP.
    – s4y
    Commented Oct 1, 2009 at 16:01
  • 1
    @SidneySM: In a way, it's lineage is irrelevant. When you use OSX, it feels like Mac a lot more than like Unix.
    – Telemachus
    Commented Oct 1, 2009 at 16:54
  • 1
    @SidneySM Thanks, you're right. By "rewrite" I meant to convey that it didn't have any code in common with its predecessor, the Mac OS, and not that it was rewritten from the ground up. It obviously didn't come out right. I'll fix it asap.
    – user4358
    Commented Oct 1, 2009 at 17:01
  • 1
    @David Thornley We can debate this ad nauseum, but possibly our differences lie in our interpretation of the Unix philosophy. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix_philosophy I happen to think OS X is geared towards usability, and not this (especially the last bit): "Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface."
    – user4358
    Commented Oct 1, 2009 at 21:47
  • 3
    If you follow the traditional UNIX philosophy too literally, you can't have a graphical desktop environment.
    – hasen
    Commented Oct 21, 2009 at 7:14