I'd love to get involved in a group effort to bring economies of scale to PPC-based Linux. But to tell the truth, I think it's futile at this point.
What rason do Microway, DCG, VA, etc. have to move away from their i386 boxes? Would they sell more computers? Have a bigger profit margin? Could they make up the *huge* development costs that would be involved in gearing up a PPC production line?
Ultimately, they have to look at what people want: The market bats last. And I just don't see enough of a popular groundswell to justify such a switch. If somebody could come up with numbers that show otherwise, I'll happily work to bring the plan to fruition. (I did some OEM negotiations with UMAX back when they did PPC clones.)
How can you say that a G3 with a Seagate Cheetah (ultra2 wide of course) is not fast enough for a disk system.
I didn't.
How can you say that a G3 with an 100Mbit card is any slower than what you can get with Linux for the x86?
I didn't.
What you forget is that we are not comparing the MacOS to windows here. We are comparing Linux on x86 to Linux on PPC. There is a big difference between these two comparisons.
Duh.
If you really say that bandwidth and harddrive speed are at the crux of the situation, then you are truly mistaken to claim that one should never use PPC hardware.
Never said that, don't believe that.
There simply is no difference!!! [between PPC Linux and 386 Linux]
Except for price, availability, diversity of vendors and configurations, and support. Those factors outweighed the superiority of the PPC architecture for me. I hope that won't always be the case.
"The platform has grown up, partly because Apple has close control over what goes on."
Oh, I agree completely -- it's a great architecture. But I'm a businessperson, not a research scientist, and Apple boxes don't give me enough real-world advantages to compensate for their disadvatages. I'm open to persuasion, but your arguments have to show me how I'll (a) save time, (b) save money, and/or (c) get a better product from an end-user standpoint.
A bit of background: I've been using Macs since 1995, used to write and edit for MacWEEK, and have spoken at several Macworld Expos. I know all about the PPC's advantages -- I've run benchmarks at Ziff-Davis' labs. But when it came time for me to buy a Linux server, I went with an AMD-based machine. Simply put, practical considerations outweighed the architecture's advantages.
I won't bore you with the details, 'cause I'm sure you know them. Price, component availability, a community of support, yadda yadda yadda. Although I really wanted to use a PPC-based machine, I had to ask myself: What advantages would I gain?
Speed? Processor speed is virtually irrelevant in Internet serving, as bandwidth and disk access are the gating factors. Striking a blow against an evil company? Apple's not so clean, and certainly can't claim better corporate morality than AMD or the screwdriver shop where I bought my Linux box. (Needless to say, there will be no Microsoft code on it.:) )
Having said that, I'm glad to see Yellow Dog continuing with its plans. Until now, there have been three PPC Linux vendors that I know of: TurboLinux, mkLinux, and LinuxPPC Inc. (not the same as LinuxPPC.org). Frankly, none of them have approached the market with the resources, experience or commitment needed to make an impact. mkLinux is the side project of a book publisher; TurboLinux does PPC support as an afterthought (and devotes $0 to PPC Linux promotion AFAIK); and LinuxPPC Inc. has problems best not discussed in public. Yellow Dog seems to be making the first real stab at the market: I hope they can eventually convince people like me that running Linux on PPC is the best deal.
Ellis-D (ellis-d-25@spam.excite.com) writes: "Only one page, not the site? Oh come one!! Kill this to death!!"
Err, I have a business to run, you know? Tell you what: If you create other parody pages, I'll consider adding them to the site. Hey -- that'd make this a real open-source model! Finally, I have control of a kernel... heh heh heh...
About a year ago, I was representing a company that does support for free software, and managed to get a meeting with a very famous Silicon Valley venture capitalist (who shall remain nameless). I asked them about the likelihood that VC would invest in free software, and they responded something to the effect of, "If there's no proprietary content, we can't see how a company could make enough money from the model to satisfy us."
I just sent them a "told you so" message. God, that feels good.:):):) God bless the Linux community for making it happen!
Too bad Real Networks scrapes the InterNIC database and Web sites, spams indiscriminately, and has no real opt-out procedure. They get neither my e-mail address nor a penny of my money.
Are you *nuts*, Rob? If the spam "warning" goes in the Subject line, you wouldn't be able to filter it until the SMTP DATA parameter. By that time, the spammer has already stolen from you, making the point moot.
I could understand labeling earlier in the transaction -- like, right after HELO -- but labeling in the Subject line is useless. (This was the point of California's Bowen bill, BTW, memorialized inCalifornia Business & Professions Code 17538.4. See http://suespammers.org/ca/laws/bpc_17538-4_full.html for the full text.)
Well, I typed about 50WPM on QWERTY, and about 80 WPM on Dvorak. Regardless of whether it's better for society as a whole, it's better for me. And that's all I really care about.
Where does YDL say that LinuxPPC Inc. doesn't supply support with their distro? I don't see it. They specify six differences between the two companies/distros, and their assertions all seem right and proper. Am I missing something?
