Slashdot Mirror


Learning UNIX for Mac OS X

Spencerian writes "I've become quite accustomed the depth of co-author Dave Taylor's writing on UNIX in previous books such as Teach Yourself UNIX in 24 Hours . As you can note from Dave's recent writing credits, his experience and knowledge of UNIX is vast and varied. That said, I was mildly disappointed with this latest offering that discusses the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X." Spencerian explains the logic underlying that conclusion in his complete review, below. Learning UNIX for Mac OS X author Dave Taylor & Jerry Peek pages 139 publisher O'Reilly and Associates, Inc. rating 7.5 reviewer Spencerian ISBN 0596003420 summary A good first-reference for new UNIX users, but steer clear if you're a UNIX vet.

For starters, I was annoyed to find that the book's title implied a larger format than the 139 pages it comprises. The book has an audience problem because of its size. UNIX guys like thick books. Is this book mostly for newbies to OS X, to UNIX, or to Mac OS X's implementation of UNIX? Despite this targeting problem, the book's contents are still useful, but I think its audience is more geared to new UNIX users. The book just doesn't have much depth for even a reference title, especially for a topic such as UNIX, and particularly for a new, little-documented UNIX family operating system such as OS X.

While Mac OS X is a BSD variant, it has a few idiosyncrasies that may throw off a veteran UNIX user, and this book manages to address most, if not all of these notable problems. For instance, Dave notes problems in sendmail that prevent it from working from the command line in Mac OS X's Terminal application, and presents a fix for the problem. If you use command lines in UNIX all the time, the book does present good instructions on getting Lynx, IRC, newsgroups, pine, and the like up and running in Terminal. The book shies away (quite appropriately) from any graphic interface items unless required, such as when changing Terminal's preferences.

This book was very recently published (May 2002) but already has fallen behind with the release of Mac OS X 10.2 (Jaguar). Some components of Jaguar, such as CUPS support for stronger printing options, are completely missing from this book. If you have Jaguar installed on your computer, don't dive headlong into the NetInfo Manager steps for LPR printer configuration. Books typically don't age this fast, but in the case of this book, small changes seem to mean a lot to this title's usefulness -- the introduction of CUPS may have made Chapter 5's contents almost irrelevant.

Another small nag involves the lack of information on useful commands for Mac OS X users that weren't available (or were difficult to find) with the old Mac OS 9. One such command, cron, makes my life easier for handling some tasks on my home computer. It's not even mentioned in this book, nor will you find much information on shell scripting or compiling UNIX code you might happen to find. I guess I'm most annoyed at the lack of compile information since the Apple Developer Connection marked this book as a Recommended Title.

Despite our fondness for (and tolerance of the slightly-higher prices of) Macintosh computers, Mac users aren't made of money and don't like to buy a bookstore's worth of tomes for basic information. It would have made a lot of sense to talk more about compiling software since Apple's software or other GUI products don't meet or can configure all UNIX needs. And I won't even talk about the lack of coverage about XDarwin, an application that starts XFree86 within a Mac OS X installation, allowing X Window applications to run atop or in tandem with the OS X interface. XDarwin has become popular enough for it to become part of the stable XFree86 distribution. Given that not every UNIX user is a command-line freak, this is a pretty critical omission in my mind.

So, who should buy this book?

If you are completely new to UNIX and have been a gooey-kiddie who's used almost nothing except Mac OS 9, this is a very good reference to get your toes moist with UNIX. However, as drug dealers say, "the first taste is free." This book will leave you wanting more detailed information. More experienced UNIX users can probably find out what they need about Mac OS X's command line from a few free locations such as Mac OS X Hints.

One last thing: A pox upon Tim O'Reilly for not using the platypus for the animal on the book's cover. Given that the open-source core operating system of Mac OS X is named Darwin and has a nicely-modified take-off on the BSD mascot that depicts both the name of the OS and its BSD origins, I would think that O'Reilly would have jumped on this obvious cover.

You can purchase Learning UNIX for Mac OS X from bn.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

163 comments

  1. Things to do today by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    (1) Burn the flag.

    Flags are nothing but colourful rags being unfurled every time the right wing politicians want to increase their wealth and influence by sending more young men to die abroad.

    You should try burning a flag some time. It's a great feeling to see how upset some people can get over a petty symbol of nationalism (or more accurately: NAZIonalism).

    All this flagwaving since 9/11 makes me sick!

  2. IMPORTANT!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality,' which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

    What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

    • Linus Torvalds is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
    • Richard M. Stallman, spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
    • Alan Cox is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

    I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

    Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail, which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

    As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted on leftist commie propaganda site Salon.com as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

    And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo slut!

    Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children. To quote from the article linked:

    'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

    Is this why you were touching your penis in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

    We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

    Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

    In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

    Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis, glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

    And Red Hat is secret homo slang for the tip of a penis that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

    The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other automatically.

    The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously /anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no /opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

    More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

    Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherit gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

    Even the title 'Slashdot' originally referred to a homosexual practice. Slashdot of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, http://www.eff.org/.

    The editors of Slashdot also have homosexual names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement. (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot runs on Apache!

    The Apache server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

    And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

    To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'

    FEEDBACK

    What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo-calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

    You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

    you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus, Slashdot

    Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator.

    ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism.

    Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h, Slashdot

    Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

    dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church. Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

    Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

    And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee, Slashdot

    Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

    One scary thing about Perl is that it contains hidden homosexual messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

    And PHP stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

    Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase, Slashdot

    Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

    That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    *sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

    However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

    In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

    Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation. Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

    If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

    It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

    As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

    I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman.

    Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    What the fuck?

    I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    Well bugger me!

    ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

    Fuck right off!

    IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD, which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain. You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat, but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

    Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

    Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

    Current changes: This version sent to FreeWIPO by 'Bring BackATV' as plain text. Reformatted everything, added all links back in (that we could match from the previous version), many new ones (Slashbot bait links). Even more spelling fixed. Who wrote this thing, CmdrTaco himself?

    Previous changes: Yet more changes added. Spelling fixed. Feedback added. Explanation of 'distro' system. 'Mount Point' syntax described. More filth regarding `man` and Slashdot. Yet more fucking spelling fixed. 'Fetchmail' uncovered further. More Slashbot baiting. Apache exposed. Distribution licence at foot of document.

    ANUX -- A full Linux distribution... Up your ass!

    1. Re:IMPORTANT!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      You really need something to occupy your time...

  3. Mac users aren't made of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Well, that's news to me!

    1. Re:Mac users aren't made of money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac users aren't made of money and don't like to buy a bookstore's worth of tomes for basic information.

      You bet they aren't made of money, they blew it all "upgrading" their computer by throwing out the old and buying something completely new.

  4. All these Mac articles... by LionHeartCJ · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    make me wanna drop 3 grand on a new shiny titanium powerbook

    1. Re:All these Mac articles... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can have my scuffed up, dented one for 1 grand.

  5. UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by stuff-n-things · · Score: 1

    I for one usually read O'Reilly books on any given subject because they are smaller, more to the point and less filled with useless graphics (usually screen shots), than most publishers. Granted O'Reilly isn't always that way (how many shots of -borderwidth did "Learning Perl/Tk" need?), but as a rule they are better than most publishers (cough*Oracle Press*cough).

    1. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by GeekSoup · · Score: 1

      I only buy the OReilly 'Pocket Reference' guides these days!
      Minute Rice? Who has the time?

    2. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      O'Reilly books are nice but basically a rip-off when you can get all the same information from the web for practically zilch.

      Okay, if you want to collate it, stick a picture of some cute critter on the cover and print it, it'll cost you your time, ink and paper but hell, the days when I pay $35 for some programming tome are long gone!

    3. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by Golias · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It sounds to me like the review was a result of misunderstanding. He was hoping for a "OS X UNIX for UNIX geeks" book, when it sounds to me like it's actually meant to be a "the basics of UNIX for OS X n00bs" book, which certainly has its place. A lot of MacOS 7-9 users are totally new to sed, awk, grep, cron, and the common UNIX directory layout. A simple UNIX primer from a good publisher like O'Reilly Press could be very handy for some of them.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by SlamMan · · Score: 2

      Conveintly enough, Oreilly is publishing abook called "Mac OS X for Unix Geeks." Should be out sometime this month.

