Remember Macworld 1997 and how it was unintentional comedy g

They're still like that though, fucking U2 and Walk the Moon at the end of a keynote? It's just as bad as the Qualcomm one really.

File: 1348048269062.gif (756KB, 300x169px) Image search: [Google]

756KB, 300x169px

>>51386618
nothing is worse than that qualcomm bit

>>51386977
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJs7N3aM75Y

>>51385973
lol the playoff music started before they were actually done

Gil Amelio is spilling spaghetti all over the place. I'm genuinely amazed Apple didn't go with BeOS. Nextstep looked rough as fuck back then. GNUstep still looks terrible.

File: staysafe.jpg (113KB, 944x544px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 944x544px

>>51385973

I like this better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WxOp5mBY9IY

>>51387321
Yeah that purchase worked out really shit for them.

I was watching and was like "what's so funny?"
and then I realized someone was like "You [Woz] were supposed to be in the back" and I lol'd a bit

and then the indian dude comes up

and holy fuck

this completes me.

>>51387321
BeOS looked and felt more Mac-like, sure. I'd have chosen it on those grounds myself.
but NeXTStep was definitely more solid at the time, particularly underneath the hood, and that's what Apple really needed more than anything, OS9 is literally Windows 3.1 tier under the hood

Be was a literal nobody in the industry, too. NeXT being led by Jobs certainly had something to do with the pick.

File: geenustep.jpg (627KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

627KB, 1920x1080px

>>51387321
>Nextstep looked rough as fuck back then. GNUstep still looks terrible.
How so to both?

remember a bunch of really interesting steve jobs talks? i buy macs, i think steve jobs did some cunty things, but there's a ton of prime entertaintment listening to him plan out home tech of the 90s

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbkMcvnNq3g

>>51385973
>Remember Macworld 1997 and how it was unintentional comedy gold?
Nobody on /g/ remembers this because they're all in their early 20s or younger

>>51391411
>this feeling
>it's like it's the year 1994 in 2015 or the year 2015 in 1994

>>51387321
They did use a lot of NEXT's UI like the dock, but mainly, it stayed around conceptually. They acquired it for the code, which would help Apple get their hands on stuff like preemption. Jobs refused to use any OS9 hardware himself, in the end. He said it felt crappy, and in the year 2000, I would have to agree. I don't know if BeOS would have let Apple buy them out. They didn't have nearly as much money at the time.