Slashdot Mirror
Apple and Linux Beneficial to Each Other?
viewstyle writes "There is an interesting commentary on eWEEK discussing the 'synergies' between Apple and Linux after visiting LinuxWorld. It makes a good point that advancement of Linux is good for Mac OS X and vice versa, because of the ease of porting across the platforms (soon to get easier with the X11 on Mac OS X)." Next thing you know, most of the Slashdot editors and programmers will be using Macs ...
>Next thing you know, most of the Slashdot editors and programmers will be using Macs ...
:)
But this is already happening. Cmdr Taco and Hemos both have Mac laptops, and from what I read online on their pages/blogs, they are their main machines these days!
I am thinking of buying a 12" Powerbook for myself. I have many PCs over here (8+) and an old G4 machine. But I need a new laptop, and that 12" powerbook does look good.
pronounced "10-11" by Steve Jobs!
If they can work towards an open file format system to replace MS office, they could chip away @ the MS desktop market.
I attended Jeff Bates's talk at linux.conf.au where he gave his presentation using OS X. The only presenter all week who dared to use a non-Linux platform.
Not only Linux wins, but all platforms capable of running KDE win. Huzzah.
I think care needs to be taken around Apple.
While they are producing some good stuff now (lets not talk about the past will we) they are a commercial company. That much won't change any time soon
As such their "priorities" so to speak are different and opposed to those of open source, linux, and software.
We could end up just feeding apple a lot in the way of open source projects, all up and dancing in a hoohaa of joy.
What happens when apple change their mind? Suddenly they're not so supportive of OSS. The commercial climate is fickle, and it WILL change
I'm waiting for Apple to get a version of Quicktime for Linux.
I'm sure Apple gets a lot of aid from the community (not just Linux), but what do we see in return? Sure we got darwin (But it's horribly outdated) and where is the updates for freebsd?!
... as microsoft wont share it with us.
Also we give them X11 support but would they ever give us Aqua support? I dont think so. Apple is in it for money, as long as they get money they'd be happy, they wont share it with us
Tell me in what ways Apple has been beneficial to the opensource movement (not just Linux).
X has been available on OS X for about a year. With XDarwin and OroborOSX it's about as perfectly integrated as it can get. Most X programs will compile just fine (and the ones that don't more often than not the problem is with the configure scripts.. rewrite the makefile and it works) I use gvim as my text editor and other X programs with relative frequency. OS X really is the best of both worlds IMO.
Penguins like apples. They grow quite well in Antarctica.
So much is the same between them!
Personal Web Sharing is Apache. Windows File Sharing is Samba. Printer Sharing is cups. The firewall is a default deny ipfw setup. OS X is OS X's killer app.
Hope we keep up the good relations, too. Should be a bright future if it's full of Linux and Mac boxen.
Don't think that a small group of dedicated individuals can't change the world. it's the only thing that ever has.
It's funny, I've used Macs since I was a young'n in 1984, and I've used Linux since kernel 0.99. I've never used anything else, except for a couple years in college using Windows and Sun on and off.
;-).
Linux has power and flexibility, and the Mac always "just worked". Sometimes I was annoyed that Macs were so closed, and sometimes I was annoyed at the lack of polish on Linux. Between the two I could do anything.
It's amazing, almost *surreal*, that Unix and Mac merged together in Mac OS X. It's truly the best of both worlds.
Of course, I'm still wary of "depending" on Mac software, because of the proprietary lock-in and other evil stuff that companies do. But Apple's continual underdog status has been keeping them in check.
I look forward to more cool stuff from Apple...just getting ready to invest in a 12" powerbook (Mac #8 in my life) and a new Linux-based mini-itx PC to build a home gateway (Linux box #4).
Life is good (well, computer-wise
if someone plugged the OS X interface on top of Linux. man oh man that interface is snappy.
1) the stability of linux
2) the price-point of linux
3) the beauty of the Aqua interface
there'd be no reason to ever own a windows machine again.
smd4985
they are just as expensive as new pcs these days. if you look at the price of a new non mac notebook, say a ibm thinkpad, you'll pay no less than $1600. on the other hand you can buy the lowest end 12" powerbook for $999
I write code.
I was thinking the same thing then checked out the $ situation of desktop G4 systems at the apple store and....wow. the base system - 1GHz proc - is only around $1500 - not bad if you ask me.
Apple's hardware has always been a step or more ahead of everyone else, and linux could benefit a great deal if it could take full advantage of it. When the G4s came out, they slammed all the x86s against the wall. Of course, there's always the problem with explaining clock speed vs. flops, so Apple needs to do some marketing about that to educate people.
The equivalent of tux racer for the mac. apple sleder.
I've seen all of you saying 'it doesn't matter', but it does.
From a purely technical standpoint, it might not matter. From a 'how things look to the outside world', it matters a lot. If a company as large as Apple was to have a change of heart, it would be as detrmental to the *idea* of open source to the same extent that Apple support open source has been a positive factor. You can't have it both ways.
creation science book
i just hit the refresh button after playing simcity 4 for about 8 hours (making sure to walk around the room every hour to prevent clotting) and BAM! i see a headline similar to the hilarious headlines generated by simcity 4.
i immediately rubbed my eyes and decided that it may be time to do something else for a while...
signatures are for fools with hands
If you want to write an application for osX and you used X11, porting to linux would be much much easier.. So more applications will hopefully make there way from macos x to linux. I don't think many mac programs are X11, but if you wanted to program cross platfrom developers should start thinking about using it.
/GNU has helped make OSX much better with fink (OSX version of debian app-get) which gives mac osX users easy access to install a lot of gnu software. I got perl/ ImageMagik and xemacs running on my osX box. Its a great thing.
Linux
The fact that gcc is the standard OSX compiler doesn't hurt either.
I've been running both OS X & Linux boxes at home for the last 10 months. I can and do use both hardware and software as common elements, from drives & PCI cards to mail, music, browser and office apps, etc.
For me, these boxes are extensions of each other, not competitors, and I've come to think of them as one environment.
MySQL on one...MP3s and image db's on the other. Apache and PHP on both...DVD's play on both... TV on one...DVD authoring on the other. It continues to delight me that I can expand and build as they both mature. This effort started out as an experiment. Now, I wouldn't consider just running one box or one system.
The beat goes on.
though, not all penquins live in there. though it's true that there are penquins on the cold continent, there are also warm weather penquins in south america, and south africa. natively however, no penquins make their homes in north america (unless i misread my source)
I write code.
if they use Safari, they could even get spell checking for free thanks to cocoa.. Now if only there were support for 'duplicate story' checking..
First off, just to clear this up...
soon to get easier with the X11 on Max OS X
X has been on X for quite some time. You could fink it if you wanted, or, if you want something even easier, you could XonX it or xdarwin it.
What's new, of course, is Apple's X11. That Apple would Aquafy X11 is really a great step forward, and hopefully means that -- and this is key -- Apple will start shipping Macs with X11 preinstalled.
Just as OS X's built in Java Virtual Machine makes OS X a first-rate Java deployment platform as Java apps look and act native without a single end user consideration about VMs, soon OS X could be a first-rate, well-integrated client-side deployment platform for open source software. Most importantly, this will continue to add new developers to open source movements, and that can't be bad. Even if Apple doesn't share everything they do, the fact that you'll have people used to making client-side apps increasingly contributing to open source projects is a great thing.
Not to mention that I've been impressed with what Apple's give back to the oss community, even though they technically often have no reason at all to do so. They've made Darwin open source, and have worked with the BSDs to share code that they have no pressing legal reason making them do so. Safari's updates to KHTML continue to be checked back in to the Konquerer source code by this paid Apple employee, which is another great move.
The only way I see Apple's new love of oss possibly being a bad thing is that Apple tends to hire the best away from open source projects and slap them onto Apple-first ones. Though this is great in that these people feel connected to the oss community, it has to shift their attention away from Linux and other F/free *NIXes a bit.
But more developers, especially good client-app developers, is a good thing, and having Apple return their contributions to the community is icing on the cake.
It's all 0s and 1s. Or it's not.
As I posted in another Mac article,
:
Here's what I'd like to see
User Mode Linux under OSX That would be interesting. Running a complete Linux distribution as a user process under OSX.
Based on the comments from the linked exchange above, Jeff Dike (UML developer) thinks it can be done.
one of the best *nix apps sights out there:
http://fink.sourceforge.net
I'm currently running windows maker on top of aqua
kiyote
Yeah, good point. Because we all know IT geeks, sysadmins, software engineers, etc. -- you know, your average Slashdot reader -- are dirt poor.
--- Why yes, I am the webmaster of Microsuck.com
rofl, yes yes, good point. I'd even go so far as to guess that most if *us* are scrounging university dial up accts and making the most of the very limited free dial ups still left. Taking whatever hand me down box we can get our hands on.
... While you _can_ run X11 rootless, it's only a little bit better interface-wise than Classic. Apple really should provide a wrapper to Quartz/Aqua which'd include several widget sets as well as straight X.. I'd still use X, if only so I can execute stuff like 'metatool' on my laptop, but as far as porting apps goes it's not going to be terribly convincing.. Of course, if Apple integrated X11 to the point where you didn't run all X apps in the same memory/app space, it might be close enough for art..
Granted, Qt is available now fully-supported and there's work on gtk, but there's plenty of other widgetsets and frameworks (particularly Motif) that'd be great to have ported..
