Slashdot Mirror
An Answer To "What is Mac OS X?"
XCube writes: "'What is Mac OS X?' is a fascinating article over at KernelThread.com. According to Amit Singh it's a hacker-over-friendly answer to that question and a low-level taste of Apple's OS. The extensive article covers many details on Mac OS X: history, Mac firmware & boot loader, system architecture, kernel, startup, file systems, app environments, programming facilities, available software, and more. A great read if you are interested in Mac OS X, though some stuff is too technical methinks. On second thought, this may be a better read if you're *not* interested in Mac OS X! The author says he wrote it to introduce Mac OS X to the Linux User's Group at his work."
I'm sorry but - there's no reason to run OS X - FreeBSD 4.x already offers everything it has for free, and FreeBSD -current far surpasses it.
Why pay for something I can get for free?
Honestly, isn't this stuff we already know???
iDon't really care.
Much of the book has been created from letters written by listeners of her show. These personal anecdotes are used to illustrate points and provide examples we can all relate to; given their tremendous variety, you're sure to find some that click with you. They make the book an easily absorbed read and provide a welcome break from Schlessinger's angry tirades on premarital sex, addiction, and the general "stupidity" of the human race. Behind her anger, you'll find suggestions on taking time to really listen to each other, ways to respect each other's needs without catering to selfishness, and a firm belief that relationships are nearly always worth saving.
Somewhere in California, in a seamless ivory tower that slowly glows, then fades.
Steve: "Well, we'll just give all the G5 people the free upgrade, the powerbooks are shit out of luck."
Lackey: "What if the angry powerbook owners storm the building, and take it?"
Steve: "How much damage can they do? Those powerbooks wouldn't even dent my skull. Now, if the G5 owners got pissed, wielding their G5s like clubs, then I might shit my pants. Those things are big. Let's keep them happy."
Lackey: "Good thinking, master. I will alert your minions."
Steve (to self): "Yes... Angry G5 owners...damn....Shit my pants..."
The linux hacker
I just installed SuSE 9.0 with GNOME 2.2.2. However, I can't seem to find a way to edit the main menu items and rearrange them in a way that I like. Did I forget to install something with Yast, or does anybody know of a program to do this?
I mean...honestly.
Are they going to release OS-X under a free license ? If not, it's not very intersting since you cannot hope to hack the code and redistribute it..
Ploum.net.
On second thought, this may be a better read if you're *not* interested in OS X!
But if I wasn't interested, then why would I be reading it?
Signed,
A Bunch of Homosexuals
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_ _ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __
g_______________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\_______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|______a
t|_______`._____________|_________|_______:_____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|_____s
e_\_______|_/_______/__\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|____*
g____\______\_________.--------.______\|___|____g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o
a_______\___.__C____)_________(_(____>__|__/____a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/_TOSS_\_(_____>__|_/_____t
s______/_/\|___C_____)___MY__|__(___>___/__\____s
e_____|___(____C_____)\_SALAD/__//__/_/_____\___e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|__x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'_____________|__*
g____|__\______________\_______/____________/_|_g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\____________|_o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\___________|_a
t___|__________/_/____|_________|__\___________|t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|s
e__|_________/_/________|____|_______|_________|e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
Important Stuff: Please try to keep posts on topic. Try to reply to other people's comments instead of starting new threads. Read other people's messages before posting your own to avoid simply duplicating what has already been said. Use a clear subject that describes what your message is about. Offtopic, Inflammatory, Inappropriate, Illegal, or Offensive comments might be moderated. (You can read everything, even moderated posts, by adjusting your threshold on the User Preferences Page) If you want replies to your comments sent to you, consider logging in or creating an account.
Carbon. This is a set of procedural C-based APIs for Mac OS X that are based on the old Mac OS 9 API (actually dating back as far back as Mac OS 8.1)
To nitpick: actually, a lot of the Carbon APIs go as far back as System 1.0 -- most of QuickDraw for example.
Darwin has been released under the GPL. It's only the higher layers (like Aqua) that are closed.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
It's been at the back of your mind all along, always there, you're always asking...
"What is Mac OS X?"
Do you want me to show you, Neo...er...Steve? Eat the blue apple, and you'll go on living your life, believing whatever you want to believe. Eat the red apple, and I'll show you how deep the worm hole goes. And you'll realize that there is no Mac OS X. It's only your mind that has unfathomably sexy UI elements.
Help protect civil rights from abuse by the TSA - visit TSA News Blog.
http://www.tsanewsblog.com
Windows 95 = Macintosh 87 OSX 04 = BSD 93
Since the whole Max OS X is written in Perl, I don't really trust it because I am not sure what will happen when Perl 6 is released.
stable
easy to use
gorgeous
well rounded
interesting Kind of sounds like the perfect boyfriend/girlfriend. But remember, we're talking about software here... :P
.deviatefromtheabsolute.
If you've been under a rock and haven't read much about OS X, still view Linux as a strong desktop OS, but hate having to fight to get the latest software, hardware, or other common computer accessories working without a call to your other Linux buddies, you should get a kick out of this article.
While the author disavows the article to a degree, it may be of great use to Linux and other UNIX users who haven't a clue of the true nature of OS X beneath its GUI interface. From the kernel, to a typical Mac's boot firmware, to its BSD origins, this is probably one of the better free web-accessible summaries that Linux geeks could appreciate.
OK, it might not make you switch, but note that this guy admits to using OS X for only 3 years or so, and he's gained quite an understanding of it.
Will OS X work for you best? YMMV.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
I hate X-Windows, crappy widgets and horrible fonts. As much as people criticize OS-X for being an "expensive" FreeBSD the display engine is light years ahead, its better than anything currently being used on Linux or FreeBSD.
Even NeXtstep and OPENSTEP's use of Display Postscript was excellent on low powered Intel based hardware.
In short, OS X is everything Linux wants to be, and FAR FAR more. Time to switch, penguin-heads! Think different, think better, think APPLE!
but I know it isn't UNIX.
How much "hacking the code" have you done on Linux? Be honest. Have you ever needed to significantly modify your operating system's source code? Do you even know how?
Are you just bitching because it isn't Free for the sake of bitching?
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.
with much gayness,
Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.
I wish I knew what OSX was like firsthand, because I sure as hell can't afford a mac with what I get paid. Maybe if they offered some sort of lite x86 version, they could get more converts, but so far, my setup of pirated Windows XP and Linux seems to work quite well.
I know it's a long shot to hope for an x86 version, but I like to see what the hype is all about in OSes most of the time.
i must admit that i admire apple's os x platform. for example one *can* use the command line as much as one likes but one doesnt't *have* to. i can't say that i love editing my xf86config for example. tho os x is far from perfect (it *is* after all proprietary) but it seems like an evolution of linux in ways of usability. i think however that the major OSS desktop environments aren't that far away from obtaining equally powerfull yet userfriendly operation (having only working knowledge of the gentoo distro) it's been a while since i used os x (10.1 in fact) and i must admit i regret lacking the funds to buy myself a peachy powermac g5 cuz i'm quite tempted by os x panther and the ilife bundle (man garageband look awesome!) sometimes i've wished linux was a bit more 'it just works' although i know huge progess is being made in that field every day (ie getting alsa to work has been a major pita for me) i for one just think os x gives the user still a much smoother computer experience than linux can at the moment. i consider it to be a best of both worlds - operation system. only, personally, i think os x could do with decent skinning features as simple far from everybody likes apple's aqua interface. way to go apple
It's good to explain more of the underpinnings OS X. You see, NeXTSTEP was almost the perfect operating system and development environment.
:-)
The NS environment (living on in Aqua today) is just so cool. Well-designed interfaces abound. Design patterns everywhere, created when the term "Design Pattern" had barely been explored in the computer world. For instance: most objects use delegation to extend their behavior. Not subclassing! Just compare building a GUI in Swing to Cocoa, it's like salt and sugar.
Objective-C is a wonderful semi-dynamic language, much nicer than C++.
Programming the mac is a true joy, even if all this dynamic dispatch is a little slow and hardly anybody uses macs.
Thanks for your letter. Being Catholic myself, I know exactly what you're talking about! It has always been our plan here at Apple Computer Inc to revolutionize personal computing with our high-quality and highly gay products.
I'm happy to answer your letter by letting you know that YES we will be releasing an entire hLife ("homo-life") software line. You'll be able to recognize it in stores by the small stylized logo depicting a large cock entering a tight anus with an Apple logo on it. ("Suddenly it all comes together" indeed!).
Anyway, I hope you and other members of our community will join us on our mission, and purchase the exciting new hLife boxed set. Only the boxed set comes with translucent cock rings!
Sincerely,
Harry Rodman
Vice-president
Homosexual Liaison Services
Apple Computer, Inc.
An attractive, usable, and stable GUI counts for something. FreeBSD (which I run and love) can't provide that.
Also, the iLife suite is fuckin awesome. Nothing on windows or *nix comes even close to it as far as quality and integration are concerned.
--
the strongest word is still the word "free"
I loved some of the concepts behind linux, but I think Linux's greatest advantage is also it's greatest weakness. The fact that there is no central governing body for most projects means that you get lots of fragmentation (X11: freedesktop.org, fresco, XFree; Distros: Gentoo, Debian, Mandrake, Redhat, etc) which makes it very difficult to stick to one standard. Thankfully, over time some projects fork (gcc) and wind up becoming the project that takes over. It's this fragmentation that helps linux adapt so rapidly. However because of all this, developers can't code for one toolkit api, one kernel api, etc. Mac OS X, to linux users, is like linux controlled by ONE group who says yes or no to all issues so that the complex fragmented software base can concentrate on one goal: a good consistent end user experience. I honestly would say Mac OS X couldn't exist without Linux or BSD because it wouldn't be where it was today without the OSS community. People complain that OS X is too proprietary, but i believe it is the perfect mix. On one hand you have OSS software. On the other hand you have commercial software. It's truely the best of both worlds! Isn't this what many linux users want? Linux grandma can use? Companies to write native software? Games? Gaim and KMail side by side with safari and photoshop? You don't have to wait if that's what you want. Linux is a great server OS, but mac os x has it by leaps and bounds as a good desktop platform. Am i saying Gnome and KDE should die off and we should all just use mac os x? of course not. But i am saying if you want a usable unix desktop now, not later, you don't have to look much further.
