Hard Drives Preloaded With GNU-Darwin

proclus writes "A 40 gig Maxtor 3.5 inch, ATA/EIDE hard drive ready to go with GNU-Darwin OS pre-installed, plus GNU-Darwin Office, plus a full ports tree and select distfiles. This bundle includes Darwin-6.0.2, GNOME desktop, AbiWord, PyMOL, The GIMP, gdFortran, parallel computing, and much more. A triple CDR set is also included. Available now for ppc and x86 computers. The PPC version includes OpenOffice-1.0.1 and Mozilla-1.0. Compatibility is as specified for our OS installer CDs. Check out our updated ordering web page. (Mirror one mirror two.) You want it."

Comments

seems pretty pointless

[g4dget]

Installing a 40gig hard drive is supposed to be less work than installing GNU Darwin from an installer CD? The only thing that suggests to me is that the GNU Darwin installer CD needs work.

There is some use for disk-based OS distributions: eventually, external USB2.0/FireWire drives may become a reasonable choice. You plug them in and boot from them, and you get your complete environment. However, unfortunately, most BIOSes don't support that yet, so the best you could do right now is to use a DOS or Windows chain loader.

Re:No faq, no real info

[lvdrproject]

Actually, Apple did do that.

As for "desktop-on-top-of-unix"... if you meant by that that it comes with the Aqua GUI, i don't believe it does. That's proprietary, if i'm not mistaken.

I actually tried installing Darwin 6.0 on a laptop i got lying around here, a few weeks back. But, because the disc wouldn't boot (i made the mistake of using WinRAR to unzip and un-ISO the image), i can't really offer anything more specific about Darwin. I believe other people on Slashdot, however, are indeed running it (for x86, that is).

For all intents and purposes, it's just a BSD distro, i guess.

:Lav

Should better be done by hardisk manufacturer

[Joseph Lam]

Instead it will be a good idea if IBM, Maxtor, WD, etc...are distributing their hd with free OS preloaded. The volume will be huge!

Also, the large capacity of current HD will allow preloading a couple of free OSes together.

A Slight Discrepancy...

[whiteranger99x]

It might be my imagination,but doesn't the $250 price tag strike anyone as being ludicrous???

I mean, looking at pricewatch, a similar 40GB Maxtor HD costs around $70-$80 (give or take, street value)

And supposedly, the 3 disc set of Darwin costs $15 per disc...how does that equate to $250???

Re:Timothy - why is this news?

[TracerJPN_USMC]

Why is this not newsworthy? Last time I check, this was news for nerds. I haven't seem somebody doing this before, maybe it is stupid or pointless, but it is still a new and different concept. What other group of people would this apply to better? Maybe it doesn't apply to you specificaly, but who is to say it wouldn't appeal to somebody on this site. More drunk ramblings.. need mroe beer.

BSD^H^H^HHurd is Dying

[RAMMS EIN]

So let me see what we have here...the GNU system running on Darwin? And Darwin is Mach based? So what's that other GNU/Mach system again? Ehmm...GNU/Hurd, that's it. I love microkernels, and I love Mach, and I would liked to have seen GNU Hurd thrive, but it seems there really isn't much reason for it to survive now. Linux currently works a lot better (and has for a long time), and if you want a Mach based system, you can get Darwin, which is more stable, backed by a computer giant, and runs on more hardware. Or am I wrong here?

GPL-purists might argue that the APSL is not a Free license. This brings up a very interesting argument. [puts on flame protection suit] Apple's use of Mach illustrates the core of the liberal (BSD, MIT, public domain, etc.) licenses vs. GPL issue. Apple could use Mach as a base for their own non-Free product because it wasn't copylefted. GNU hard-liners will see this as a Bad Thing because the hard work of the Mach-developers is now being used in a non-Free product. On the flip side, this move keeps Mach alive, and will probably benefit Free Mach implementations as well. Increased interest can result in more developers for those implementations, and software developed for Apple's kernel might also be easier to port to other Mach-based systems than, say, software developed for Linux or the NT kernel. Plus the contributors to the Mach kernel Apple used can be proud that their work is featured in a product of a renowed company, and used by millions of people every day.

Re:BSD^H^H^HHurd is Dying

[RAMMS EIN]

``They are very different systems (personally, I think all of the current crop of kernels, including Darwin, have serious design problems).''
Agreed. I think if I were to hack on an existing microkernel today, I would probably go for VSTa rather than Mach.

``The phrase "purism" suggests that you think that this is some irrelevant ideological issue.''
Sorry for giving you the wrong impression, then. I don't think the issues are unimportant at all. I just don't agree with those who want everything to be GPLed (those I call GPL-purists). I understand companies' hesitation to release their source code, especially under something as irrevocable as the GPL. If they can't figure out a viable business model with that, they shouldn't do it. Of course it would be nice for us hackers to be able to Use the Source (WOW), and it might be better for the world, but that's not what drives companies in a capitalist environment.

