Slashdot Mirror
A Power Users Look at Linux on the Mac
An anonymous reader writes "Even though most Linux users have treated Linux as an operating system for their x86 white boxes, Linux runs equally well on PowerPC machines. This article looks at Linux on the PowerPC and the appealing range of PPC machines produced by Apple, where the option of using Linux is of great value to many users."
...the best of both worlds under linux on Mac hardware:
http://www.maconlinux.org
-Ghostis
Computer Science is all about trying to find the right wrench to bang in the right screw. -T.Cumbo?
One thing that is certain: If you use a Mac, you have no exotic hardware and drivers should work quite well. Thousands of users have the same harware configuration as you. Therefore you can get the most out of the hardware - if you want to use linux on a mac - I think MacOSX is quite a nice Operating System, especially for desktop use.
Spelling mistakes: My is english spoken not tongue of mother.
If you want something totally concurrent with the PC world then Gentoo linux is the way to go. Nearly all packages will work with PPC because they are self compiled. As long as you know a little about linux and have used it before, or are willing to learn Gentoo can be installed. They have the best documentation I have yet found, and the most friendly forums.
YellowDog is a port of RedHat, pretty much. The advantage is that they only produce a PPC distro and are very good at it. They have navy contracts with PPC products and actually sell PPC hardware. One of the very few companies who do aside from Apple. YellowDog is good if you want the ease of use that a modern distro should provide.
OpenOffice should run fine. It will also run with OSX using apple's X11, but not natively under Aqua.
KOffice and the Gnome office will also work out-of-the-box.
One of my friends runs a music studio and is constantly fighting with turning off ACPI on Win 2000. It causes all sorts of issues with our sound cards (Dual Delta 1010s), SCSI card, and IDE controller card. Having to worry about IRQs and ACPI has got to disappear. Are IRQs treated the same under Linux? I would hope that Linux would not give the same kind of issues, the way all Mac OSs don't. I had never heard of an IRQ until we started having these problems at the studio. No wonder most studios are all Mac, we don't have the time to fsck around with this crap. No BIOS, etc.. It's better that way, it seems.
I guess it depends on your definition of a Mac.
If you call anything in the last 2 years a mac, then sure, you probably have a good case for OS X being a better choice.
But what about my sweet Power Tower Pro with a 250 Mhz 604e chip? Am I supposed to be content with OS 8.1 (the last *officially* supported OS by Apple), or the dead end 9.x? Or try to run XpostFacto to get OS X to run? Nope.
My answer was YellowDog Linux. It discovered all the hardware and runs sweet. I can use apt-get to install/upgrade software (who cares if it's an RPM and not a DEB, aside from the politics?). Heck, mplayer even plays MPEG4 encoded avi's smoothly.
The choice is yours, but for my machine Linux has definitely resuscitated it!
Hm - there are some interesting implications with that.
IBM wants to sell chips. Apple wants to sell hardware. If IBM came out with a "desktop" or even "workstation" PowerPC machine that ran, say, Yellow Dog Linux (or PPC Suse or the like), how would Apple respond?
Especially since most of the programs made for PPC Linux can easily be ported to Apple - whether running under X11 or adding in Cocoa portions - and I'm sure Apple would be more than happy to supply a compiler that could turn PPC-X-Windows code to Aqua code - cludgy, but it could work.
If such a system took off, Apple would be pretty happy - more programs could be converted easily. And odds are, if you're already running PPC desktop, you might be looking at OS X for ease of use issues.
On the other hand - who would use such a system? Most people would probably go for x86 Linux - x86 parts are cheaper, more software is available (even on just the Linux side alone). So a person wanting a PPC desktop would have to have a very good reason, like wanting to do high-end calculations or graphics rendering.
In which case, they'd probably just go for a Mac first anyway.
Personally, I think that Apple's best move is this:
1. Keep the high-end Powermacs/powerbooks.
2. Keep the lower-cost iBooks.
3. Make the iMacs truly cost compatible. Yes, there are the eMacs - what I think would blow away the market is a $600 headless iMac. Small base, maybe like the Cube (only upgradeable - that's what killed the little guy). Most people already have monitors, and if they could by a $600 G4 Mac they'd be estatic. Apple would make money, and could eventually move them over into the more expensive stuff - and even if they didn't, they'd gain market share, which would still mean more money.
Either way, we'll have to see what happens with IBM and Apple. The 970 chips are becoming more popular (Xbox Next, anyone? - this could be a side issue about how many Xbox games could be ported to OS X if the Xbox Next is truly G5 based....), so the future could hold anything.
52 Weeks, 52 Religions with John Hummel
For almost any model there is an installation report about Linux on an Apple PowerBook or iBook.