- tristan
It's proprietary software.
That's my major beef with it: I don't have the freedom to play with it as I'd like.
There are also minor problems: brain-dead BSD tools rather than nice GNU tools (compare the arguments of touch -d on a GNU/Linux system vs. a BSD system); various oddnesses in setup; old Apache (this may be fixed); somewhat difficult postfix setup (ditto) &c. But the major issue is that Mac OS X is proprietary software. I'm am American--I'm quite attached to freedom.
It's the fact that apple only sells LCD monitors, starting at $699. It's the fact that airport (which is a fancy name for 802.11b/g) is much more expensive than what is available for PCs. It's also the fact that systems have high initial costs ($1299 for JUST A BOX!).
Mod this as a flame, or whatever, but it is NOT the software that turns people away from buying Macs.
Oh?
From the developer of FilGimp: "Film GIMP developer Caroline Dahllof, a programmer at Rhythm & Hues, "Photoshop handles more layers with big images better". Matte painting artists at Rhythm & Hues create large backgrounds with perhaps forty layers and use a lot of specialized plugins. Working on single large images is quite different from the typical Film GIMP tasks of retouching film frames to remove dust or wire rigs. To get rid of Photoshop completely would require investing a lot of developer resources."
"Who are in control, they are not in control of anything - they don't even control themselves!" - Glen Beck
Read his post carefully
Folks it just seems to me that Mac OS X relies heavily on Adobe (Photoshop, Illustrator, Go live, et al) and Microsoft (Office, Outlook, Messenger, Media player, el al). Then pretty much everything is either proprietary apple software or free GNU tools. To me it just doesn't justify the profound cost of owning an Apple.
+++ David Watts 5495 0.0 0.5 1888 884
I think what he is saying is:
I want someone else to be able to hack my operating system's source code. I don't want that someone to be limited to an employee for one particular company.
In the article, it explains why Macs aren't overpriced. No wait a minute, that is the only 'misconception' not debunked.
OSX is probably more friendly then linux but it will never be as flexible. OSX only has to deal with a extremely small amount of targeted hardware. Hell anyone can build a good system around a specific hardware specification. If linux only had to deal with a specific drive, a specific processor, a specific cdrom things would be extremely easy now wouldn't it.
Got Code?
This is one of the very best "OS Review" articles I've ever come across - especially the way that it brings in all aspects of history, influences, etc to address ignorance & common misconceptions.
Good Job!
-tor
I will not be buying any Apple hardware or software you fucking cocksuckers. You can take that IPod and IRamItUpYourAss. OS X can OSuck my dick. I will take a G4 PowerDump on your PowerBook. QuickTime can QuickBlowMe. iTunes, more like shiteTunes. Expose? I'll Expose my fucking nuts to your chin.
I will be using Linux, XFree86, and Gnome. You Apple cockgobblers can keep taking it up the ass from Panther, or whatever new animal you like beastial anal sex with. Penguins never rape anyone, although they bite if they have to.
Apple is just another company that wishes they were Microsoft, so they can ass-ream you repeatedly with ease. If they had the market share that Microsoft had, they would be ass-fucking you harder and faster than Microsoft is. They already have a small group of willing homosexuals that let them do this to them already. But its not enough. What they want is the whole world to be forced to bend over and take a huge titanium iCock up their rectums.
Bill Gates = Joseph Stalin, 1945
Steve Jobs = Adolph Hitler, 1924
One item that is glossed over is the yearly "upgrade" fee which runs about $130 per OS X computer. Additionally, many of the multimedia programs which were formerly gratis, now will cost each user an additional $50. Of course it is a personal decision on whether to pay these what amounts to a de facto tax. Apple can't force you to pay. It is your call.
I did the next best thing I could do when I got my Mac. fdisk that dang OS X and installed Yellow Dog.
This is a test. This is a test of the emergency sig system. This has been only a test.
- see subject -
Yeah, it's too bad that Apple forces you to use its LCD monitors and wireless hardware.
Oh wait, they don't.
Go away, troll.
I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate.
Because I was just at the website and the store says 799$ for the emac right now. Shipping included.
Airport may be expensive, but you don't have to get it. In my laptop it was cheaper than the PC equivalent.
The initial cost of 800 does cost more than a PC, but they also don't become obsolete AS quickly so it's a neat trade off.
OK, it might not make you switch, but note that this guy admits to using OS X for only 3 years or so, and he's gained quite an understanding of it.
Maybe you should try Linux again, has it been 3 years? I've had very few problems with the latest hardware and software. Now I do have an ibook laying around, its a nice machine and fink+osx is powerful, but I have yet to see a good reason to switch to OSX from Linux. Yes the gui is prettier and there are more solid desktop apps but strangly enough, I actually prefer XFCE 4 to more fully featured desktop enviroments.
Misses the ``sturm und drang'' over Adobe's promising a free, then low-cost, then no-way-what's-your-market-cap license for Display PostScript (originally co-developed by NeXT and Apple), as well as the free ``Yellow Box'' run-time which went away at that time, as well as the moving target of the up-dated APIs when Apple ceased to think of Mac OS X as an OpenStep implementation.
.pdf out of pretty much any app. If one needs access to other features, well, there's always pdfTeX....(which provides access to things which the Adobe Acrobat GUI _doesn't_)
:(
Apple's support for PDF/X gainsays the claim the pdf support isn't a replacement for Adobe Acrobat to a certain extant. By tweaking a few settings one can get a press-ready
And the author misses Gerben Wierda's spiffy iInstaller.app which is a neat way to install iInstaller packages (which includes TeX, xfig, imagemagick, Ghostscript &c.). This was developed to work around (then limitations) of Apple's Installer.app and to make updating packages more efficient---way cool stuff.
osx.hyperjeff.net is a way-cool app tracker....
Also misses Macromedia FreeHand MX and the irony of NeXTstep's premier drawing / page-layout application having come to Mac OS X as a Carbon app
But a nice, informative article naetheless.
William
Sphinx of black quartz, judge my vow.
FeeBSD.
Apple have come up with some innovative products, but their market share remains tiny. Sadly, though, many buyers have been mislead by the marketing and eye-candy, and desperately try to justify their overpriced purchases to themselves on forums around the Net. Let's see what they really mean...
"MacOS X is everything Linux wants to be."
"Despite the fact that Linux is just code and can't WANT to be anything, I truly believe that it'd love to be a single-vendor, single-platform, sluggish half-proprietary OS with dwindling market share. Linux would love to throw away its impressively growing corporate takeup for that."
"Apple hardware is for real computer lovers."
"It's no hassle to use a plethora of keyboard combos to make up for the patronising one-button mouse. Despite the fact that my hands have FIVE fingers, and multiple-buttons make Web browsing so much more pleasant, I prefer my computer to be treat me like a special-needs child."
"Aqua makes me so much more productive!"
"My non-techie friends drool over the transparency and scaling effects, even though UI research has shown that they add practically nothing to getting real work done. It feels like KDE 2 on a Pentium 200, and I can't change to a light and fast WM, but those drop-shadows must make me work so quickly!"
"OSX shows that Apple is committed to open source."
"OpenDarwin.org and its community of about 27 is surely not just a token gesture by Apple. Pretty much nobody uses pure Darwin, and all the crucial components of the system are closed and require me to spend money just to get major OS updates, but they're really helping the community somehow."
"You get what you pay for with Apple hardware."
"My iBook was made by in Taiwan by AlphaTop and has design and build quality flaws (needing foam sheets jammed in to stop the common problem of the keyboard scratching the screen). But it's silvery and cost far more than an x86 laptop of better spec, so it must be much higher quality!"
"...blah blah MHz myth blah..."
"Although there's truth in PPC being more elegant than x86, it's crushing that the top-of-the-range 1.5 GHz chip is slaughtered by the equivalent 3 GHz Pentium 4. However, Steve Jobs showed some vague Photoshop filter benchmarks at the last MacWorld, so being a leprotard, I'm convinced."
The largest flaw of the article involves the availability of games for Mac OS X. The writer admittedly didn't know of many, so I'll list a few, past, present, and near future. Games that cannot play with their PC or Linux counterparts in a multiplayer mode will be marked with the number sign (#)
-Return to Castle Wolfenstein (original; the Enemy Territory MP expansion is not yet available) (Multiplayer DOTH ROCK.)
- Diablo 2 (including all expansions)
- WarCraft 3 (including all expansions)
- Neverwinter Nights (original; expansions not yet available, but can be hacked to work)
- Baldurs Gate II
- Icewind Dale
- Star Wars: Jedi Knight II
- Star Wars: Jedi Academy
- Lara Croft: Angel of Darkness
- No One Lives Forever 1 and 2
- Halo
- Soldier of Fortune 2
- Dungeon Siege (#) (Legends of Arranna expansion not yet available. This game is made in part by Microsoft and uses proprietary software to make MP work for PCs)
- SimCity 4
- The Sims (including all expansions, excluding Online)
- Splinter Cell (coming soon)
- Command & Conquer: Generals
- Star Wars: Battlegrounds
- Call of Duty (coming soon)
- Medal of Honor: Allied Assault and Spearhead expansion (new editions not yet available)
- Unreal
- Unreal Tournament 2003 and 2004
- Quake 3 (duh--its the engine for most of the games listed)
About the only big game that never hit the Macintosh in recent years was Half-Life. I built a PC just to try that baby out, and I wasn't disappointed.
