Apple hides OS X Server from dually G4 buyers

— 11:59 PM on July 25, 2000

My friend Darwin alerted me to an enlightening post on MacOSRumors (probably my favorite Apple rumors site). Rather than explain it, I'll quote the Q&A from the Mac guys directly:

I just tried to buy a Mac OS X Server and found out that the software does not run on the new machines. Any idea when these will become available?

Not wanting the press -- or users -- to latch on any further to the fact that Apple does not currently have any shipping operating system capable of Symmetric Multiprocessing (SMP), it has pulled the OS X Server product and is not currently offering any G4 Server products.

So there you have it.

Yes, Macs are technically inferior—especially when running MacOS 9 and older. They lack basic things like a real multithreaded, multitasking kernel—something my Amiga had back in 1989. That alone isn't what irritates me about Apple, though. It's marketing stunts like this one, complete with outright lies about the performance of the products, that bother me. Add to that a vocal group of folks utterly convinced Apple's hype is outright gospel, and it starts to stick in ol' Damage's craw.

Now I don't know what a craw is, but I sure as heck don't want anything stuck in it.

So let's hope Apple comes back to earth soon. Their OS X efforts may actually put the first, best truly usable desktop interface on top of Unix. Avie Tevanian and the NeXT crew are definitely capable. I just don't want them to tell me it's 5000% faster than a Pentium 4 when the time comes.

In the meantime, though, dually G4 buyers will have to suffer through with one usable processor and one 500MHz space heater.

Like what we're doing? Pay what you want to support TR and get nifty extra features.
Top contributors
1. BIF - $340 2. Ryu Connor - $250 3. mbutrovich - $250
4. YetAnotherGeek2 - $200 5. End User - $150 6. Captain Ned - $100
7. Anonymous Gerbil - $100 8. Bill Door - $100 9. ericfulmer - $100
10. dkanter - $100
Tip: You can use the A/Z keys to walk threads.
View options

This discussion is now closed.