      --
      Mod point free since 2001
    5. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by neuroticia · · Score: 1

      Actually, it sounds more like the reveiwer is aware that it was for newbies, but disappointed that certain valuable things were not covered. Things that would be of value to anyone using the system, newbie or guru.

      One of the things you mentioned (cron) is one of the things he said wasn't covered: "One such command, cron, makes my life easier for handling some tasks on my home computer. It's not even mentioned in this book, nor will you find much information on shell scripting or compiling UNIX code you might happen to find."---it sounds like some of the basic time-saving wonderful command-line tools that we all use are missing from the book.

      I hope that they at least included a warning to NEVER type "rm -rf /" =]

      -Sara

    6. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by Golias · · Score: 1

      cron & shell scripting is probaly omitted because lost of old-school Mac apps already exist for automating tasks. Mac users who are UNIX newbies are far more likely to stick with AppleScript.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    7. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by Golias · · Score: 1

      Heh... typing "lost" instead of "lost"... I think that goes beyond a mere typo into the realm of a good-ol malepropism. Yogi Berra & Dan Quayle must be so proud of me.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    8. Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong by neuroticia · · Score: 1

      Not necessarily true. If something exists that is better, then Mac users might use it.

      Err. Oops. ;) Then they'd be on PCs, right? ;)

      Sorry- couldn't resist.

      -Sara

  6. Here we go again: @# +1; Informative #@ by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll


    We had this debate a couple of weeks ago. I
    don't think I need to cite the article.

    Again: "Unix for Mac OS X" is NOT Unix!!

    Note: The BSD m4 Macro processor is dated as
    1991 and is nowhere as powerful as the GNU m4.

    Be Patriotic: Smoke Amerikan Grown Ganja!!!!

    1. Re:Here we go again: @# +1; Informative #@ by SeanWithoutPants · · Score: 1

      I'll bite

      Nowhere near as powerful? Perhaps-I'm ignorant of the differences. Regardless, the Open Group seems to think OS X is unix. Check out http://www.unix-systems.org/what_is_unix/single_un ix_specification.html#platform

      Not that this really matters to me, I'd enjoy OS X even if it were labeled as Belly Button Lint.

    2. Re:Here we go again: @# +1; Informative #@ by KH · · Score: 2

      Again: "Unix for Mac OS X" is NOT Unix!!

      Note: The BSD m4 Macro processor is dated as
      1991 and is nowhere as powerful as the GNU m4.



      But GNU is Not UNIX, is it?
    3. Re:Here we go again: @# +1; Informative #@ by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 2

      Note: The BSD m4 Macro processor is dated as
      1991 and is nowhere as powerful as the GNU m4.


      what does bsd m4 have to do with Darwin?

      [14:02:33][jeremy:~]$ uname -a
      Darwin Jeremy-Erwins-Computer.local. 6.1 Darwin Kernel Version 6.1: Fri Sep 6 23:24:34 PDT 2002; root:xnu/xnu-344.2.obj~2/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc
      [14:02:37][jeremy:~]$ /usr/bin/m4 --version
      GNU m4 1.4

  7. Note the highly agressive, early moderation here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Practically everything is Offtopic or Troll!

  8. platypus by ChristTrekker · · Score: 1

    Hexley does seem the obvious choice, but all the Apple-themed O'Reilly books have a dog motif. I guess they thought consistency was better.

    1. Re:platypus by Anonymous+Cowrad · · Score: 1
      --

      --
      pants ahoy
    2. Re:platypus by Tokerat · · Score: 2

      His name is Clarus, not Moof.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    3. Re:platypus by Anonymous+Cowrad · · Score: 2

      I'm well aware of that.

      Hey says moof!, though.

      --

      --
      pants ahoy
    4. Re:platypus by BobTheJanitor · · Score: 1

      Technically, Clarus is a she, not a he. In an interview, the author of Apple's Technote 31 said, "She's a female, as are all cows; males would be referred to as dogbulls, but none exist because there are already bulldogs, and God doesn't like to have naming problems." (Interview here)

    5. Re:platypus by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      Touché :-)

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  9. OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll

    How many times do I have to say it OSX is *NOT* UNIX. even apples own site admits they have changed the kernel from the proper unix one to another, and that doesn't begin to start on configuring the thing its so different.

    rememeber the power of a unix system is something that microsoft dont want you to have, and they wont allow osx to be a proper unix ever (yes microsoft as microsoft own 51% of shares in apple since 1996 i think)

    1. Re:OSX and Unix by skwirl42 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Microsoft owns nowhere near 51% of Apple's shares. The shares they bought in 1996 were a) non-voting and b) maybe a percent, at the very most. Although I believe the shares have been converted to voting shares at this point, but still, incredibly far from being controlling shares. Not to say Microsoft still doesn't hold sway over Apple in some way.

    2. Re:OSX and Unix by wolftrap · · Score: 1

      Microsoft doesn't even own 5% of apple. OS X has all the power of Unix and more.

    3. Re:OSX and Unix by BJH · · Score: 1

      MS owns 51% of Apple?

      "+1, Interesting"?

      "-10, Pure bollocks" is more like it.

    4. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      I think you might be mistaken as i have a friend who is high up in the industry who assures me OS X is microsoft

    5. Re:OSX and Unix by Slaveway · · Score: 1

      I believe Microsoft has sold their 'Non Voting' shares in Apple.
      Microsoft, as a show of faith purchased $150,000,000 worth of Apple shares. In no way does Microsoft own %51 of Apple.

      --

      http://www.Slaveway.com
    6. Re:OSX and Unix by BitHive · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yes, your friend sounds very high indeed.

    7. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Nice troll. I'd like to kill whomever modded it as "+1 Interesting".

    8. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

      Troll. Idiot. Microsoft bought 150M USD Apple stock in 1996 or 1997 to ward off a lawsuit. They have long since sold this stock at a handsome profit.

      Secondly Microsoft could not care less about "the power of a unix system". They are worried about Linux but for reasons entirely different from it being "a UNIX".

    9. Re:OSX and Unix by Green+Light · · Score: 1

      I can't believe that this idiotic^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpost got modded up.

      Microsoft has nothing to do with MacOS X, and no, Microsoft does not own 51% of Apple.

      Note to moderators: the parent post is a "Troll", not interesting, insightful, or anything positive...

      --
      "Send an Instant Karma to me" - Yes
    10. Re:OSX and Unix by danamania · · Score: 2

      microsoft own 51% of shares in apple since 1996 i think

      Was it nice crack?

      a grrl & her server

    11. Re:OSX and Unix by imperator_mundi · · Score: 2, Informative

      From yahoo finance => Institutional ownership: 59%

      as long as Microsoft is not an institution is quite hard that it can own 51% of apple shares

    12. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      It was August 1997, MSoft ponied up something like $168 million. Apple at that time was a $10 Billion (with a B) company - so that is less than 2%, and as the previous poster mentioned, it was non-voting stock anyway.

      Reminds me of some of the truly moronic comments I got at the time. "So what are you gonna do now that Bill Gates has bought Mac?" Sheesh.

    13. Re:OSX and Unix by russellh · · Score: 1

      That's right. Gnu's Not Unix, either. What is Unix? Perhaps it is but a dream..

      --
      must... stay... awake...
    14. Re:OSX and Unix by MouseR · · Score: 5, Interesting

      yes microsoft as microsoft own 51% of shares in apple since 1996 i think

      Jesus! What kinda smoke have you been inhaling?

      MS bought 150M $ USD worth of NON-voting shares of Apple back in 1996. That's peanuts. Apple was worth net 2.1 billion at that time.

      That's nowhere near 51%.

      Besides, you're factually wrong to start with. BSD was a set of tools that sat on top of AT&T's Unix. It eventually grew so large it required only a few files to become it's own OS. That was the kernel. They eventually got that.