Usually, you have to wait 2-6 months for a successful PC game to be ported by companies such as Aspyr, but the wait is usually worth it because the game has been patched and runs much smoother than when it was first introduced on the PC.
I jokingly consider PC players as my beta testers, since a PC game that sucks ("Bloodrayne" notwithstanding--that turd got through the quality control somehow) is never ported to Mac OS X.
So, if you gotta play everything, the Mac isn't for you. If you want to enjoy the best of the games in a year, it's a sure bet it'll be ported soon.
Some companies, like Blizzard, ship boxes that contain both the Mac and PC versions of the game, such as WarCraft 3.
Vos teneo officium eram periculosus ut vos recipero is.
You might also want to steal comments from someone who doesn't have 1765 comments, and does have a life...
Yadda yadda anti-slash yadda yadda mod down.
How the hell is this "insightful??" Macs can use any LCD or CRT monitor and standard 802.11b/g equipment.
Actually you can use any 802.11b or g wireless router with a Mac (so it's not just available for PCs as you probably already know). The Airport base station has a slightly different set of features that I don't need so I just use a cheap-o wireless router. However, to be fair, there are probably some users who can make use of the Airport features. You're not just buying a more expensive version of the exact same thing when you buy an Airport base station.
I admire all 4 of them
I use both a Linksys AP and an airport and I tell you, the airport is much much better.. it has a better range and my ibook talks directly to it. I use a regular monitor, a tv and the build in display on my ibook (a Compaq 19" monitor if you want to know) the "price myth" is one that all PC users use to justify not switching. -joe
So don't buy an LCD or basestation from Apple. PowerMacs also have DVI, so you can use it with most modern LCD screens from other manufacturers. Apple doesn't like to use technical jargon, so it gives user-friendly names when possible (Airport=802.11b, Airport Extreme=802.11g, Firewire=IEEE 1394). You don't have to use an Airport Basestation. Until I sold it to a friend, I used a Linksys wireless router for connecting my Mac and PC to the Internet. Now I have a ABSE, but I bought that for the USB print server more than anything else.
Note that you said "high initial cost." This is correct. The price is high at the beginning, but you get that extra cost back in spades over time. I've had a Powerbook for about 3 years now and the money spent is well worth the lack of frustration that I have when using it.
"The objective of securing the safety of Americans from crime and terror has been achieved." -- John Ashcroft
"Imitation is the sincerest [form] of flattery."
--Charles Caleb Colton, Lacon, volume I, no. 183
But I don't understand...how do I right-click? What's the magic manuever to access the context menus?? The magic keystrokes?
Oh I see...it's right here in the manual: You have to hold down G-A-Y while while you click. There we go. Now why do I all of a sudden want to go dig that black turtleneck out of my closet and put on those old Dieter glasses??
Touch my monkey!
Do I really need to explain that we Linux users aren't running Green CRT's and looking at "crappy widgets and horrible fonts" all day. This isn't 1993. Get a clue Troll.
Come on Mods, think a bit.
If you wanna get rich, you know that payback is a bitch
ps. there's nothing 'profound' about a price tag--get a new thesaurus...
So Apple only sells LCD monitors, and fancy looking wireless routers which are pricey. Big deal! Macs will work with any wireless router, and any VGA or DVI monitor, IDE hard drives (now some S-ATA), USB mice, etc. etc. They are selling high-end branded hardware. You pay for the name / bragging rights. All kinds of "high end" companies do this.
Look at BMW. They also have a strong brand as being high end. Try buying "official" BMW floormats. What's that you say? $150 for a pair of floormats? You can just as easily buy non-BMW matts at a local hardware store for about $10. They will certainly keep the dirt of the floor just as well.
Anyhow, perhaps I've borrowed too much from the car analogy, but you get the point. Apple is marketing themselves as a high end computer dealer. I won't even get into all the great included software that comes with their machines. Oh, and by the way, you can get an all-in-one eMac for about $999. Doesn't sound too outrageously priced to me.
You don't have to use Apple's LCD monitors. I'm using a very old 20" Radius on my G5 out of the box (ships with a DVI to VGA adapter too).
You can use other 802.11 devices with different feature sets that will be cheaper.
Macs aren't that expensive, they simply don't sell "low end" computers. We've beaten this horse to it's quarks several times here on
But, the software is the #1 mac purchasing carrot, if you will.
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
It's the fact that airport (which is a fancy name for 802.11b/g) is much more expensive than what is available for PCs.
It is also a different product.
Airport can route a modem connection rather than just a ethernet like every other product.
So with Airport you can share a dial-up connection wirelessly.
Extra functionality , and from what I've seen, the only wireless router that can do this.
really, i prefer my applications to be fully-abled;>
The G5 is currently the only Mac shipping without a monitor, and the video cards they ship with have both DVI and ADC outputs. The G5 comes with a DVI to VGA adapter in the box, so while Apple doesn't sell anything less than a $700 LCD they do not limit you to anything. My 4-year old Mitsubishi CRT works just fine until I can find the extra cash laying around to upgrade to an LCD.
The "crappy widgets and horrible fonts" have nothing to do with Quartz vs X11. The X Athena Widget toolkit might look ugly by todays standards, sure, but why use that today? GTK with the industrial theme looks great (IMO), and there are a lot of great fonts now. If you like Aqua, fine, but that's not due to Quartz.
Quartz is nice, but IMO Cairo has it beat, being based on the network transparent, portable X window system.
If Quartz was so "good", why would Apple need to make it's own (non-free for that matter) version of X11 available as well?
Cairo uses a model very similar to Display PDF, which is a good idea which much of the good sides of Quartz stem from.
No. It was a resource hog on anything except NeXT's own machines (which had a decoding card specifically for that purpose). Not only is the X Window System a lot leaner, Display Postscript has inherent security flaws (one of the best reasons to go with Display PDF instead, as Quartz does).
Obviously, as Plan 9's Rio proves, a window system can be made a lot leaner than X. But Quartz is going in the other direction than that - features and rendering - and still it hasn't got X beat. That's pathetic, considering X is free and Quartz isn't. You can keep your golden chains.
You do if you don't want to shell out $$$ for a converter and/or adapter. You'll also probably want to make sure you're using a non-Apple Monitor that can be supported by Apple's Display Configuration Utility.
Go away, uneducated stupid comment maker guy.
Now that is something I'd like to have a look at.
Anyone seen it/got it/set-it-up-for-kix?
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Don't tell! :-)
--- Ban humanity.
It's also the fact that systems have high initial costs ($1299 for JUST A BOX!)
It's also because most people are used to the fact that their $300 white box is unuseable as a primary machine after a couple years. Sure it makes a nice fileserver/router/whatever.
But there are many people out there happily running Panther on 5 year old Macs.
Quite a few of the SMCs do this. Nice feature when the cable goes down.
Yep, that VGA adaptor that came with my PowerMac G4 that lets me hook up my 21" Hitatchi CRT was pretty expensive.
And if you're going to play the "well, I was talking about LCDs with DVI" game, they are available from a variety of sources for around $40.
If Quartz was so "good", why would Apple need to make it's own (non-free for that matter) version of X11 available as well?
Because people wanted to run the GIMP and X-Chat.
Seriously; that's just about it.
I have three monitors connect to my 400MHz AGP G4 running Panther, one that I connect to my 1GHz 12"PB, and none are Apple LCDs. I also have 3rd party "airport" (802.11g) wireless hardware.
Apple monitors (LCD and otherwise) have typically been at the higher end of the spectrum because they are at the higher end, quality wise. If a lower spec monitor suits your needs, then fine. Save that money and buy ass-ugly generic monitors. I did.
There is no reason to buy the Apple AirPort "flying saucer" other than it has a nice package than any other 802.11b/g unit. Some people like Apple's industrial design, and will pay a premium for the nice wrapping. But, Apple adhered to the 802.11b/g standards, so one can use whatever hardware one wishes.
And, btw, x86 folks. Whether you are a Linux-head or a Windows-advocate, drop Apple a thank you for once again dragging your hardware manufacturers into the future by pushing a wireless networking standard. You think all those 3rd party wireless networking devices would be available to you if Apple hadn't shown the rest of the industry that wireless computing was a capability desired by the consumer?
Riiiiight....
---anactofgod---
---anactofgod---
"Equal opportunity swindling - *that* is the true test of a sustainable democracy."
At this time, as I've scanned through the posts I've noticed two score modes:
0 and 5
Anyone else notice it? And if you read the posts you'll find that their contents are very consistent, too:
People who make rational observerations get a lot of 5's and then there's the Windows fags that score 0's for their incipid rants.
That's precisely the sort of thing that Fink is for: easy building and installation of Unix tools on OSX.
Incidentally, it's based on apt-get, that beloved tool of Debian users everywhere.
PowerMacs and PowerBooks have standard DVI out, and come with a free (aka zero $$$) DVI to VGA adapter. iBooks come with a free VGA adapter. Putting a 3rd party display on an iMac is just plain tacky.
Go away, uneducated stupid comment maker guy.If you're interested in trying OS X, Apple's online store has new iBook G3s for $799 (look in the Special Deals section). I bought one for my wife and 'borrow' it liberally ;-) OK so it isn't a PowerBook G4 but it has to be one of the best values in laptops. Its fast enough to do reasonably sized software development, and its more than enough for couch-born web surfing and email. Unix + great GUI + lightweight portable = bliss.
Not trying to sound like an advertisement, just giving a heads up to people that want the cheapest way possible to run OS X. (well, on new gear, on the same page you can get factory refurbs for even cheaper)
I thought OS X was an operating system. I do not understand the confusion.
