NetBSD/macppc is a new NetBSD port, only recently imported into the source tree. It supports Apple Power Macintosh computers with PowerPC processors and Open Firmware. For older (680x0-based) Macintosh computers, see NetBSD/mac68k. There is also an experimental NetBSD/bebox port for Be, Inc's PowerPC-based BeBox.
Supported System Models
Apple Power Macintosh 7300/7600
Apple Power Macintosh 8500/8600
Apple Power Macintosh 9500/9600
Apple Power Macintosh G3 MT266/DT233
Apple PowerBook 2400c/180
Apple PowerBook 3400
Apple iMac (all flavors) and Blue G3
Apple PowerBook G3/400
UMAX Apus2000
PowerComputing PowerWave 604/120
Motorola StarMax 3000/240
Apple Power Macintosh 7500 (With G3 upgrade such as w/XLR8)
It probably won't be "easy". The iBook uss the new United Motherboard Architecture (UMA) and the new UniNorth controller chip. This support will have to be added before LinuxPPC will work with it. However, since the new "Sawtooth" G4s, the new "Kihei" iMac on the way, and the upcoming G4 Powerbooks in January all are basd on the UMA, adding support for the iBook will make it easier to get it working on these other machines.
I spoke to Jason Haas at LinuxPPC and basically he said it would take some time, but that it would work eventually.
This is so true. I bleed six colors, but I'm no newbie. I worked as a sysadmin for Linux, Solaris, SunOS, AIX, DEC/OSF, IRIX, and HPUX for two years. I have run multiple subnets of machines running MacOS, Windows, various UNIX flavors, and other more obscure OSs. I have been programming for over 15 years and can code in more languages that I care to admit. All my friends are of similar levels of experience, and we all prefer Macs.
I love Linux/UNIX and all of their strengths, but they have never and probably will never compare to the elegence of MacOS. With MacOSX, if Apple does it right, I'll have the Mac user experience with a powerful foundation and all the nifty CLI tools to boot. It's the perfect OS.
If Linux is the best thing to come out of the net century, I'll be pretty disappointed. I wanna plug a wireless receiver into my head and download the Library of Congress on demand. Screw this personal computer stuff, let's think big. I want total connectivity. I want video vmail in my head, projected onto my visual cortex. Give me eyes with telephoto zoom, infrared vision, light amplification, and ultraviolet spectrophotometry. I want a built-in GPS wirelessy linked up to all the maps in the world. Think big! The pwrson who gives us these things will be the man (or woman) of the next century. Total empowerment! Not the one that made an evolutionary advance to our desktop PCs.
For $900 more? That's more than half of the price!?! I have two desktop machines. One is an x86 PC that dual boots Windoze and Linux. The other is a Mac that boots MacOS 8.6, LinuxPPC, and BeOS 4.5. I have powerful desktop systems. I don't need to spend $2500 for an all-inclusive notebook. What I need is a decent machine that's durable, fast, has a nice screen, and can hook into my network quickly and easily. I don't need DVD, and weight is not my primary concern so much as the ability to haul it to work and have it function all day without swapping batteries.
The iBook is it. It's cheaper than most PC laptops with similar features, it has a great screen, built-in modem and Ethernet, and wireless networking so I can sit on my deck and surf with my cable modem wirelessly at 11MBps.
And the iBook will sell very well. It's not because of Steve's salesmanship, it's because it's a great value (more so even than the iMac, which is expensive compared to the PC world).
I bought an eMachine 366si recently. It's got a Celeron 366 processor, 32 MB RAM (gotta upgrade that), 40x CD, and USB on the front. With a 17" monitor it was $550 (the CPU was $400). It's a very nice box for he money. It seems to be well-manufactured, and the case is easy to get into and out of. I stuck in an ethernet card and hooked it into my hub, and now it's on the internet. I have not ever (and will not ever) use the modem, so it's a non-issue for me. I'm going to stick my Voodoo1 card in its slot when I get a Voodoo3 for my Mac.
For what my wife wanted, it's perfect. Quicken, solitaire, web surfing and email.
The problem is that cryptography is not a secret. It's not some great knowledge that only US companies have. Any moron can go buy a copy of Applied Cryptography and a copy of Visual Basic, and within 2 hours can create a 2048-bit encryption program (using known, published, secure algorithms) that cannot be cracked in a reasonable timeframe. Don't you think Saddam Hussein knows this?
