Slashdot Mirror
MacOS X Beta Sneak Preview
Ruddy writes: "ZDNet has screenshots
and a preview of Mac
OSX beta being released Wednesday at the Apple
Expo in Paris, as well as a list of some apps
and utils that will ship
on the beta CD (apparently no download). Some of
the leaking details are a very NeXt-ish file browser, No Airport
support yet, only partial USB and only partial Firewire; Full
Java 2, Full OpenGL, Full SMP; Choice of Aqua or Graphite eye candies;
New Dock choices; installing on G3 & G4s only--requiring the OEM
video cards (no Voodoos or 3DFX) and single monitor systems only; installs
alongside OS9 with no major speed hits for Classic apps. The screenshots look fab and it all sounds pretty heady except for the connectivity shortage, but will
it look and feel? And will it plug and ...play? Highlights from
the rollout will be webcast here
starting Wednesday."
The "release it already" dept. What happened to waiting until the software was of sufficient quality to warrant release, aka, v1.0 == bug free?
--
Peace,
Lord Omlette
ICQ# 77863057
[o]_O
A recent register article mentioned British protest over MacOS and its terminated British-English version. I thought I'd mention it, even though their protests will do little good. Then again, they'd just have to change their spelling component under OS X to get it checking properly again.
Lowmag.net
Yes, the beta supports SMP. See http://www.apple.com/macosx/.
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
When Steve Jobs built the NeXT, the goal was to make the GUI easy for the developers. They were quite successful and many NeXT computer were sold to shops where they needed to build custom software. NeXT's biggest customers were banks and other financial institutions that needed custom trading software. Their single biggest customer was the CIA who needed custom image processing tools. NeXT wasn't successful in the general consumer market and custom apps weren't enough to carry it. All of their customers loved the NeXT computers but they needed Word and Excel and couldn't put two boxes on each desk so the NeXT's had to go. Now Mac is NeXT or NeXT is Mac or something like that, and all of the Microsoft apps will be available.
I predict that we will see some very innovative apps come out for OS-X/Cocoa in the near future. Much in the same way that we saw such innovative apps for the NeXT back in the '90-93 timeframe as Lotus Improv, Diagram, Notebook, SBook, and even the NeXT Mail app (attachments? how quaint...).
Burris
While I hope that Apple can make OS X work, I can't really see it changing the landscape at all. What the Mac is missing, and I don't think they'll ever get back, is the innovative application development that made it succeed in the first place. Applications like Photoshop, Illustrator, Word, Excel, PageMaker, Director, and Quark are what sold the platform above and beyond the OS. How many killer apps start on the Mac these days, and does anyone think that OS X is going to reverse this trend?
I'm writing this on my spiffy new dual processor G4/450, and I can say that there's an enormous aesthetic appeal to the machine that transcends tiresome questions like killer apps.
Certainly the new killer app for the system is digital video, what with both iMovie and Final Cut being made only for the platform. That and my high hopes for MacOS X are the main reasons I bought this system.
Using iMovie, I made a 47 second quickie horror film, complete with sounds, music and cheesy special effects, and it turned out well enough to impress a potential business partner interested in making a real, he-man style moneymaking project with me. Now, Final Cut is much better, and I'm looking forward to using it, but I think that's a good testimony to the merits of the platform and system.
There are two interesting problem areas for X that I haven't noticed anywhere, but are interesting:
* MacOS Classic users are going to miss features such as the Apple menu. Within hours of buying my spiffy new system, I was able to easily customize it to work the way I wanted. The new system is totally different in this regard, and I've heard a lot of grousing about the Dock being unable to replace the old features. I think they have a point, and this is allegedly one of the major reasons this is a beta and not a final release.
* I'm surprised Adobe and others haven't come out with carbon versions of their software yet. It was said to require but minor modifications, and they even showed a Carbonized Photoshop earlier this year. So why is there no Carbonized Photoshop yet if they already know how to do it? This concerns me a bit.
Thoughts?
D
----
but IE on MacOS 9 is a very impressive program. It just keeps on running. Netscape on the same machine crashed within a few minutes of my trying it out.
I'm looking forward to using Omniweb, though. They claim to have full JavaScript support and all kinds of goodies, which I'm certainly anticipating with glee.