I hate sigs.
if your buying a computer based on how many buttons its OEM mouse has, you have some major issues.
i recently bought my IBook 12 inch about 3 months ago, my first Apple ever, and since then, i've given my brother my new toshiba satelite 1.6ghz laptop, cause i have absolutly no use for it anymore
i've used a usb microsoft optical mouse, and a RF logitech keyboard and mouse, usb also on the mac and it works perfectly fine. So what, its not white and clear plexi glass.
I also got the airport extreme card for it, and it connects just fine to my netgear wireless hub. and the built in ethernet port ? just fine to my netgear gateway router.
and bluetooth. My girl friends phone is blue tooth. it took me 2 hours to use her phone as a modem on her windows laptop. i took the usb adapter, pluged it into my ibook, and in 5 minutes i was online threw her phone
nitpicking will get you no where. My only complaint is, if i would have known id like it so much, I would have gotten a dual g5
my 2 cents.
Airport cards are not more than other decent wireless cards. You don't have to buy Apple's base station.
They sell the eMac which comes with a CRT monitor. If you buy a G5 tower, you can use whatever monitor you want.
Their hardware is priced higher than the cheapest possible x86 box you can buy, but it also doesn't suck and doesn't contain used parts.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
The first problem is that buying an affordable mac means buying one that is waaay below spec when compared to what a PC user may be used to (example: my G4 500MHz Cube cost me $800 via e-bay, and was considered a fairly decent bargain.)
After spending $400 for a processor upgrade, and a LOT of shoehorning just to get a competent videocard to fit in it (a cheap re-flashed Radeon 8500), not to mention OSX itself (currently at 10.2.8), I wound up with nearly $1300 sunk into a box that ran roughly as well as a 2GHz Pentium 4.
After ironing out Apple's particular quirks, I still had to contend with an eternal wait whenever I wanted to load a program, and performance was spotty at best. Granted, this was because jacking up a native G4 w/ a Powerlogix chip isn't going to get you the same performance as a system built natively w/ such speeds in mind, but quite frankly, buying a used Apple to test out OSX would be a lot like buying a 386 laptop to see how Linux stacked up against XP on a gamer's box.
Your best bet would be to spend some time on a friend's Mac (get 'im to make an account for you), and see what it would be like on something more recent (albeit more expensive.) Then, if you want to go whole-hog, go get a G5 and call it good. It'll cost a fortune, but at least you can do it knowing that it'll remain useful for at least 6 years (whereas PC's tend to become 'legacy' items after 3.)
As for me and my cube? I've got 3 Yellow Dog Linux CD's ready to get installed on it... I figure a that YDL 3.0 with MOL (Mac On Linux) for my CG proggies will suffice. At least everything that doesn't require OSX will run with a response time that ends before the next ice age
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
Personally, I got tired of having to re-locate the the set of arcana I needed to get my USB and DVD stuff working again on my Linux box after each kernel update. When the time came for a new machine, I bought a Powerbook.
I still have my Linux servers, but for daily use, my Mac is a dream.
Clear, Dark Skies
No, it's compatibility FUD (I actually had an online banking support rep say to me "remember Betamax?") and a complete lack of understanding of ROI and the lifecycle of hardware. Not to mention lemming behaviour...
And I've heard more people than I can stomach who just need to use the internet and type some letters say that there isn't any software for the Mac, a salesperson told them so. (10K native apps plus VirtualPC and all those OS 9 apps, and counting.)
$1299 for just a box (WTF? which one? izzat $CDN?) that you'll use for 4 years as-is (after a third-party RAM upgrade) and can run semi-pro creative applications without geekery, viruses, or downtime--not bad at all, especially if you use it to make money.
Damn those pesky terrorists
There are also clones of NeXT/Apple's InterfaceBuilder and ProjectBuilder and a host of end user applications. GNUstep builds on Linux and other UNIX systems. The Foundation classes work fine on Windows and there's serious work to perfect the GUI classes on Windows as well.
iMacs are just plain tacky.
There. It had to be said.
Darwin is the core of OS X; but you don't get the higher level APIs.
Clear, Dark Skies
Is there a printable version for those like me that prefer wireless paper solutions while in the craper?
uh...by the way - i do plan to read it. not wipe with it. hmmm...unless there's an emergency or the article sucks.
if your buying a computer based on how many buttons its OEM mouse has, you have some major issues.
There is one really, really big issue. Apple is famous for their laptops. Apple's desktops are not (IMHO) particularly exceptional or cost-competitive, but their laptops have traditionally been near-PC price and well-built. Most people I know that want Apple hardware want a laptop.
However, if you purchase an Apple laptop, you cannot simple snap in a new trackpad. You are stuck with a single button. Yes, you can can purchase an external mouse, but then you're stuck using an external mouse with your laptop. This is a pain in the ass, and something that you can avoid on non-Apple laptops -- you can get nice three-button laptops elsewhere.
This is not something that Apple is unaware of or incapable of fixing. However, they have made a conscious (and much-protested) decision to not natively support multiple buttons in their hardware, even as an option. While I can respect their reasons for doing so, it does make their hardware much less appealing. The reason people get so bent out of shape about this is partly because Apple *insists* on forcing you to use their hardware to use their software, and *insists* on not providing an option for more buttons for the (many) folks that are unhappy with their default setup.
If this is not a problem for your uses, that's fine. For me, it would be a major issue -- having to find a flat surface and carry along a big clunky external device to use the thing *is* an issue. Please do not call this "nitpicking" -- it is an entirely justified criticism that Apple has chosen not to address.
May we never see th
I guess I'm suprised that UNIX just accepted the CDE and never really extended it to be something really cool. At its base OS X is BSD, and Panther actually comes with a version of X one could install. Personally I like OS X, but macs hardware is just to expensive for a poor man like me. IMHO Mac OS X is the uppermiddle class mans extra friendly UNIX. I'll take Linux cause I'm poor ;-)
Only 'flamers' flame!
Does slashdot hate my posts?
Almost everyone with a clue agrees OS X is pretty good. It's the damn hardware costs.
Most of what is here is cutting but true. However, the article, unlike most Slashdot posters, does not claim this. He doesn't say that OS X is a "better Linux" -- he says that they're two different beasts.
"Despite the fact that Linux is just code and can't WANT to be anything, I truly believe that it'd love to be a single-vendor, single-platform, sluggish half-proprietary OS with dwindling market share. Linux would love to throw away its impressively growing corporate takeup for that."
True, but I don't believe OS X has dwindling market share.
"Apple hardware is for real computer lovers."
I don't think I've ever seen people say this.
"My non-techie friends drool over the transparency and scaling effects, even though UI research has shown that they add practically nothing to getting real work done. It feels like KDE 2 on a Pentium 200, and I can't change to a light and fast WM, but those drop-shadows must make me work so quickly!"
True. However, I think they may also be referring to the lower learning curve of much Mac OS software. Unless you're using software quite a bit, the learning curve plays a larger role than the total amount of functionality. I claim that it takes around three years of heavy use of emacs before you really start to get a lot more good out of it than its traditional Windows and Mac OS counterparts.
"OpenDarwin.org and its community of about 27 is surely not just a token gesture by Apple. Pretty much nobody uses pure Darwin, and all the crucial components of the system are closed and require me to spend money just to get major OS updates, but they're really helping the community somehow."
True. Apple does not "get it" WRT open source in anywhere near the same way that Red Hat and friends do. They produce a high-end, propriatary product. However, they are infinitely better than Microsoft (and to many people, Mac OS is a valid alternative to Windows...but Linux is not). Furthermore, even before the open source thing started up, Apple was much better about helping folks tinker around with internals than Microsoft was.
"My iBook was made by in Taiwan by AlphaTop and has design and build quality flaws (needing foam sheets jammed in to stop the common problem of the keyboard scratching the screen). But it's silvery and cost far more than an x86 laptop of better spec, so it must be much higher quality!"
I agree that many folks try very hard (and fail) to justify the amount of money spent on their Apple hardware. I find such claims pretty much futile on desktops. However, while they aren't perfect, many Apple laptops are fairly price competitive and pretty good compared to their PC counterparts. Yes, Apple has had a history of doors breaking off, of scratches, and of some flimsiness. But I've also seen countless x86 laptops with all kinds of problems as well. Apple may not be light years ahead here, but they sure aren't light years behind either.
"Although there's truth in PPC being more elegant than x86, it's crushing that the top-of-the-range 1.5 GHz chip is slaughtered by the equivalent 3 GHz Pentium 4. However, Steve Jobs showed some vague Photoshop filter benchmarks at the last MacWorld, so being a leprotard, I'm convinced."
Very true. Macs are (significantly) slower than x86 machines. It's simply true. Folks who are arguing that Macs are good should not waste their time trying to argue otherwise. They're much better off with the "Yes, but what are you actually *using* said cycles for? I'm getting drop shadows out of it -- you seem to be using about 2% of your CPU on average!"
May we never see th
Make sure you partition your drive, having the first 8 gigs for OSX to install on. Later machines don't need to do that.
I have Panther on a Rev B 333mhz iMac, it runs well with 256mgs RAM
photosMy Photostream
LOL... so, so true
There are two reasons to consider Apple's Airport stations - a modem for internet connections (sounds crazy, but not everyone has broadband yet), and a USB port for simple printer sharing.
R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
Their hardware is priced higher than the cheapest possible x86 box you can buy, but it also doesn't suck and doesn't contain used parts.
Actually, Apple doesn't really use ultra-nice components, as they did back in the day. I'd say what they put into their cases is about what you'd get in an x86 box. On the other hand, Apple's prices have also come down a lot since the day, and their laptops are price competitive.
May we never see th
I wrote a petition a while back to get that added to OS X, but it never seemed that anything came of it. W00t!
...of course, there's the obvious rejoinder that Mac folks would upgrade more frequently if it were more affordable...