The only people that these laws hurt are honest people who want to protect their private correspondance.
It's 2.4 GHz. As others have said, the max distance is 150 feet. Basically, it's running on the same base frequency as the high-end phones (they are generally 2.4GHz receive and 900MHz send, but there are exceptions).
You're referring to LocalTalk, which is an implementation of the Appletalk protocol over telehone wire. It's max throughput is 230Kbps. Appletalk is capable of running on Ethernet at much higher speeds. With the newest Appletalk mechansims like AppleshareIP, Appletalk works well even over ATM and gigabit Ethernet.
My impression is that the decryption algorithms for DVD are kept as a big secret to prevent movie piracy (which as most of us know is becoming the next big thing on the net). In order for Linux to get a decoder, it would have to come from either (a) hardware or (b) some group who has access to the decryption scheme.
Just because LinuxPPC is not the platform that YOU use does not make it a waste to port. There are many LinuxPPC users (myself included) that would be more likely to use Linux full-time if we didn't have to go back to MacOS for games.
Besides, everyone knows that each time you port, the code gets more portable. It's likely that a port to Alpha (or SPARC or some other processor) would be easier after the PowerPC port is completed.
Just wanted to say that this is a great game by a great company. Bungie is known in the Mac community for quality software, and now PC users know it too with the Myth series.
I beta tested Myth I and Myth II, and I volunteer as a Bungie.net Administrator. If the Linux port is as good as the Mac/PC version, it should be on every game player's to-get list.
Shareware in my experience tends to be done either quickly or by people that have little talent at what they code. If these people had real talent, how come they haven't been hired to write software professionally?
This argument is no different than the ones corporations used to give for Open Source Software. "If it's free/cheap, how can it be any good?" Many, if not most shareware authors are professional programmers. My software site has about a dozen free programs, and half a dozen more as shareware. I have been a professional programmer for several years, and I am employed in that line of work.
I really don't want a 16 year old kid or somebody who has remedial coding skills to be writing closed source software, since we really don't know what or how he makes it work. Finally, much of the shareware software I have seen is quite buggy (such as ircle--it doesn't crash often on a good day).
I can say the same thing for some of the commercial software that I've encountered. Some of the brightest coders you'll find are under 21. These are the Linus Torvalds of the future. Just because there are some crappy VB-based hacks out there doesn't mean that all shareware sucks.
If you are going to showcase your coding skills to the world, it forces you to write good code, since everybody in the world will see it. It also makes you more competive to everybody else--you end up making better code.
The purpose of shareware generally is not to show off one's coding skills, but to make some extra side money. I write programs that are useful to me, and if they turn out to be useful to other people, I consider embellishing them and selling them for $5 to $15 via Kagi. The extra cash is not significant, but it is worth doing considering I have already written the programs anyway.
Paying shareware fees can freaking add up quickly. $10 + $25 + more and more adds up to big bucks, trust me.
Sure it can be, but for your money you'll get a lot more shareware than you will commercial software. You can't really compare shareware to open source. One is a source of income, the other is not. I have a full-time job; I don't write software complicated enough to need much support beyond the documentation, and I don't have any interest doing full-time support anyway.
It's a fact that less then 5% of downloads of shareware actually get payed for. People just run shareware unregistered or crack it (trust me, anybody with two months experience on a computer can crack a registration system on several shareware programs).
And your point is? Is it that shareware is not viable? There are tens of thousands of shareware authors, the very existance of which disproves your point. I personally can attest that it's a worthwhile venture if your software is unique and fills a need. As to piracy, sure, software can be cracked. But who's going to waste time cracking my serial number algorithm on a $5 image converter?
Another example: thanks to the internet, I was rcently able to download the full release of Quake II for the Macintosh. However, it was a good port, so I went to CompUSA and bought a copy. I didn't have to, since I already had downloaded it, but I did it to support the company (LogicWare) for creating a good product on the Mac platform. Other people feel as I do, that you should support a good company that supports your OS of choice (be it Linux, Mac, *BSD, or whatever).
Don't get me wrong --I'm really happy apple is releasing something to the community. But it seems to me this could seriously affect their sales of OSX. My guess is that they are banking on making more money of Quicktime than off of server sales, anyone agree?
Well, the truth is that no one is making big money with streaming media except content providers and bandwidth providers. I work for the biggest US news organization on the net, and streaming video is great for us. It turns out that clickthrough rates on video ads are 20x as high as on static banner ads. So we can sell a video ad for more money.