D
----
Nice selection of apps, although it has a bastard child of IE, but oh well, nothing's perfect. It looks like it has some compatibility issues with some of the file system apps under Mac OS 9, though...
It still has some work to be done (as expected with a Beta), as a lot of peripheral standards have yet to be implemented, and it can only handle a few different types of video cards. And it won't install on several types of systems, including ones with more then one monitor.
Also, it won't be available for download, but CDs with the OS will be made available for a 'nominal' charge. Me, I'd wait for the full release unless you absolutely have to have it. Check out what it can't run here on ZDNET.
Kierthos
Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
>So how much upgrading can you do to your cube? ... I'd take a 1Ghz PIII over the Mac Tissue Dispenser any day.
Well, there's a brilliant comment for ya. Would you take a P3 laptop over a g4 cube? How about a Gateway Astro running a P3? Those things have even less upgradability than a cube does! You aren't making a fair comparison, as you're using two different form factors. Try comparing a g4 tower to an average mid-tower case, and then you might have an argument. And yeah, g4's have less pci slots - but keep in mind the ethernet, modem, usb, firewire, video out, and sound out are all built-in, so none of those need to take up pci slots.
Some corrections from the original article post. As a registered developer I have MacOS X DP4 which was released in June and USB, Airport and my Voodoo3 2000 card(although no 3D acceleration) work just fine. Firewire I have not had a chance to play with although I have heard it is still in progress which is why this is a beta release.
Are you daft? This is the first beta. The previous releases were "developer previews" (more like alphas or pre-alphas even) and were not available to the public.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
Remember when Apple bought NeXT because BeOS wasn't ready yet? Remember when Apple killed MacOS 8 (Copland) because it was taking too long? Hell, remember OpenDoc? New stuff from Apple doesn't mean anything until it ships in volume.
- some users are blockheads (no, not cube users, blockheads)
- Some times, keyboard shortcuts and a black terminal line is enough to make some users cry for their mothers
- some users don't know or barely hear the fact that this is BETA and coo and go "pretty!"
- that those same users, when the BETA doesn't quite work with everything (including that same pirated copy of Photoshop 4 ALL mac users have 'cept me) they are going to bitch a cacophany that will heard far and wide.
- with this knowledge, Apple's going to hold back the unwashed (but not smelly, cuz our poo don't stink) masses
Hence, Apple's playing the scare card and saying "Don't look directly at the CD, it'll blind you unless you're willing to fork over 1.5 GB of HD space, 128 megs of ram, your first AND second born, etc, etc, ad nauseum, MIGHT CAUSE DATA LOSS don't operate Air Traffic Control system or Nuclear Power Facilities, blah blah blah.Fact is, there will likely be some hairy moments coming out in the next coupla weeks (or, whenever they ship the things). Best leave it to the professionals who:
- Will read the user documentation
- understand they is a good liklihood of some sort of breakage.
- Realize they're helping upgrade the standard for an end-user operating system
- Can get themselves out of the trouble they get themselves into
Dig?--Humpty Dumpty was pushed!
First, it needs to be officially released. Hopefully, Apple will support all the hardware in the supported systems. Then, software vendors need to make OS X native applications that take advantage of certain features.
And then users have to wait for it to become stable. Considering all this, maybe a year is too soon.
--
And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
IBM PC clones came about because the BIOS they used was primitive and relatively easy to reverse-engineer in a legal fashion. The popular OS (there was originally a choice between DOS & the UCSD Pascal system) was licensed from MS under a non-exclusive contract. Thus once Phoenix came out with a good clone BIOS the market jumped from almost-alikes to out & out clones running a functionally identical BIOS and the same OS.
IBM sued folks for years trying to kill the clone market, then when it was clear they were unsuccessful they tried to come out with another 'standard' that they had complete control of. By that time however the architecture was entrenched & IBM simply moved themselves into a niche market from which their PC operations never really recovered.
On the other hand Apple put a large chunk of it's code into proprietary ROMs installed on the motherboard. These ROMs contained many of the routines critical to operating the Macs and they were both heavily legally protected and difficult to reverse engineer. There was no particular genius in this - it was simply how Apple built their boxes and it turned out to be fortuitous way of keeping their hold on their market.