May we never see th
Oh, and by the way, you can get an all-in-one eMac for about $999. Doesn't sound too outrageously priced to me.
True, but to be honest, the eMac kind of sucks compared to what you can get in the PC world for $1K.
May we never see th
Haha!! maybe to it's Mesons and well.. nevermind
don't forget FireWire, and also really popularizing USB, and getting rid of stupid floppy drives, and Mice for that matter. The list goes on and on.
I was thinking of OpenDarwin, I di actually know that Apple Darwin is APSL but I posted a little hastily. I figured someone would jump on that...
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I got an Airport card last night for my G4 ($79.00 US). It took me about 10 minutes (most of which was spent cautiously looking at the connector and card) to install & hook up the built-in antenna. It then took me about 5 minutes to set up using the airport-ready software (already installed). I was browsing the internet through my wife's Windows-based Netgear base station (using Roadrunner) about 2 minutes later. And when it comes to hardware, etc., I'm pretty much a complete amateur.
Hmmm, damn I could have sworn the PowerMac we just bought is working absolutely fine with our nice Sony CRT and our NEC LCD monitor, both of which use standard VGA connections.
And I could swear that the D-Link wireless card I have works very nicely in my Powerbook.
I must just be dreaming though.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
I agree that hinting too little has been a problem with past versions of OS X, but whatever they added between Jaguar and Panther (I guess Apple prefers to call it "micro-pixel positioning") has done a lot to clean up the color problems that existed before. I noticed the difference the first time Panther booted, and the appearance of small fonts in particular is much more readable now.
This is the answer I never saw properly answered, and I hoped the article would.
Why combine the loss of performance and added complexity of Mach with the lack of flexibility of a single (BSD) server?
One could be lean with a single BSD server, or flexible with Mach and a multiple server system like the Hurd. But XNU gives one the worst of both worlds as I see it...
Leandro Guimarães Faria Corcete DUTRA
DA, DBA, SysAdmin, Data Modeller
GNU Project, Debian GNU/Lin
Office desktop: RedHat 9 on AMD
Home (me+wife+kids): Mac OS X Panther
Something I use for one-off client software and site testing: Win2K on Dell P3
I have used a Mac since the SE30 (circa '88). The office is 100% Windoze, including assets in India (where they are about as Windoze addicted as one can be) and my office Linux desktop and laptops work out OK with the printing and shares with some fiddling. The server room is probably 75% Linux however, much of which I manage, and I went to Linux on the desktop a year ago with no regrets when my WinDell started locking up, except that I would have prefered a Mac.
I would use OS X at work if I could get the PHBs to spring for the hardware. But they don't really care about a lot that IMHO is important to enjoying work; I already bought my own Aeron task chair (to save my aching back) and my own LCD monitor (to save my aching eyes and immune system) and already built my own workstation (because I already have one flaky Dell) so maybe I should buy my own Mac for work.
Makes me feel like a damned visitor here sometimes! Screw it; I'll get a new iMac for home and bring my G4 to work. Some things you just cannot compromise on.
=^..^= all your rodent are belong to us
So the parent, with the same message was +3 Funny. The child was -1 Flamebait. What the fuck ever.
Quote:
I hear ya. Just the other day I was updating a complex technical document in Microsoft Word F, when FreeBSD's Unix core came in handy as I wrote a little perl script to analyze my Apache logs. Then I fired up Quicken and balanced my checkbook to find out that I have a little extra cash this month. Thank god I didn't have to pay the ridiculous Apple Tax! Those stupid suckers.
Hopefully this weekend I'll get around to editing my sister's wedding video and creating a nice DVD of it for all of the family. I don't have Final Cut, but the free movie editing and DVD creation tools available for FreeBSD are easily the best and easiest to use. I'll probably write some custom piano music for it using my MIDI keyboard and Digital Performer (which runs best on FreeBSD).
Next week I have a bunch of code development I need to do for a big project. Thankfully I have several machines at my disposal, and FreeBSD's kick ass development environment automatically senses my other machines and uses their free cycles to speed up those long compiles.
Finally, I think I'll have a nice video chat with my grandmother. Haven't seen her in a while. FreeBSD is the best platform for this. Suck my ass, Apple apologists!
I guess you showed those Mac zealots a thing or three... Why, even I, running on my piece of crap G4 400Mhz Mac (It's only been running 3+ years without problems - must be ready to go any time now) with my 1 button mouse (with 4 buttons?!?) and sluggish Aqua interface (which somehow seems faster on my 400 Mhz G4 than KDE does on my 2.4Ghz Pentium 4 at home -- must be an illusion...) have been convinced. I've been using Linux at home and the Mac at work (and at home with my laptop) for a while now and hadn't seen the light about Linux superiority! So in response...
Linux Zealot Translator-o-matic
"Linux is everything Mac OS X wants to be."
"Despite the fact that Linux is pulled in numerous directions by various factions, contains an antique driver architecture, and is weighted down by the need to support a gazillion obsolete bits of hardware alongside of bleeding edge hardware made by manufacturers who refuse to release specs to the open source community, I truly believe it wants to be a lean, stable, easy to configure and use OS just like Mac OS X. Linux would love to rewrite itself from scratch to accomplish this."
"Linux Hardware is for real computer lovers"
"I can use ANY hardware I want to on my Linux machine, even this cool new motherboard I just boug... Okay, once I download the drivers I can use any hardware I... Hmph, okay, after I recompile my kernel and install new dri... Blast it all, after I upgrade to the latest test kernel and install the latest patches... *&^*&^ drivers -- Fine, after I *write* new drivers, maybe? Never mind -- I'll go back to my motherboard from 2 years ago - I know *that* one works, anyway. Mostly."
"KDE makes me so much more productive!"
"Yeah, it blows away that whole Aqua thing - I can render a web page in 3.2 seconds, which is a whole tenth of a second faster than they can on the Mac. And so what if Aqua can use hardware acceleration to composite the screen faster than I can draw three windows -- who needs more than one or two windows on screen anyway - they only clutter things up and slow things down, so I don't use that many. Besides, even when I do, I know where they all are anyway - don't need that Expose crap. And I've got glasses, so when I squint to make out the fonts, it won't hurt too much."
"Only Linux is *real* Open Source"
"Just because Apple provided open source to Darwin, doesn't mean it's really open source -- you need a couple thousand people working on it to count. And it's BSD based anyway -- who needs that? It's not like BSD is a real open source system either. We all know only Linux counts. (And those guys calling it GNU/Linux should learn that too...)"
"You get what you pay for with Linux hardware."
"Absolutely. Except for quality, ease of use, quick setup -- those cost extra. But I can certainly get cheap, low quality, hardware cheaper. I might even get it to work eventually."
"...blah blah MHz myth blah..."
"Although there's truth in x86 being more awkward, it isn't really that bad -- a top end Pentium 4 when overclocked (and water cooled) *almost* comes close to the top of the end 2.0 Ghz PPC G5 chip. Why, the Athlon 64 even does slightly better, at least until higher speed G5 chips come out next month. We'll cling doggedly to our current lead to show our superiority and show those Mac weenies who's boss..."
What is Mac OS X?
...plus more
mac os x is a real peach
mac os x is as innovative as the computers that run it
mac os x is emerging as the best place to develop and deploy your java applications
mac os x is provided in the mac os x developer tools bundle
mac os x is a rock
mac os x is apple's new operating system
mac os x is targeted at any mac that apple shipped with a powerpc g3 processor or better
mac os x is available from the xonx project
mac os x is based on unix
mac os x is visionary and practical
mac os x is riding the wave just right
Hmm, he lists Lisp amongst the interpreted languages. I hope the rest of the article is more accurate...
...
Edi.
== Programming Language Myths ==
BASIC Myth: People who learn BASIC go on to learn other languages.
Reality: Most people who learn BASIC go on to find less nerdy ways of writing "Mr. Gzabowski is a lame teacher" over and over again.
C Myth: C programs are insecure, full of buffer overflows and such.
Reality: C programs are only insecure if written by imperfect programmers. Since all C programmers know that they are perfect, there's no problem.
COBOL Myth: COBOL is dead.
Reality: It stalks from out the ancient vaults of death, its putrid mind drawn to the blood of the living.
Forth Myth: Forth makes no sense.
Reality: backwards. think to have just you sense, perfect makes Forth
Java Myth: You need Java to do business applications.
Reality: You need Java to get a job.
Lisp Myth: Lisp is an interpreted language.
Reality: Lisp is COMPILED DAMMIT COMPILED! IT'S IN THE FUCKING STANDARD!!!
Pascal Myth: Pascal is a toy.
Reality: Oh, wait, that is not a myth, it is true
Perl Myth: Perl is impossible to read.
Reality: You are not taking enough psychedelics.
Python Myth: Python's only problem is the whitespace thing.
Reality: Python's only problem is that it is fucking slow.
You can also use the Airport's modem to dial-up your network and use it's broadband or poke around for a file you left at home.
Its a troll, but I'll bite.
When I outgrow my Macs, I usually either sell them on eBay or donate them; they will get a few more years that way (usually running a current OS from year 1 to 4, then sticking with that in years 4 -> 8.)
For example, my first Mac, a Mac II went with system 6.0.4 in 1989 to 7.5 in 1993, when I gave it to a school where they kept it until 1995.
My second Mac, a PB 170 went from 7.1 in 1991 (or 2?) to 7.5 in 1994, when I gave it to my sister to use in her school. She still uses it.
I had a 6100 for a year or two, and sold it for about 1/3 what I paid, which is just about right for depreciation on computer equipment. System 7.5 on that, I think.
I had a PowerBook 5300 at around this point, and it was a total piece of shit. Worst Mac Ever.
My 8500 had System 7.5 to 9.0, lasted in my house for I think 2 years, and then I sold it again for about 1/3 purchase price.
