One person to remember is Ellen Hancock. She was brought in as CTO under Amelio, and one of the things she had to deal with was the complete foundering of Copland. Copland was the next-generation of the MacOS, meant to replace System 7. It had been in development since 1992 and by the summer of 1996, it missed yet another integration deadline. Ellen had the guts to pull the plug and search for a different solution, which culminated in the buy-out of NeXT.
Perhaps the most interesting bit of this transistion is how she totally pulled a Mikhail Gorbachev. If you remember, Gorbachev was the last president of the USSR. Under his leadership, they began a program of perestroika or "restructuring". This program eventually lead to the collapse of the USSR and the rise of indenpendent soviet states. In short, Gorbachev led himself right out of a job.
In a similar way, Ellen Hancock helped to pick the best solution available and ended up being out of a job.
The second interesting historical point has to do with licensing of the MacOS. The conventional wisdom has always been that Apple should have licensed the MacOS to others, and that when they began to do so in 1996, it was too late.
However, this is wrong. Apple licensed the MacOS a decade earlier, and this license is exactly the reason that Windows still dominates. Apple licensed certain UI elements to Microsoft in 1985. In retrospect, it was one of the stupidest business moves ever, because it gave Microsoft carte blanc to copy the Mac. (Microsoft wasn't very blatant with their copying until the Apple / HP-MS case was withdrawn in the early 90s. The most obvious evidence of this is the change of the cut,copy,paste shortcuts in Windows 3.1 -- which went from unmemorable combinations with the Ins and Del keys to the familiar Ctrl-X, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V)
Of course, Apple isn't to be entirely blamed. The license was part of a quid pro quo from Microsoft so that MS would renew the license of AppleSoft BASIC. AppleSoft was a key component of the Apple ][, which was Apple's key money-maker in 1985. So it made some sense in the short term. While the conventional wisdom is that Apple lost the desktop market for not licensing the MacOS, the truth is the lost the market because they DID license it], which was Apple's key money-maker in 1985. So it made some sense in the short term.
While the conventional wisdom is that Apple lost the desktop market for not licensing the MacOS, the truth is the lost the market because they DID license it.
by Bill Coleman — Dec 21
One person to remember is Ellen Hancock. She was brought in as CTO under Amelio, and one of the things she had to deal with was the complete foundering of Copland. Copland was the next-generation of the MacOS, meant to replace System 7. It had been in development since 1992 and by the summer of 1996, it missed yet another integration deadline. Ellen had the guts to pull the plug and search for a different solution, which culminated in the buy-out of NeXT.
Perhaps the most interesting bit of this transistion is how she totally pulled a Mikhail Gorbachev. If you remember, Gorbachev was the last president of the USSR. Under his leadership, they began a program of perestroika or "restructuring". This program eventually lead to the collapse of the USSR and the rise of indenpendent soviet states. In short, Gorbachev led himself right out of a job.
In a similar way, Ellen Hancock helped to pick the best solution available and ended up being out of a job.
The second interesting historical point has to do with licensing of the MacOS. The conventional wisdom has always been that Apple should have licensed the MacOS to others, and that when they began to do so in 1996, it was too late.
However, this is wrong. Apple licensed the MacOS a decade earlier, and this license is exactly the reason that Windows still dominates. Apple licensed certain UI elements to Microsoft in 1985. In retrospect, it was one of the stupidest business moves ever, because it gave Microsoft carte blanc to copy the Mac. (Microsoft wasn't very blatant with their copying until the Apple / HP-MS case was withdrawn in the early 90s. The most obvious evidence of this is the change of the cut,copy,paste shortcuts in Windows 3.1 -- which went from unmemorable combinations with the Ins and Del keys to the familiar Ctrl-X, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V)
Of course, Apple isn't to be entirely blamed. The license was part of a quid pro quo from Microsoft so that MS would renew the license of AppleSoft BASIC. AppleSoft was a key component of the Apple ][, which was Apple's key money-maker in 1985. So it made some sense in the short term. While the conventional wisdom is that Apple lost the desktop market for not licensing the MacOS, the truth is the lost the market because they DID license it], which was Apple's key money-maker in 1985. So it made some sense in the short term.
While the conventional wisdom is that Apple lost the desktop market for not licensing the MacOS, the truth is the lost the market because they DID license it.