As to selling servers, the onl people who actually buy them are small sites like porn sites and smaller news orgs. The largest companies are actually paid by Real and Microsoft to broadcast in their format. Ever wondered why CNN only archives video in NetShow format? They paid for the priveledge.
I wish I could say more, but I don't know what's public information and what is private, so I'll keep my mouth shut. Suffice it to say that right now, marketshare is Apple's biggest goal. There was not a good, free streaming server to run on all those gazillions of Linux boxes out there, so Apple is providing one in hopes of becoming the de-facto standard. It's a good plan IMHO. BTW, everyone go download the Apple Streaming Server 1.1 -- it compiles on Linux on Intel! Now, if only I can get it to work on LinuxPPC!
The no-client:(-dept. It sucks. Why can't we get to see a client? Or just a codec? Apple is getting worse, simple fact. Anyone inside the Mac market must have figured out Apple's latest strategy: Buy it out and pretend it's free.
The codec does not belong to Apple. The license it from Sorenson. If you want to, you can call up Sorenson and license it too. Go for it. As to "buy it out and pretend it's free", that's Microsoft's strategy. Apple didn't buy Quicktime, it invented it. Apple did buy NeXT, but there was no streaming server in NeXT.
Power Computing. It was competition. So it was removed.
No, it was a mistake on Apple's part, so it was corrected. Apple still generates most of it's profit in hardware. Power Computing was licensed to sell MacOS-based systems, and they were not playing by the rules. If Apple had not ended cloning, all the clones and Apple too would have gone out of business.
PPCLinux. It didn't suit Apple. So specs were withheld. Same with BeOS (sorta.. Be is a diff case)
That's a BS lie passed areound by Be Inc. so that they can only develop new stuff for Intel. LinuxPPC runs on every Mac Apple sells, including the B&W G3s and the iMac. Why can LinuxPPC do it and Be can't, especially when the LinuxPPC source code is open-source? Sounds to me like Be is at fault here.
Quicktime. It once was just a nice free client. Now it's got a 'Pro' edition. Plus the fact that Apple is gripping the codecs like they're made of pure gold.
There is still a free Quicktime client. You're faulting Apple because they want to make money? How dare they, you say! Apple is a company, and their goal is to make money. Next you're going to be upset because they won't give you a G3 for free!
Then there are the legalese issues on the ASPL. I'm no lawyer so I can't touch on them. But I hope they're reviewed and fixed.
Apple revised their open-source license, and most people in the OSS community are happy with th new form of it.
Plus, whatever happened to that issue with OSX/Apache crashing..?
Well, if you followed Apple news, you'd know that this has been fixed in the Mac OSX Developer Preview 1 (see MacOSRumors from the other day for info on DP1, it sounds awesome).
Anyway.. I just have to say that Apple is really annoying me. I thought underdogs were the friendlier ones? But Apple doesn't seem to think so. Their playing monopoly with only a few of the cheaper streets and some houses. MS at least can't DO anything monopolistic right now, the DOJ is all over them.
Monopoly? Why, because they open-sourced their next generation OS (Darwin) and a high-performance RTP/RTSP server? Sounds pretty consumer/user friendly to me!
Well there's my ramble for the night/morning. As nice as Apple is being with the limited amount of Open Sourcing they're doing, they still aren't quite coming off friendly. How would we react if MS opened a small part of a program to Open Source and kept everything else under raps, including continued monopoly plays? Food for thought.
If they open-sourced the whole thing, they'd go out of business. They are open-sourcing more things than you hear about though. What about OpenPlay? Thanks to that, OpenPlay will exist on linux (being ported by Loki now for use in Myth II), and we'll have a cross-platform (Mac, Windows, and UNIX/Linux) network gaming transport layer that's free for everyone. That's a good contribution from Apple you don't hear about often.
Cut Apple some slack. They're still the best thing going in the commercial realm, and OSX is gonna rock.
Most of the stories at CNN are not CNN stories. CNN gets stories from the various newswires (P and others), which are automatically sorted and converted for the web site. All the editor has to do is look at it and post it.
No one here seems to realize this. Probably only 20% or so of the stories are written in-house, and virtually none of the techno articles originate at CNN.
You make a lot of good points, but I wanted to take issue with a couple of them:
You have to include the cost of ownership. Nobody will convince me that Linux is cheaper to maintain than NT.
