Slashdot Mirror


A Linux User At MacWorld

usermilk writes "Linux Journal just posted a pretty cool article, A Penguin Angle on the Ox: Day One at Macworld. It features a Linux user's perspective on MacWorld, OS X, Darwin, and how all these things play together. Most interestingly, he comments on the large number of open-source-Unix bigwigs who are now on Apple's payroll. There's also a pretty concise description of the difference between Apple building off of BSD compared to Microsoft trying to also reap the benefits of open source." Doc Searls' perspective makes a great companion to the report from the floor (and part II) that chrisd posted.

15 of 202 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Darwin Mascot by pelorus · · Score: 2, Informative

    That's a listing of the "public" wireless networks set up by people on their laptops in the keynote room. you can name the network anything you want so I guess there's some satire there...

  2. A Mac from the view of a Linux Newbie by jawtheshark · · Score: 4, Informative
    I bought an iBook two weeks ago and it is my first Mac. I was playing around with Linux for over a year and feel quite confident with it. (quite a lot, on my older hardware). You know compiling kernels, getting stuff to work and to interoperate with my Windows machines, setting up a nice desktop and using it as a desktop machine. Worked perfectly and I was hapyp.
    The Mac always looked a bit like toys for me, but they are most of the time pretty. (Yes, that is a selling point for me!) They also have a stimga of being computers for people that don't want to know about computers. However, prettyness and curiosity about OSX got me buying one. Now, I am not desoriented at all using OSX. It really rocks! Command line open and it's all there: it's often more useful than wading through config screens which you are unfamiliar with. I know, stating something like that is very un-Mac, but the point is: you come from a Linux world (or *BSD) and your Mac will feel at home. If you come from a Windows background, I'm pretty sure you will feel at home too (and enjoy a prettier desktop *grin*),

    One people get a bit more open-minded on computers and operating systems, and are willing to give a Mac a a try....then I'm sure the Mac will have a very bright future.

    (A bit offtopic: even from my hardcore PC users co-workers, I only had positive reactions on the design of the new iMac)

    --
    Ahhh...the great dumpster continuum. Many a free computer will be found there. -- sowth (748135)
    1. Re:A Mac from the view of a Linux Newbie by glwillia · · Score: 5, Informative

      I agree. I've been using Linux and FreeBSD since 1995, and just recently bought a Mac. OS X is, quite simply, fabulous (despite the interface issues, which I expect will get ironed out soon enough).

      I've heard a lot on /. about how Macs do not appeal to geeks, but I think they might. How many Linux/Unix coder geeks really care about Photoshop and computer graphics (besides rendering?) Judging from what I've seen of KDE/GNOME splash screens (with the exception of Ximian), I'd say not very many. There are some of us out there who want access to a command line and a top-notch development environment, but also might want to create movies and modify images without learning Photoshop (or GIMP) or Premiere, or spending the money on these applications. That's really the appeal of the (new) Mac experience to many geeks: top-notch consumer OS, with the Unix functionality built-in.

      In fact, here in the Physics department, I've watched a fair amount of people switch from Sun/SGI to Linux, or Mac OS X (and even some from Linux to OS X), because it runs their applications, is cheaper than new SGIs/Suns, and just works right away, unlike (sorry) Linux.

    2. Re:A Mac from the view of a Linux Newbie by nachoman · · Score: 2, Informative

      X86 isn't all the amazing, in fact it's not even that great of an architecture. It's just used everywhere.

      Oh, and Their kernel, Darwin, runs on x86 as well as PPC.

      Oh, and no their hardware isn't all that expensive. Take a look at the low end iBooks and compare it to the low end Dells. The iBook was about 70$ CDN more for the same basic system (except the iBook had firewire too). So I bought an iBook. Their desktops are a bit pricy though.

  3. Re:Apple by pelorus · · Score: 3, Informative
    True. They hired Jordan Hubbard and made sure he could pay the rent. They hired Bud Tribble and Brian Croll who were both Eazel developers. All these guys have to pay the rent.