But one thing that does bother me about this page is their confusion of LinuxPPC the distro and LinuxPPC Inc. the company. ("Yellow Dog Linux, like LinuxPPC, Inc., uses the LinuxPPC kernel...").
"If I read their official circulation figures correctly, MacWorld's average monthly readership in 1998 was over 650,000 total"
A small, technical correction: 650,000 is their circulation, not their readership. In publishing jargon, "readership" = circulation x number of people who read each copy. The latter number is a combination of the biggest number the marketroids can think of, SWAGs (strategic, wild-ass guesses) and something to do with the entrails of a goat.
I talked to the TurboLinux folks at Linuxworld Expo. They said they expect 3.x out in about a month. I, for one, am looking forward to it. Wish they'd get their marketing asses in gear, though! Their promotion is pretty pathetic. I mean, you ask anyone semi-knowledgeable what PPC-based Linux distros are available, and they'll answer, "MkLinux and LinuxPPC". TurboLinux is almost a secret.
If you go to one Linux show this year, make it the Atlanta Linux Showcase. Last year's was one of the best shows I've ever been to, and I've been to a lot.
Why?
* Reasonable price
* REAL community-based thinking
* Fun exhibit layout (wandering up and down the one aisle passed the time nicely.:) )
* Relevant talks
...etc., etc., etc. So what are you waiting for? Hie thee to priceline.com (or wherever) and buy your tickets now!
I think what the earlier AC said about IBM porting "drivers and shit" is probably true. My prediction: IBM *is* going to use an existing PPC-based Linux, but also work to make sure there are no RS6000-specific bugs or gaps.
As for IBM coming out with their own distro... Hey, there's no reason they can't -- that's the beauty of the GPL! If that happens, I'd guess that IBM decided the two biggest existing PPC Linux distro companies (Prime Time Freeware and LinuxPPC Inc.) just don't have the resources to support them, and that it would be unwise to stake something this important on someone else's distro. I'd probably make the same decision, to tell the truth.
Interestingly, RedHat already sells mkLinux as part of its "Rough Cuts" CD . I'm curious to see whether their "port of RedHat" will be mkLinux or LinuxPPC. The envelope please...
I'm surprised no-one's mentioned Stagecast Creator. It started out in life as Cocoa at Apple; Larry Tesler (yes, that Larry Tesler) took it and ran with it when Apple killed the project. It's a world-building sort of metaphor. --Tom, who also learned BASIC on a TRS-80. Microsoft BASIC (remember?)
Slashdot Mirror
What rason do Microway, DCG, VA, etc. have to move away from their i386 boxes? Would they sell more computers? Have a bigger profit margin? Could they make up the *huge* development costs that would be involved in gearing up a PPC production line?
Ultimately, they have to look at what people want: The market bats last. And I just don't see enough of a popular groundswell to justify such a switch. If somebody could come up with numbers that show otherwise, I'll happily work to bring the plan to fruition. (I did some OEM negotiations with UMAX back when they did PPC clones.)
-- Tom Geller
How can you say that a G3 with a Seagate Cheetah (ultra2 wide of course) is not fast enough for a disk system.
I didn't.
How can you say that a G3 with an 100Mbit card is any slower than what you can get with Linux for the x86?
I didn't.
What you forget is that we are not comparing the MacOS to windows here. We are comparing Linux on x86 to Linux on PPC. There is a big difference between these two comparisons.
Duh.
If you really say that bandwidth and harddrive speed are at the crux of the situation, then you are truly mistaken to claim that one should never use PPC hardware.
Never said that, don't believe that.
There simply is no difference!!! [between PPC Linux and 386 Linux]
Except for price, availability, diversity of vendors and configurations, and support. Those factors outweighed the superiority of the PPC architecture for me. I hope that won't always be the case.
-- Tom Geller
"The platform has grown up, partly because Apple has close control over what goes on."
Oh, I agree completely -- it's a great architecture. But I'm a businessperson, not a research scientist, and Apple boxes don't give me enough real-world advantages to compensate for their disadvatages. I'm open to persuasion, but your arguments have to show me how I'll (a) save time, (b) save money, and/or (c) get a better product from an end-user standpoint.
--Tom
I won't bore you with the details, 'cause I'm sure you know them. Price, component availability, a community of support, yadda yadda yadda. Although I really wanted to use a PPC-based machine, I had to ask myself: What advantages would I gain?
Speed? Processor speed is virtually irrelevant in Internet serving, as bandwidth and disk access are the gating factors. Striking a blow against an evil company? Apple's not so clean, and certainly can't claim better corporate morality than AMD or the screwdriver shop where I bought my Linux box. (Needless to say, there will be no Microsoft code on it. :) )
Having said that, I'm glad to see Yellow Dog continuing with its plans. Until now, there have been three PPC Linux vendors that I know of: TurboLinux, mkLinux, and LinuxPPC Inc. (not the same as LinuxPPC.org). Frankly, none of them have approached the market with the resources, experience or commitment needed to make an impact. mkLinux is the side project of a book publisher; TurboLinux does PPC support as an afterthought (and devotes $0 to PPC Linux promotion AFAIK); and LinuxPPC Inc. has problems best not discussed in public. Yellow Dog seems to be making the first real stab at the market: I hope they can eventually convince people like me that running Linux on PPC is the best deal.