You may never believe it, but this is simply a fact for many of us. Generally, the Linux user is a more computer-saavy person than the Windows user. They're more likely to fix their own machine than to incur costs in paying someone else to come and do it.
Many of us who have run both kinds of servers believe that Windows is less reliable than Linux, and this really does affect support cost. There are other more measurable means to make this argument though. I have a Mac at home, and I run a remote Linux box that does DNS for 8 domains, a web server, ftp server, mail (SMPT/POP), etc. If this machine were a PC, I'd have to buy Timbuktu to do any remote maintenance from my house or work. As it is, I just log in via a rhs/ssh/telnet/whatever, do my work, and log out. No cost incurred save my own time.
Hardware is another issue. Because of Linux, I can get a server-quality OS for free that will run on the hardware I already have. This box is a PowerPC Linux box, so I couldn't put Windows on it anyway. I saved a good bit of money right there.
What?! NT is just as stable as Linux. My NT box at work has now an uptime of something like 8 months. As long as your hardware is up to scratch and you don't mess up the registry by hand NT is rock solid. How long did you use NT for?
I have an NT4 box at work. The registry is corrupted, and I never edited it by hand. I can't get it to run Flash content, because it seems to believe that all Flash content is some kind of inheirently unsafe ActiveX control, and it won't let me. Admittedly, I'm not a Windows guru, but I'm pretty competent. Because NT is commercial, and I don't want to turn the corporate support guys loose on the machine I depend on to get work done, I have to use a much slower Mac to do all my Flash/Generator testing. Reliability means more than the lack of a BSOD/kernel panic. In Linux, the web browser is an application. If it gets corrupted (not likely, since I can't modify it unless I'm root), I just reinstall. In WindowsNT, the browser is "integrated", and reinstalling it doesn't fix the problem. It's not like a Mac either, where I can just go find the offending file and delete it. You're stuck relying on "Uninstall", which doesn't work reliably.
On a side note, my NT box generally goes about a month between reboots (usually a crash), compared to about every two months for the Linux box (getting a new kernel, etc). Both are acceptable uptimes for what I use them for.
mod_asp? Where can I find this? I'd like to learn ASP just for the heck of it, but I'll be damned if I'm going to run an NT/9x machine to do it. I looked in the Apache module registry, but the only two I found were (1) commercial or (2) for Windows apache only and at version 0.1.
Please email me if anyone knows where I might find such a beastie.
It seems to me that the FSF is simply a more restrictive view of the same context. RMS states that Open Source software doesn't necessarily comply with the FSF ideals. However, the FSF software certainly falls within the Open Source movement. It's like the old geometric addige:
Not all rectangles are squares, but all squares are rectangles.
Very cool site. Worth a look, to be sure. However, the discussions on the nature of the light sabre blade lend a lot of insight into jut how obscessed and frightening some of these people can get. This guy has obviously read ever piece of Star Wars-related literature ever published, and analyzed it extensively.
Slashdot Mirror
It probably won't be "easy". The iBook uss the new United Motherboard Architecture (UMA) and the new UniNorth controller chip. This support will have to be added before LinuxPPC will work with it. However, since the new "Sawtooth" G4s, the new "Kihei" iMac on the way, and the upcoming G4 Powerbooks in January all are basd on the UMA, adding support for the iBook will make it easier to get it working on these other machines.
I spoke to Jason Haas at LinuxPPC and basically he said it would take some time, but that it would work eventually.
We use Flash Generator for Solaris at CNN. See it in action HERE. You do have to have Flash of course to see it.
This is so true. I bleed six colors, but I'm no newbie. I worked as a sysadmin for Linux, Solaris, SunOS, AIX, DEC/OSF, IRIX, and HPUX for two years. I have run multiple subnets of machines running MacOS, Windows, various UNIX flavors, and other more obscure OSs. I have been programming for over 15 years and can code in more languages that I care to admit. All my friends are of similar levels of experience, and we all prefer Macs.
I love Linux/UNIX and all of their strengths, but they have never and probably will never compare to the elegence of MacOS. With MacOSX, if Apple does it right, I'll have the Mac user experience with a powerful foundation and all the nifty CLI tools to boot. It's the perfect OS.
Giants are a [Baseball,Football] team. I forget which, since I hate/don't care about sports.