      Mac OS X (or, Darwin, actually) is entirely FreeBSD (some tidbits of NetBSD too), except for the microkernel, which is Mach (no relation to "Mac").

      And YES, Darwin/Mac OS X *IS* Unix, as it has licensed the trademark from the Open Group, the rightful owner of the trademark.

      What makes a Unix is not the kernel. It's how the package operates and how well is follows the standards (such as but not limited to Posix). The Unix trademark is awarded upon proper registration and evaluation of the OS. There are costst involved, is is pretty much the only thing that keeps Linux being called a real Unix.

    15. Re:OSX and Unix by osu-neko · · Score: 1
      Unix is an Ideal, a Perfect Form that only exists in the world of the Forms. Some operating systems participate in that Form more than others...

      This is all explained in Second Timaeus, alas the dialog appears to have been lost...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    16. Re:OSX and Unix by CableModemSniper · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Oh, for mod points...

      --
      Why not fork?
    17. Re:OSX and Unix by CableModemSniper · · Score: 1

      Oh come on, why didn't you blow that mod point on modding the grandparent up instead of parent down? What a waste.

      --
      Why not fork?
    18. Re:OSX and Unix by aWalrus · · Score: 1
      Microsoft, IIRC, is a non voting member of the Apple board, which means they don't have a say in Apple's policy (would probably break up their best defense against the monopoly argument). They just invested money in the company, but can't control it. Besides, there IS a certain level of compatibility between OSX and other unixes, as attested by projects like fink

      __

      --
      Overcaffeinated. Angry geeks.
    19. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't bo-guard that joint

    20. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's "bogart." As in Humphrey.

    21. Re:OSX and Unix by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 1

      skwirl42 wrote:

      > Microsoft owns nowhere near 51% of Apple's shares.
      > The shares they bought in 1996 were a) non-voting
      > and b) maybe a percent, at the very most. Although
      > I believe the shares have been converted to voting
      > shares at this point, but still, incredibly far
      > from being controlling shares.

      The shares were dumped on the market back in Fall of 2000, which together with a big loss reported that quarter seriously tanked Apple's stock. While the rest of the industry crowed about Apple's eminent demise, the earnings warnings started rolling in.

      The next quarter, Apple had returned to the black. The computer industry was a shattered landscape, where only a single tree still stood proud. It was Apple's turn to laugh.

      > Not to say Microsoft still doesn't hold sway
      > over Apple in some way.

      Sorry, the agreement expired in August. Microsoft is just a third party developer and a competitor now. While pundits talk of patching up the marriage, Apple has gone to war!

      Even if Apple should loose Office, Microsoft themselves will give Apple its biggest selling point. When Palladium comes, users will flee to the Apple that has pledged to fight for their fair use rights.

      Windows: "Go talk to my friend, an 800 pound monopoly-abusing gorilla!"
      Mac: "And here's my good buddy, the 66,000 ton Godzilla!"
      Godzilla: Stomp! ;)

      G Countdown: 26 days (www.godzillaoncube.com)

    22. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think a Saudi Prince is the biggest investor in Apple. I saw an article on him. He is seen as one of the savviest investors in the world. He was against the selling of US stocks, and urged other Saudi not to sell.

      GIMP runs well in OSX.

    23. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey you spelled girl wrong! ;-)

    24. Re:OSX and Unix by gnuadam · · Score: 1

      Not that I disagree with the jist of what you're saying, but fink does not a unix make.

      Cygwin sits on top of windows and provides most of what fink does (minus the snazzy apt-get functionality) but no one would argue windows is unix.

      Mac OS X is a unix IMHO, but fink is not the reason.

      --
      You say :wq, I say ZZ. Why can't we all just get along?
    25. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but no one would argue windows is unix.

      Although it is nominally POSIX compliant. Which I usually take as an example of how weak the POSIX standards really are, rather than any endorsement of windows.

    26. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      And YES, Darwin/Mac OS X *IS* Unix, as it has licensed the trademark from the Open Group, the rightful owner of the trademark.

      Excuse me???

      Mac OS X is not certified Unix by the Open Group. See their list of certified Unices. Notice the distinct lack of Mac OS X (and GNU Linux for that matter) in their lists.

      --AC

    27. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either is IRIX or FreeBSD. What's your point?

    28. Re:OSX and Unix by digicrom · · Score: 1

      Actually it's more in the neighborhood of 15%, and it's non-voting stock. And though Apple does admit to changing the kernel, this is no more different the many UNIX variants. They are all, and will always be UNIX. So please before you post, get your facts straight.

      Have a nice day!

      --
      We are all born originals - why is it so many of us die copies? -Edward Young, poet (1683-1765)
    29. Re:OSX and Unix by guttentag · · Score: 2
      MS bought 150M $ USD worth of NON-voting shares of Apple back in 1996. That's peanuts. Apple was worth net 2.1 billion at that time.

      That's nowhere near 51%.

      Correct, but you left out one important detail -- sometime in the last year or so Microsoft said it no longer owns any of those shares. This is one reason relations have been somewhat strained between the two companies in recent months -- that's one common thread that no longer connects them (remember the reports that Microsoft was attempting to steal Jobs's thunder a few days before MacWorld NY?).
    30. Re:OSX and Unix by aWalrus · · Score: 1

      You are right. I meant to point out that a lot of linux/unix apps do not need to be tweaked much to be able to run on OSX, but that came out wrong.
      __

      --
      Overcaffeinated. Angry geeks.
    31. Re:OSX and Unix by foobar104 · · Score: 2

      Actually it's more in the neighborhood of 15%, and it's non-voting stock.

      It was nowhere near 15%, and the shares were sold many months ago.

      And though Apple does admit to changing the kernel, this is no more different the many UNIX variants.

      It's not accurate to say that Apple changed the kernel. They're using their own kernel, xnu, which is based partly on the Mach work out of CMU and partly on work done by NeXT and, later, Apple themselves.

      So please before you post, get your facts straight.

      Physician, heal thyself.

    32. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      It is official; Netcraft now confirms: *BSD is dying

      One more crippling bombshell hit the already beleaguered *BSD community when IDC confirmed that *BSD market share has dropped yet again, now down to less than a fraction of 1 percent of all servers. Coming on the heels of a recent Netcraft survey which plainly states that *BSD has lost more market share, this news serves to reinforce what we've known all along. *BSD is collapsing in complete disarray, as fittingly exemplified by failing dead last in the recent Sys Admin comprehensive networking test.

      You don't need to be a Kreskin to predict *BSD's future. The hand writing is on the wall: *BSD faces a bleak future. In fact there won't be any future at all for *BSD because *BSD is dying. Things are looking very bad for *BSD. As many of us are already aware, *BSD continues to lose market share. Red ink flows like a river of blood.

      FreeBSD is the most endangered of them all, having lost 93% of its core developers. The sudden and unpleasant departures of long time FreeBSD developers Jordan Hubbard and Mike Smith only serve to underscore the point more clearly. There can no longer be any doubt: FreeBSD is dying.

      Let's keep to the facts and look at the numbers.

      OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of NetBSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

      Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

      All major surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is very sick and its long term survival prospects are dimmer than dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will be among OS dilettante dabblers. *BSD continues to decay. Nothing short of a miracle could save it at this point in time. For all practical purposes, *BSD is dead.

      Fact: *BSD is dying

    33. Re:OSX and Unix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That list is Unix 98, you doofus. Even HP/UX and IRIX aren't listed, and I'd like to see you claim that they aren't Unix.

  10. classic 1) 2) ??? 3) PROFIT!!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    1) Become mildly disappointed with this latest offering that discusses the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X.
    2) ???
    3) PROFIT!!!!

  11. Re:Note the highly agressive, early moderation her by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    It'll be some little jerk on a power trip coz he's got mod points - whoooo!