Apple did have a licensing program, often incorrectly characterized as clones (in licensing the product is authorized under terms and the license holder is compensated - clones are simply legal knock-offs with nothing going back to the inventor.) The program was intended to supply Macs to markets Apple considered insufficiently profitable for it (Apple at the time had terrible supply management problems and an astonishingly high overhead.)
Unfortunately the licensees didn't remain focused on the small-margin educational market, super-high-end graphics market & burgeoning but very price sensitive foreign markets as originally intended but began to cannibalize Apple's high-profit mid/high-end domestic Mac market. As a result they began to cost Apple both in support, un-recovered R&D, and lost sales and thus were eventually unceremoniously killed.
Apple does have an advantage when it comes to close-coupling their hardware with their software. By making their own boxes they can design the hardware and software to compliment eachother. This is also a drawback as it limits the market to what Apple can develop & supply.
USB adoption came about when Apple needed to drop it's aging Apple Desktop Bus (ADB) and USB was a good match for the old technology (functionially they're very similar so it was easy to write shims for USB to operate in place of ADB.) Firewire/1394 was developed as a next generation SCSI and to correct the many mistakes Apple had made in it's originial SCSI implementation and then codified with (mis)use. The wireless inclusion was a bit of clever thinking on Apple's part and some great product engineering/cost negotiation resulting in a suprisingly inexpensive implementation (which humerously enough is based on a 486)
Wintel PCs have their own advantage in MS setting the WinHEC specifications and many, many companies optimizing their hardware production. This diversity makes for less optimization and greater support issues but it also makes for a much broader market and relatively faster pace of innovation.
Apple would be unwise to compete in the x86 market simply because they'd be horribly far behind when it comes to device support. In the 'sheltered' Mac market it's accepted that not third-party all devices are supported & cost more (conversely Mac users are furious when supported devices don't work flawlessly.) In the Wintel world everyone is expected to have WinX drivers and that's that.
Furthermore Apple commands a high premium for their Macintoshes simply because they're the only game in town. Were they to attempt to get the same margin on x86 boxes they charge on Macs they'd be laughed out of the market. To sell x86 PCs at a competitive price wouldn't recover their OS development costs and would cannibalize their traditional Mac platform sales.
Who would want a $2,000 PC selling for $3,000 runing MacOS X and a limited set of hardware options? I love Macs but this would be hard to swallow. Apple could consider using another chip (perhaps an Alpha) to justify/disguise their markup but it would still be difficult.
Then there would be that whole problem NT had with x86/Alpha/MIPS/PPC binaries and Lunix/BSD have with their own different hardware bases. It was tough enough for Apple when there were the M68020/M68030/M68040 and PPC issues (variations in memory management, floating point, and with PPC an entirely different architecture) leading to products that would run on some combinations of hardware & software but not others. This culminated with the 'Fat Binaries' for M68x/PPC applications.
Unfortunately as we've seen with other mixed-processor OS's (Linux being a good example) the whole process of supporting code on different processors is fraught with difficulty. Can you imagine explaining today to a Mac customer that some apps run on MacOS X PPC & other on MacOS X x86 and that the versions aren't the same?
Finally - Apple didn't 'steal' anything from Xerox. This is an old chestnut that's gone around for years and is patently false. If you do a bit of research you'll discover Apple had already settled on a graphical interface for their next-gen OS well before their visits to Xerox.
Certainly the Lisa folks were influenced by what they saw at Xerox but it was by no means a copy or theft. Indeed the concepts of much of what they eventully shipped were developed *before* their trips to Xerox. Furthermore much of what they released was significantly different from what Xerox had (and yes I've used a Xerox Star extensively.)
Apple is a neat company and they've devloped some great stuff but they're not perfect. They've made some incredibly foolish, incredibly arrogent mistakes. They've also developed some amazing stuff and managed to pull their chestnuts out of the fire more times than any company has a right to.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
please take it cum grano salis .
I'm in ADC, so I cannot got into detail of exactly *where* it is wrong; but I can say that Apple *is* supporting several key technologies ( and have been for a while) in this release that are misreported by ZDNet.
I would have posted AC, but I wanted to make sure this got read by someone before the world flew off the handle.
Later...
One day, you'll learn to watch what you post...