Gaywads, Dorkwads Sign Historic Wad Accord
Enemy of Enemy = good friend :]
And twins?
And I love you too.
Here's to love songs!
Key parts of OS X are still proprietary. Until they are free (or at least open), I still consider Apple an enemy. However, since we have a common stronger enemy, Microsoft, I'm willing to work together for now.
Luke-Jr
You are obviously a hacker. As long as Linux is the only OS you load on it, go for it, but please don't post the "Mac hardware is expensive" bullshit again. It's been done before and it's tedious for the rest of us.
If Linux is so good and stable and free, why do Slashdot Editors want to run it on overpriced of hardware like a Mac when you can run it on an equivalent featured/powered PC for hundreds (or thousands) less? Don't confuse distain of MS-Windows with a lack of appreciation for cost effective hardware. Remember, once Windows is gone, its just hardware waiting to run an O/S.
I'm scared of world leaders who think locally and act globally.
I brought home my Ti OS X PowerBook from work one day. My Solaris/Linux loving spouse immediately downloaded OroborX (sp?), turned on the wireless networking, fired up iTunes and accessed remote Xterm apps for his job. I have asked him to stop greeting me at the door with "Hi Honey! Did you bring your PowerBook?", as it makes me feel he loves me only for my laptop.
Negotiations are currently underway for his own PowerBook, so that I might eventually recover mine.
bluesangria
If together the two groups and help eachother out, that seems wonderful to me. Not every business in the same market has to be working to destroy all others. Often times a symbiotic relationship will be more beneficial than a destructive one.
At this point they have 90% of the market to shoot for. There's plenty of room for both to grow together while taking most of their customers away from MS.
More marketshare means more apps. It also means that technologies like OpenGL just might survive and keey DirectX from taking over the gaming world.
Just think, standards that are standard. Programs designed to run on multiple platforms. Sharing ideas rather than secreting them away.
Sounds good to me.
Macs are not popular with the linux crowd? I admit that before OS X I wasn't that impressed with apple's offerings, but when jaguar came out this summer, I paid a visit to the local mac dealership. I tested out the command line for hours at the store; Everything that I would come to expect from any UNIX is there. I felt at home immediatly. Then I thought: photoshop, dreamweaver, flash on a UNIX machine? And its so pretty. I had to have one. So I bought a little iBook ...and six months later, I can say that I am not looking back.
Next thing you know, most of the Slashdot editors and programmers will be using Macs.
+1, Funny.
With them both having their roots in *nix it would be quite obivous, theyre practically cousins.
Despite what the average Troll on either side says, both do complement each other well. And when you mention Open Source to an Apple developer they light up, they truly do seem very pleased about having Linux/Open Source thriving.
But I am disappointed that Quicktime hasn't been released to Linux as a native app and iTunes still doesn't encode in Ogg yet.
StarTux
you can buy the lowest end 12" powerbook for $999
:)
of course you mean that the 12" iBook is $999. The 12" PowerBook start at $1799.
"However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation."
1. I believe you can add GPL on top of BSD license.
2. Apple used the BSD operating system , not the BSD license (or did they use both?).
Luke-Jr
Since OSX , Mac OS has ben based on BSD. Thus porting between both is (should be) somewhat easy. Now with the XServer over OSX it will be even easyer!
But the interesting thing here is if MacOSX apps could be ported to linux?
Yay!, first post...
C-x C-c
I always knew that penguins prefer to eat small and soft fishes than Apples
getSexySig();
If this is as good at it gets I'm in deep trouble. One of the synergies between Mac OS X and Linux is that Matlab is available for the Mac again, after Mathworks had previously announced that would no longer release on the Mac platfrom. Very good news for me, however, Matlab for Mac OS X uses XDarwin and OroborOSX, and it's incredibly buggy. (I am using Simulink, which relies heavily on OroborOSX.)
What kinds of bugs you ask? I can't always navigate through the fields in parameter boxes (one button mac mouse and the key combos just don't do it). I can't use the letters 'f' or 'd' in comments when OroborOSX isn't in the mood (well, there are 24 other letters in the alphabet). Matlab crashes reliably if I choose "cancel" instead of "save" with the "save as" command (in a Simulink model).
And sometimes when Matlab crashes, XDarwin doesn't shut down completely which prevents me from being able to reboot from the system on my internal hard drive -- I have to reboot from an external hard drive and then restart. It happened (again) yesterday while I was working at a coffeeshop.
I'm not sure who's to blame here, and I'm really pleased that Matlab is available, but the integration of these various programs still has a long way to go.
blog-O-rama (more raving & ranting about my experiences with OS X, etc. etc.)
foldplay your photos won't know what hit them.
Don't fall into the trap of thinking too small. An hour with Project Builder and even a moderately experienced programmer could whip up a native Cocoa UI that would plug right into Slashdot's MySQL back-end, using libmysqlclient. Spell-checking for free, sure. Duplicate story checking would be a small matter of SQL programming. It wouldn't be perfect, but you could get pretty close.
I write in my journal
You'll still need decent hardware (128MB, >300Mhz) to fully appreciate Nautilus, but the same can be said about running Mac OS X.
Gnome is the closest living relative to NeXT/OpenStep or OS/2 Warp which both were truly wonderful environments but steamrolled into obscurity by the MS monopoly. Gnome and Linux are GPL'd so they can't be steamrolled off the market!
Gnome's the choice for a poor man since it runs on the commodity-priced x86 platform. Mac OS X is good value on Apple's reasonably-priced 'Books though.
Gnome's the choice for a free man since it allows the user to decide when to upgrade (and do it for free if desired) and on which iron to run it. Mac OS X, while nice, leaves the user at the mercy of Apple's whims. I talk from experience; Mac OS X won't run on my (back then) expensive PowerMac despite Apple's promises at the time.
Under Gnome-on-Linux users can run practically any type of apps, including classic Mac apps under Mac-on-Linux or Windows apps under WINE (only recommended as last resort IMO, won't work under PowerPC yet). Some KDE apps are truly great and they also run natively (it's all about the LIBS, not the windowmanager...). X, Java, console, emulators... it's all available.
PS. I'd buy one of those new 20" Apple displays if they came with a standard interface (namely DVI) instead of the proprietary ADC. I still want to see them around *innovating*, but not on their terms and at my expense...
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
I laughed when I saw this story because just now I was trying to understand Apple's relationship with Linux regarding Quicktime. I complained earlier today to the U.S. Mint because of this page, which is a sublte advertisement for the Microsoft Media Player. WMP has significant proprietary features, and just linking to Microsoft as the sole standard implies something.
... I've written several emails to other government sites that sport the infernal "best viewed with Internet Explorer" links. I doubt I can take credit, but my state of Virginia dropped the MSIE tags. (They originally wrote back explaining, "Frontpage told us to say that." :)
... why was I hanging out at the U.S. Mint site? My 6 y.o. thinks the state quarter program is very cool, and the Mint even has a whole kids' site built around the damn things. I'm getting tired of state factoids, but am impressed by the savvy of the Mint. We've already calculated how much the Mint would make if everyone in the U.S. took a complete set of commemorative quarters out of circulation.
The immediate licensing problem in WMP may simply be a side effect of DRM, but of course Microsoft intends to use WMP as a wedge to push its own standards into what is now fairly generic commerce -- as it did with MSIE. I told the rep at the U.S. Mint (who knows if anyone will care) that it was unseemly for the government to tacitly endorse a private company by offering just one format, even providing a link to the company's site to get the player, especially where across town the government just recently busted Microsoft for monopoly abuse.
Anyway, Apple doesn't make a QT player for Linux (right?) but appears supportive of it (right?), and there are options to access QT content from *nix. Meanwhile, Microsoft's antagonism towards GPL is very well known, and may appear over WMP. Of course, generic MPEG does streaming, which QT plugins will play. (Also, there's Real, yech.) Maybe this is most another Windows versus Macintosh struggle, but I'd hate to see the government take sides, and I don't trust MS.
On standards and compatibility
BTW
1. I believe you can add GPL on top of BSD license.
You can add whatever you want on top of code that has been BSD-licensed.
2. Apple used the BSD operating system , not the BSD license (or did they use both?).
Apple used the Mach microkernel and the FreeBSD userland with a little bit of NetBSD to make Darwin (the kernel for OS X). Darwin is considered a member of the BSD family. Much of the code they used to make Darwin was BSD licensed, but there were also some GNU tools like gcc. The Darwin kernel is released under the Apple Public Source License.
The article makes a lot of good points, especially the fact that a lot of Linux users are picking up Apple portables. As a longtime Mac user I noticed this trend early last year on all the Mac boards I frequent. More and more Linux users were popping up talking not about how they "switched" but how they picked up an iBook to compliment their Linux desktop. The most common reasons for doing so seemed to be a combination of the stylish design of Apple's portable line, the slick GUI mixed with the familiar CLI and of course the long battery life.
:)
On the contrary, the adoption of OS X on the desktop by Linux users seems quite a bit lower in my experience. Perhaps this is a testament to the fact that Apple is losing the edge in price/performance in the desktop market (even among its own users) and that it's just so much geekier to build your own box.
Either way I agree that both systems compliment one another quite nicely. Then again, as a web developer I produce my sites on OS X, test them on XP and host them on Linux boxes so in my opinion all the OSes have something good to offer.
DigiSquid Design.
I could build an x86 box with the same power for 1/4 of the price.