Both, actually. New York Giants in football and San Francisco Giants in baseball.
http://crack.linuxppc.org/
If Linux is the best thing to come out of the net century, I'll be pretty disappointed. I wanna plug a wireless receiver into my head and download the Library of Congress on demand. Screw this personal computer stuff, let's think big. I want total connectivity. I want video vmail in my head, projected onto my visual cortex. Give me eyes with telephoto zoom, infrared vision, light amplification, and ultraviolet spectrophotometry. I want a built-in GPS wirelessy linked up to all the maps in the world. Think big! The pwrson who gives us these things will be the man (or woman) of the next century. Total empowerment! Not the one that made an evolutionary advance to our desktop PCs.
For $900 more? That's more than half of the price!?! I have two desktop machines. One is an x86 PC that dual boots Windoze and Linux. The other is a Mac that boots MacOS 8.6, LinuxPPC, and BeOS 4.5. I have powerful desktop systems. I don't need to spend $2500 for an all-inclusive notebook. What I need is a decent machine that's durable, fast, has a nice screen, and can hook into my network quickly and easily. I don't need DVD, and weight is not my primary concern so much as the ability to haul it to work and have it function all day without swapping batteries.
The iBook is it. It's cheaper than most PC laptops with similar features, it has a great screen, built-in modem and Ethernet, and wireless networking so I can sit on my deck and surf with my cable modem wirelessly at 11MBps.
And the iBook will sell very well. It's not because of Steve's salesmanship, it's because it's a great value (more so even than the iMac, which is expensive compared to the PC world).
For what my wife wanted, it's perfect. Quicken, solitaire, web surfing and email.
The only people that these laws hurt are honest people who want to protect their private correspondance.
http://www.yellowdoglinux.com/
It's 2.4 GHz. As others have said, the max distance is 150 feet. Basically, it's running on the same base frequency as the high-end phones (they are generally 2.4GHz receive and 900MHz send, but there are exceptions).
You're referring to LocalTalk, which is an implementation of the Appletalk protocol over telehone wire. It's max throughput is 230Kbps. Appletalk is capable of running on Ethernet at much higher speeds. With the newest Appletalk mechansims like AppleshareIP, Appletalk works well even over ATM and gigabit Ethernet.
Steve announced the specs:
12.1" TFT Display - 800x600@24bit
Rage Mobility graphics, 4MB VRAM
300MHz G3 w/512k backside cache
24x CDROM
32MB RAM, upgradable to 150MB
3.2 GB hard drive
56k modem
USB
10/100 Ethernet
full-sized keyboard
battery life: 6 hours!
Colors; Tangerine and BlueBerry
Price: $1599, available in September
Oh, and get this:
AirPort WIRELESS NETWORKING!!!!!!!!!!!
The stats on this:
Wireless LAN
11 MBps
Based on 802.11 wireless networking
40-bit encrypted transfers
It has a baseStation with modem and ethernet.
How cool is that!
My impression is that the decryption algorithms for DVD are kept as a big secret to prevent movie piracy (which as most of us know is becoming the next big thing on the net). In order for Linux to get a decoder, it would have to come from either (a) hardware or (b) some group who has access to the decryption scheme.
Just because LinuxPPC is not the platform that YOU use does not make it a waste to port. There are many LinuxPPC users (myself included) that would be more likely to use Linux full-time if we didn't have to go back to MacOS for games.
Besides, everyone knows that each time you port, the code gets more portable. It's likely that a port to Alpha (or SPARC or some other processor) would be easier after the PowerPC port is completed.
I beta tested Myth I and Myth II, and I volunteer as a Bungie.net Administrator. If the Linux port is as good as the Mac/PC version, it should be on every game player's to-get list.
This argument is no different than the ones corporations used to give for Open Source Software. "If it's free/cheap, how can it be any good?" Many, if not most shareware authors are professional programmers. My software site has about a dozen free programs, and half a dozen more as shareware. I have been a professional programmer for several years, and I am employed in that line of work.
I really don't want a 16 year old kid or somebody who has remedial coding skills to be writing closed source software, since we really don't know what or how he makes it work. Finally, much of the shareware software I have seen is quite buggy (such as ircle--it doesn't crash often on a good day).
I can say the same thing for some of the commercial software that I've encountered. Some of the brightest coders you'll find are under 21. These are the Linus Torvalds of the future. Just because there are some crappy VB-based hacks out there doesn't mean that all shareware sucks.