This is nitpicking, but do you mean FreeBSD 2.2? Because, considering that BSD4.0 was released in the very early Eighties, BSD2.2 is pretty old-tech. ;-) FreeBSD 2.2 is not-quite-so-old tech, in that it was developed in an era when PCs existed. ;-D
*Sigh*... how I miss using FreeBSD as my main development OS. Java's what's killing it. No Java 2. We bugged Sun for Java 2, no Java 2. We bugged IBM for Java 2, no Java 2. BSDi claimed they would bring Java 2, but no Java 2, too! I'm depressed. I think I'll go to the zoo tomorrow and throw rocks at the penguins.
More nitpicking... GNU/Linux and FreeBSD don't have very much in common, except that they're Unix-workalikes, free, use XFree86, and have a common application userbase. And I'm not being sarcastic. FreeBSD is a direct descendent of BSD, the Unix system which started as a fork of the original AT&T UNIX about twenty years ago, with GNU goodies on top. GNU/Linux is the combination of a SVR4-ish kernel (with failed aspirations of POSIX compliance) implementented by Mr. Torvalds about ten years ago, and the GNU utilities, applications, and libraries that are the fruits of Mr. Stallman's FSF, which was born about fifteen years ago. Apple's choice of FreeBSD as a basis for OS X has absolutely nothing to do with Linux. Stop rejoicing, GNU/Linux users... this is one war you had nothing to do with winning.
BSD v. SVR4 is the stuff of flamewars. Even though Linux isn't really System V, I hate to see you guys getting along like this. I think it's sad that we live in a day in age where hackers don't care what OS they're using, so long as it isn't Windows. Bah. Flamewars aren't what they used to be. Nowadays it's just NT v. UNIX, and those are too easy to win. No offense, astroturfers.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
--
I like to watch.
So there I was. Naked. In a refrigerator. With a potroast on my knees. Smokin a cigar. That's when it got REALLY weird.
I think the version number is in reference to FreeBSD, not UCB BSD.
Just a quick note to the moderator who marked this as "Insightful": You are a complete, utter, indescribable moron.
Apple bought NeXT, so I think they have something of a right to imitate them.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
I don't think anyone's pointed out yet that "Project Builder", the IDE for Mac OS X Cocoa developers, doesn't seem to be included in the beta.
... but only because I agree with your logic that a $400 entry barrier to playing with the dev tools would be insanely fucking stupid.
:)
Separate CD which gets mailed out to Select/Premier developers.
It strikes me as likely that they'll allow Online (free signup) developers to order and/or download the tools CD
Not that mere insane fucking stupidity in any way disqualifies a course of action from Apple embracing it, it seems. *shrug* We'll know within 24 hours
Requires 1.5G of disk
Requires an original Mac video card with one monitor only (No 3dfx allowed)
MacOS X for me because:
Are you telling me that Linux does not require the same blind love and desbelief to run it. An OS where you have to compile an application to use it, an OS that makes you deal with text files in order to configure it, an OS that forces you to read thru countless README files and such to install basic peripherals.
That my friend, does require blind faith among other things.
i seem to remember hearing that almost everything will come with most ports (telnet, ftp, smtp etc) closed up (why would most macos ses need them open anyway?) Expert users can config it all they want. Im also looking forward to the Apache frontend app :) I've never heard of one being done, but if you do a security audit on NeXT boxes, they might just be pretty tightly sealed up :) Also, most CLI (read: exploitable) tools are OSS, GNU, all that so there should hopefully be few problems, and hopefully not exploitable ones. We'll see though :)
---
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
MacOS X will be able to run X apps if it has X installed. Apparently Apple is not shipping X with the OS. However there is already an excellent commercial X availiable that works under Quartz and fully integrates with the Aqua UI.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
So what services do you have access to? I'll be more then happy to run the search for you but you can pay for your own copies. Doubtless a finance whiz like you subscribes to Bloomberg / FirstCall / West / etc.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
Windows 2000 Professional
Mac OS X
BeOS
Linux+GNOME/KDE
I'm starting to like this "prosumer" OS stuff. I almost shiver to say it, but Mac OS X is looking super sweet.
It's 10 PM. Do you know if you're un-American?
Nope.
Darwin (The BSD-ish layer of OSX) is open, and supposedly compiling on x86.
OSX, the whole tamale, with DPDF and all the other nifty stuff,
is Apple hardware only. And with Jobs in control, that's not likely to change.
--K
---
Of course not everything works yet. This is still a beta release. Nothing may have changed in the GUI or general structure, but they probably tuned it up some under the hood in order to get it working better. Something about Developer Release vs. Public Beta may have something to do with that.