Mac OS X is so much more refined than Linux, and actually has a huge amount of produtivity software. So why should anyone in their right mind want to run Linux on a Mac, unless (s)he is a masochist?
might very well be Mac on Linux, ironically enough. Check out this:
http://www.maconlinux.org/sshots/pic12.jpg
Running multiple versions of MacOS in parallel. Think about the possibilities for software developers. Having multiple environments immediately available for testing.
Then of course there's the ability to run all those Mac apps when needed and still have the Linux desktop to go to when they aren't needed.
Mac on Linux is what the open source world should try and create for the Windows world. Think of the possibilities if you could run Windows at work in a Window - be able to do all the windows specific stuff at need, but have Linux goodness in which to work as well. If a phb strolls in, just flip your desktop over to full screen windows. Then for the rest of the time go stealth with Xpde, good enough to fool a casual glance. Maybe some rootless window hack could even be figured out.
Of course, if your boss says you Must Use Windows, there's not a whole lot you can do. But perhaps this would be an acceptible compromise.
"I object to doing things that computers can do." -- Olin Shivers, lispers.org
Simply put: I don't like OS X. Its not because I think Linux is superior; OS X just doesn't go with my personal preferences. I realize you excluded that option from your question but I feel that most people who run linux on Macs do so becasue they prefer linux. Hence my machine at work has only Yellow Dog on it (this also has the side affect of keeping everyone else away from that machine :)).
:)
Oh, and as someone responsible for patching all of those OS X boxes let me say that the machines are only as secure as the patches you apply to them. If you don't patch the OS X machines, or the linux machines, or the windows machines, they're going to be vulnerable. I'd say at the moment I've applied as many patches to the Linux machine as security updates to the OS X machines. The windows machines (two of them) are currently unpluged in a corner so I feel they're pretty safe at the moment.
While the heading refers to Linux on Macs, there's a number of other PPC machines that'll run Linux
a pegasos I or II is a PPC based machine, there's also Amiga One boards - a new Mini-ITX AmigaOne looks REALLY appealing, as long as it's not slugged with the "Amiga Tax" (double the price for the privilege of being able to run AmigaOS4 if it's released). a Mini ITX board with a GHz or more G4 - not a scaled down VIA type setup, but a full honest-to-goodness G4. That's appealing.
There's also several VMEbus boards based on PPC chips from PPC440 to G4s, and a newer one out soon from Momentum computer, Dual G5s on an ATX board. Pricey, but it's just a reference board at the moment.
If prices dropped on these, especially on the Momentum board, I could see these being real alternatives to x86, especially for people a bit worried about MS's palladium plans. A mac is a wonderful thing, but if you ask 'Why bother" about putting Linux over the top of a machine that'll run OSX, one of the above solutions might be an option.
OK... maybe this note is a little karma whoring by the author of the referred article. But what the heck, I -did- write it, and I'm always pleased when things by or about me make the slashdot headline.
:-)).
/.-ing.
A question a bunch of people have raised in comments is "why bother with Linux if you buy a Mac with OSX on it"... well, read the article. I don't say that switching to or adding Linux is always desirable; but I think I do a good job of describing some scenarios where it is. That said, I certainly -do- like OSX quite a bit (where my favorite installed application is still bash
Also, contrary to some down-modded poster, IBM can INDEED easily handle the load of slashdotting. In fact, a zillion hits to my article is indirectly good for me (I'm not on commission or anything, but it puts an extra sparkle in my editors' eyes). Also, FWIW, all my articles soon make it to [http://gnosis.cx/publish/] (which reminds me that I need some updating, it's been a couple months)... which is also quite strong enough to survive
Yours, David...
Buy Text Processing in Python
Actually, the BSDs execute Linux binaries quite fine. Not all of them, but there are people running Oracle that way. Just don't expect any vendor support.
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
I have mod points right now, but I'll respond to this instead.
KDE and Gnome have been ported to run on MacOS X. Apple provides a version of XFree86, which is bundled with Panther, or a free download for Jaguar. X11 runs rootless, which means all of your X11 windows are mixed in with your normal OS X windows. KDE and Gnome have both been ported. KDE is a little farther along than Gnome, but both are available through Fink. Check to see which packages are available.
Also, with KDE, the Qt library has been made available under the GPL for MacOS X, just like on Linux. So KDE software can be ported to MacOS X native with much less hassle than before.
Apple also supports Linux on their computers. TerraSoft makes the Yellow Dog Linux distro. They are also an Apple Value Added Reseller, and they sell Macs with YDL preloaded without voiding the Apple warranty.
--
The internet is the greatest source of biased information in the history of mankind.