My 450mhz G4 I bought in 1999 (a few months after my Dell XP 450). I still use it as my primary computer - it went from system 8.1 to OS X 10.3. I've only ever added memory and a second internal disk. I'll probably hang on to it for another year. While I use a 2ghz DP G5 at work, I don't find the G4 slow enough to warrant an upgrade for the light duty development work I do from home. If I were to sell the machine on eBay right now, I'd get about $300.
The Dell? It would cost me more to get rid of it than its worth. I see two of them on eBay with a buy it now price of $79 and no bidders.
Macs simply hold their value longer.
OS X is the UNIX desktop Linux has been trying to be for 10+ years now. If OS X came out for x86, would the drive for desktop Linux effectively die?
"Sufferin' succotash."
" Yeah, it's too bad that Apple forces you to use its LCD monitors and wireless hardware. Oh wait, they don't. Go away, troll."
Ha ha, Apple zealot ducking the obvious. He's talking about hardware, not I/O, dumbass. Repeat after me, apple hardware cost too much.
Unfortunately, no one can be told what Mac OS X is, you have to see it for yourself.
This article seems to overlook (though I may have missed it) the fact that OS X is based in part on Apple's MkLinux project that had PowerPC Macs running Linux (and other OSes) on top of the Open Group (OSF/RI) Mach 3.0.
I'm buying a new computer soon. It was originally going to be parts added to the current one, but eventually I ended up affording a whole system. The system ended up being around A$1300, which largely covers an AthlonXP 2500+, flat 19" monitor, 120Gb hard drive, 512Mb RAM, GeForce4 MX, and similar, non top-of-line specs.
I remembered after I put the prices together that I said that if I could afford a whole machine I would consider a Mac, since a friend had been trying to convince me that the prices are comparable now.
Well... I priced a similar Mac. 1.25GHz G4, 19" monitor, 80Gb hard drive, 256Mb RAM, Radeon 9000 was the only part which was really better than the system I put together myself... the price? A$2500.
I think at what seems to be more than twice the price of an x86 system, Apple have a long way to go before they can debunk what they call "myths" about the expensiveness of the Mac. First of all, they need to drop over 50% off the price.
Karma: It's all a bunch of tree-huggin' hippy crap!
At the job I currently have, we're stuck developing in Visual Basic .Net (ASP.Net pages and the like). My laptop had taken a crap on me and I had to buy a new one, and was forced to get a laptop with Windows when I wanted to go with a Mac.
.Net (or something that would let me work with Visual Basic .Net) was available, and I'm not sure where to even begin looking. Since I know some people here use Macs, is there any kind of IDE for developing in Visual Basic .Net?
I wasn't sure if Visual Studio
It's the fact that apple only sells LCD monitors, starting at $699.
Yes, and nobody else makes displays that work on the Mac. I'm just imagining the two ViewSonic LCDs that are connected to my G4 right now.
It's the fact that airport (which is a fancy name for 802.11b/g) is much more expensive than what is available for PCs.
Yeah, and no other wireless hardware works with the Mac. Those pesky hallucinogens pumped through the air ducts at my office only make me THINK my iBook is connecting via the company's Compaq wireless access point.
It's also the fact that systems have high initial costs ($1299 for JUST A BOX!).
Well, it's not Apple's fault that people are cheap, short-sighted idiots. I've gotten significantly longer usage out of the Macs I've owned than the x86 hardware I've owned. I got six years out of the last Power Mac I bought new, but I've rebuilt my x86 box with newer hardware three times in that same time period. You might be able to get a PC for 1/3 the cost of a Mac, but chances are you'll have purchased two more before I'm ready to replace my Mac.
~Philly
You can run Baldurs Gate I on Mac OS X too through the BGII engine. Get "bg1tutu" from here: http://ire.mainecoon.net/customs/weidu.html
Consistency. UI guidelines. Simplicity. Aesthetically informed developers. These are aspects of Mac OS X that the ad hoc community of Linux developers lacks in the desktop arena.
One can start up almost any unfamiliar Mac OS X application and find all the standard app features in seconds. Preferences in the application menu, help in the help menu, the same command shortcuts for new, open, close, save, quit, print, undo, copy, cut, paste, select all, find, find next, info, minimize, hide, switch windows, etc. The same behavior of key modifiers, such as shift to select a range, command to toggle selectedness, option to get extended behavior, shift to constrain proportions, option to snap-center, etc. Many of these standards developed in the apps of Aldus/Adobe. Taken together they compose a transactional language that Mac users expect and appreciate. A well-designed Mac application is one which adheres to the accepted standards and extends them elegantly.
I don't find the same level of consistency and simplicity on other platforms. Take a typical Windows application. The menus will sometimes contain items ambiguously named Preferences, Options, Settings, and Defaults. Sometimes the items are in the Options menu, sometimes the Edit menu, sometimes the File menu. Quite a few Linux desktop apps suffer from the same problem.
I haven't looked deeply into the development of KDE, Gnome, etc., but are there any guidelines extant for the way these UI toolkits are actually used? It seems to me that an established set of standards and practices is a necessary element. Otherwise Linux will just end up being a patchwork of ideas halfheartedly borrowed and extended from Windows and Mac OS... which to some extent it has.
-- thinkyhead software and media
The configurability is a Mac vs. Linux philosophy thing. Don't tout it, you'll start a flamewar. Suffice to say, Apple has decided that for UI, One Consistent Way is better than a huge amount of configurability.
You need CocoaGestures to get system wide gestures. The hotkeys support is already there.
The system-wide password manager? Prithee, sir, what then would we call KeyChain?
System wide spellchecking is part and parcel of the very good Apple text widgets. You use their widgets, you get it for free. You can configure it specially, or you can let all the code in NSApp just do it for you (usually what you want).
Apple doesn't do things like auto-completion in a generic fashion (although you never see it mentioned, they do provide a completion service, and other people have cheerfully extended this functionality with supplemental abilities.) because they haven't decided on their One Consistent Way to do it. Until then, we have a plethora of software, free and commercial, that does most anything we want. The OS X software community is very happy correcting any perceived flaws or blank spots a dozen different ways.
UI is a very subjective matter, so Apple (that makes money off of their good, consistent user experience) takes the middle road in most everything. It's smarter for them that way, since it's so incredibly easy to extend their input mechanisms.
Slashdot. It's Not For Common Sense
Technically, the article was a good overview of the various bits and pieces of Mac OS X.
However, the article either skipped or provided very skimpy coverage of Apple's DRM system and the defacto closed source nature of Mac OS X.
The one gigantic difference between Linux/*BSD and OS X / Windows is that Linux and *BSD are *open source* while Mac OS X and Windows are *closed source*.
While there are a few pieces of Mac OS X that are open source, much of it is not. And as far as I have read, there is no way to know if what you run as Mac OS X was even built from the published Darwin sources.
Open source matters as without a full open source OS (and tool chain), an OS simply cannot be trusted. Much as there are many rumors of spyware in Windows (and some documented cases), the same sort of spyware is likely to be in Mac OS X as well. This is especially true given the environments in the western world, especially the USA and EU, with more and more draconian police state laws being passed every day.
I noticed the author didn't mention Apple's closed source DRM system, for instance. It doesn't exist in his model of Mac OS X. That was good for a chuckle. It is these sorts of externally managed and controlled "rights" systems that are most likely to invade a person's privacy and violate a person's legal and natural rights. I suppose the author didn't want to upset people with stuff they shouldn't know about...
Mac OS X certainly is a full-featured corporate OS. However, it will never be considered a trusted OS until it is fully open source. Unless a person is incredibly ingenuous, he cannot have unknown black box "digital prison management" software on his closed-source OS machine and think "yes, I trust this computer".
While opinions on the matter differ, I believe the big force driving the popularity of Linux is "trust". It is far easier to trust a product that is owned by an open community -- with everything that entails -- versus a product that is owned by a vendor whose sole goal is to bleed you for as much money as possible and return as little value to you as possible.
There is little doubt in anyone's mind that both Apple and Microsoft are out to take as much of your money as possible. Microsoft is a known monopoly with monopoly pricing and Apple is just a Mini-Me version of Microsoft, complete with their own monopoly pricing in their closed market. In an industry of low margins, Apple is legendary for their extremely high profit margins and how they respond to problems with their products only if you threaten them with drastic legal action.
It is easy to understand the author's personal preference, as a wealthy American, for Mac OS X. It works well, it looks reasonably good, and it's trendy in various American subcultures, from drug subculture, to music subculture, to the social elite subculture. So why not go with the trend? It seems like modern American culture, especially their foreign policy, management ethos, and environmental policy is "rip/mix/burn".
The great truth, though, is that Mac OS X it is not a healthy choice for the world, for humanity.
I often say "people may be ignorant, but mostly they are not stupid". And so, wisely, most people in the world avoid an expensive closed source OS from one of the world's greediest and most abusive corporations.
And while Windows users are captive under the power of a monopoly, slowly more and more of them are moving away from their closed source OS to the open source world.
There are many reasons that Apple's global market share is falling every year, but one of the most important is that even when you spend all the money it takes to buy into the Apple computing world (religion?), you still do not get a trusted computer.
Meanwhile the Linux world is getting closer and closer to giving people everything they need in "good enough" form, all in an open, trustworthy, and transparent manner.
Maybe Apple can ponder this as they wonder why -- with all that "insanely great" technology --- most people are deciding they really don't need to buy an expensive yet ultimately untrustable Mac.
They don't use the high-priced bulletproof components from 10 years ago, but trust me, compared to the components Dell digs out of the trash bin, they're bulletproof compared to them.
Not a week goes by that a Dell at work doesn't have some piece of hardware fail. Multiple systems have had multiple optical drives replaced simply because the cheap P.O.S. unit Dell finds don't last. Motherboard swaps, RAM swaps, hard drive swaps, you name it, it fails. All systems are connected to APC UPSes so the power is at least relatively conditioned. If it wasn't so widespread I wouldn't be so quick to blame Dell, but dear lord, systems shouldn't have their HDs fail twice in a year.