What's the point?

[tequesta]

Hi,

this is a really honest question. Why would anyone want a GNU/Darwin system? OS X is a Unix (arguably the one that is the nicest to use), and the few of tools it lacks can be gotten with Fink. And if you really really don't want anything non-free, get FreeBSD. Where is the need for any effort on Darwin? I'd really like to know.

And please don't tell me "it's so Apple can port Aqua to x86". You can't honestly believe that's going to happen.

Maybe ;-)

[RAMMS EIN]

This is an attempt to clarify some issues. Correct me if I'm wrong, Darwin's histroy is complicated and I might be off here and there. In my opinion, the question if GNU-Darwin is Apple Darwin or not is the mirror image of asking if Linux with BSD toolchain instead of GNU toolchain is Linux or not. Darwin is an operating system developed by Apple, which serves as a basis for OS X.

Apple's Darwin distribution is a BSD flavor, with a kernel based on CMU Mach, and most of the utilities taken from FreeBSD. It is released under the APSL.

GNU-Darwin is a distribution of Darwin with some favorite GNU software ported to it, as well as the FreeBSD ports tree. It is not Free Software, as the Darwin part is APSL, and thus considered non-free by the FSF. Despite its name, its not a GNU package either. Nor is it GNU/Darwin, as that would imply that it is the GNU system on a Darwin kernel; AFAIK GNU-Darwin is a BSD system.

I don't know anything about OpenDarwin and am too lazy to go find out right now. Hopefully I have managed to enlightened some of you who were wondering what all this is.

WTF

[lvdrproject]

. . .

Nobody is forcing anything on you, jackass. It's not like they're saying "Hey, you can't buy a hard drive without Darwin". Rather, they're saying "Hey, if you're interested in using Darwin as your operating system, here's a hard drive pre-loaded with the system; you don't have to download any CDs or mess with the installation, it's all right there for you".

I don't know what the Hell your deal is with "that Devil mascot". It's a cartoon devil. If you're implying some sort of Christian, anti-Satan, whatever... that's pretty retarded. It's a CARTOON.

There is no "bad marketing". This stems from your incorrect belief that they are forcing you to use Darwin. This is merely an attempt at getting people to try Darwin in the easiest possible way. Darwin is FREE; if you did purchase one of these hard drives and decided that you did not like Darwin, you would be more than able to format the Hell out of it. You would not lose a single penny; you would simply have yourself a new hard drive.

:Lav

PS: The mascot for Darwin isn't actually a devil (or daemon, as BSD people seem to prefer). The devil is the mascot of BSD. Darwin, while built on BSD, is not exactly BSD. Rather, Darwin's mascot is Hexley the platypus (though he does where a devil costume).

Re:HURD != Darwin

[RAMMS EIN]

From the acronym expansion, I would think you have it backwards. HURD is short for Hird of Unix Running Daemons, which suggests to me that it is indeed Unix inspired. The part that isn't Unix is _Mach_, the microkernel that Darwin and HURD (and NEXTSTEP and Lites) are based on. As I see it HURD could (theoretically) run concurrently with (for example) a win32-compatible personality, which is _not_ the same as running that personality under HURD; both HURD and the win32 personality run as servers under Mach.

You are right in saying that HURD and Darwin aren't equivalent. HURD is equivalent to a bare Unix kernel (like Linux without GNU), whereas Darwin is a full operating system distribution (like any BSD flavor, and like GNU/Linux).

Gnu-Darwin not freindly to fink

[goombah99]

I tried the installing the gnu-darwin package on mac os X and had to remove it. The main problems with it are.

2)Unlike fink which stays out of the way of the operating system direcories like /bin and so forth. This think has all the worst chararistics of unix installs, spraying its files everywhere wiht no warning mechanisms, road maps, and no unistalls.

3) The installation interface and its dependency checking is only for the advnaced user, unless you want to just install it all. Then watch-out. Updating or selectively updating or patching is a nioghtmare in my opinion--wehn compared with FINK

I suspect this last property is the reason they are offering (forcing) people to get the whole install pre-done.

Fink is vastly superior in user experience and now in coverage of useful programs. The fink update experiece is a dream compared to Gnu-darwin. Gnu-darwin is a relic of how not to do things given the fresh start in apple unix.

On the otherhand, I'm being unfair here. Unlike FINK, Gnu-darwin has another agenda. Gnu-darwin is not trying to be compatible with the OSX way of doing things. It is not even trying to be sybmiotic as FINK is. instead GNU darwin is trying to replace OSX. And to do so it needs to put files where it thinks they belong. This does not excuse the crudeness of the delivery and update mechanisms. But if you are going to install the WHOLE distribution as you probably would od if you are using it as an OSX replacement, then it is perhaps not so bad.