  12. speaking of learning... by Trolling+Stones · · Score: -1

    y'all should learn to eat more often at Subway. For less than 5 dollars american, you get a giant, filling, foot-long sub, piled high with fresh meats and cheeses, mouth-watering veggies, and a smorgasbord of topings, like the new southwest southern chili steak sauce.

    g to the oatse
    c to the izzex
    fo shizzle my nizzle just for the disclaimer, I don't have subway stock.

  13. Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


    Yeah, you must be a real hardcore techie.

    Read dummies books too?

    1. Re:Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? by principio · · Score: 1

      Hey, I love those dummies books. They have funny cartoons and helped me find the "Any" key.

    2. Re:Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? by d1taylor · · Score: 1
      Pardon my vent, but give me a break, anon. Even the best techies, hackers, what-have-you started out somewhere, and that somewhere was probably with zero knowledge. I can remember the first time I saw a Unix command line (late 1980, at UCSD) and thought "WTF?" Then the first time I used a Mac (1985, while doing some contract programming for The Well) when I scoffed and said "right, can I have a real computer to work with, please?"

      I am baffled by this sort of mindless macho agressive attitude. Hey, it's totally okay not to know something. Look at it this way: at least the people reading the Teach Yourself and Dummies books are learning, and isn't that better than either thrashing (typical hacker way to learn things!) or bailing and saying it's stupid?

      On the other hand, it must be very cool to be omniscient, so you know what you want to know, and have no reason to learn anything new. Hmmm... :-)

    3. Re:Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? by boskone · · Score: 1

      I've found their the best way to get a quick overview of a subject so that I can understand what experts are saying about it or take my knowledge further by going and reading more advanced books on the topics. For instance, learn unix in 24 hours is a good place to go before UNIX in a nutshell for someone who's never been at a UNIX terminal other than to type pine. also, they cover a lot of non-tech subjects. If you wanted to learn about real estate investing, they have books on that to get you started, or incorporating, or fly fishing or whatever. It's a great way to get a baseline understanding of a topic.

  14. Its a shame its not 10.2 by Hunts · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've been having major problems with OS X Server 10.2 thats driving me insane.

    Thinking in a more unix way, I starting trying to hunt down the proccess involved..but all to no avail. I couldnt find any proccesses that seemed to be having problems..and was told by a friend in the know that my issue was more of a mac gui thing...something I know nothing about :/

    A good decent book on OS X Server 10.2 would be really nice at the moment

    --
    "Enlightenment is your ego's biggest disappointment." --Yoginanda
    1. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by Halo1 · · Score: 1

      All the "mac gui things" are also processes. You may want to subscribe to a mailing list (such as macosx-admin) and actually mention what the problem is that you are having, it might help.

      --
      Donate free food here
    2. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by rampant+mac · · Score: 0, Troll
      Have you tried downloading the admin guide from Apple?

      It's 622 pages worth of pretty useful information, like setup, maintenance, and troubleshooting.

      --
      I like big butts and I cannot lie.
    3. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by Graff · · Score: 1, Troll

      Let me start by saying that I think MacOS X Server is totally awesome. The GUI tools to administrate the server both locally and remotely are very well done and you have a lot of power.

      That being said, the documentation is slim. I managed to totally bork my authentication services on my MacOS X Server box because I didn't totally understand LDAP and Netinfo. That was fun, couldn't login to the GUI or use the admin tools at all - it's a good thing I wasn't working on the main server and that I had lots of stuff backed up.

      Right now I have everything working nicely, with the exception of not being able to serve out IMAP mail services. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, the documentation just doesn't explain enough for me to understand it fully.

      I wanted to take one of the courses on MacOS X Server that Apple offers, but the course is $2,500. That might be par for the course, but I work for a non-profit and we can't afford to spend that much money on one training course. What we could do is to spend a few hundred on proper documentation and then teach ourselves.

    4. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by Spencerian · · Score: 2

      I agree--having to shuck a few thousand down for a class is a pain in the patootie.

      I've already written one book. I'm hoping to take these classes and write study guides for the various Mac OS tests so we can all save a few bucks but get the training we need.

      I've recently played with an Xserve and 10.2 Server for a few weeks. It does rock, but Apple really needs stronger and enterprise-based documentation. They write too often with consumers in mind, not IT people.

      --
      Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
    5. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by dr00g911 · · Score: 1

      I've found that most stuff I've wanted to do under the command line os GUI under OS X, from getting sendmail working properly on developer betas on to other, more specialized stuff can be found at one of the two following sites.

      MacOSXHints

      Piles of customization and installation information for all versions of X client/server. Almost always the hint I'm looking for is here, with /.-style user follow-up responses and clarifications.

      Marc Liyanage

      Has custom-compiled packages of the biggies: PHP, Apache, mySQL, Postgres, ImageMagick and several others. Also has build instructions for the more difficult ones (ImageMagick comes to mind... I tried manually compiling it with different options for days and it would never link the correct libraries). He also has a hints section on his site.

      Between these two sites and Google, I've been able to find answers to just about every problem/issue that I've come across in the 2+ years of using OS X.

      That said, the OS X for Unix Geeks is a solid book, although so much changes between point releases of OS X (one of my major grievances... why must Apple always replace my custom PHP and Apache, or do weird, undocumented stuff to the default umask for the ftpd?) that you really need up-to-date info that just doesn't come in dead-tree form.

      --dr00gy

    6. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by Hunts · · Score: 1

      umm the log in problem is actually one of the problems I'm facing.

      The admin tools work for a while and then bam...cant log in any more, cant use the admin tools, cant connect to file shares..nothing. I can still connect, ping and even use web pages..but I just cant login. :/

      I'd love to know how you solved this.

      --
      "Enlightenment is your ego's biggest disappointment." --Yoginanda
    7. Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 by Graff · · Score: 2

      Heh, well it's quite easy really. I backed up the user accounts I had using the ditto command :

      sudo ditto -rsrcFork /Users/ /Volumes/VOLUME_NAME

      I then did a complete reinstall of the server. Yeah it was a bit of overkill but it totally cleared up all of my troubles. (I had a few other odd problems that were plaguing me.)

      Since then I have been a bit smarter about how to run the server. I have been keeping the user accounts on a separate drive. That way I can mess with the server drive without having to worry about messing up the data. I was circumventing Apple's tools for the firewall because I had a much more involved rule set that I wanted. Now what I am doing is using Apple's GUI to start the firewall and then adding in ipfw rules around the ones the server software creates.

      If you are having problems with logging in it may be one of several problems. First of all, you may have messed around with Netinfo's domains. If you bork Netinfo then you lose many of the authentication services. You may also have created firewall rules which mess around with your loopback. If your server can't use its loopback properly, then it may not be able to do authentication lookups. Lastly, you may have accidently messed up one of the configuration files that controls your authentication services.

      I'm not that well-versed in running a MacOS X Server machine, but these seem like the main issues. Since I did a re-install of the server and I was a bit more careful about messing around with things, I have had very few problems. My main one now is the fact that I am having trouble setting up IMAP accounts. It may be due to the fact that I'm running NAT, but I'm not sure yet.

      Good luck with it!

  15. Not dogs, Dogcows. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    They need Dogcows on their books. Dogcows go Moof!

  16. Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Why would anybody in the 21st century like any book? Thick or thin?

    Hang on to the past!

    1. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. Books don't need batteries.

      2. You can make notes in the margings (books have better built-in handwriting recognition).

      3. Books are made from sustainable, recycleable materials.

      5. Books look nice on your shelves and smell nice :)

    2. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot #4

      4. ????

    3. Re:Why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6. Profit!

  17. Re:UNIX guys like thick books by Meech · · Score: 1

    One of the thickest books I own is the O'Reilly Unix Power Tools book.

  18. forgot something... by Mage+Powers · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why should MacOSX Users learn UNIX? The other review of this book I read said that that point wasn't covered.

    1. Re:forgot something... by King+Babar · · Score: 2
      Why should MacOSX Users learn UNIX? The other review of this book I read said that that point wasn't covered.

      Do you mean the "explaining why you might want to learn about Unix" part, or do you mean that the book doesn't do a good job of teaching parts of Unix that are of interest to most users of OS X? If it's the latter, I would agree that most Mac OS X users probably don't care; they're going to buy the "Missing Manual" series or something. If it's the former, that might be more of a problem.