    There was also that NFStest stuff that Avi gave to the BSD guys which they are using to "fix" NFS which is pretty borken!

    I don't think they care about getting into "good books" any more than providing a machine that works. No-one is saying dump Linux, they are saying that when using screen and mutt, use a Mac OS X Terminal window...

  4. Re:it's kind of funny by mccalli · · Score: 2, Informative
    It's kind of funny to hear the Apple marketing force extol the virtues of UNIX, when until OS9, they wouldn't have given a UNIX programmer the time of day

    Well, no. Far back in the mists of time (err..1992/1995), I earned my living writing code on the Mac. One of the things we regularly used was MPW - the Macintosh Programmer's Workshop.

    Now, this wasn't necessarily the most elegant thing in the world. However, it was a fairly good approximation of a Unix development environment on a Macintosh. You know - command-line make, STDIO-driven command line tools with (emulated) pipes...much porting of utils from Sun-derived sources went on too.

    Point is that Apple has never, to my knowledge, been anti-Unix. It's just that until recently, Unix simply wasn't what it did.

    Cheers,
    Ian

  5. Re:it's kind of funny by doggo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I dunno, Macintosh always seemed UNIX friendly to me. My first experiences with the Internet were on a Mac (1993), and at that time there were'nt any WinXX Server boxes on the 'net. Mac seemed to interact with UNIX boxes a lot easier than Windows 3.1 machines did.

    Not to mention all that freeware that did what UNIX tools did on Mac.

    And what about that apple UNIX like server OS, what was it, A/UX?

    Apple's been flirting with UNIX for years, it's just now that they're finally getting it on.

  6. Re:Apple really has something here... by Rand+Race · · Score: 2, Informative
    Built in burning is super easy, but get Toast anyways. For some reason the built in burning software will only format about 680MB of a 700MB disk. No problem unless you have a 700MB file... like, oh say, a DAP episode of MST3k. Toast OTOH will format all 700MB.

    --
    Insanity is the last line of defence for the master diplomat. But you have to lay the groundwork early.
  7. Apple Gives Nothing Back to Open Source? by lordfetish · · Score: 5, Informative

    Time and time again, /.ers complain that Apple takes but does not give back to Open source. If you believe that the only way to contribute to the Open Source Movement is by releasing all your intellectual property under the GPL license then by your estimations then it has taken and not given back. However, you are then being just as blindly bigotted and dogmatic as those who would only want software released under strict licenses at considerable expense and lack of freedom to the enduser (i.e. MS).

    Apple has contribute to Open Source in several small, but significant ways. For a start, there are currently six open source projects at Apple that it is providing funding for under the APSL:
    1) Darwin (the foundation of Mac OS X)
    2) Quicktime streaming server.
    3) Common Data Security Architecture (CDSA).
    4) Open play - a cross platform network abstraction layer.
    5) Headerdoc.
    6) Documentation.
    Apple gave back all this stuff away despite the fact that the BSD license doesn't force them too (in the case of Darwin).

    Furthemore, Apple provides employment for Open Source programers, such as Jordan Hubbard (FreeBSD) and Guy 'Bud' Tribble (ex-Eazel) - although admittedly since Eazel went tits up because it couldn't make a profit from a GPL product, I don't think Dr. Tribble will be doing as much work on GPL software for a while.

  8. Re:it's kind of funny by greygent · · Score: 2, Informative

    >I also don't think OSX, while being UNIX-compatible, should be called a version of UNIX

    Check your facts.

    Actually it SHOULD be called UNIX:
    1.) It's largely based on BSD. Despite what lawsuits say, BSD IS UNIX, and always has been.

    2.) Apple's OS X got the UNIX (R) "certification a long time ago [slashdot.org]. So both technically and legally, OS X is UNIX.