MacOS X Downside: It'll demand Apple hardware to run, and demand G3+ hardware at that. There's also been talk of X not working with third party CPU plug-ins. Whether it's a matter of optimizing for Apple's specific hardware, or crippling the software on other machines isn't a big deal, unless you planned to cross-compile it. (And judging by the 'first posts,' the Lintel Hegemony is still roaming in force.)
MacOS X Upsides: People complain about how hard it is to configure a Linux system. Well here it is, folks: the people who brought user interface to personal computers are slapping a pretty front end on BSD and are not only planning on *selling* it, but intend to make *money* on it.
(Also consider: a) Apple Computer is in the habit of bundling DVD-ROMs with their systems these days. b) Apple is basing MacOS X on BSD. Therefore, c) Apple will be providing BSD-DVD drivers legally to their users.)
If you want Linux and the various *nix clones to be accepted by the public as a serious force instead of the domain of cloistered geeks, you want to do something to make it visible. KDE and Gnome are okay interfaces, but they're only distributed as far as Linux is. Here's a manufacturer of hardware AND software bundling everything together -- OS, drivers, and front end -- and giving the whole thing visibility.
If you want to pooh-pooh Apple just becuase they 'suck,' then you might be doing the *nix community a disservice. Because most people, if they turn away from Apple for whatever reason, tend to think Microsoft first, not Linux.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
BTW, there is a bug in slashcode. I assume your HTML code is not
<A HREF="http://www.tenon.com/TARGET=_blank">http://w ww.tenon.com/
</A>
but
<A HREF="http://www.tenon/com" TARGET="_blank">http://www.tenon.com/</A>
But slashcode generates http://www.tenon.com/ anyway.
Are you mad? MacOS X is a true NOS, Windows 2000 can't even aspire to that yet! The stuff MacOS X can do with PDFs is amazing! OpenGL support is built in! Apple is giving people a CLI, Microsoft is taking it away!
Refrag
I have a website. It's about Macs.
MacOS X is not being developed for x86. Yes that was the plan for Rhapsody, MacOS's immediate predecessor. This was scrapped. Yes Darwin has been released as Open Source by Apple for the x86. Yes this is the base for MacOS X. No these are not the same things. MacOS X includes the Quartz rendering layer and the Aqua interface, the Classic, Carbon, and Cocoa environments, Quicktime, etc. Darwin may be the engine but that's *all* it is. It's unlikely Apple would release MacOS X for x86 since Apple is a hardware company and thus this wouldn't make sense for them financially. Yes you and many others think doing so would be cool but financially it would be suicide for Apple so tough - buy their stock and be happy they make a profit.
MacOS X uses a Mach kernel and is compatible with BSD 2.2. It is based on Nextstep and has inherited many of that OS's features. Technically Apple bought Next; practically Next took over Apple's OS development.
Yes Apple's computers come in funky cases with unusual colors. Hopefully most geeks can see beyond the flashy cases and note that there's some real compute power and some innovative OS stuff going on inside. There are those who are so put off they can't get past the box - that says more about them then it does about the products or their marketing.
This is MacOS X beta If history holds true Apple still has a few cards up it's sleeve it's saving 'till later. Steve Jobs likes very much to "Wow" folks and suprise them with kewl stuff. Nowhere does this beta say it's a full disclosure - it's a preview. Furthermore as a beta this release is expected to not be complete, to be buggy, to have problems - that's the point of releasing it. Lots of folks will want to review this Beta as they would the final release - don't pay too much creedence.
True Apple has gotten very aggressive about enforcing it's NDA's. If you were in their market you would be too. Not only does it weaken their technological edge by having everyone know what they're doing it also affects their sales. Folks hear rumors over & over of a 17" iMac next month and stop buying in advance of it (never happened - unlikely will - lousy form-factor.) Again Steve jobs likes to "Wow" folks - that's his sales technique. Spilling the beans, even a few hours ahead of time means the announcement goes from being a headline for Apple to being buried in a story.
MacOS X is a big deal for Linux & BSD folks. This is the first time a mass market vendor has released a Linux/BSD compatible OS. Sure the interface and many of the details are different but it opens the way for cross-ports. If a developer makes something for one OS they can support the other fairly easily. Thus it means many Linux/BSD applications will get access to the Mac market and many Mac applications being ported to MacOS X will go on to be ported to Linux/BSD etc.