"No need to mention that the quality of open source support in OS X is worse than on MS-Windows: Xfree, OpenOffice, Mozilla - they are almost unusable, comparing to them on MS-Windows boxen."
Unfortunately, it seems as though you have never even tried Xcode and/or Fink ( http://fink.sourceforge.net/ ). the current open source apps I run on my Mac are: Mplayer (direct port), Xchat (direct port), Gaim (direct port), Camino (Mozilla derivative direct port), Gimp (via XFree86), XMMS (Via XFree86), and GNUPG that I personally compiled with GCC. I also have absolutely no problems at all with an ssh -X session to run my X apps off my Linux server.
If you are going to bash something you could at least provide some examples; everything I have tried to run that is open source has compiled and run just perfectly.
"The strong will do what they want, the weak will do what they must."
-Thucydides
One of the things that people have been saying with each iteration of OS X is that it is getting faster and faster. While this may be true, they still have a long way to go. I recently tried out a gentoo live cd on a friends 600MHz G3 iBook, and I was blown away. In OS X 10.3 the iBook feels responsive, but it is clear that a fast G4 or G5 would fair a great deal better. Under Gentoo running gnome 2.4 this computer was sickeningly fast. It felt almost as fast as my Athlon XP 2500. I was amazed at how much this little 600MHz G3 was capable of. If you are looking for a reason to use Linux over Mac OS X, look no further than getting to utilize the performance your system is capable of.
I know I know OS X is a more modern os blah blah blah. People used to say (maybe they still do and I just ignore them) the same thing about java, it is a more modern language and all of it's advanced capabilities are too much for todays computers. The end result? Very few modern GUI apps are written in java. I say the same thing for OS X, just because it uses a somewhat new concept for GUI (pdf-based) doesn't justify it's cripplingly slow speeds. I for one would rather have a fully functional GUI that doesn't make a decent processor suck wind every time I try to resize a browser window, than have the prettiest antialised interface. For the record I personally find gnome 2.4 with the ximian industrial theme quite pleasing to the eye. Just my $0.02.
Fear trumps hope and ignorance trumps both
1) Turning it off in BIOS, 2) During the start of the Win2k installer, where it says press F6 (or F8? I forget) to install third party drivers, you hit that button and then install "Standard PC."
I think you can do the same by changing the "ACPI-compliant computer" driver in Device Manager under "computer" to "Standard PC." Of course, this isn't recommended, as I believe it requires the reinstallation of a lot of drivers (maybe all?), and I don't even know if that works correctly, but one should always be open to experimentation I guess. :P
Try Jaguar on a 7300. Or Panther on a 9600. Or even Panther on a beige G3. For those of us who love Apple hardware, can't afford gear more recent than four years old, and want to get some UNIX out of it, Linux just blows OS X right out of the water.
Linux doesn't care about my video chipset. X11 DEs don't require 32 megs of VRAM. Linux runs inside of 128 megs of physical memory without difficulty. Fluxbox is just as responsive as OS 9 on the same hardware- something OS X still can't claim.
All that and here's the bag of chips: The Debian "Software Update" (apt) updates EVERY APPLICATION ON THE SYSTEM. Compare to OS X, where I get my Apple updates through SWU and have to download and install Adobe updates, new builds of BZFlag, new versions of Quicksilver, etceteras myself.
Not to say I don't have issues with various packages, but dear GODS Linux is far more useable on older hardware than OS X. On a general level- quality of applications and userland are a slightly different matter.
Linux on Sparc is the real untold story. The installation of Debian unstable on an unused Sun Ultra 5 has been a recent revelation, and given the prevalence of such hardware sitting unused in many locations, represents a low (or no, if one carries out an ftp install) way of recycling such hardware to make it truly useful. The Sun Ultra 5 recently rejuvenated in this way is running much faster than it ever did using Solaris 7 or 8, and also has none of the compilation/compatibility problems which beset Sun desktop users who don't have Sun's own (expensive) compiler. apt-get install - could life get any easier?
I have Puma on my 8600 and Jaguar on my Beige G3, atm. Have a look at X Post Facto.
If you want to run X11, then yes it does. Have a look at /etc/X11/XFree86Config-4 on your Linux box. Now go and install X11 on Darwin, and look at the same file. Oops! It isn't there. That's right; it doesn't need you to tell it what blinking graphics card you have, it can just ask the kernel.
Only if you only install Debian packages. As soon as you install something from another source, you have to maintain it yourself. Just as you would on OS X.
OS X also has the benefits of being a BSD: no ugly klunky SysV init, a classy signal handling mechanism, and Ceren. But it's a ++BSD; have a look at the System Starter. Marvel at the way you can compile a single binary that will run on multiple architectures. Drool over the dynamic loader. Whimper in awe at the Mach threading system.