Dual processors? DDR RAM? ATI Radeon 9000 (or GeForce 4 Ti) graphics? Audio I/O? Gigabit Ethernet? FireWire 800 and FireWire 400? DVD-RW burner? Built-in 802.11g and Bluetooth?
Maybe you could build a machine like that for $500. But it wouldn't be easy, no sir.
I write in my journal
the day the editors all move to macs will be the day the editors fix the slashcode to remove dupes being posted! Vote CoyboyNeal for president.
Of course, if Apple integrated X11 to the point where you didn't run all X apps in the same memory/app space, it might be close enough for art..
what the...
In classic, the apps run as a single process (TruBlueEnv). If one app in classic misbehaves, it could bring down all of classic.. With X11.app, Xquartz is a separate process. xterm is a seperate process. xemacs is a seperate process.
Me too.
I also think its great when I can't figure out a problem "Mac-style" and I am able to jump to the terminal to solve my problem "Unix-style"
"However," replied the universe, "The fact has not created in me A sense of obligation."
Geee... uuuu... aaiiee? Oooh, those old thigngs. You pick and skin them yourself, doogan.
Banaaaana!
Back in the day they used to fly a Jolly Roger (skull and crossbones) flag over corporate headquarters.
They basically ripped off Xerox Parc's windowing system and mouse interface ideas.
Don't turn your back on these guys for a second. This goes for 85% of the large businesses, for that matter. I have seen alot of business people's mouths moving and making sounds like "we want what is best for the community", while their actions say "profits at all cost - community be damned". The other 15% are somewhere in the middle; catch them on a good day...
While I may end up in a MAC (due to certain sadistic game makers failing to support open standards like OpenGL on Linux) - I will always have a Lintel box around for that warm fuzzy I get from compiling source code that I have lovingly massaged.
Lodragan Draoidh
The more you explain it, the more I don't understand it. - Mark Twain
[snip]
1) the stability of linux
2) the price-point of linux
3) the beauty of the Aqua interface
there'd be no reason to ever own a windows machine again.
You're right, and Apple knows it. It'll never happen, because Apple also knows that there'd be no reason to ever own an Apple machine again[1].
This would be like OSX on ix86: it could be the death of Apple. You might think that there's a way for them to do it safely, but I doubt that the big cheeses at Apple agree strongly enough to gamble their company on it.
[1] Yes, many Apple loyalists would still buy Apple for the nifty hardware and low-hassle experience. They certainly wouldn't get any NEW customers this way; people who were interested in a do-it-yourself solution would put this on non -Apple hardware. It wouldn't be cheap, but neither is an Apple.
See what I've been reading.
So few people understand this - if there were Mac clones there would, in short order, be nothing left of interest in the platform. The key to Apple's role in the industry is that they are the last vertically integrated, "make-the-whole-widget," software-plus-OS company around selling desktop machines. That enables them to do things and be things that give them the unique place in the marketplace. Without that unique place there'd be nothing left of them.
Of course, the vertical integration is at once the best thing and the worst thing about Apple. But clearly without it they'd be entirely forgettable and irrelevant.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
Get and Aqua theme for enlightenment. I don't know what feautres you want, but you get the pretty stoplight buttons and clean interface.
... that IBM can't market anything. Where I work, we have this big black computer sitting in the middle of the computer room, that cost several thousand dollars, and has a support contract that probably costs several thousand more annually. It has IBM stamped on the side.
And have you used any of their modern laptops? The best description that I have for when I got to play with an IBM Thinkpad 240 for a week is 'precision'. The hardware felt like a precision piece of equipment. Everything had tight tolerances, the tactile feel of the unit was superb, and the machine just felt sexy. The sleek black case was both soft and firm at the same time, a cool trick of ABS plastic, yet didn't feel too weak or brittle to take on the road.
If IBM still made a laptop in that small of a form factor (its footprint was smaller than a piece of letter paper), I'd have one. The American market doesn't seem to want small machines right now, though.
Oh, one more thing, there was driver support for this machine (and many of the other brand new thinkpads) for as far back as Windows 95 and OS/2 Warp, and as far forward as Windows XP. Drivers that work properly, not half-assed drivers like Compaq and other large companies provide for products they're no longer making money on.
You can also still downloadd support files for machines as old as the original 8088.
If I need some really expensive piece of equipment, IBM is definitely on the list for a vendor.
IBM had PL/1, with syntax worse than JOSS,
And everywhere the language went, it was a total loss...
Yeah, it's been a long time since the horrid M$ office interface has bothered me. Auto-indent, auto -listing, auto-spelling, and all those other nasty auto-make your work take forever and look horrible stuff are fading from memory. That's because it has been about 8 months since I learned how to wade through the forrest of tabs required to turn those "features" off, and four months since I've been forced to use Office. I don't even want to think about what a terrible bug ridden easy to crash, no transaction "database" access was. Excell was OK, but the data format, like all M$ junk, kept changing and it's very dificult to get your work back out. It's good to be free of that.
Please, please, please keep that junk away from me and do not design interfaces like that. Ah the beauty of not seeing red and green squigly underlines beneath the repeated please above. When I need to spell check, I will. When I need a typesetter, I'll get one. When I want to hurt someone, I'll give them Word. There are so many superior free alternative, you have to wonder why people use Office.
What do the Apple people use these days, I wonder. I remember filemaker Pro was a very nice database. I can only imagine they had reasonable word processors and what not. M$ did not poison them too much when they bought so much of them in the deapest darkest days of Pepsi style Apple ruid, did they?
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
For 39 bucks from the Apple store you can buy an ADC to DVI adpater. If you're going to spend 2k on a display, you would think you'd do a little research first, eh?
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
An AC wrote:
:-)
> w00t first post
Only for values of "w00t first" >= 100.
> Who uses apple and linux
Apple has about 25 million users (and growing). In its first two months, OS X actually outsold Windows 2000.
As for Linux, whole governments are either using or investigating using it. IBM sells Linux mainframes to banks and big corporations. Linux has a sizable market-share on the server side, a market that Microsoft does not have a monopoly in.
> This is Bill's world. Get used to it.
At the rate he is driving his users away (Licensing 6, the evil feature formerly known as Palladium, etc.), it won't be Bill's world for much longer.
"Your way of thinking is completely different from mine!"
Mac user Shinoda to PC user Katagiri, "Godzilla 2000 Millennium" (Japanese version)
(From the world's biggest switch commercial, starring Apple's biggest fan: Godzilla!)
Since Mac (OSX) runs Unix based now, the incompatabilities have been reduced greatly. While Mac still relies on proprietary hardware, some would argue that's a strength, not a weakness. Personally I like being able to customize what parts go in my machine, but on a Mac, you never have to worry about driver problems.
Microsoft Windows is the only operating system that isn't Unix based, and it will be their undoing. While technically Mac competes with Linux (from an economical standpoint), they're actually working together to pick away at Microsoft. If MS wants to stay in business, they had better go Unix-based too. I forsee the combined strength of the Unix-based operating systems eventually crushing MS.
But then again, that's just my 2 cents. (and a paperclip.)
You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
From another thread...
Bet you it won't run OS X.
I like big butts and I cannot lie.
Rob Malda (cmdrtaco), Jeff Bates(Hemos), and Chris Nandor(pudge) are all using Mac laptops at least part of the time these days. Who else among the slashdot crowd is sporting either a PowerBook and/or an iBook?
http://tinyurl.com/4ny52
In the mean time, why not use the machine? It's got X11, right? Can't you just ssh into the beast and export all the apps you want? DVD burning and all that singing and dancing, why not have it? Apple is getting better, who knows, one day they may be free.
Everything looks nice in window maker.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
Gnome is the closest living relative to NeXT/OpenStep or OS/2 Warp...
Can't say I follow this. OS X is the closest living relative to OpenStep. OS/2 Warp... Perhaps eCommStation? But that's barely alive, admittedly. Either way, I wouldn't liken GNOME to either of them. GNOME is a pretty close relative to Windows, as far as how the UI works.
That's not a troll or a dis. It's not my style (I prefer NeXTSTEP and the Newton OS as models of good UI), but a lot of people have grown up with Windows 9x/NT, so it's no surprise that the majority of the users who like GNOME share this background with the majority of GNOME developers. Having actually used OS/2, NeXTSTEP, OpenStep, Rhapsody, OS X 10.x, Windows and Linux+{GNOME, KDE} extensively, I think it's safe to say that GNOME works the most like Windows. I could go on and on why, but that probably be over kill.
That said, I must say I'm pretty impressed with GNOME in RedHat 8. A lot of people hate RH for it, but I think it's quite brilliant. As a person who switched from Linux to OpenStep four years ago and then to OS X in the last few years, I became pampered with the ease of use, and most importantly, the consistency provided in OpenStep and OS X. Not to mention the great feature that things usually "just work." I left Linux because it was so bloody consistent, from a GUI user's point of view.
I've had my fill of other modern distros as well. RH8 is far from perfect, but at the very least, it provides a taste of what potential GNOME and KDE holds, a pointer to the kind of consistency that distros, GNOME, and KDE should be working towards. I fear it won't get much better, considering that all too many Linux developers seems to think that appearance is what is worth copying from OS X, while the way things work- how they feel, seems to come from Windows or CDE. Bah.
Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
Or does my question not make sence? Darwin, Mach 3, BSD 4.4? What's the breakdown of Max OSX in regards to its technologies?
-
"You can download the source code for WebCore (1 MB) and JavaScriptCore (321 KB)."