Finally Apple is doing some interesting stuff for BSD and Linux. They've developed a great way of graphically configuring all of the subtly-different configuration files in Unix. They're beginning to help work on a new way of distributing, installing, and maintaining packages. They're spurring development of new drivers (DVD anyone?) With all of the discussion of X-Windows failings Quartz is an interesting example of what can be done with another model - an example that is not just an ambitious plan but a working widely used test case.
Finlly Apple is not perfect. They've blown more opportunites then can be counted, have more lives then a cat, and have legions who love or hate them (or both.) They're famous for developing amazing technologies then failing to capitalize on them, for their 10 (or is it 15?) year quest for the successor to MacOS, for arrogance and indecision. They've more then once set off on a path then abruptly changed course (the licensing program they dumped when it started to bleed them dry, the Newton and the eBook, OpenDoc & Bento, etc.)
But damn they make the market interesting :)
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
From a geeks technical point of view OS X is the best of all worlds (BSD, Mach, Apple presentation layer). But the folks who make up the majority of the mac's hardcore user base are already starting to feel a bit alienated by the new interface and the loss of some of the components near and dear to the mac users heart (Apple Menu, Application Switcher,etc.) The big question here is, will the people follow? And more importantly, will the application developers follow if there is a backlash against OS X? Now don't get me wrong, I will buy a Powerbook just to run OS X because I think it's so cool, but the designers I work with, some whom have been using Macs thier entire professional lives are not so excited. In fact, they're downright hostile towards the whole thing.... Should be interesting.
Remember: MS Office will not be made for X (most likely because standard Mac OS X will not have an X server IIRC); it will probably be made for their new-fangled NeXTStep-based API.
its not imitation, its a direct update from the NeXT codebase....Apple DID buy NeXT, rememberrrrr?
---
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
Grant us not to be subject to MacOS
Which sucketh even more so than Linux
And give us this day Windows 2000 Professional
Which art the superior OS
We beg your forgiveness
For our neighbors that use Linux
Even though they suck the penis of Satan
Amen
"...some innovative OS stuff going on inside."
Like what? They do some "innovative" UI stuff (scare quotes because I don't think they are all that great, just different)--but what innovative OS stuff have they done or are they doing with OS X?
--
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
Linux MAPI Server!
http://www.openone.com/software/MailOne/
(Exchange Migration HOWTO coming soon)
OSX, the whole tamale, with DPDF and all the other nifty stuff,
is Apple hardware only. And with Jobs in control, that's not likely to change.
At least, not if he doesn't want to be lynched by the shareholders.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Hey,
Got one myself, 500MHz/128M/40G + AirPort and the 15" flat panel (being an overpaid unix/net admin kicks @$$).. The thing is a masterpiece of physical design.. A few notes after about a week of usage:
Now I just have to wait until the next KGP show to drop a 512MB DIMM in.. Apple RAM (as is most vendor RAM) is ridiculously overpriced..
Can't wait for a fully functional OSX release..
Your Working Boy,
Apple just updated the Darwin FAQ a couple of days ago. It goes into more detail than you might expect about how they're keeping the userland in sync with the other BSDs, and what their future plans (distribution-wise) are.
I've seen that Mac OS X uses "/" as a separator character in paths (rather than ":")--does anyone know about other small unixisms being put in?
What about the EOL character? Does Mac OS X use newline, or does it still use carriage-return?
Does anyone here know?
-rozzin.
No chance unless they port Darwin to PC hardware. And we all know that's not gonna happen.
Admit nothing, deny everything and make counter-accusations.
Anyway, the Hurd is coming along slowly. If you subscribe to one of the mailing lists, you'll see that there are still a handfull of people working on it. A few of the .debs for Debian GNU/Hurd are a couple years old, but
they work okay (mostly). It seems that there's a rather noticeable
difference between the Hurd's sockets and your average BSD sockets, as
pretty well all of the unsupported network apps I tried died immediately
with "socket exception".
In short, if you depend on the network (and I think most people do), the Hurd isn't incredibly useful yet. You can FTP, telnet, and reportedly even get lynx working, but that's abotu it. It's kind of fun to play around with for a few days though (if you have a couple dozen megs of hard-drive space to spare).
will be the end for Linux.