Thank god there's a whitebox AthlonXP box under my desk. It's the only reliable non-server in the building.
KDE is awesome
KDE is only *tolerable* if your only previous experience with GUIs is MS Windoze.
This is not true at all. Others have already pointed out that you can use a VGA CRT with a Mac with the included DVI-to-VGA adaptor.
In fact, Apple does sell CRT monitors. Just not with the Apple name. I ordered a dual 1.8 G5 earlier tonight through the online Apple Store for Eduction, and there were two Mitsubishi CRT displays listed as options, one was about $150. I notice though that they're not listed for regular online Apple Store. I didn't pay too much attention since I'm going to be using my beige G3's 17" Optiquest for now.
End of Line.
And I could swear that the D-Link wireless card I have works very nicely in my Powerbook.
You failed to mention that you had to spend $25 to get a driver for that card from aerocard.
You're not just buying a more expensive version of the exact same thing when you buy an Airport base station.
We have both an airport and a linksys ap+4port switch at work, and as far as I can tell, the airport doesn't offer anything that the linksys doesn't have. The airport base station really is just a more expensive version of your everyday standard AP
I could swear I didn't, but thanks for letting me know where I spend my money. Can you tell me what my tax return will be this year too?
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
I could swear I didn't, but thanks for letting me know where I spend my money.
Then could you please tell me how you got your d-link card to work under OS-X? What program did you use to set your WEP key?
A few more details are available here.
Where else could I write a 13 line word processor?
http://wirelessdriver.sourceforge.net/
I win
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
you want the red candy icon, or the blue one?
"The author says he wrote it to introduce Mac OS X to the Linux User's Group at his work."
Interestingly, "his work" is the IBM Alamaden Research Center.
And as far as I have read, there is no way to know if what you run as Mac OS X was even built from the published Darwin sources. ...except for compiling the sources yourself and comparing the size and content of the binaries. But that would require actually knowing what the hell you're talking about, which you do not.
/Applications/iTunes.app, then find a more useful way to spend your free time than trolling on slashdot.
I noticed the author didn't mention Apple's closed source DRM system, for instance. It doesn't exist in his model of Mac OS X.
Apple's "closed source DRM system" is a function of (and only of) iTunes.app. It's an application. It has nothing to do with the functionality of the core OS.
If you don't like it, rm -rf
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
In the Apple world, DRM, or digital rights management, is built into Apple digital hub products like iDVD, iMovie, iPhoto, iTunes, Final Cut Pro, Quicktime, etc.
You might as well delete all "iLife", Quicktime, and all the other Apple software you use if you want to have a better chance of getting rid of DRM on Mac OS X.
There are many ways DRM pops its ugly head up on Mac. For instance, Apple decided not to enable screen captures so that you can't grab still frames of a DVD movie. Not even even your own DVD movie shot with your own camcorder.
And of course, if you don't have Apple's DRM system running, you cannot play back the MP4 AAC files you purchase from the iTunes store as they are encrypted and have DRM access controls.
When it comes to Darwin, Apple only released the code because Darwin is comprised of much open source code that likely has licensing requirements to maintain the openness of the code. I'm sure Apple likes all the free bug finding and fixing they get as well.
BTW, if you can prove that the shipping OS X is fully built from the published Darwin sources, by all means do so. I cannot do so, that is what I already said. Apple's website says "Many of the projects in the Darwin repository are the same live source trees used by Apple engineers for the Mac OS X product build." Which implies Darwin is not quite the same as shipping Mac OS X.
All in all, I believe I've been accurate in my comments regarding Apple and Mac OS X. Apple has a lot of DRM on their platform, not just iTunes. And Darwin is not totally the same code as Apple's Mac OS X.
There are many ways DRM pops its ugly head up on Mac. For instance, Apple decided not to enable screen captures so that you can't grab still frames of a DVD movie. Not even even your own DVD movie shot with your own camcorder.
Once again: an application is not an OS. An OS is not an application. This has nothing to do with any all-encompassing "DRM system"; it's a function of dvdplayer.app. Yes, it's annoying. 10 seconds with google would have found you the workaround for it.
And of course, if you don't have Apple's DRM system running, you cannot play back the MP4 AAC files you purchase from the iTunes store as they are encrypted and have DRM access controls.
Which part of "so don't buy from iTMS if you don't like their terms of sale" is hard for you to grasp here?
When it comes to Darwin, Apple only released the code because Darwin is comprised of much open source code that likely has licensing requirements to maintain the openness of the code.
Again: no. The open source portions of OSX are BSD, not GPL. Apple was under no obligation beyond acknowledging that portions of the OS were copyrighted by the Regents of the University of California.
I cannot do so, that is what I already said.
That's your problem, not mine, and not Apples. RTFM on "strings" and "md5" if you want to solve that problem.
ll in all, I believe I've been accurate in my comments regarding Apple and Mac OS X.
You may believe that as much as you want, but it is not so.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
I think the key point here is that there is a lot of DRM that ships with "Mac OS X", not just iTunes. I don't want to have to find a workaround for all sorts of little things because Apple includes DRM sprinkled all around their OS/apps.
As for what is an "OS" and what is not, everything I mentioned other than FCP ships with "Mac OS X". While in a technical sense, some of the DRM may not be in the OS kernel, it is still part of what the consumer considers the "OS". Because all of Mac OS X is not open source, we don't know what is in the shipping OS anyway.
Time will tell if Apple's strategy of making a small part of something similar to their OS open source will provide them with any market advantage.
So far, Apple has taken far more from the open source community than they have given back, so they are nothing more than a parasite.
Oh goody, yet another non-programmer with a Great Concern for the Well-Being of the Open Source Community. Just what the world needed.
Have you considered getting a real hobby? Or at least one that you're actually good at?
I think the key point here is that there is a lot of DRM that ships with "Mac OS X", not just iTunes.
For values of "a lot" that apparently encompass...one example that you've been able to come up with other than iTunes. You're not exactly wowing us with Apple's constant perfidy here. (Please do not waste our time here by shocking us with the news that iDVD uses CSS.) My suggestion: stop reading Andrew Orlowski's columns and start reading more manpages.
Also: the distinction between DRM at the OS level and the application is not at all a trivial one. If I buy a Macintosh with the intention of running MacOS X, I don't have any choice about using, say, the Mach kernel: it's part and parcel of the OS, and it won't function without it. I do have a choice about using iTunes, iDVD and DVDPlayer: they're applications, I can delete or ignore them if I want, and if they don't suit my needs, I can install replacements that do.
And so could you, but apparently spreading FUD on slashdot is more to your taste.
So far, Apple has taken far more from the open source community than they have given back
Fascinating. I'd ask what sort of metric you're using to measure this, and how much in terms of man-hours and dollar-value Apple would have to "give back" to make up the "balance", but that would indicate a level of interest in your thought on this matter that I just don't have.
Here's a free hint, though: you can't "take" (in the sense that you're using the verb) something that's offered as a gift. Not all OSS is the GNU project.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
To get back to the facts --
First, there is indeed a lot of DRM in Mac OS X. Most every Apple app that deals with content has DRM code in it. While you, as a techie, are making distinctions between the Mach kernel and other parts of "Mac OS X", most people, especially Mac users, do not make such distinctions. Most Mac users don't even know that there is another way to play a DVD other than using what came on the machine as part of "Mac OS X". BTW, did you ever notice those two letters "OS" in "Mac OS X"? Your technical view of the OS is certainly not what Apple considers the "OS".
Second, Apple themselves admit that Darwin is not the same as "Mac OS X". Unless you work at Apple on the OS, it is impossible to know what the differences are between Darwin and "Mac OS X".
Third, in terms of how much open source code Apple has included with OS X compared to how much code Apple has contributed back to the OSS community, the difference is gigantic.
There is no substantial application that Apple has contributed to the open source community. There is not even one body of code similar in size and complexity to Samba or JBoss that Apple has contributed to the open source community. Yet Apple includes both as part of "Mac OS X".
No matter how you quibble over word meanings, Apple is a net "taker" from the community. I used the word parasite because this word accurately describes how Apple works with the open source community:
"One who habitually takes advantage of the generosity of others without making any useful return."
The OSS/Linux community would be far better off without any more parasites, especially those as big and hungry and vicious as Apple.
Whenever someone focuses on delivering personal attacks vs. discussing the issues, it is usually due to the fact that they have no factual argument to present and must rely on emotional attacks to confuse the issues.
Or maybe they just think you're an idiot.
First, there is indeed a lot of DRM in Mac OS X.
Repeating this over and over does not, oddly enough, make it true. You've so far come up with all of two examples, only one of which could seriously be considered an imposition on anyone's time, and neither one of which could be considered part of the operating system except in the irrelevant sense that they live on the same CD.
You also need to stop using the phrase "DRM" as if it were some sort of digital cooties. Separate application-level restrictions are a very different can of wax from hardware-to-OS-level DRM architectures such as Microsoft's proposed Palladium scheme.
Most every Apple app that deals with content has DRM code in it.
For all the fervor with which you state this, you'd almost think that it was true. Every Apple app that deals with content? Let's see, last I checked, that was:
iTunes
iDVD
iPhoto
GarageBand
Final Cut Express
Final Cut Pro
Soundtrack
DVD Player
Logic Platinum
DVD Studio Pro
Keynote
Shake
Tremor
Quicktime Player
Quicktime Pro
Quicktime Streaming Server
Quicktime Broadcaster
Of those, the only ones that contain "DRM code" that restricts what the end-user may do are iTunes, Quicktime Player, and DVD player. You could, I suppose, complain that Apple's DVD authoring software uses CSS and region codes, but since those are part of the DVD specification, that would be a stupid thing to complain about.