I took that to mean, quite literally, they release the source code for the rendering engine. Could be all that crack i'm smoking though.
today is spelling optional day.
WebCore and JavaScriptCore are the glue code I am referring to. Read the descriptions on the page.
Unless Apple open sources Cocoa, I can't see how this is giving back to anybody but Apple.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
That's the sound of LONGtime Macintosh fan gloating ... in a nice way. :)
Without the rendering engine it is just a window that displays bytecode. I think the part they released is the most important part. The interface, which is all that's really left in a browser after you remove the rendering engine, is pretty much an afterthought, and is pretty standard from browser to browser (save a few gimmcky knick-knacks like a google search bar in the buttonbar... which can save you maybe 3 clicks over any other browser). The back, forward, stop, reload, etc. buttons are fairly standard.
today is spelling optional day.
Apparently you've not heard of GNUstep. GNUstep is an implementation of the OpenStep API and includes most of Mac OS X's extensions.
:)
The GUI builder is almost done (I am the pricipal developer of it).
Take a look at http://www.gnustep.org.
GJC
Gregory Casamento
## Chief Maintainer for GNUstep
Very true, penguins are native to everywhere in the southern hemisphere.
"Sic Semper Tyrannosaurus Rex."
The part they released is worthless, unless you are going to use KHTML under Cocoa.
Read the web page. It actually is very clear on this point.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Hell, the display I was talking about was just announced a couple of days ago so I demand some slack! :^)
:^)
Umm, the ADC (Apple-only) -> DVI (generic) adapter is only good for relatively recent Macheads who want to use commodity flatpanels.
Anyways, after having another look I found Apple selling a DVI -> ADC adapter for US$99.
All things considered that's not too much extra to pay for an added inconvenience - althought it also encourages Apple to keep to its proprietary ways - but now I (the potential outside-Apple-market customer, my Macs are pre-ADC) must somehow ensure that this extraneous adapter doesn't cause any added complications under X-windows. Not that I'd expect any from a straight digital conversion but I've learned to be cautious over the years.
PS. The new 20" Apple flatpanels are actually just $1299 instead of the 2k you're talking about... Is that an acceptable excuse for my lack of research?
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
I find it interesting how much Slashdot has love/hate relationships over different things. Take for example the war of words that went on with Slashdot about KDE. People where talking about how KDE programs broke from the true faith. There was flaimbaits about Troll Tech. And bashing of the QPL. Then discussion on "Project Harmony" to bring the community back together. And finally Troll Tech going GPL with Qt.
But now we have Apple with Aqua API and Carbon API. Apple has put their legal dogs on the Free Software and Open Source community time and time again. You would have thought that the legal "look-and-feel" wars would have ended when the courts got done with Lotus vs. Borland, but Apple is ready to show it can bully every little guy over look-and-feel all over again. In the past, we have worked towards compatiblity and portablity by cloning the API and look-and-feel. With OSI's Motif, we produced Lesstif that follows the same API and look-and-feel. When the license of Qt was in question, the Harmony project cloned the API and look-and-feel. Winelib makes porting Win32 apps easier because it clones the API and the look-and-feel. But, Apple has made it clear by drawing a line in the sand when it comes to both the API and the look-and-feel of Aqua and Carbon. Porting Aqua applications to an OS that doesn't have Aqua is non-trival. Porting Carbon applications to an OS that doesn't have Carbon is non-trival. And if we ever so slightly cross that line that Apple has drawn to try to make it easier in the long run to port application back then they will bully us again. Regardless of what percentage of modern KHTML is Apple contribution, I still see Apple as a bully and a leech. They do not play fair and it is by being a bully they hope to ensure that the MacOS X desktop becomes a superset of any other *nix desktop. Just like in a certain company's commerical about 1984, we are being told with lawyers that Aqua and Carbon can only be done one way from one company. If we continue the route that Apple being "friends" will lead us then we will see why 2004 will be like Orwell's 1984. We are now facing a much bigger threat than "QPL."
Yeah right. Next you'll be telling me that they use Linux!
(Sorry, a bit harsh of me, I suppose. I guess I thought everyone knew that everyone knew about the editors and their Macs.)
Boom Shanka
This means that when you run Konqueuer on KDE you will be enjoying the beta testing that thousands of MacOSX users have performed on Safari. This is what open source is about and this is what makes it powerful.
Go out and get sailing!
I said a living relative of Mac OS X... ;-)
Sorry for the unfunny joke; I actually kept up with GNUstep until a couple of years ago, always wishing the project well.
I know they've made progress since Apple finally started pushing the faithful towards the *step/yellowbox/Cocoa apps and it'd be great to have those apps available under GNUstep/Linux as well.
But I'd still prefer Gnome as the frontend for all this natural goodness.
Should invading one's peaceful neighbours be opposed, or rewarded with trade deals?
Example: spouse has os x server at work, needs to archive a directory (Stuffit not there for some reason). I tried to explain tar, but she got lost with the final parameter "path to the folder she wants to archive."
Solution: type tar cvf myfile.tar in the terminal and then drop the folder to be archived on the terminal app. Presto! It instantly fills in the full path. She presses the enter key and it just works. Throw in some gzip and she looks like magic to the rest of the office.
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day.
Teach him to eat and he will fish forever.
Of course, that might change in the future
The Raven
Friend, WebCore includes KHTML and KJS with tons of fixes and optimizations-- all of which have been submitted back to the project, as per the LGPL-- Kwq, the QT adapter library, and the Objective-C SPI. Apple improved the hell out of KHTML and KJS, sent their changes back to the project maintainers, and then released the whole shebang in an OS X-style package. What more do you want, exactly?
I write in my journal
Will you ever quit bitching and go away?
YES! We get the point.
You can only use one kind of keyboard.
Pleeeeese stop.
But Apple has made the system much more proprietary and non-standard than it needs to be. The system administration database is different from mainstream UNIX systems made integrating the Macs into my home and work networks much more work than a Linux machine. The window system is completely different from UNIX, hard to port to, and rather sluggish. Apple's software package management is worse than even that of Windows. And the commercial software situation on Macintosh is not all that great either. A big disappointment, too, was that Apple had promised "free .Mac service with every iMac" and then started charging less than a year later.
Altogether, I think Apple has benefitted quite a bit from UNIX/Linux compatibility, by promising a no-hassles Linux-like environment and attracting some UNIX and Linux users. I don't think they really have delivered, and I will probably not be upgrading my Macs--I can get better functionality and more software for less money with Linux. On the other hand, Linux has not benefitted directly from OS X: there is little or no useful software that Apple has donated to the Linux community (Darwin is more of a distraction), and I don't think Apple's "switch" campaign has been all that effective.
I think in the long run, Apple will be forced to become more and more Linux compatible, and then maybe there will be more benefit to the Linux community. Until then, every Windows user that moves to Macintosh is still of some benefit to the Linux community.
In no particular order:
/ 190248&mode=thread -- Apple SUED Macromedia to keep them from releasing a properly functional Linux player. Also don't bother me with 'but you can buy blah blah blah' or 'you can use unauthorized codec clone blah' -- I don't want nor should have to buy anything or break the law to watch what Mac and Windows users see legally for free.
1. Harrassing Aqua-ish theme makers. As Apple should know, you can't patent "look and feel" -- as their failed case against MS demonstrated.
2. Refusing to release a Sorenson codec enabled player or library for Linux, effectively locking Linux users out of an increasing majority of all Internet video content and thus making Linux unviable to end users. Don't bother me with 'it isn't Apple's' fault -- as was covered here months ago, IT IS! See http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=02/07/19
3. Undercutting development of established Open Source projects, like Mozilla and XFree86, by pushing less open alternatives and thus both cutting their mindshare and draining developer talent. And before someone replies 'but now it supports X11', the point is that they aren't the 'default' systems under MacOS -- which means "native" GUI MacOS X applications are useless to Linux, and pages coded for Safari will probably becoming increasing incompatible with Mozilla.
Apple is a parasite sucking the blood of the Open Source movement, and is actively working to destroy Linux as a viable solution. The "open" solutions Apple endorses (Quicktime, Safari) do not work on Linux and serve only to spur sales of MacOS X.
In short: Apple is not Linux's friend, and these articles that claim otherwise are stupid and tiresome. Jobs may be fooling the moronic majority, but that isn't everyone. FUCK YOU, JOBS.
CmdrWass wrote: "You won't see me own a mac until the day comes that they open the hardware standards and there is good competition for hardware. In other words, until I can build a mac from spare parts, you won't see me owning one."
... can't count video cards, I guess) that Macs are less different from PCs than they used to be in the days when just exchanging floppies between Windows and Mac OS was a big pain. Now (for instance) I frequently transfer things between Mac and Linux machine with a little 65MB memory key that cost me $35 at a computer show :) (And next year, maybe 128MB will cost the same amount ...) I have an external CD burner that works under Linux and Mac OS X, scanner likewise. Enough components live *outside* the box that the computer itself isn't always as important as it seems ...
... even if no one else can produce Macs per se, Apple knows that they are not alone in the world, and the ability to switch hardware platforms without switching OS has got to affect their pricing. (Not that Apple laptops are badly priced, all things considered ... go price some non-Apple 17", super-thin, aluminum-clad notebooks;)) Even though it's not direct, it's definitely competition. And that's just for people willing / anxious to run Free software; even for Mac OS-only users, Windows laptops (which cannot run OS X) are obviously competition; people need computers, not necessarily Apple computers.