It was fun while it lasted.
Finally, a REAL UI with a BSD based system.
"the people who brought user interface to personal computers are " - no longer working at Apple. Don't kid yourself.
For better or for worse, Steve Jobs has always been Apple's final word when it comes to anything visual. This includes advertising, industrial design, the web site UI, and certainly OS UI. This was true in 1984, and it is true today.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Here come the next batch of Mac themes... :)
Apple controls hardware for a good reason: a good chunk of their revenue stream comes from it. Removing the need for anyone to buy Apple hardware by porting OS X to the x86 architecture (and in the process encouraging software designers to abandon the PowerPC) would be a bone-headed maneuver, and probably certain death for Apple Computer.
Also, the x86 realm is fraught with hardware foibles that no one company can resolve completely, let alone control. Whatever revenue would remain would be gobbled up in tech support.
Just in case you don't believe that last tidbit: As I write this, I'm trying to use a PCI/serial port card on my Intel-based Linux box, but something in the BIOS of the machine (I assume) keeps the card from responding properly. I've tried new kernels, new BIOS images, new cards from the manufacturer, and new driver source code, all to no avail. And it's nobody's fault but that of the x86 "standards", which make the Wild West of yore seem as orderly as the changing of the guard at Buckingham Palace. (If you wish to participate in this wild goose chase, email me with ideas. I'm tearing my hair out, and at this rate, even a new or used Dustbuster would be welcome.)
Suffice to say, I own a Mac at home, and that situation ain't gonna change.
-----
"O Lord, grant me the courage to change the things I can,
the serenity to accept those I cannot, and a big pile of money."
".sig,
So what happened to Apples' industry leading creatively in design? It looks exactly like NeXT...
You're seriously saying that Mac OS X looks reasonably similiar to Next? Huh?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
(btw, any chance of an X-compatibility layer or 'wrapper port'?)
Assuming you mean X11 (damn that's confusing -- does "X" mean OSX or X11?), there are several efforts underway. The commercial one is from Tenon, and there are some other floating around. Carmack did one for Darwin, I think.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
I was seriously afraid for a time they would leave a proper CLI out of it.
The rep I spoke to at Seybold said there was (unsurprisingly) a bit of internal controversey over this before actual deciding to ship it.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Or they could install multiple user login on OS9 to get used to the idea...
;)
Like I did..
Though I'm already used to the idea
(btw, any chance of an X-compatibility layer or 'wrapper port'?)
Your Working Boy,
hello, author of the story here...
according to our rather solid (and that's all i'll say on that) information, the installation instructions say that the beta will not install on systems with multiple monitors. it doesn't say why, or if it'll run on systems that have a second montior added after installation, or whatever.
yes, there was support in dp4, but it's not uncommon for features that the developer isn't solid sure of to be dropped between versions. in a similar way, a new version of open transport was dropped between beta and final versions of mac os 9.0.4.
ddt
The article says the Beta won't be available for download, only available on CD for a "nomimal" charge.
the Command Line... I really like Macs, and think they are fun to use, but I miss the command line... now, I will finally have it all!!!
i'm using OSX Server right now. it has basically all the cool stuff in OSX client: kernel, BSD, any shell I want, Objective-C, cocoa, etc. i've used just about every GUI consumer OS, except OS/2, including BeOS (i was be developer #136) and I've never been happier than I am now, using OSX Server. coding in WebObjects and Objective-C is absolutely beautiful!
i've played with OSX dp3, and the interface sucks ass. i really hope we can rip out the candy and replace it with a truly useable interface...
I dont own a powerpc, i will soon but for now all i have is i386. Can anyone drop any info on macosx for i386?
Not for a while, if ever. Apple makes money on hardware sales.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
I don't think anyone's pointed out yet that "Project Builder", the IDE for Mac OS X Cocoa developers, doesn't seem to be included in the beta.
Really? Do you have the beta already?
Project Builder was included in DP4.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
The first *public* beta, actually.
--------------------------------------------
---------------------
%46%55%43%4B !
It wasn't clear to me if the Classic environment *would* support USB. Can anyone who has used DP4 comment? I'm going to Paris tomorrow just for to grab a copy of OS X. Can't wait!