If you are going to showcase your coding skills to the world, it forces you to write good code, since everybody in the world will see it. It also makes you more competive to everybody else--you end up making better code.
The purpose of shareware generally is not to show off one's coding skills, but to make some extra side money. I write programs that are useful to me, and if they turn out to be useful to other people, I consider embellishing them and selling them for $5 to $15 via Kagi. The extra cash is not significant, but it is worth doing considering I have already written the programs anyway.
Paying shareware fees can freaking add up quickly. $10 + $25 + more and more adds up to big bucks, trust me.
Sure it can be, but for your money you'll get a lot more shareware than you will commercial software. You can't really compare shareware to open source. One is a source of income, the other is not. I have a full-time job; I don't write software complicated enough to need much support beyond the documentation, and I don't have any interest doing full-time support anyway.
It's a fact that less then 5% of downloads of shareware actually get payed for. People just run shareware unregistered or crack it (trust me, anybody with two months experience on a computer can crack a registration system on several shareware programs).
And your point is? Is it that shareware is not viable? There are tens of thousands of shareware authors, the very existance of which disproves your point. I personally can attest that it's a worthwhile venture if your software is unique and fills a need. As to piracy, sure, software can be cracked. But who's going to waste time cracking my serial number algorithm on a $5 image converter?
Another example: thanks to the internet, I was rcently able to download the full release of Quake II for the Macintosh. However, it was a good port, so I went to CompUSA and bought a copy. I didn't have to, since I already had downloaded it, but I did it to support the company (LogicWare) for creating a good product on the Mac platform. Other people feel as I do, that you should support a good company that supports your OS of choice (be it Linux, Mac, *BSD, or whatever).
Well, the truth is that no one is making big money with streaming media except content providers and bandwidth providers. I work for the biggest US news organization on the net, and streaming video is great for us. It turns out that clickthrough rates on video ads are 20x as high as on static banner ads. So we can sell a video ad for more money.
As to selling servers, the onl people who actually buy them are small sites like porn sites and smaller news orgs. The largest companies are actually paid by Real and Microsoft to broadcast in their format. Ever wondered why CNN only archives video in NetShow format? They paid for the priveledge.
I wish I could say more, but I don't know what's public information and what is private, so I'll keep my mouth shut. Suffice it to say that right now, marketshare is Apple's biggest goal. There was not a good, free streaming server to run on all those gazillions of Linux boxes out there, so Apple is providing one in hopes of becoming the de-facto standard. It's a good plan IMHO. BTW, everyone go download the Apple Streaming Server 1.1 -- it compiles on Linux on Intel! Now, if only I can get it to work on LinuxPPC!
The codec does not belong to Apple. The license it from Sorenson. If you want to, you can call up Sorenson and license it too. Go for it. As to "buy it out and pretend it's free", that's Microsoft's strategy. Apple didn't buy Quicktime, it invented it. Apple did buy NeXT, but there was no streaming server in NeXT.
Power Computing. It was competition. So it was removed.
No, it was a mistake on Apple's part, so it was corrected. Apple still generates most of it's profit in hardware. Power Computing was licensed to sell MacOS-based systems, and they were not playing by the rules. If Apple had not ended cloning, all the clones and Apple too would have gone out of business.
PPCLinux. It didn't suit Apple. So specs were withheld. Same with BeOS (sorta.. Be is a diff case)
That's a BS lie passed areound by Be Inc. so that they can only develop new stuff for Intel. LinuxPPC runs on every Mac Apple sells, including the B&W G3s and the iMac. Why can LinuxPPC do it and Be can't, especially when the LinuxPPC source code is open-source? Sounds to me like Be is at fault here.
Quicktime. It once was just a nice free client. Now it's got a 'Pro' edition. Plus the fact that Apple is gripping the codecs like they're made of pure gold.
There is still a free Quicktime client. You're faulting Apple because they want to make money? How dare they, you say! Apple is a company, and their goal is to make money. Next you're going to be upset because they won't give you a G3 for free!
Then there are the legalese issues on the ASPL. I'm no lawyer so I can't touch on them. But I hope they're reviewed and fixed.
Apple revised their open-source license, and most people in the OSS community are happy with th new form of it.
Plus, whatever happened to that issue with OSX/Apache crashing..?
Well, if you followed Apple news, you'd know that this has been fixed in the Mac OSX Developer Preview 1 (see MacOSRumors from the other day for info on DP1, it sounds awesome).