      My guess is that the average reader of this book is somebody who was really into Mac OS X, and then saw somebody perform a Unix command line magic trick that saved tham a whole day's work. This does happen, and it does have an effect on the witnesses, who then go forth, intrigued, to the bookstore. But, lo: the Unix books are written for the high priests! Ah, here's a book for an acolyte like me...it even says "Mac OS X" in the title. :-)

      Time will tell if there really is an audience for this or not.

      --

      Babar

    2. Re:forgot something... by d1taylor · · Score: 1
      Why learn Unix if you're a Mac OS X user?

      You definitely do not have to do any such thing; you can work happily in Aqua and never even know about the Unix "lurking" underneath. However, when you start having to download freeware apps to do things like a simple file renaming that can be accomplished in a three-line shell script, you might just wonder about what kind of capabilities there are "under the hood" in this new operating system world.

      And then there are the Unix people who never got into kernel hacking or the GNU-patch-of-the-day club, but are still excited about having a beautiful GUI and all those greate Mac applications and a powerful Unix underneath....

      For me, OSX is terrific because I can work for days without using the command line, and when I feel the urge, I can launch Terminal.app and program, write shell scripts, ftp/curl new apps, fly through editing tasks with vi, and generally cause mayhem to my heart's content. I think Mac OS X is a phenomenally cool melding of my two favorite computing environments!

      Just as an example, I find sftp the fastest way for me to interact with my secure server, even more so than RBrowser (etc). Sure beats the pants off Netzilla and my weekly puzzling over why it (Windows XP) can't seem to handle a simple ssh connection. But that's another story!

  19. What, no dogcows? by BJH · · Score: 4, Funny

    Moof!

    1. Re:What, no dogcows? by d1taylor · · Score: 1
      Very good! A dogcow would have been great, but I surmise that there just isn't a good woodcut in the graphics library that they use at O'Reilly. :-)

      By the way, I have to say that authors are definitely NOT allowed to know about the animal that'll be on their cover until publication. It's quite a mystery, and I felt lucky to have a relatively normal critter rather than something, uh, weird or peculiar.

  20. the oreilly 'gotta get something published' model? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    IT seems that this book is of the 'Gotta get something published on this topic NOW'. Hey, see if JimBob can write a 100 pages on topic X!

    I'm seen this example with this book and with things like Rob Flickenger's 'community wireless networks'.

    It's not at all that they AREN'T good books, or not informative, but they are, indeed, lean and seem to be something just to get published.

    After all, we now have OSX: the missing manual (second edition coming soon) and other OSX manuals (which I can't name cause it aint out yet) that are more of the OReilly 'tome' size (400 + pages)

    I am not a publisher and I really dont know how the publishing business really works, but as an end user and a buyer of dozens of Oreilly books, this 100 page short book thing seems to be a way to get a book, ANY book, to the market ASAFP while larger tomes are worked on.

    $.02

  21. Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by CMU_Nort · · Score: 5, Informative

    It sounds like the book he really wanted to get was O'Reilly's Mac OS X for Unix Geeks. It includes a lot of his gripe topics like:

    * A quick overview of the Terminal application

    * Understanding Open Directory (LDAP) and NetInfo

    * Issues related to using the GNU C Compiler 9GCC

    * Library linking and porting Unix software

    * An overview of Mac OS X?s filesystem and startup processes

    * Creating and installing packages using Fink

    * Building the Darwin kernel

    * Running X Windows on top of Mac OS X

    --
    --------- Beware the dragon, for you are crunchy and good with ketchup.
    1. Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by Spencerian · · Score: 2

      That's exactly the content I was expecting to find in this first OS X/UNIX book that O'Reilly offered. I did scan the book before I bought it and knew it didn't have what I was really looking for. It never hurts to have Yet Another Useful Reference Book, however.

      Don't get me wrong--it's an excellent book. But in the past year or so, I've already outgrown it's content. I've dived into the UNIX innards of OS X quite often, and you can't help but learn the basics that way. This book was really for someone who has never used UNIX before but knows a bit about Mac OS.

      The "UNIX Geeks" book definitely requires a read for me.

      --
      Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
    2. Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by King+Babar · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Don't get me wrong--it's an excellent book. But in the past year or so, I've already outgrown it's content. I've dived into the UNIX innards of OS X quite often, and you can't help but learn the basics that way. This book was really for someone who has never used UNIX before but knows a bit about Mac OS.

      Well, I was baffled about why you didn't think the title made this very clear. O'Reilly "Learning" books are for beginners (in some sense), and the title of this one is "Learning Unix for Mac OS X". What is the intended audience? Beginners. What will they learn? Unix, in the context of Mac OS X. Believe me, there are thousands of those people around, including many who don't usually buy many computer books and therefore have not come to expect the "brick of verbosity" tomes that some people really seem to want.

      Having said that, I have to confess that I fell into a similar trap back in the day with "Learning Perl/Tk". Now there's an O'Reilly book that earned something approaching scorn in the geek community, and the reason why is because that one really didn't have much of the audience intended (beginners wanting to learn Perl/Tk), but instead was the only real book for *anybody* to buy that really talked about Perl/Tk...and most of the actual buyers were complete geeks in search of something that would augment the then sparse-ish documentation for the toolkit. But all's well that ends well; we now have "Mastering Perl/Tk", and I think we're all happy again. :-)

      The "UNIX Geeks" book definitely requires a read for me.

      Me too. I'm guessing that this book if it turns out to be as good as we'd hope will sell a *lot* more copies than you might expect given the rate of adoption by geeks of (T)iBooks. When I went to YAPC in St. Louis, i was floored by the number of those being used during talks...

      --

      Babar

    3. Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by Spencerian · · Score: 2

      I agree with your comments completely. I guess I'm falling into that UNIX trap of geekness. I expected this book to be deeper because UNIX is deep, period. I guess I felt as if I got a tutorial book on quantum physics and felt cheated because they left out a section on building your own toroid quantum particle accelerator.

      I wrote the review with /. folks in mind, of course. The book would have a glowing review otherwise--it's just not the book for most /.ers.

      --
      Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
    4. Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, I have been waiting months for this one. At WWDC, they said it would be out in August but now it's supposed to be October. Not out yet. Grrr.

    5. Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by Dhrakar · · Score: 1

      Just to let you know, I got a copy of the OS X for Unix Geeks book and it is great. IT even has man pages for some of the undocumented Apple CL tools! Definitely worth getting if you want details about OS X.

      (PS: I'm writing this while in the 'Mac Hacking' session of the O'Reilly OS X conference... This has been a really good conference and I'm quite glad I came to it ;-)

    6. Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks by d1taylor · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Don't get me wrong--it's an excellent book. But in the past year or so, I've already outgrown it's content.

      Right, but that surely is a mark of success with a Learning title? As the lead author, I look at it this way: I want to prepare the reader for their future journeys into Unix. Jerry and I did our best to ensure that we explain potentially foreign Unix concepts clearly, enlighten readers on the philosophy of command lines, flags, pipes, redirection, and other weird Unixisms that are a long way from Mac OS 9 / Windows interaction, and generally push everyone in the right direction so that they (you) can learn more and shed the book!

      I'm quite delighted to read your comment, Spencerian, actually. I wish that all my readers came back a year later and said "thanks for getting me started. I don't need your book any more!" :-)

  22. 24 Hours? by skaffen42 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I didn't know Mac users had that kind of attention span!

    (ducks...)

    --
    People couldn't type. We realized: Death would eventually take care of this.
    1. Re:24 Hours? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's harder to tell since they don't usually have to spend that kind of time configuring drivers or clicking through 'wizards.'

  23. Oh I don't know by Drath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    UNIX guys like thick books

    That's a misnomer, My Kernighan & Ritchie C book gets a lot of use and it's only ~280 pages. Large does not espessially mean better.

    1. Re:Oh I don't know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny
      "Large does not espessially mean better."

