Why did Apple's Copland fail when so many 90s OS succeed, dominate world today

Re:Why did Apple's Copland fail when so many 90s OS succeed,... by Someone1234 on Thursday December 06, 2018 @03:34PM (#18621928)

But one could ask what is the current paradigm?

For example, you can view it as the desktop stopped evolving, or that we moved to the browser as a virtual machine hypervisor running whatever environment you choose (particularly true with WebAssembly).

The 90s were exciting because the desktop was seen as the center of the computing universe; these days the browser is the center and the desktop is a "me too!" paradigm.

One could argue we got "stuck" or one could argue that evolution shifted to an internet first paradigm with more security in mind.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why did Apple's Copland fail when so many 90s OS succeed,... by bluGill on Thursday December 06, 2018 @04:22PM (#18622369)

I prefer the '90s overall. There are good points to the modern web/internet world, but given a choice the '90s design is a better paradigm. Of course this assumes that one does their respective paradigm well, there were a lot of bad designs in the '90s that are worse than today's equivalent. However I contend that if effort had been continued in the '90s direction the result would be better.

Again, there are some major points in favor of the current internet/web world. For any "program" which you will use rarely it isn't the worth the cost to install the program.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Why did Apple's Copland fail when so many 90s OS succeed,... by ghaff on Thursday December 06, 2018 @04:48PM (#18622618)

We have two dominant mainstream paradigms.

We have the browser. And we have the app store.

Arguably, for better or worse, the desktop shifts to a combination of these and probably converges with mobile for mainstream users.

[ Parent | on HN ]