-- Tom Geller
Full disclosure: I'm doing contract PR work for Franz. Stories like this are like candy to me. :) --Tom pr@franz.com
Err, I have a business to run, you know? Tell you what: If you create other parody pages, I'll consider adding them to the site. Hey -- that'd make this a real open-source model! Finally, I have control of a kernel... heh heh heh...
--Tom
About a year ago, I was representing a company that does support for free software, and managed to get a meeting with a very famous Silicon Valley venture capitalist (who shall remain nameless). I asked them about the likelihood that VC would invest in free software, and they responded something to the effect of, "If there's no proprietary content, we can't see how a company could make enough money from the model to satisfy us."
I just sent them a "told you so" message. God, that feels good. :) :) :) God bless the Linux community for making it happen!
--Tom
Besides, the semi-open QuickTime's much better. :)
--Tom
Are you *nuts*, Rob? If the spam "warning" goes in the Subject line, you wouldn't be able to filter it until the SMTP DATA parameter. By that time, the spammer has already stolen from you, making the point moot.
I could understand labeling earlier in the transaction -- like, right after HELO -- but labeling in the Subject line is useless. (This was the point of California's Bowen bill, BTW, memorialized inCalifornia Business & Professions Code 17538.4. See http://suespammers.org/ca/laws /bpc_17538-4_full.html for the full text.)
--Tom
Hey, it's Open Source (TM), right? That means we can create "derived works".
--Tom
P.S. Note sent to legalteam@gorewebsite.com and sourcecodevolunteers@algore2000.com. Oy. --Tom
--Tom
Where does YDL say that LinuxPPC Inc. doesn't supply support with their distro? I don't see it. They specify six differences between the two companies/distros, and their assertions all seem right and proper. Am I missing something?
But one thing that does bother me about this page is their confusion of LinuxPPC the distro and LinuxPPC Inc. the company. ("Yellow Dog Linux, like LinuxPPC, Inc., uses the LinuxPPC kernel...").
--Tom Geller
AC writes:
"If I read their official circulation figures correctly, MacWorld's average monthly readership in 1998 was over 650,000 total"
A small, technical correction: 650,000 is their circulation, not their readership. In publishing jargon, "readership" = circulation x number of people who read each copy. The latter number is a combination of the biggest number the marketroids can think of, SWAGs (strategic, wild-ass guesses) and something to do with the entrails of a goat.
--Tom, ex-editor for MacWEEK and others
I talked to the TurboLinux folks at Linuxworld Expo. They said they expect 3.x out in about a month. I, for one, am looking forward to it. Wish they'd get their marketing asses in gear, though! Their promotion is pretty pathetic. I mean, you ask anyone semi-knowledgeable what PPC-based Linux distros are available, and they'll answer, "MkLinux and LinuxPPC". TurboLinux is almost a secret.
--Tom
If you go to one Linux show this year, make it the Atlanta Linux Showcase. Last year's was one of the best shows I've ever been to, and I've been to a lot.
Why?
* Reasonable price
* REAL community-based thinking
* Fun exhibit layout (wandering up and down the one aisle passed the time nicely.
* Relevant talks
...etc., etc., etc. So what are you waiting for? Hie thee to priceline.com (or wherever) and buy your tickets now!
--Tom Geller, who's considering presenting again.
I think what the earlier AC said about IBM porting "drivers and shit" is probably true. My prediction: IBM *is* going to use an existing PPC-based Linux, but also work to make sure there are no RS6000-specific bugs or gaps.
As for IBM coming out with their own distro... Hey, there's no reason they can't -- that's the beauty of the GPL! If that happens, I'd guess that IBM decided the two biggest existing PPC Linux distro companies (Prime Time Freeware and LinuxPPC Inc.) just don't have the resources to support them, and that it would be unwise to stake something this important on someone else's distro. I'd probably make the same decision, to tell the truth.
Interestingly, RedHat already sells mkLinux as part of its "Rough Cuts" CD . I'm curious to see whether their "port of RedHat" will be mkLinux or LinuxPPC. The envelope please...
--Tom Geller
Well, not exactly. But see Frank Garvey's robotic sculpture, "One-legged men at a butt-kicking contest" at http://www.omnicircus.com/robotics/r obot1.html. I've seen it in action, and it's truly awesome. Check out the whole site at http://www.omnicircus.com.
I'm surprised no-one's mentioned Stagecast Creator. It started out in life as Cocoa at Apple; Larry Tesler (yes, that Larry Tesler) took it and ran with it when Apple killed the project. It's a world-building sort of metaphor. --Tom, who also learned BASIC on a TRS-80. Microsoft BASIC (remember?)