      You go on and keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, your girlfriend will be spending another night with me.

    2. Re:Oh I don't know by osu-neko · · Score: 1
      That's a misnomer

      Not really. It is a falacy, though...

      My Kernighan & Ritchie C book gets a lot of use and it's only ~280 pages. Large does not espessially mean better.

      Indeed. K&R is probably the best book in existence for learning C, precisely because of its lack of excessive and distracting crud...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
    3. Re:Oh I don't know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. Two of the most used books on my desk are K&R (2nd Edition) and POSIX : A Programmers Guide. K&R is, as you say, ~280 pages, and POSIX is ~450, ~350 of which are purly reference.

      Thick books just make for anoying indices that you can't grep ;)

    4. Re:Oh I don't know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That's a misnomer

      Not really. It is a falacy, though...

      Not really. It is a misconception.

    5. Re:Oh I don't know by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a misnomer

      Not really. It is a falacy, though...

      Not really. It is a misconception.


      Not really. It is a misapprehension.

    6. Re:Oh I don't know by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 2
      My Kernighan & Ritchie C book gets a lot of use and it's only ~280 pages.
      280 pages? Mine's got only 230!!! I must have been ripped-off!!!!
  24. Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 55 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    I just heard some sad news on talk radio. Horror/Sci-Fi author Stephen King was killed this morning when his parachute failed to open on a routine skydiving trip. Mr. King plummeted to his death from 16,000 feet; he fell through a barn and killed two cattle upon impact. Even if you never read any of his books, you probably have some of his painting hanging in your home. Truly an American icon.

  25. The Logic Underlying that Conclusion by Alexander · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Well, it's so clean!

    It's certainly not contaminated by cheese.

    Venezuelan Bever Cheese?

    Not today sir, know.

    Ah. How about Cheddar?

    --
    "oohhh... I didn't know Schopenhauer was a philosopher!" ..."uhhh yeah, he's the one that begins with
  26. Re:UNIX guys like thick books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > One of the thickest books I own is the O'Reilly Unix Power Tools book.

    Do you realize how dumb that sounds?

  27. Alan Thicke - DEAD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic
    I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found DEAD in his home this morning. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon. He will be missed :(


    Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):
    Show me that smile again.
    Ooh show me that smile.
    Don't waste another minute on your crying.
    We're nowhere near the end.
    We're nowhere near.
    The best is ready to begin.

    As long as we got each other
    We got the world
    Sitting right in our hands.
    Baby rain or shine;
    All the time.
    We got each other
    Sharing the laughter and love.

    1. Re:Alan Thicke - DEAD!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      maybe he got killed by steven king

    2. Re:Alan Thicke - DEAD!! by Gropo · · Score: 1
      --
      I hate Grammar Nazi's
  28. Oh boy! from +3 Funny to -1 Flamebait in minutes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    Too bad!

  29. Not familiar with O'Reilly books? by wunderhorn1 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Too me, "Learning UNIX for Mac OS X" implies a book for newbies to UNIX. Definitely not a reference volume, they would save that for an "... In a Nutshell" book. (For example, "Learning Perl : 300 pages. "Perl in a Nutshell": 800 pages.)

    Also, O'Reilly already used a platypus for "Web Database Applications with PHP and MySQL", so no dice there.
    However, I just got an idea to somehow play off of the BSD Daemon/Apple connection by using a picture of the story of the devil offering Eve fruit from the tree of knowledge. Also sort of a connection to Darwin via the evolution/creationism debate.

    OK, so it's a pretty big stretch ;-)

    --
    Karma: Bored. (Thinking about resurrecting the "Anyone else is an imposter" joke.)
  30. I suck by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Offtopic

    s/to/too

  31. "Audience Problems"?? by vi-rocks · · Score: 5, Insightful
    The review stated:

    The book has an audience problem because of its size. UNIX guys like thick books. Is this book mostly for newbies to OS X, to UNIX, or to Mac OS X's implementation of UNIX? Despite this targeting problem.....

    This is crazy!!! There is no "targeting problem" -- the book is written for people who are new to UNIX -- that is the target audience. The book is right on for this crowd. As mentioned by others, there are other books that the UNIX savvy will find useful. -- Why would someone who owns "Unix PowerTools" or "Essential System Administration" even consider bying a book with "Learning Unix" in the title???

    1. Re:"Audience Problems"?? by vi-rocks · · Score: 1

      (-1) --- TROLL -- Your fucking kidding me, right?

    2. Re:"Audience Problems"?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Your fucking kidding me, right


      No, actually I think it's O'Reillys fucking kidding me, not mine.

  32. yup by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My farts are plentiful and foul today. Be glad you aren't in my office.

    Mmmm, stinky.

  33. Stupid screenshots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    trying to convey information visually in an easy to understand format! I'll show them!

    I for one usually read O'Reilly books on any given subject because they are smaller, more to the point and less filled with useless graphics (usually screen shots), than most publishers. publishers (cough*Oracle Press*cough).

  34. As of 58 Posts: 25 Kharma Points by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That means that the trolls have taken at least 33 kharma points away from the value of this discussion. Keep up the good work, trolls!

  35. not too good with vi, either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i suck

  36. Re:Oh boy! from +3 Funny to -1 Flamebait in minute by skaffen42 · · Score: 1

    Yeah, well. Sounds like they "switched" off their sense of humour!

    Can't these people take a joke? :p

    --
    People couldn't type. We realized: Death would eventually take care of this.
  37. taming unix by goombah99 · · Score: 2, Insightful
    It's like the chinese curse "my you live in interesting times". Mac OsX has given us a wonderful set of opportunities and pitfalls. Books are sorely needed, and needed quickly. Most of all are books that point out the pit falls of assuming linux and macOSX work the same way.

    Apple gave us a lot of power but has not told us how to use it. In the mean time We are encouraged not to use them until they are documented, but being geeks we cant resist poking and prodding. And assuming that because we know linux or BSD that we know Mac OSX. Then we get MAD when we get into trouble from our uniformed meddling or we discover some bit of uglyness behind the veil that we dont like exactly how apple has implemented it. Whereas before we were bilssfully unaware and untempted. It seems like all the anti-apple slashdot critiques that are at leaset slightly based on experience are along the lines of "well linux doesn't do it that way, so apple is wrong."

    When I first got OS X beta, I nievely tried to set /etc/fstab and /etc/exports. Got steamin mad. Then discovered netInfo. (I vaguely knew where to look from NeXTstep) Thought that was truly wonderful and sorely needed unification of unix configuration. Blessed apple. But apple had not issued the manual. No matter, I waded in, did some cool things, and by the end of the day my computer was unbootable from one leeetle mistake. (had to re-install). Cursed Apple for not documenting this. (I had called them on the phone and they warned me not to meddle with it!) But within 6 months the NetInfo manual was indeed out along with some idiot proof gui "training wheel" tools for making changes to certain records.

    My experience with OSX has been extremely positive. I make some whopper mistakes, but that was really y fault. mac unix is unix but its not LINUX and HFS+ is NOT UFS. But that does not make it worse. In fact on the whole I think its much better. But if you assume that cp and mv do the same thing they do in linux, well you will eventually get a surprise.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  38. OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but... by BluBrick · · Score: 1

    Hey, numbnuts! Do ya reckon the rapid moderation might be because you really are off topic? Just maybe? No?

    Well, what the hell does early moderation have to do with:
    Apple,
    OSX,
    Darwin,
    thick books,
    big ticket hardware,
    attempting to make newbie guides relevant to Unix gurus,
    deluding long-time Mac freaks into believing that they are using a real operating system,
    or Disney rip-off cartoon platypii(*)?
    ???,
    profit!!! (oops, Freudian typo - sorry folks!)

    (*) Does anyone else see the Huey/Dewey/Louie -> Hexley similarity?

    --
    Ahh - My eye!
    The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
    1. Re:OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, dickhead!

      The moderation here is getting stupid. For example, some guy posts a perfectly reasonable (almost insightful) comment entitled:-

      "Why would anybody in the 21st century like any book? Thick or thin?"