Instinctively, I agree with that -- don't want to be stuck with something dependent on one company etc.
However, a couple of things mitigate that fear:
- there are enough standard-enough parts n' ports (ethernet, CD-ROMs, firewire and USB, IDE hard drives, etc
- file formats: there are quite a few that are legitimately cross platform. Depending on what you do with a computer, they might not fill all your needs, but for many people, RTF / PFD / html / JPEG / mp3 / ogg and other very cross-platform file formats mean a lot more than the OS being used to open / use / manipulate / save them. Double-edged sword, though, since so many apps love to create difficult-to-share filetypes by default, so if that *is* a concern, it is probably a deal killer. [Ahem]
- there are non-Apple OSes that run on Apple's hardware (a few varieties of Linux, and at least the three biggest *BSDs). Now I'll admit this is a roundabout argument, but
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
chess.tgz on Apple's site. It's right there for the taking.
God save our Queen, and Heaven bless The Maple Leaf Forever!
I just got rid of my old ass compaq laptop with a 12" screen (actually it died) and was more than happy to pick up one with a 14.1" screen and this bigger one weighs nearly 2lbs less. I hope I never have to use another notebook with a 12" screen :/
I have an iBook.
... my sister's iBook had a broken D key, and I snapped off my delete key when I installed the Airport card); trackpad (it'll never happen, but how I wish Apple instead of IBM had invented the eraserpoint); power cord (feels flimsy, slips out unbeknownst to the user ...); speed (though I'm spoiled by the speed of Blackbox and other Linux WMs).
Good things: sharp screen; moderate weight; decent battery life; built-in DVD player; user interface in general and specifically OS X (which became usable enough with 10.2 that I have not booted into OS 9 since upgrading); decent included apps; above average case design (like the magnetic hinge with nothing to snag on); iMovie; iTunes (which now supports ogg); internal 802.11 (which can turn an equpped iBook into a wireless basestation).
Mediocre things: speakers (lousy, even at close range); keyboard (awful; about average for laptops and better than many, but still awful
Depending on what you think about software, the fact that OS X is closed source may bother you, may not. I prefer Free software in general; so far though, I've been reluctant to risk disappointment / problems, and I have kept OS X on the iBook.
However, when I'm at home, OS aside, I generally prefer a big monitor, a responsive keyboard, and a quicker-feeling machine, which is why I type this from a machine running Mandrake 9, and am installing Red Hat on another machine yea verily even as I type this.
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
1) Did you think Apple should cater first and foremost to the huge market of UNIX users clamoring for Mac hardware, or to their existing customers? Seems to me that by taking care of Mac users and getting them to switch to OS X is a pretty high priority.
2) Even so, Apple seems to be doing a fair job of paying attention to the UNIX market. I mean, OS X is an implementation of UNIX, which makes Apple the largest volume distributor of UNIX boxes in the world. If that equates to ignoring the UNIX market, I'm not sure if our definitions of "the UNIX market" are the same.
Macs don't have the keyboard layout you'd like, which is a shame. Hopefully Apple will soon fix the situation to your satisfaction. But I think it's something of an overstatement and a distortion to say that Apple is not paying attention to the UNIX market, simply because of these keyboard issues.
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Say, apple releases the OneButton Mouse Driver (TM) 1.0 under BSD licence. they then go on to develop it and release 1.3 binary-only. there's still no way they could take 1.0 away from the community. i think that's what the parent of your post meant.
Free as in mason.
This is exactly how I feel. I just purchased a new powerbook because I have been looking for a laptop to complement my linux desktop for a while, and now that apple sells 3 types of PB's (affordable, less affordable, and #!@#$%#@!!!!), and they are currentlty some of the best laptops in the world, in my opinion. However, I would NEVER fork out the dough for a Mac desktop. Their simply not worth the money. As for XP... I have gained an appreciation for it because of its driver support and general not-so-stupidness (as opposed to win98), but still I say fuck off to Microsoft, they offer nothing to me.
The BSDs have linux emulation, and are much more closely related to OS/X from a userland perspective ... which is why they're not likely to "die" any time soon :)
smash.
I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
Say, you do keep that comment in a file, or do you go back to your old comments and copy-and-paste ?
Veteran, Bermuda Triangle Expeditionary Force, 1992-1951
Well, if it took you 8 months to figure out some trivial settings then you shouldn't be aloud near a computer...well I guess you can use a Mac then.
Hmmm, you are confused. Eight months ago, I took the time to figure out how to turn all that XP crap off. It took me a week or two because the damn "features" kept turning themselves on until you figured out the double secret key punch to kill them. About four months ago, I quit using office all together thanks to a job change. I would have been happy to be using anything else.
Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.
The X apps are normal Unix processes, each has it's own memory space.
As mentioned in other posts, if the file format had been open and documented there would not really be an issue. However, since legacy formats are starting to punish businesses with real costs, the issue can no longer be ignored, even by those that don't/can't plan ahead.
DMCA and EUCD are two additional reasons for migrating from legacy formats. These two could legally prevent businesses (and agencies) from accessing their own documents if encoded in undocumented, proprietary formats and the tools to manage these formats are no longer licensed.
Chip, yes, but it MS-Office revenue will collapse like a sand castle when it goes -- but that's a separate thread. Since Microsoft has alrady taken a publicly stated position against the open file formats, the collapse will only reduce the overhead costs of businesses, agencies and citizens.Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
If anybody here had their heads on straight, people would be trying to clone Aqua for Linux - NOT putting nasty Xfree86 on a perfectly good OS. Seriously, I hope somebody reads this and is in a position to actually fix the problem.
just like the humble blood clot... turboporsche@telus.net
I talk from experience; Mac OS X won't run on my (back then) expensive PowerMac despite Apple's promises at the time
Out of curiosity which PowerMac are you talking about and from back when? I run Jaguar (aka OS X v.10.2.x) on (among other things) a five year old Biege PowerMac G3, and I know of people running it (unsupported) on even older systems
how many OSes are there out there that you can run the latest version of on Hardware that's half a decade out of date?
...when Apple decided to go UNIX, I predicted that the popularity of UNIX will skyrocket, not only in users, but developers.
I used to work in Graphics (prepress) and we had Photoshop and Illustrator on IRIX (SGI's UNIX implementation). It ran like a champ. I _KNOW_ there is a port for these programs and I suspected many more. Porting will be less of a problem from MacOS X to/from Linux than rewriting to XP or the next Windows OS.
Baseline aregument: If its for one, It can be for all.
INSERT INTO comment VALUE('Doh!') WHERE user='you';
It would establish QuickTime as the premier portable media format.
While Linux isn't a force on the desktop, it is pretty important among the technicians in the server rooms, and these guys often get to make technical decisions such as "which media format to use". As long as it is convenient to play on MS Windows, their bosses don't really care. Unless they have just been visited by a MS sales representive, they will leave the decision to the technicians.
How much did Apple give back to the BSD peeps, that's the real test.
Also, is Apple going to sue KDE for lookie likie themes
thank God the internet isn't a human right.
That's the problem of all non-GPL open-source software - it's just convinient to be hijacked.
Try to do it (hijacking) with GNOME and see what's happened.
It's time to remind again: GPL doesn't restrict the freedom. GPL restricts the people who wants to restrict the freedom. Got it?
Less is more !
By releasing this, they also show developers how easiy it is to plug an app originally written for Linux into Cocoa. It's just as much "proof of concept" as it is "giving back".
The way it benefits others is that they can look at how it's done, compare it to the original Linux tweaks and implement the same changes into their own software without an NDA. Apple gets more Cocoa apps, and developers who were originally planning to only use Cocoa can see how they can go to Linux as well.
As a longtime user of Mac, Unix and Windows, I respect the first 2 groups much more than the pure Windows users. Generally speaking, people chose Mac or Linux over Windoze for good reasons such as technical or design superiority, ease of use, style, productivity, TCO, security, bad experiences with Windoze, refusal to reward the convicted Redmond monoplist for its bad practice, etc, and they tend to be more articulate and intelligent than the Wintel PC crowd who either think Windows is the only thing in the computing universe or Linux is too complicated or Mac is too expensive and slow and has no software or second mouse button. Everytime a PC hothead lost his argument, there is always the last defense: why is everyone using Windows if Mac and Linux are so good?
Personally, I think both Mac and Linux platforms badly need the critical mass to break the MS monoply, and the best way to achieve that goal is to help each other. I am not suggesting that MS should be elliminated altogether, but the economy and the computing industry are desperately in need of several viable alternatives and adequate ecological diversity to be heathy and prosperous, and MS is just too nasty to be trusted to control our destiny. Without the design flair and innovation of Apple and the spirit diversity of the Open Source community, the computing world would be such a boring place.
"Try to do it (hijacking) with GNOME and see what's happened."
Hmm, which rendering engine would they possibly want to hijack from GNOME?
gtkhtml? Its so buggy its dead.
and galeon uses the mozilla engine, which is not GPL. Also, it is already available for the mac.
And I doubt somehow the apple people would expect to get anything useful from nautilus.
my
In 95 when powerpc's and risc were the new buzzwords I wanted a mac so bad. I had WIndows 3.1 and a defective motherboard(didn't know it at the time). My system crashed ever 3 to 4 hours and even froze up in DOS. I hated it, the dos and WIndows3.1 memory limitations not to mention powerpc's at the time were twice as fast. Motorolla fucked apple bigtime recently while AMD/INTEL got into a speed race leaving apple in the dust. I wanted to be different and run a risc processor to impress my friends.