A message from our sponsor
Once again Apple demoes a supper cool operating system that is to be released "next year".
Mac OS X is quite capable of shipping. I don't know if you have played with it, but it's quite a bit more usuable than many Linux distros. I think Apple is basically waiting for developers to catch up with Carbon apps now.
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
Everything he showed, everything he demoed, everything being discussed here is already supported under Windows 2000.
BTW: Have you ever put NextStep and Windows 95 side-by-side?
- Scott
------
Scott Stevenson
Scott Stevenson
Tree House Ideas
"Sources who have gotten an early look at Apple Computer Inc.'s Mac OS X Public Beta tell ZDNet News ..."
and were promptly served a supoena by Apple naming "john doe" in a lawsuit.
Apple should seriously just have a ticket number system like a deli counter..."Now suing number 1,341,111".
Sig it.
If by "a few tweaks" you mean recreating the entire Apple 'Carbon' environment and then getting it to work under X instead of Quartz then - sure.
The more honest answer is 'No' - or at least - "Not with MS Office 2001 for the Mac."
MS is not moving their Mac Office apps. to the Unix-side of MacOS X but rather tweaking the to run under the MacOS-derived Carbon environment. Thus aside from dropping some of the more difficult to support calls it's the same as it's always been. Indeed MS Office 2001 for the Mac won't even require MacOS X to run - t'll do fine on any Mac running MacOS 9x as long as the Carbon libraries are present.
The question comes what about after this next release? Will MS refuse to move to the Unix side of the OS, simply move only as far as the Cocoa side (neat Openstep-derived technologies) or go with Java (little chance.) Furthermore will they tie themselves to Apple's Quartz rendering/Aqua UI or write more generalized code that could be retargeted towards X Windows.
I don't read ACs: If a post isn't worth so much as a nom de plume to its author then I wont bother either.
I don't think anyone's pointed out yet that "Project Builder", the IDE for Mac OS X Cocoa developers, doesn't seem to be included in the beta.
This is truly a disappointment. In order to survive Apple must supplant its old OS with a better one. In order to do that, they need apps, and in order to get apps they need lots of developers.
Apple's fairly expensive Developer Registration fees (actually they're not much compared to Microsoft's, but they're still not free) has stopped a lot of potential developers from obtaining developers previews through official, legal channels. Isn't this just going to continue the trend?
Maybe it will be included, and Apple just doesn't want to confuse users. But if it isn't, it's going to be hard to convince people to develop for Cocoa. Come on Apple, get on the ball.
--Lagos
I, for one, have a dream... a dream of a time when Macs of all colours can live in peace and harmony, free from the segregated attitudes of people like Julius. I have a dream that green Macs will cluster with blue Macs, and red Macs will swap Zip disks (or whatever those Macs freaks use... Syquest disks or something) with with purple Macs, and beige PCs will telnet to black RS/6000s, and grey Palm pilots will sync with purple E450s. No computer will be shunned, regardless of make. Even your computer, Julius, which refused to share data with Macs of colour, will be accepted and loved as it it were part of the network.
But I also have dreams about fat, greasy, naked clowns with chainsaws, so YMMV.
---------///----------
All generalizations are false.
--
I like to watch.
Which runtime library version will be supported, 1.2, 1.3 or even the upcoming Merlin (1.4)?
So there I was. Naked. In a refrigerator. With a potroast on my knees. Smokin a cigar. That's when it got REALLY weird.
Its nice to see Apple will be including a graphite option for the interface. Although the flashiness of the aqua is nice, the graphite just provides a much more "professional" presentation.
The Aqua look is reminiscent of the Blue/White G3s and the iMac look, and is probably where it will be most commonly used. But, if you've noticed...all of Apple's newer high end systems (the G4/G4multiprocessor/Cube/iMac DV/iBook SE) are graphite colored; becuase they know that although people want a good looking system, it must keep a professional image.
Frankly, you won't get that if your system is Blue, Orange, or Green.
-Julius X
-Julius X
remove "-whatkindofspamdoyoutakemefor-" from email to send
Breathlessly awaiting when AAPL = $0 !!!
I'm going throw a huge party that day.
Pretty ironic that, just before you pass out, your face will turn a downright iMac shade of blue.
It'd almost be worth my losing ten grand to see it.
Don Negro
Perl 6 will give you the big knob. -- Larry Wall