      This is almost immediately modded as "-1 Offtopic".

      How can this be 'offtopic' when we are discussing friggin books here?

      Moderators? Shit 'em!

    2. Re:OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but... by Tokerat · · Score: 1

      OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but...

      You must have been pretty hungry yuorself then, tough guy.

      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    3. Re:OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but... by BluBrick · · Score: 1

      :You must have been pretty hungry yuorself then, tough guy.

      Fair call! ;)

      --
      Ahh - My eye!
      The doctor said I'm not supposed to get Slashdot in it!
  39. Re:Oh boy! from +3 Funny to -1 Flamebait in minute by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clearly not!

    I guess the run-of-the-mill slashbots modded you up then the humor-impared elitist apple mac nazi assholes modded you down.

    C'est la guerre!

  40. RTFM? 622 page maual by goombah99 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I've been reading the 622 page admin guide. My first impression was "622 pages!!!! that is not why I bought an apple." After reading it two things are clear. First they are very gentle so even a unix weaking can understand both the big picture and the little picture. Second, it is not a unix manual,instead it focuses on using gui tools and a fixed, thought rather broad, set of tasks (e.g.setting up LDAP, mounting a disk). It still does not teach unix. A book teaching command line unix that specialized in mac's has stillnot been written (Yes I am aware of the various attempts). My third impression is that it needs a second edition. There are a lot of incompletely explained concepts that only an experienced NeXSTstep user would understand or descriptions that dont quite match the actual gui-tools. But it's wonderful to have a reference now.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  41. might be worth looking at by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was interesting.

    http://freshmeat.net/articles/view/557/

  42. Online UNIX tutorial for OS X by phatvibez · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here is a MacOS X UNIX tutorial I just found yesterday. If you're an old time Mac user or just want to learn some UNIX commands then this is something you might want to check out...

    http://www.osxfaq.com/Tutorials/LearningCenter/

    --
    --- Brad (http://www.LinuxReview.net)
  43. A Really Thick Book on OS X by Melantha_Bacchae · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you want a really, seriously, thick book on OS X (probably a bit dated post-Jaguar), try "OS X Unleashed". It covers both the Mac and Unix sides. The X Window System is covered, as is setting up a mail or ftp server, programming in Perl, using MySQL, even installing Lynx (if you want a text based browser).

    It makes a great reference book, and comes in real handy whenever you need a heavy, if slightly soft, weight around the house. ;)

    "Godzilla's coming"
    Io, "Godzilla 2000" (US version dialog)
    G Countdown: 26 days (www.godzillaoncube.com)

    1. Re:A Really Thick Book on OS X by skribble · · Score: 1

      FYI... An updated Jaguar version of "Mac OS X Unleashed" should be on shelves by year end.

      --
      --- Nothing To See Here ---
    2. Re:A Really Thick Book on OS X by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      put yer fuckin' sig where it belongs, asswipe

  44. 'smart' quotes in articles by SCHecklerX · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Why is it that we get ?'s on the main page, but when you read the article, stuff displays properly on that page? Please either reject people who insist on submitting with this crap, or fix it consistently throughout slashdot.

  45. Mac OS X and UNIX... by bsdparasite · · Score: -1, Flamebait
    I thought Mac OS X was a consumer OS (despite the old BSD kernel), pointed toward those who do not want to use the command line. Why the hell is anyone even bothering to rig this set up to compile Darwin and X? Thoroughly stupid if you ask me. Just use the goddamn machine for doing things. If you really want to know how to use UNIX, get a *real* UNIX box instead.

  46. Re:RTFM? 622 page maual by Graff · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have been looking through the admin guide and I realized one big thing: dead tree docs are so much better than electronic docs! I am seriously thinking about printing the whole damn guide and binding it. The only thing holding me back is just what you said, the guide is way too general.

    I want a very in-depth guide, or set of guides, similar to the old Inside Macintosh series, but for MacOS X Server admin. So what if it covers Unix topics, or GUI topics? Cover it all and break it down into modules that you can buy and read as you want. Have an intro book for general topics, have a book on mail, a book on web serving, a book on firewalls and NAT, etc. I'm sure Netinfo and LDAP will take a book just by themselves.

    The point is that these introductory Mac books just don't cut it any more. They are all pretty much clones of each other and they tell you simple stuff like how to set up your web browser. That's great for the home user, but it does nothing for the professional system administrator looking to use Macs.

  47. It was a typo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It should have said:

    Linux guys like thick cocks

  48. stick an Apple in my rectum by Anonymous Coward · · Score: -1, Troll
    Dear Apple,

    I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

    with much gayness,

    Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

  49. Not really a Slashdot book. by dheeraj · · Score: 1

    I'm just glad I got this for free -- somebody bought it for me off the Amazon.com wish list for fuckMicrosoft.com (plug, plug).

    I, too, was amazed at how THIN it was. Aside from having a hard copy of the directions for tweaking Sendmail so it works locally, I don't expect to get much use out of this book.

    If you want to do some serious, under-the-GUI hacking, get "Mac OS X Unleashed." Seriously ass-kicking, as most of the Unleashed series tends to be. (Had to pay for that one . . . )

    --
    --- Why yes, I am the webmaster of Microsuck.com
  50. FreeBSD Handbook by Glanz · · Score: 1

    The FreeBSD handbook, available for free on the web, contains more useful Unix information pertaining to OS X than this book.

    --
    Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
  51. However, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0



    Many Unices include GNU tools.

    Thanks for your concern.

  52. I also like Mac OS X Unleashed by Bogatyr · · Score: 2

    It's the book I currently recommend to people from a UNIX background who are interested in OS X. Yes, it's a bit dated right now as of the Jaguar release, but it's decent even now, and the highly-likely updated version for Jaguar should be out soon (in my opinion, I don't know any specifics or inside info on publlishing dates).

  53. Re:Linux is not Unix either by Glanz · · Score: 1

    ....so there! Nyaa nyaaa nyaaaaaa

    --
    Rien n'est plus beau que le creux du 0.
  54. The Open Group and Apple by GPS+Pilot · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    That that is is that that that that is not is not.
    1. Re:The Open Group and Apple by mfnickster · · Score: 1

      OS Opinion has an article (outdated) which covers this whole debate.

      "[Open Group VP] Graham Bird explained that the Open Group actively pursues companies that use the UNIX trademark in a way that may confuse buyers. He mentioned that the company has a department that does nothing other than seek out violations and that this department has gone after "many" individuals who have allegedly infringed upon the trademark.

      "Bird also mentioned that the Open Group is aware of Apple's usage of the term and would only go after the company for trademark violation if it (or any company for that matter) used the UNIX specification in such a way that may confuse buyers."

      So there you have it. Mac OS X is not an official "UNIX," but Apple is justified in using the name in its marketing material.

      - MFN

      --
      "Slow down, Cowboy! It has been 3 years, 7 months and 26 days since you last successfully posted a comment."
  55. linux is dying by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No one cares about a 1/2 ass broken implementation of Unix(tm) like linux anymore. Now that Mac OS X and BSD are on the rise, the industry can move forward instead of rehashing old ground due to fatal Not Invented Here disease that linux has in everything ranging from APIs to already written code.

  56. Book Doesn't Make Compelling Case for LearningUnix by CaptMondo · · Score: 3, Insightful
    I remember being really interested in this title when I first heard of it -- most of the Mac OS X books I've looked at don't really take a good hard look at the BSD Unix heart of the OS.

    I ended up reviewing this book for The Computer Paper, and my editor summed it up with the title: "Unix book doesn't explain why Mac users should learn it".

    Okay, I know it is aimed at the beginner, but aside from teaching the basics, none of it really goes into learning any of this would be useful to the reader. Why teach someone about using the lynx browser for example, and not show them how to use grep for finding files, or the basics of shell programming to automate common tasks.

    Best book of its type that I've seen so far on this specific topic is Mac OS X Unleashed. For the beginner, I'd recommend Mac OS X: The Missing Manual which probably has about as much info on the Unix end of things while having plenty of good general useful info on OS X.