Today I enjoy FreeBSD and Windows2k. Pallidium and drm scare the crap out of me. Mainly because palladium will require modifications to the cpu, memory, and every component into a trust relationship anti-tamper proof nightmare.
Its my dam computer and if I can't use it then I don't own it. Drm is a blaspheme in the regards that it takes a public copyrighted work and turns the ownership to the creator. To make things even more extreme, they now want to own your possesions are you purchase them! First right of first sale need not implied. Legally the items are still yours but your own items will work agaisnt you and serve MS and Hollywood.
Sure macs are slow, expensive, lack alot of games and other software products but dam its mine! I am wating for the powerpc 970 which will make things hell of alot faster and competitive again. I have a feeling if palladium turns into a situation where you can't turn it off then you can expect Linux to take a noise dive and leave IT along with opensource software altogher. WHy? Because if redhat can't stay in bussiness and all the new kernel hackers prefer macs, then Linux will become the next sco and IT managers are scared of being obsolence and leaving the heard.
I personally believe this is Microsoft's plan.
Its the same fud that killed borland and hurt unix when NT became popular 7 years ago. MacOSX may be the only free unix left that won't be shunned by IT. Yes Linux is hot now but after people can no longer run it under commidity hardware it will become a SCO.
http://saveie6.com/
Where is the comment "Real man use Linux" !!!????
What is happening to Slashdot!!!
You can buy a 12" iBook for $999 which has everything I want as a programmer, plus 4+ hours battery, instant sleep and wake up, dozens of first class, multimedia, Unix, Java, C/C++, Objective C/C++, Perl, Ruby, GUI programming tools. Can you build one for me? No, I don't trust you for that.
Don't mod me offtopic, but the same thing goes for office chairs.
Some people think it's crazy to shell out $800 for an nice ergonomic office chair, but they will think nothing of spending an extra $1000 for leather in their cars.
1.5 hours a day in the car.
8-12 hours a day in the chair.
-- "The reward of suffering is experience." - Aeschylus
Well, at least there are modules available to support the software modems in the new iBooks. Could be worse...
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
I've been using octave as a replacement for Matlab with pretty good success. It's easy to install with fink on MacOSX. I'm running it with the Apple X11. Just do a 'fink install octave'.
I'm surprised that anyone could mention what Macs and Linux have in common without mentioning the GNUstep project. GNUstep is an implementation of OpenStep, which is the basis for the Cocoa API on the Mac. There are GNUstep apps today that can be compiled under Cocoa. GNUstep still has a ways to go before its finished, but anyone wanting to make Mac apps work on Linux and vice versa should check it out.
I have never been happier with my home office setup: an iBook on my desk (with the improved Mac X server :-) networked to a dual-processor Linux box in a closet (so I don't hear it).
I do a lot of AI work, and having the Linux box for long machine learning runs, etc. and for hosting experimental sematic web stuff is great - that leaves my iBook for most coding, running design tools, Microsoft Office, etc.
Apple's recent release of a customized X server really helps a lot (still some work needs to be done on it though). Linux KDE applications look great (fonts!) using the iBook display.
Anyway, I feel like I get both the fun and productivity of Linux with the great experience of OS X. Perfect!
-Mark
Timeo idiotikOS et dona ferentes
The .doc format hasn't changed since Office 97. Though I agree with the general point about MS changing formats so no one can make an effective clone.
And I'm still waiting for Apple to release the source code to their GNU Chess port, dammit.
You're currently modded "flamebait" for this post. Maybe it's because you would rather rant than research? I found Apple's source for chess here. Hope that helps.
--
$tar -xvf
http://www.ramelectronics.net/html/DVI_monitor_cab les.html#adc
Has a neat summary about DVI at the bottom of the page.
ADC is pretty similar to DVI-I in that it carries USB, Digital, and Analog video signals.
Here is a link http://developer.apple.com/techpubs/hardware/Devel oper_Notes/Macintosh_CPUs-G4/PowerMacG4Cube/trin-5 7.html all about ADC connector and the signals it carries.
As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, this is simply wrong.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Alright then.
The same query to Apple engineers two years back resulted in no reply whatsoever.
And you get no results if you try searching on gnu chess in the Apple Developer forum.
Excuse me for not knowing the secret password. It isn't supposed to be this way with GNU code. The instructions for how to obtain the source are supposed to be included with the binaries, are they not?
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Every single time when I post about Apple, I got modded down.
Almost every other time I post, I get modded up.
Like I could give a shit either way.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Clearly it is you who do not know what you are talking about. The changes Apple has made are not open source. If they were, we would have access to them. We do not.
That is what open source means, having access. You can't say, "one day we'll make the source available, really, honest, we promise" and then still get to call yourself open source. It doesn't work that way.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
I'm not a Mac geek, although I've used Macs in the past. My cousin, however, is a dyed in the wool Mac fan. Between his rants plus just staying up on technology in general I think I've got a pretty good handle on what's real and what isn't in the Mac world. As usual, there are grains of truth behind the myths. I'll answer the ones I know.
:)
:)
"Ripped off Xerox"
Back in the '80s Steve Jobs managed to wangle a tour or four at PARC for himself and some other Apple types to see the windowing system that Xerox researchers were working on. The researchers were ordered to show the Apple team members how things worked.
At least one key member of the team objected strenuously to giving any information to Apple without any sort of benefit for Xerox. (no NDA, no financial compensation, no limits on the information that was being given away, etc.) She was ordered to comply anyway.
Was Xerox 'ripped off'? Not really. Was the management team at Xerox incredibly incompetent not to take even the most basic steps to protect their research investment? Absolutely.
"Can't use multi button mouse"
Hasn't been true for a long time. However, it's still the hardware configuration on laptops. And before you ask, I have never liked the "ctrl+mousebutton" combination.
"Uses non-standard hardware"
Yup. What did you expect? Apple still sees itself as a hardware company.
Seriously, though, if you're talking about peripherals that's not really accurate. PCI and AGP hardware and drivers are available that can be bought from a variety of vendors. I don't know if IDE controllers are there. I assume there are.
"Is a monopoly"
Of what? Their own hardware? Sorry, that's not how everyone else in the world sees the desktop/server market.
"Owned by Microsoft, a major shareholder"
This dates back to the huge influx of cash that Microsoft injected into Apple some years ago. At the time, I think it made Microsoft Apple's single largest shareholder behind Steve Jobs. I remember wondering what impact if any this might have on Apple. There was some speculation by conspiracy fans then that Microsoft might buy out Apple entirely and cut Intel out of the business.
In fact, it's clear now that it was part of a defensive strategy on Microsoft's part to try to convince the US DOJ that it wasn't a monopoly by showing that there was competition in the market. In order for that strategy to work, there had to be at least one other viable desktop vendor out there. At that time, Apple was the only other player in the market that was worth a damn in terms of marketshare, but they were in deep trouble financially.
Microsoft almost HAD to give Apple some money if their strategy was to pay off. Obviously, the strategy failed (witness the conviction).
"Costs too much"
Compared to what? For what it does, the Mac line is very reasonably priced now. However, IMO it was definitely overpriced for quite a while in the '90s.
"OS X is slow"
Well, if you're trying to run a modern OS on ancient hardware, yes it'll be slow. If you're running OS X on modern hardware and you've upgraded to the latest release it runs just fine.
As an aside, one of the reasons I like both BSD and Linux is the ability to strip down the OS to run on some really lightweight platforms. OS X is not designed for that because, as I've already noted, Apple is a hardware company. It's not in their best interests to make it easy to run OS X on platforms like the old Mac Classic.
I suppose you could probably get at least part of it to run on a Classic since OS X uses BSD in its core. No one but an obsessive geek with way too much time on his hands would even try. Oh, wait.
"Lawsuits for no reason"
The only example I can think of was the lawsuit against Microsoft for the use of the windows paradigm for a UI. A frivolous lawsuit on its face for a variety of reasons. I don't know of any in the same vein in the last 5 or 10 years. Does anyone more knowledgeable than I about Apple care to elaborate?
"Rips off Linux"
Umm, no. There are a number of GNU tools available as part of the OS X package, but as long as Apple follows all the rules in the GPL they're not ripping off Linux. And, since Apple uses a BSD kernel and not the Linux kernel, this is false on its face. Unless you've dug into the source for the BSD kernel Apple is running and can show that they're using GPL'ed code from the Linux source tree. No? Didn't think so.
This is a propietary platform isn't it? How come all of a sudden we love Mac's when we can't even build one? bah. humbug.
Remember, the DMCA's (overly reaching) powers are granted to the copyright holder who tries to protect his own works by placing technological barriers around them. In your example, an office-software vendor tried to place technological barriers around works that they did not own. The DMCA does not apply.
Easy, automatic testing for Perl.
"That Apple would Aquafy X11 is really a great step forward, and hopefully means that -- and this is key -- Apple will start shipping Macs with X11 preinstalled."
For those who need a compatibility sandbox, this is good. For those who are people who just want to use their computer, they'll not want it. Instead they'll want the old X11 software properly ported to Aqua and following Apple's L&F standards. L&F standards only work if everyone follows them, and adding X11 in doesn't do that.
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
Excuse me for not knowing the secret password.
It's pretty simple to find: apple.com, click on OS X, click on Darwin. At the bottom of the page, click on Projects. At the bottom of that page is the link. So it's only three levels below the Apple home page.
