Slashdot Mirror
Mac OS X x86 Put To The Test
stivi writes "ZDNet has tested Mac OS X x86 on a Toshiba laptop. The article discusses installation process, performance and power consumption comparison and has a thorough photo gallery as well." From the article: "Mac OS X will not be available on any old x86 PC, though, as Apple wants to retain control over its hardware platform. From the company's point of view, this is an understandable position, as the margins on Apple-branded computers are much higher than is usual for standard x86 PCs. Were Apple to put the x86 version of its operating system on general release, Dell would begin to manufacture Apple clones. This would put enormous pressure on the price of Apple's own computers -- something the company is naturally keen to avoid."
Of course, you have to consider one question here: why are they trying this?
The whole reason non-geeks buy Macs is because either they're a journalist, or they think Apple is cool. Talk to someone who knows very little about computers - most don't even know that Apple makes computers.
If Apple could support x86 hardware and were sold by Dell in direct competition with Microsoft, they'd have a higher profile. I wouldn't like to make any broader predictions about their success in that situation. It looks to me like they're thinking about that road though.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
What I really, really want is a developer version of Mac OS X / x86 that can run under Xen (or VMWare). It doesn't need to include drivers for real hardware, the iApps, etc, just the main OS and the developer tools.
... with a spiked hammer. All these sorts of issues make it crucial to test on Mac OS X ... but yet, Mac OS X is one of the harder common platforms to test on due to the need for special hardware and the lack of developer / "lite" OS versions.
Why? Because it means I can test my application on a "Mac" without having to fork out for hardware I don't want. This benefits me (save some cash / easier to test the app on another platform) and Apple (more apps for Mac OS X).
If their "virtual Mac OS X for Developers" is sufficiently cut down, it'd probably be a real PITA to install on real hardware, largely eliminating fears they might have about undercutting their hardware sales. Sure, you could build a thin Xen system just to load the Mac OS X image, but I really doubt this would be attractive to many people. Certainly not to your average Mac user.
Currently, Mac OS X is just UNIX-like enough to lull you into a brief false sense of security before brutally stabbing you in the back and raping your corpse. Any developer of cross-platform apps or UNIX apps who needs more than core POSIX facilities MUST actively test on Mac OS X to have a hope of things actually working when it comes to someone trying to use the application. This is doubly true of GUI apps using portable toolkits - Mac OS X has quite a few special traps for GUI developers who work on Linux and target Mac OS X.
Don't believe me about Mac OS X's very much un-UNIX-like true heart? Try to add a static network mount. Just drop it in fstab, and it'll all be there, right? . Sorry yet?. Now look at the syntax in `ld' for linking "framework" libraries, and hell, the fact that "framework" libraries exist. If you haven't worked on build systems, you won't understand the horror of that one. If you haven't given up yet, try starting a GUI app from the console. Tip: You have to use the special "open" command, just executing it isn't enough. It goes on, and on. None of these things are all that bad (well, except for the retard who chose to ignore all compatibility and use "-framework name" instead of "-framework,name" in the linker options) but they're all very frustrating for someone developing for UNIX. They're also good reasons to inform any Mac user who claims that "Mac OS X is just UNIX on the inside" just how wrong they are
A virtualisation-friendly version of Mac OS X for developers would help address this, without cutting into Apple's pricey OS and hardware sales. Anybody able to suggest a downside?
What kind of drugs are you on?!? And more importantly why aren't you sharing?
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
Apple should understand that most people want OS X for the operating system's technical superiority, not the beautifulness of Apple's hardware.
BWHAHAHAHAHHAAAH.... . hAHHAHHAhahaha.... gurgle... AHHAHAHAAHAHAHAH!
Yet another example of a Slashdot user who is completely detached from reality and has absolutely no idea how most people choose/use computers.
People buy Apples because of marketing. Macs look great. People love that. Nough said.
I've never heard a developer say that a customer doesn't "deserve" their product before. That truly is special.
They wonder why people look at mac fanboys as raving loons.
---- Den ene knappen er powerknapp, den andre er Bender voice knapp "Bite My Shiny Metal Ass"
Fedora Core 4 won't recognize my wireless PCI card.
Oh, I had the same problem. I bought a "wireless PCI card" and Linux wouldn't recognize it. I figured that since it was wireless, I could just leave the little green card sitting next to the computer. But it wouldn't work; no matter how close it was to my computer, it wouldn't find it!
Turns out "wireless" PCI cards are not wireless at all. You need to actually open your computer and plug it in.