  57. Re:Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? - Dummies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you don't have clue 1 about a topic a dummies book is a good place to start.
    After you gets some basics then move up.
    Seen a lot of know it alls fail just because they didn't know about some really basic stuff.

  58. I know this is a troll, but. . . by dasboy · · Score: 1

    It seems to confirm my newfound belief that "Anonymous" is Latin for stupid.

  59. The only thing unique about shell scripting OS X by guttentag · · Score: 3, Informative
    Is the audience.

    Mac users will require more initial hand-holding to become comfortable with the command line. And they'll need instant gratification to convince them that dealing with such an apparently-archaic interface is worth the effort.

    If you know someone who is in this situation, get them:

    1. The latest version of BBEdit.
    2. An easy-to-use shell scripting book as a reference. Reading a book like Teach Yourself Shell Programming from beginning to end is going to either bore them or scare them off. But as they are experimenting at their own pace and discovering just what they can do with shell scripting, they'll want a reference to thumb through for solutions to the problems they encounter.
    Start them out with something simple and relatively familiar, like df, and explain what information it provides.

    Then show them df | bbedit. They'll feel more comfortable seeing a connection between the GUI world they know.

    Then shown them df | grep disk0s9 | bbedit.

    And df | grep disk0s9 | awk '{print "Disk Size: " $2/2000 " MB"}'.

    Work on basic one-liners first, then show them sed, head, tail, wc, etc. And when you go to show them something new one day and you discover that they wrote something on their own purely because they were interested, you know the fire has been lit.

    And if they have any doubts about the value of shell scripting, show them the Linux version of my Buddy program, which is really just a collection of over 70 shell scripts (most of which are reasonably-well commented) and explain that the Mac OS X version is just the Linux version with an AppleScript Studio GUI slapped on top.

  60. The point of the book by d1taylor · · Score: 1

    You're right. Golias - the point of this book wasn't to have an exhaustive document about Unix or Darwin (there are man pages and some great Web sites with that information) but to address the market of people who migrated to Mac OS X (perhaps from OS9, perhaps from Windows) and suddenly had this nifty new capability of the Terminal.app and the shell. If the reader wants a more comprehensive book for learning Unix, well, of course, there are a variety of O'Reilly titles, and there's always my Teach Yourself Unix in 24 Hours, which, contrary to some mindless slams earlier in this discussion, is actually a very pleasant way to go from embarassed newbie to Smart Person Who Gets This Stuff. If I say so myself. :-)

  61. Speaking of 10.2 by d1taylor · · Score: 2, Informative

    It wouldn't be a bad idea if those people who've read the book and have ideas about what should be added to the next edition (focused on 10.2 and, um, perhaps beyond) sent me a note about it!: taylor at intuitive dot com

  62. Re:The only thing unique about shell scripting OS by bigdave64 · · Score: 1

    "Mac users will require more initial hand-holding ..."

    Your blanket statement seems to assume that Mac users, in general, do not have Unix experience. I don't think that is true. I for one, use Unix all of the time at work. So it was a snap to start using Unix on my Mac at home.

    In addition, I would point out that Macs are very popular on college campuses where Unix is also prevalent.

    If you follow OS X discussion boards, you will certainly see a fair number of newbie questions about Unix. However, you will also see at least as much discussion about some fairly sophisticated technical issues related to BSD on OS X, indicating a fairly proficient user base.

  63. Re:The only thing unique about shell scripting OS by guttentag · · Score: 2
    The vast majority of Mac users do note have Unix experience. Most Windows users don't have Unix experience either. This is one of primary reasons for the relatively slow adpotion of Linux.

    There are many Mac and Windows users who do have Unix experience, but your comments suggest that your perspective is skewed because you work in a Unix environment. We're talking about people who are not using Unix (hence the title of this discussion, "Learning UNIX for Mac OS X) but could benefit from it.

  64. this is cool by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    --I NEED a "24" hour course in basic unix, so I just might get your book. Been struggling with linux and CLI, coming from mac classic background,and the sheer bloated variety of the online help and man pages has driven me to nutso land and back, and not having a working printer at the moment makes it doubly hard. It's nigh on impossible to make heads nor sense of anything when every single bleeding sentence has 18 acronyms you have to go look up and memorize to go forward. One-step-at-a-time works better for old dogs like me in the new-tricks department, thankew very much. Any sort of "dummies" book is appreciated. I've already got a lot more than 24 hours into it, with zip results of any practical nature other than becoming more confused. Thanks! I'm gonna order it!

  65. check out camelbones... by zonker · · Score: 0

    if you are a perl guru and are interested in getting into osx programming, check out camelbones...

    http://camelbones.sourceforge.net/

  66. Agreed by Nailer · · Score: 2

    I've reviewed a small amount (say, thirty) Linux / Unix / and (a couple of) Windows books for an Australian computer magazine (APC).

    As a rule, if a book has more than two authors and is more than four hundred pages long, its quality is generally poor. This is because such titles - eg, most of the Unleashed series - take content from several diffferent authors, but don't maintain consistent style of build a solid learning path. One fellow explains the /etc/passwd file, then another fellow explaining NIS does a longer version of the same explanantion using a different analogy, rather than building on what the audience already knew. The change is style and analogies is often confusing for those new to the platform.

    I'm not saying all huge books are like this, but because of their nature they're more than likely to need a good editor to make all the disparate content a little more seamless, and because most are churned out like nobodies' business they rarely get this attention.

    Other examples of why big books are often poorer includes the 1400 page Upgrading and Repairing PCs compared to the 700 page O'Reilly's PC Hardware in a Nutshell. Upgrading and Repairing loves including charts of the details about every PC product made by every manufacturer since the edition was published. This information is generally out of date, but th books publishers tell you you can fidn newer information onlien at the oublishers web site. Well, er, actually, I can find it at any web site. PC Hardware in a Nutshell is a lot mroe concise but contains most of the useful information. What it lacks in out-of-date charts it makes up in providing users with real-world experience and facts-supported opinion by the two authors - eg, they'll tell you that HP don't often release or support newer firmware for the CD drives they rebrand, so it might be best to avoid HP gear.

    Another famously bad exampel of a large book is John Chirillo's Hack Attacks Encylopaedia. Its ~1500 pages (IIRC) of mainly unedited text files from outdated h4x0r tools, with a chapter by John at the start. It disgusts me that a) he has the nerve to call himself the authro of the title when he's clearly the edit, and a lazy one at that b) that this is a so called premium security title and is charged accordingly.

  67. UNIX guys like thick COCKS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Yes, it's true. UNIX guys like thick cocks, not books. It's a typo from the review.

  68. Hold up your Karma Torch, it's time to burn by Tokerat · · Score: 2

    W00t! LOLZZZ

    --
    CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
  69. This is exactly what is wrong with /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Morons like this who *think* they know everything. Most of the "techies" on this board can't even write proper English.

  70. Re:RTFM? 622 page maual by rampant+mac · · Score: 1
    Hello! His problem was "told by a friend in the know that my issue was more of a mac gui thing." How does that deal with Unix? That's why the admin guide was suggested.

    There's "Unix for Dummies" if he needs Unix help.

    --
    I like big butts and I cannot lie.
  71. MacOS X Animals by staplin · · Score: 2

    In addition to having already used the platypus for another title, O'Reilly is following a pattern of using various dogs for the MacOS X titles (Learning Cocoa, Learning Carbon, etc).

  72. the os under the desktop.. what abt vice versa ? by katalyst · · Score: 1

    This book seems to be aimed at exploring the OS under the smooth MacOS. How do u think a book on the smooth Desktop over the roughedged Linux would be recieved ? The whole Linux community seems to be shifting to the Linux Desktop.... Lindows , Lycoris (yet to become stable) . large releases like RedHat8 , Suse 8.1 and Mandrake too are moving towards the desktop. Next up UnitedLinux. How about some books on this ? Are we going to have some standardization done ?

    --
    |/________
    |\A|ALYS|