It isn't supposed to be this way with GNU code. The instructions for how to obtain the source are supposed to be included with the binaries, are they not?
Are you sure they're not? Did you open the GNU Chess application folder and check (remember, the application icons in OS X are actually representative of folders, not of apps). I don't have my mac here today so I can't check myself, but it might be worth checking yourself.
Well... the Street has historically not be kind to Apple. The current stock price acknowledges the fact that Apple's CPU suppliers haven't been keeping up with Intel and AMD. Also, Apple themselves have stated that they are currently treading water under the current macro and micro economic conditions. If the economy was in much better shape, the emphasis on price and the resulting price war between AMD and Intel in the past couple of years would not have been nearly so ruthless - and Apple's (or any other UNIX hardware platform vendor) wouldn't look so expensive.
As for 1997, Apple, the Microsoft stake was $150 million dollars for a company that had billions in the bank at the time. Apple, reportedly, had a convincing enough IP theft case against Microsoft to command a settlement where Apple got an endorsement in the future of the Mac OS and a commitment to Microsoft Office for Mac OS at at time when the future looked extremely risky (Mac OS X transition and all). So the stock purchase was a small part of the deal, and Apple would have soldiered on w/o the deal and probably would have won a lawsuit against Microsoft.
As pointed out elsewhere in this thread, this is simply wrong.
Um... what? I'm sitting here looking at WebCore, and you're telling me that I'm wrong about what it includes? That takes some pretty serious balls, friend.
I write in my journal
Next thing you know, most of the Slashdot editors and programmers will be using Macs ...
:-P
you mean as opposed to windows, right?
You can check out the merges the KDE folks have made to CVS from code apple supplied with Safari here
A few things...
GNU Chess isn't a Darwin application. It's an OS X application, writting in Cocoa. So what's it doing in the Darwin section of the web site?
And why isn't it available via the search engine?
And why aren't instructions for how to obtain the source available with the application? Yes, they give you the standard GPL COPYING file within the application bundle, but that's it.
They are supposed to make the source code easy to find, are they not? I went round-and-round with Apple on this when OS X first came out, and I got no satisfaction whatsoever. This, despite the fact that I paid the big bucks to be an attendee at their first OS X WWDC.
That isn't the way it's supposed to be with GNU source.
Now, it doesn't really matter much, but back when OS X was still beta, having access to the source code for a finished application would have been enormously useful. Apple does this shit all the time, even back in bad old days of System 7. They don't share the technology. They don't give you access.
In this regard, they're actually worse than Microsoft.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
in: Chess/Contents/Resources/COPYING
GNU CHESS GENERAL PUBLIC LICENSE
Copyright (C) 1986,1987 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this license, but changing it is not allowed.
The license agreements of most software companies keep you at the mercy of those companies. By contrast, our general public license is intended to give everyone the right to share GNU Chess. To make sure that you get the rights we want you to have, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. Hence this license agreement.
etc.
-- It only takes 20 minutes for a liberal to become a conservative thanks to our new outpatient surgical procedure!
The changes Apple made to KHTML itself for rendering and whatnot are not available.
Read the fucking website:
And then consider you got modded up for BEING WRONG. Not the first time either as I recall.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
Little note, here: there was no System 7.3. There was System 7.0, 7.0.1, and 7.1 (which I think only had a 7.1.1 and 7.1.2), then System 7.5. There was, however, a System 7.5.3, but that wouldn't have booted that fast on the SE.
Lose essential liberties to get temporary safety = get only hassles and security theater.
GNU Chess isn't a Darwin application. It's an OS X application, writting in Cocoa. So what's it doing in the Darwin section of the web site?
Apple calls the "open source" section of their website "Darwin," even though it contains links to more than just the source to Darwin. I don't know why.
They don't share the technology. They don't give you access. In this regard, they're actually worse than Microsoft.
Really? Could you point out one, just one URL to source code for a Microsoft app that's publicly available on a web site link, regardless of whether or not the search engine can find it? Look, however annoyed you might be that it took 2 years to get the source code for their version of GNU Chess, it's there now. I don't think you can say the same for MS. Another example: Visual Studio = $1K / Apple Developer Tools = free download; yeah, there are more bells and whistles in VS.NET, but there is NO equivalent for Windows that's free. The cheaper student versions of the Visual Studio apps do not create full distributable binaries, as I understand.
With laptops things are different. I think that there Apple is very competitive with x86 offerings, depending upon how you use them.
Anyway, if the 970 ends up being on the same level as the high end P4 and the Athalon-64 I think you'll start to see a lot more desktop switchers.
Above whistle and below flute. Don't pretend you don't know how to count.
Twirlip:
Just so you know - even when pointed to the KDE cvs logs, where one can see the SAFARI_MERGE branch, this corebreech guy still claims the code isn't being released.
You just can't reason with some people, I guess.
That's the problem of all non-GPL open-source software
KJS and KHTML are licensed under the LGPL. In accordance, Apple has released their patches back to the maintainers.
It's time to remind again: GPL doesn't restrict the freedom. GPL restricts the people who wants to restrict the freedom. Got it?
Yes, I've got it. GPL restricts freedoms that you don't want people to have. Check.
I write in my journal
Or what if you actually want to make a living and need Office to communicate with your clients?
Having major commercial apps on a UNIX based platform is the best of both worlds to a growing number of users.
"Form should follow function...unless it's just plain ugly."
Why didn't Apple just release the code? That's what is done with open source, yes?
That's what is done with open source, no. Apple is not trying to create a fork of KJS/KHTML. They're doing exactly what they're required to do by the LGPL: submitting their changes back to the maintainers of the project. See, there's no "KDE KHTML" and "Apple KHTML." There's just KHTML. So Apple sends their changes back to the project maintainers, instead of (well, in addition to, actually) just releasing them.
And of course, the larger point is that Apple makes prolific use of open source while taking liberties with the licenses they are released under
Apple has never taken liberties with any licenses. Ever.
while open source efforts that make even tangential reference to Apple's work merits legal action.
If by "make tangential reference" you mean desktop themes that use the Apple logo, or projects that use Apple's trademarked names, then yes. Apple protects the intellectual property they want to keep (their trademarks, their look-and-feel, and core technologies), and shares what they want to share (Rendezvous, XNU, and so on).
Don't like it? Don't use Apple's products, ideas, or technologies. Nobody's forcing you to play.
Oh, and please quit bitching now about Chess.app. The fact that you're too stupid to go to the web site and click the "Chess" link says more about you than it does about Apple, okay?
I write in my journal
I wasn't trying to compare Microsoft to Apple overall, only with regards to making code available to understand their API's.
And let's not be giving credit to Apple for their developer tools being free here, OK? The credit belongs to GNU. Let's at least get that straight. For that matter, when Apple was in the business of selling developer tools (MPW) it was more expensive than what Microsoft was offering at the time.
I mean, c'mon, there was a time when you had to pay Apple $300 for access to the basic API's alone! I never recall having to pay Microsoft anywhere near that.
And there is an equivalent to Visual Studio that's free... the very same GNU tools Apple is using.
But none of that is what I'm talking about. Apple has a long history of hiding/not sharing example code, and of hiding/not sharing API's. I've yet to encounter an instance where I have seen a Microsoft program do something with Windows the available documentation didn't address. Whereas with Apple we were -- at least as of a year ago -- still laboring under closed APIs for things like control panels and those dealies in the menu bar, just to name a couple of examples.
Apple's engineers have historically made a lot of loot by doing this. They keep the feature quiet, then they leave the company and release some new application that makes use of the as-yet-undocumented feature. The motivations are probably different today (after all we're talking about the only desktop OS available that still locks you into blue or gray as a theme color) but the effect is still the same.
It's their way of maintaining a technical edge, through obscurity. Even their documentation reflects this, it's the worst in the industry by far.
LOL, it's even reflected in their choosing to give us Cocoa API's in Objective-C and Java only! Why not join the rest of the human race and give us C++ API's? (and yes, it most certainly is possible, as I've had to explain here before.)
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
It seems to me that your price of 25,000 dollars just goes to show how spoiled you make yourselves
I assuming by your comment that you either gave your remaining $15,000 to a charity or you couldn't make enough money and are jealous of those who could. I'm not advocating living beyond your means and having a lot of debt. Some people do work hard/smart enough to buy a nice car without going into debt to do it. Always seems like the whiners are people below that level. Would you be driving an '03 vette if you could have bought it outright? I probably owe as much right now for my '99 Jeep Cherokee as you do for your '99 Firebird. I've just been driving it for the last 3 years while you where either paying for another vehicle or walking.
You say that 100,000 miles is good.
10k for half of the life gone and no warranty.
20k-25k for full life and full warranty.
Seems like similar money for more hassle to me. I personally buy vehicles that are still on the lot after the next year's model comes out. You don't take the whole new car hit but you get full warranty and it really is still new.
My PowerMac 8600/300 is still running fine and has always run better than the equivalent PC of similar age. Still using it with OS9 and Linux.
a self built desktop can cost 2 grand less than a mac desktop. 200% overpriced is too much for me.
PowerMacs start at $1500 and classic imacs at $800. Even ibooks start at $1000. Yes they more expensive, but why do need to try to inflate the truth?
I have several PCs and Macs and an SGI O2. I'd pick up a nice Alpha and SPARC too if I find a deal I like. It doesn't have to be one or the other.
Then Apple has recently blown it. I was about to buy a PowerMac fully decked out with SCSI adapters and disks, but before I could buy it, Apple changed their line-up. SCSI is no longer an option.
