Slashdot Mirror
Install Slash on Mac OS X
bcapps2012 writes "I just saw this on Slashcode.com and thought it would be of interest to many apple.slashdot.org readers. Pudge has gotten Slashcode installed on Mac OS X. As jwachter notes: 'For those of you who haven't been following the issue of how to get slash running on OS X, various Slashcode posters have been asking how to get it done for roughly 2 or 3 years now (essentially since the first preview of OS X was released).' Finally Mac OS X has joined the family."
Sometimes it's just rewarding to get things done by yourself. I remember when I was being taught some basic data structures in JAVA -- the professor told us that we can't use the util class because Sun had included these data structures. I didn't understand why we were being told to write code that already works perfectly well until I actually had to do it and fix all the annoying little bugs. I guess I'm trying to say that there are lessons in the process that are worth learning on your own.
I'm not popular enough to be different.
Homer Simpson, The Simpsons
I'm not a Mac addict, but I could easily see myself becoming one. My primary machine is an Athlon 1700 w/512 MB of RAM and a sweet graphics card, your typical gaming machine. However, I do a lot of *nix-centric stuff, such as running PHP, Apache, MySQL, and Samba. These tools will all run on Windows, but nothing beats having a console at your fingertips. I know that windows XP has cmd.exe and cygwin, but they just aren't the same.
OS X has a nice console (terminal), all of my favorite standard unix tools (GCC, ssh, ftp, sftp, grep, etc..), and a GUI that doesn't make me angry. I will never be able to replace my gaming machine with a Mac or a *nix box, but I've seriously considered buying an OS X machine for my *nix activities. Apple really hit a grand slam with OS X, and I hope that we will see some web servers running OS X in the future.
- Loyal PC User
More than enough BS
It's not the architecture... The problem is that the directions for SlashCode are so complex that it turns off most people. It's 10 times easier to install GeekLog or MovableType on OSX because the instructions for the install are super-straightforward.
Those who laugh at you for you having a Mac.. are the people who constantly call you to fix their PC.
Not always. Developing on a different platform may mean:
- Increased efficiency due to productivity tools not available on the target platform. This
is particularly evident if your target platform
is less powerful, and you can afford a much
better development computer.
- More bugs exposed due to subtle differences
between platforms. Many of these are portability
issues, but some will turn out to be bonafide
bugs in your code.
As you mentioned, there are costs associated with this practice. My point is that the decision is not without benefits.While it's a good idea to run the same hardware/OS in staging and production to minimize risks, there are many situations where mixed platforms make sense. For example, when deploying J2EE applications, most of the best IDE's are typically available for NT (let's not start a religious war, please), but you'd never want to run a production environment on NT. One of the nice things about J2EE is that in practice Java server applications really are quite portable between operating systems.
And for non-Java applications, developing on Linux and deploying on Solaris works quite well, too (and saves a ton of money). Of course, you need a Sun to to some staging testing, but that's cheap compared to putting Sun's on every engineer's desktop.
Enable 3D printed prosthetics!