Oh look, you're just regurgitating a pre-written troll from a troll site. Go away, troll.
It's an iBook G4. I'm now a happy and proud owner of such a machine, and user of both MacOS X Panther an Linux on it.
/home directory, so now I have a single home for both Linux and OS X. Same desktop, same config for common programs.
The first thing I did when I got my hands on it was to re-partition it's hard drive and install Panther. Then I followed the instructions on setting up the mother of all Linux distributions on it from here.
I did the initial install of the Debian GNU/Linux base system (not without having to use a different kernel image for the ATA support, among other things to fiddle with), but then I started to take a serious look at OS X. It's an impressive operating system, with such a lovely and responsive GUI but the real power of UNIX I'm all used to underneath. I installed lots of open source software that I've get used to and couldn't live without. It all works so smoothly and nicely along other native applications, such as iTunes, Mail.app, Safari, Keynote, etc. - you get the best of both worlds. You have fink, you have darwinports, there's even OpenOffice.org. And if you're a developer, you also got Xcode from Apple. As I said, the both of worlds. And for some extra bucks you can get back some of your most beloved features from the Linux world: WindowShade X is a fine example of it.
Panther is also packed with some neat features not present anywhere else. Finder, for example, if one of the best file manager I've ever used. And Expose - I really miss it when working on Linux. One of the most useful enhancements a desktop environment could have get, it's not only eyecandy.
But then the necessity came and striked me hard. I have a small Linux consulting company. I was in a meeting with a customer the other day, and he wasn't so convinced that Linux could be a _viable_ alternative on the desktop. He thought it was just a black screen with UNIX-y commands and such. And there I was, with my iBook with Debian loaded on it but with no desktop environment to show off. Just a black screen with UNIX-y commands and such.
So I spent the whole night that day googling around and finally got my iBook to work nicely with Linux 2.6.2, supporting almost every single feature that's present on it except for Airport Extreme and the sleep functionality, which are not supported: sound, networking, USB 2.0, firewire, the combo drive, the ATI Radeon 9200 with DRI, the special function keys, the CPU frequency scaling. I even configured it to use an hfsplus partition for the
There are still some things that Linux can do better than OS X. Like OpenOffice.org or GIMP. Certainly both programs do exist for OS X but their performance and overall integration with the rest of the system is not so good.
The conclusion of it is that, even if MacOS X is one hell of an operating system, Linux is fun. I love to use the same plataform on my x86 desktop I've grown used to for more than 6 years than on my PPC based laptop. And I still have the chance to reboot and use Panther for the amusement of it.
Regards,
Articulos para gente geek: Poleras, linux, libros y mas
His problem the tech support guy didn't let him know that Airport runs its own DHCP server, that the Apple documentation doesn't mention it, or that it was one of those things that Just Runs (TM) even if you already have a DHCP server on the network (the Linux machine).
It's totally his fault that a piece of equipment was designed to be "smarter" by autoproviding certain services without checking to see if they already exist!
--
Internet Explorer (n): Another bug -- that is, a feature that can't be turned off -- in Windows.
I tried replacing an app with my wife and she unexpectedly quit.
One would normally not see this as the canonical form is:
This is faster as it does not need to send information between two processes using an IPC mechanism (the pipe) and it avoids unecessary computation ("grep filename" may be slower (depending on the grep implementation) than simple filename comparison a la fgrep).If you're actually going to use a regular expression to search for a file, the more common method is:
This avoids printing directories. Add '[^/]*$' to the end of the regex to avoid matches in directory names. Many versions of "find" (including Mac OS X "find") support a "-regex" option, but this is nonstandard.If your search allows it, even better is:
I'm not suggesting that you didn't know these things, but you can be certain that (due to the nature of the article) some *nix newbies will read your post and they may start doing those commands on a regular basis, not knowing of better alternatives, so one should be careful when posting these things to such a forum.As a Mac (primarily) and Linux user, I would say Linux on the Mac or Mac clone is not ready for prime time. Just look at Yellow Dog Linux. Terrasoft sells Macs with YDL preinstalled, but, if you browse their site, there are major areas in their own Mac machines which are not supported.
I run Gentoo on a Mac clone (Power Computing PowerCenter Pro accelerated with a G3 add-on card). Getting this up was quite a chore and the video (an on-board version of an ATI Rage card) still only works in fb mode despite literally months screwing around with it. On a G4 dual processor Mac, Gentoo works better, but the DRI acceleration is still not up to snuff.
I mostly find Linux useful in bringing slow older x86 boxes to a useful speed. My main laptop is an old 400 MHz P2 Dell which runs wonderfully with Knoppix/Debian (although the Dell Rage Mobility is still a problem).