Note to Apple: the only reason I was willing to pay the price premium for a Mac was that Apple provided and supported the SCSI option. I want a single point of contact, and Apple supplied SCSI supported by an AppleCare contract filled the bill.
But having to buy SCSI from a third party w/o AppleCare support just don't cut it.
Sorry, you lost a customer with that decision.
"Next thing you know, most of the Slashdot editors and programmers will be using Macs" ..and the readers would rater spend $200 on a box from Wal-Mart running Ark, Debian, or Red Hat then a WAY OVERPRICED, incompatable with most applications, and propretary format.
/. even carries a Mac section.
I still cannot believe
I can't believe Linux cheapskates like yourself keep posting the same thing over and over and over and over! "Too expensive! One button mouse! Proprietary architecture! Not Linux! No apps! It's ridiculous. You're not saying anything that someone smarter hasn't already said and spelled everything correctly.
And I can't believe that these same people keep bothering to come into this section or post to threads that are clearly marked Apple.
You know what? There are some technically savvy Mac users out there, myself included, who (when the threshold is turned up high enough!) actually enjoy and get a lot out of the discussions in this section.
If you don't like the threads in the section.... stay out. You're not adding anything useful to the discussion and just increasing the noise to signal ratio.
The bulk of the content on the site is geared to the OSS, Linux, *NIX crowd. Please join those discussions and let us have ours.
Pooty tweet
Perhaps you should be paying attention to which year it is. The stock was sold ages ago for a nice profit and Apple are doing quite well.
Reread the thread. You were talking about the source code to an app, not about example code. Yes, their documentation sucks.
And let's not be giving credit to Apple for their developer tools being free here, OK? The credit belongs to GNU. Let's at least get that straight.
Last I checked, InterfaceBuilder and ProjectBuilder are not GNU code. I'd be interested in seeing the licenses if they are. And yet they are included in the Developer Tools.
One can use GCC in Windows; but almost noone does. And Windows certainly doesn't provide it, now, does it?
If you want to use C++, use Carbon. No one is stopping you.
If you want to use Mac OS X, use it. No one is stopping you.
Just don't expect the rest of us to stay quiet when some idiot goes on about Apple and Linux helping each other, because it simply isn't so.
And FYI, a lot of people use GCC on Windows, esp. people who do cross-platform work. Windows not providing it is irrelevant, because unlike Apple's interpretation of open source, we can get GCC anytime we want.
As for InterfaceBuilder and ProjectBuilder, yeah, they're included. So what? Without GCC it's so much cheese, ProjectBuilder especially.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?
I'm one those weirdos who still doesn't like OS X, for a variety of reasons. I like Apple's hardware, particularly the G3 Pismo, and I'd love to buy one on eBay if I had the money - but Linux would have to go on it. Maybe NetBSD too, just for the hell of it. But MacOS X would only run in MoL, if at all. I just hate not having full control over my computer. I don't get control on Windows, but I do on Linux. Why would I want to use another platform where I don't get the control I want?
Sam: "That was needlessly cryptic."
Max: "I'd be peeing my pants if I wore any!"
OS X, *BSD, Solaris, Linux, and all other *nixs are all work simular in a programming point of view. Sure there may be some differences in some areas but most applications port easaly from one OS to an Other. So if a lot of people start using OS X with X11 they will start writting applications that work in OS X with X11 knowing that they can easally port it to an other OS. Programmers if given the choice they would normally want to make their programs to run on as many systems as possible. So if they make a OS X app then the figure they can easly port it to other OSs. Unfortunatly windows is designed so differently then Unix that porting applications usually takes way to much effert.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Wow. This thread is rife with some of the most well articulated and thought provoking posts I've ever read. I mean, take this one for example. Concise, to-the-point and thoroughly insightful! It really gives us all a clearer understanding of how Mac OS X and Linux can cooperate and further enrich our computing experiences and ultimately stick it to Microsoft.
Truly, I feel enlightened.
Pooty tweet
You're right, you can't build a Mac using non-Apple guts, at least when it comes to the motherboard. (The peripherals are pretty standard, though.) If that's the biggest factor to you, then I can't make you think otherwise, and wouldn't want to :) Though I like my iBook, and find that moving stuff between the iBook and my Linux systems is not the pain that it once was, for non-portables I currently prefer X86 machines for the same reasons you name.
:) My compact shuttle case is a bit precious, too, but to me it's at least somewhat more neutral and utilitarian looking. So long as it runs a nice OS with loads of software available, I don't care what the chip is; if Shuttle decided to get into the PPC market and sell little "almost Mac cubes" on which I could run, say, Yellow Dog linux, I'd be interested. Terrasoft is selling some big Antec-cased PPC systems, but I may have already purchased my last way-too-big computer. (And their little Bricks, though cool, seem like more money than I want to spend on a fairly limited machine ...)
Likewise with the preference for internal vs. external storage etc; I like external devices for their portability and interchangeability -- for me, it's a lot simpler to move an external CD burner from machine to machine than actually install / uninstall / reinstall an internal one, and it means I don't have to buy a burner for each machine. Everyone will have different tradeoff points, and it sounds like ours are very different. Nothing wrong with that!
File formats / data exchange are what matter more to me; one big reason I generally prefer open software (open source / Free) is that it encourages open file formats. I'd like to be relatively unconcerned with the actual hardware doing the work as I write, draw, search for a link on google, etc, as long as I can move stuff from one machine to another as necessary / appropropriate / useful / fun.
My biggest objection to Macs (esp. the desktop ones) is aesthetic -- they're just too precious. I like computers to be less conspicuous than Apple does. Can't blame the designers, who want to make them distinctive and interesting, but I *can* disagree with their design choices
Cheers,
timothy
jrnl: http://tinyurl.com/c2l8yr / foes: http://tinyurl.com/ckjno5
How can Apple and Linux not be helping each other?
Apple provides Linux the commercial backing and support that it needs to make companies look at OSS and say, hey maybe we can actualy use this.
In the mean time, Linux provides Apple with a fresh stream of ideas to work with and create as well as open their system well beyond anyting it has ever been before.
And don't go into the bullshit about apple stealing code. If you don't want others to use your code, don't distribute it open source.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Look a little more carefully. $49 gets you a SCSI card with your Powermac. Happy computing and congratulations on your shiny new mac.
You like your Macintosh better than me, don't you Dave? Dave? Can you hear me Dave?
I use MySQL (LAMP...Linux/Apache/MySQL/PHP) for rapid prototyping...that and running large music databases just for fun. I use PHPMyAdmin so that I don't have to hand roll. I use WebMin so that I can have a general front end. Both work remotely. I hate doing stuff by hand. The whole point is to put up db's quickly without being dragged down. There are many such tools, and I control my db's...they don't control me.
Sorry, but this thread is pretty funny to me. I'm not faulting your procedures or practices. I'm simply listing what I do on my computer. And what I do leads to frameworks that are either forwarded or dropped. If they are accepted as proposed, then they are redone for all appropriate criteria. Sure, I've had hits and misses, but they've all shared the same beginnings. I'm sure you are proud of your process. My means help lead me to and end. Nothing wrong with that as I see it.
When you begin to insist on structured protos, for stucture's sake, you move away from the initial consideration. Logic. The day we decline an idea based on a checklist is the day we stop improving. Does the phrase 'think out of the box' ring a bell? I could argue that it's possible to prototype a 'proper' database with twinkie wrappers, if the person doing the thinking has enough DB sense. Given proper credentials, I'd wager you'd take any proto from the right person. When I speak of prototypes, they are just that....a strawman application put up solely to test an overall hypothesis. No one is claiming anything beyond that, and again, I'm amused you find something...anything...to contest.
I think if you backed off and took a friendly look at what I'm actually doing, you'd laugh along with me. Maybe your pants are too tight, or you're joking...I don't know....:)
The downloadable Webcore has updated KHTML code from 3.0.2. You can download stuff from KDE CVS and do the diff yourself if you doubt this. No need to re-integrate the SAFARI_BRANCH code.
As for the embeddable HTML component - search for "Safari SDK" on the following link.
Or read Dave Hyatt's blog (where he says the same thing) here.
Or see what the folks at Omnigroup are saying
here and here.
The Apple link I pointed to before has the following paragraph. You were apparently too damn lazy to do the search I mentioned, so I'll reprint it here.
Hey - look - an embeddable cocoa component. No, it's not ready yet. But Safari (and webcore) are still beta - the SDK comes out when webcore gets finalized.
Fixed Dave Hyatt link (posting on January 17, 5:10 PM) here.
Quoting again (following a quote from the above ADC link)
And as far as your delusional assertion that a) Apple's sticking with a branch of KHTML 3.0.2 which isn't being released or that they're not integrating things back from KHTML, further quotes from Hyatt's blog:
Lars being Lars Knoll, KHTML developer.
And finally, talk of a unified codebase here
Thanks, I'll keep that in mind.
You're calling me dumb?
You've basically acknowledged that everything I've said is true in this message!
That Apple might someday release an SDK has never been questioned. I do however expect it to be a subset of what is provided in Safari. This is clearly the case given the way they are handling WebCore *right now*. There is absolutely no reason for not releasing their improvements to KHTML right now other than using open source for their gain while limiting our gain from the same code.
Remember the context of this thread. Does Linux help Apple and vice versa? This is an excellent example of why the latter is most certainly not the case.
Is this truly the only Earth I can live on?