Three out of seventeen isn't "most", kid.
Most Mac users don't even know that there is another way to play a DVD other than using what came on the machine as part of "Mac OS X".
Wow, that must by why VideoLan and Mplayer have each had well over 100,000 downloads! Nobody knows about them!
It's called a search engine. It's all the rage.
BTW, did you ever notice those two letters "OS" in "Mac OS X"?
Why yes, yes I did. Your point?
Your technical view of the OS is certainly not what Apple considers the "OS".
Wow, I must have missed the portion of the apple developer documentation where they said that they consider bundled applications to be part of the OS! What an oversight! Surely you'll point this out to me?
BTW: Read The Fucking Article. Ironically enough, it actually explains what OS X is, and how it functions.
There is no substantial application that Apple has contributed to the open source community. There is not even one body of code similar in size and complexity to Samba or JBoss that Apple has contributed to the open source community.
You are, again, wrong. And again, you're wrong in that particularly annoying way wherein ten seconds with a search engine would have prevented you from being wrong.
The Darwin kernel (XNU) itself is easily comparable in size and scope to any major OSS project. If that's not enough, there's a full OSS implementation of zeroconf, a fully OSS streaming media server, a cross-platform game networking library, an embeddable web browser component, and god only knows how many thousands of man-hours spent on the GCC/PPC compilers.
Dare I ask what you have contributed to this "community" other than a lot of uninformed whining?
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
YHBT.
YHL.
HAND.
http://wirelessdriver.sourceforge.net/
I win
Then your network is wide open, since that driver doesn't support WEP.
So?
The orignal complaint was Apple FORCES you to use their wireless hardware. I proved that false.
T Money
World Domination with a plastic spoon since 1984
Bravo! I appreciate that you made some progress sticking to facts this time around the platformloveberry bush :-) Maybe one day you'll be able to have a conversation with another human being without attacking him personally.
:-)
I stand corrected about saying "most" Apple apps that deal with "content" have DRM in them. I should have been more specific in my statement and said "multimedia content playback".
<I am not addressing some of what you wrote because as I have stated before, I am not going to engage in any discussion that is based on personal attacks. FYI, I did read the entire article. Move on.>
The first link you mention says the following --
"Darwin includes the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) and the GNU Project Debugger (GDB)."
At the "most", Apple created the GNU compiler backend for the PPC. Apple certainly didn't create any substantive part of the GNU Compiler Collection or the debugger. A compiler backend, especially one written to a pre-existing framework, is not similar in scope to SAMBA or JBOSS.
Secondly, you talk about Apple contributing "XNU" to the open source community. You didn't mention that the open source community had to fight Apple as Apple's original license was horribly one-sided. It is only very recently (Sept-12-2003) that Apple changed their license and had it approved by the OSI.
While the current APSL 2.0 license is going in a good direction, none of that direction is due to Apple's innate desire or inherent corporate philosophy.
This has always been the case with Apple. The company makes the least possible effort to work with their customers or partners and people have to threaten them with massive public shaming or lawsuits to get any sort of improvement out of the company.
I'm sure you recall "www.ipodsdirtysecret.com" and the current pending class action lawsuits against Apple regarding problems with the iBook. Apple is legendary for being a nasty horrible company to work with. I would think that in practice, using their source code license would be more of the same. I notice there is nobody using Apple's XNU for anything. And I wonder if Apple Legal has crushed them or silenced them in some way.
BTW, don't worry, I spent much more than 10 seconds with Google trying to find evidence of any third party using Darwin for their own projects/products and couldn't find anything. Do you have more information?
Looking at the list of "open source projects" on Apple's website, most of code was not written by Apple.
Darwin -- major parts taken from university work (Mach/BSD)
Streaming Server -- mostly Apple code???
Compiler Tools -- mostly GNU code
Kerberos -- mostly MIT code
Open Directory -- mostly outside code
OpenPlay -- ???
Printing -- mostly outside code
Rendezvous -- ???
Security -- ???
WebCore -- mostly KDE code
X11 -- mostly outside code
So far on the list above, I don't see Apple's major contributions. While it's great Apple is putting Darwin out there as open source, most of it began as open source funded by the American taxpayer in the first place.
The Free Software Foundation is mostly of the same mind on the matter:
http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/apsl.html
"...we must remember that only part of Mac OS X is being released under the APSL. Even though the fatal flaws of the APSL were fixed, and even if the practical problems were addressed, that does no good for the other parts of Mac OS X whose source code is not being released at all. We must not judge all of a company by just part of what it does."
What is your objection to making all of "Mac OS X" open source?
Why do you champion DRM and its invasion of personal privacy?
These were my key concerns in my first post and it would be good to stay focused. I still haven't heard any of your thoughts. You've been too busy attacking me, I think
The first link you mention says the following
Whoops, my bad: that link was supposed to go to the projects page, not the compiler page.
Secondly, you talk about Apple contributing "XNU" to the open source community. You didn't mention that the open source community had to fight Apple as Apple's original license was horribly one-sided. It is only very recently (Sept-12-2003) that Apple changed their license and had it approved by the OSI.
Incorrect again. The OSI has considered the APSL an "Open Source License" since version 1.1 IIRC. What changed on 9/12/03 was that the FSF decided that the latest version of the APSL qualified as a "Free Software License." Yay for them, I guess.
You really need to get over this delusion that the FSF is the be-all and end-all of the open source "community." And you really, really need to understand that BSD code is not GPL code.
A compiler backend, especially one written to a pre-existing framework, is not similar in scope to SAMBA or JBOSS.
Correct, although not in the sense you mean. A compiler is substantially more difficult, which you'd know if you'd had any idea what you were talking about.
While the current APSL 2.0 license is going in a good direction, none of that direction is due to Apple's innate desire or inherent corporate philosophy.
This is so ass-backwards I don't even know where to begin. If Apple had no "innate desire" to work with the FSF and OSI, they wouldn't have released the code in the first place, nevermind burned hundreds of man-hours of lawyer time (which probably cost them millions of dollars total) continuing to work on the license.
But hey, I'm only a developer and a sysadmin who actually reads Apple's developer documentation and knows people who work at the company. Obviously your psychic powers give you far greater insight into this situation than any mere facts.
I'm sure you recall "www.ipodsdirtysecret.com"
Yes. I also recall that it was published two weeks after Apple announced their batter refurb program, and well over a year after ipodbattery.com launched their (3rd-party) replacement offer. But again, I suppose psychic powers trump mere facts. And what the hell does this have to do with MacOS X or open source? Not a goddamn thing, and the same with your pathetic attempt to drag the ibook's hardware problems into this. Stop wasting my time by trying to turn this into yet another "everything Apple does is evil" whinefest.
I notice there is nobody using Apple's XNU for anything. And I wonder if Apple Legal has crushed them or silenced them in some way.
Yeah, that's right, Apple's black-suited ninjas arrived in the middle of the night and slit their throats. SCAAAAARRRRY.
You have to "wonder" about such a thing only because it didn't happen, and therefore you're reduced to spreading FUD rather than pointing to actual events.
I spent much more than 10 seconds with Google trying to find evidence of any third party using Darwin for their own projects/products and couldn't find anything. Do you have more information?
Apparently you're just not that good at actually using google, not that this is a shock or anything.
Looking at the list of "open source projects" on Apple's website, most of code was not written by Apple.
And you of course actually looked at the CVS checkins and counted up how many lines of code were contributed by people at Apple?
No, of course not, we've already established that you're not actually a developer, just some sort of weird FSF fanboy with an axe to grind.
Yes, the Mach kernel originally came out of CMU. That was, since you were not paying attention, over fifteen years ago. First NeXT and then Apple have spent the intervening time completely rewriting most of that code.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters? Like hell.
No, screen capturing under OS X is a function of the OS, exposed through the Grab.app application.
That said, there may well be a technical reason why you cannot capture frames from their DVD player - images may be sent directly to the video card by the application, without going through the Aqua graphical library routines.
This is not true for all OSS software they include. For instance, 'gcc' (included on the XCode CD) and 'emacs' are not only covered under the GPL, but are GNU projects. KHTML (a component used in the Safari web browser) is also covered under GPL.
-tor
It is very immature to respond in way which is just dumping a bunch of anger and hate on someone and then walking away.
I had some hope for you regarding personal attacks, but I see I must temper it. I can only be optimistic and think that you are not like this in other parts of your life, just when it comes to your precious Macintosh.
Just out of curiosity, do you eat a lot of beef? I see a lot of angry people eat beef frequently and it may be mad cow that makes you so angry and filled with hate.
I'll skip your hate-filled response to my original message and again ask --
(1) Do you have objections to making all of "Mac OS X" open source? If so, what are they?
(2) Is there ANY digital rights management in "Mac OS X" that is not in an application? If I delete the various programs you mentioned, will that get rid of all DRM? Can you point me to anywhere on Apple's public website where they discuss what DRM is in "Mac OS X" and what it is used for?
If you don't answer, that's okay. You seem like a person who is more interested in cathartic release of repressed rage than addressing the key issues I have put on the table.
I just can't stop singing...
"I tend to think of OS X as Linux with QA and Taste", James Gosling, creator of Java
But not enough... not enough for Apple to throw away their (core) hardware business.
One other eventuality of OS X for x86 would be Microsoft going berserk, which would be fun to watch for a bit, but would probably leave Apple crushed in the dirt.
If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
You are in a maze of twisty little Slashdot postings, all different
Bill Stewart
New Fast-Compression-only CPR http://preview.tinyurl.com/dy575ks
This name is familiar - can't place him. He's at IBM now, has worked at Bell Labs - but it's something else - anybody remember what?
PS. Good article...
How many licks does it take to get to the center?