  9. One button mouse by overunderunderdone · · Score: 4, Informative

    Can you live with only one button, sure, but its easier with 3 , I honestly belive most mac users adhere to the use of one button mice for two reasons, Mac users are adverse to change, 2 they feel as most mac people they are unique a one button mouse is a seperation from the norm somehow make them special, individuals rather than part of some drummed up MS conspiracy crap.

    My own observations as a fairly biased mac user: It is largely a matter of what you are used to. I find two button mice to be no great advantage when I use them. I suppose for a one handed person (or perhaps someone who's other hand is 'busy') a two-button mouse is a great increase in functionality and ease. But for two handed computing it is a step down in functionality (if not in ease) since now a mouse click is only modified by one other button rather than by the four modifier buttons a mac user is accustomed to (Command, option, control and shift). To gain the equivalent functionality that a mac user is accustomed to having at their left hand while their right hand manages the mouse you would need a 5-button mouse which seems like it would be unweildy and awkward (how would you move the thing with all five fingers up on the surface of it pushing buttons?).

    A scroll wheel on the other hand is a huge advantage and something I wish Apple would either adopt or create a reasonable (or better) subsitute for. Of course their is no reason I couldn't get a mouse with more buttons and a scroll wheel.

  10. Re:Software stability in the public opinion? by bshroyer · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been using OS X since mid-November (two months). The machine has been up 24/7 since then except for a couple of upgrade reboots.

    I experienced my first crash last night. "Kernel (panic)" totally freaked me out.

    Point is - my expectations had changed. I expected Mac OS 8 & 9 to crash periodically. I expected Win 95 & Win 98 to crash daily at work, if I was doing any intense spreadsheet work.

    Expecting the crash altered my user behavior; I tended to minimize the number of apps open at once, and I would consistently save work before toggling over to or launching another app. I'd gotten out of the habit while using OS X. They were good habits to drop; I think that my productivity increased significantly when I stopped worrying about how the OS would react to my workflow.

    --
    The cure for cancer is coming: Reovirus
  11. Re:Apple by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    They do give back to the community in the form of improvements to code and refinements that aren't seen in Open Source development. If you're expecting them to give back in the form of Quartz and Aqua, why should they? That was developed in-house. As Jobs said, it is their crown jewel. I think it is amazing enough that Darwin is even available. Can you imagine Microsoft opening the source to NT?

  12. Yes and no... by TheMCP · · Score: 5, Informative

    The difference between Microsoft making everything including the kitchen sink part of their operating system and Apple's behavior is that Apple is enclosing applications on their machines, not making them part of the system. Microsoft made IE an un-removable part of their OS... Apple lets you throw out iTunes, iMovie, iDVD, and iPhoto, and you can replace them with whatever you like. With my powerbook, iMovie didn't even come on the same CD as the OS any more. I installed it because I thought I might play with it sometime, but I haven't, so I'll probably just delete it.

    There actually *are* commercial apps that do the things these apps do, in some cases better, and unlike in cases of Microsoft melding their apps into their system, on the Mac you can throw out the apple software (quickly, easily, and painlessly) and use fully functional alternatives. On Windows, you try making Netscape your browser for everything. IE will still come up regularly like it or not. On the Mac, IE is also the default browser but it took me about a minute to switch completely to Netscape once I'd configured my network. Most of that minute was remembering which control panel to make the change in. I threw IE out.

    Apple can be accused of bundling software. (Whether they meet the legal definition of having done so or not, I have no idea, but I think we can agree that they give enough of the appearance of having done so that they could be accused of it.) However, they haven't displayed the heinous behavior of forcing you to *use* it.

    It also doesn't hurt that Apple's software is usually easy to use and actually works.

  13. Re:Apple really has something here... by PMan88 · · Score: 2, Informative

    have you tried fink?

    once you get it installed all you need is
    $ sudo apt-get install xfree86-server
    and you've got x installed!