Anyway.. I just have to say that Apple is really annoying me. I thought underdogs were the friendlier ones? But Apple doesn't seem to think so. Their playing monopoly with only a few of the cheaper streets and some houses. MS at least can't DO anything monopolistic right now, the DOJ is all over them.
Monopoly? Why, because they open-sourced their next generation OS (Darwin) and a high-performance RTP/RTSP server? Sounds pretty consumer/user friendly to me!
Well there's my ramble for the night/morning. As nice as Apple is being with the limited amount of Open Sourcing they're doing, they still aren't quite coming off friendly. How would we react if MS opened a small part of a program to Open Source and kept everything else under raps, including continued monopoly plays? Food for thought.
If they open-sourced the whole thing, they'd go out of business. They are open-sourcing more things than you hear about though. What about OpenPlay? Thanks to that, OpenPlay will exist on linux (being ported by Loki now for use in Myth II), and we'll have a cross-platform (Mac, Windows, and UNIX/Linux) network gaming transport layer that's free for everyone. That's a good contribution from Apple you don't hear about often.
Cut Apple some slack. They're still the best thing going in the commercial realm, and OSX is gonna rock.
Most of the stories at CNN are not CNN stories. CNN gets stories from the various newswires (P and others), which are automatically sorted and converted for the web site. All the editor has to do is look at it and post it.
No one here seems to realize this. Probably only 20% or so of the stories are written in-house, and virtually none of the techno articles originate at CNN.
You have to include the cost of ownership. Nobody will convince me that Linux is cheaper to maintain than NT.
You may never believe it, but this is simply a fact for many of us. Generally, the Linux user is a more computer-saavy person than the Windows user. They're more likely to fix their own machine than to incur costs in paying someone else to come and do it.
Many of us who have run both kinds of servers believe that Windows is less reliable than Linux, and this really does affect support cost. There are other more measurable means to make this argument though. I have a Mac at home, and I run a remote Linux box that does DNS for 8 domains, a web server, ftp server, mail (SMPT/POP), etc. If this machine were a PC, I'd have to buy Timbuktu to do any remote maintenance from my house or work. As it is, I just log in via a rhs/ssh/telnet/whatever, do my work, and log out. No cost incurred save my own time.
Hardware is another issue. Because of Linux, I can get a server-quality OS for free that will run on the hardware I already have. This box is a PowerPC Linux box, so I couldn't put Windows on it anyway. I saved a good bit of money right there.
What?! NT is just as stable as Linux. My NT box at work has now an uptime of something like 8 months. As long as your hardware is up to scratch and you don't mess up the registry by hand NT is rock solid. How long did you use NT for?
I have an NT4 box at work. The registry is corrupted, and I never edited it by hand. I can't get it to run Flash content, because it seems to believe that all Flash content is some kind of inheirently unsafe ActiveX control, and it won't let me. Admittedly, I'm not a Windows guru, but I'm pretty competent. Because NT is commercial, and I don't want to turn the corporate support guys loose on the machine I depend on to get work done, I have to use a much slower Mac to do all my Flash/Generator testing. Reliability means more than the lack of a BSOD/kernel panic. In Linux, the web browser is an application. If it gets corrupted (not likely, since I can't modify it unless I'm root), I just reinstall. In WindowsNT, the browser is "integrated", and reinstalling it doesn't fix the problem. It's not like a Mac either, where I can just go find the offending file and delete it. You're stuck relying on "Uninstall", which doesn't work reliably.
On a side note, my NT box generally goes about a month between reboots (usually a crash), compared to about every two months for the Linux box (getting a new kernel, etc). Both are acceptable uptimes for what I use them for.
mod_asp? Where can I find this? I'd like to learn ASP just for the heck of it, but I'll be damned if I'm going to run an NT/9x machine to do it. I looked in the Apache module registry, but the only two I found were (1) commercial or (2) for Windows apache only and at version 0.1.
Please email me if anyone knows where I might find such a beastie.
It seems to me that the FSF is simply a more restrictive view of the same context. RMS states that Open Source software doesn't necessarily comply with the FSF ideals. However, the FSF software certainly falls within the Open Source movement. It's like the old geometric addige:
Not all rectangles are squares, but all squares are rectangles.
FSF is the square.
Very cool site. Worth a look, to be sure. However, the discussions on the nature of the light sabre blade lend a lot of insight into jut how obscessed and frightening some of these people can get. This guy has obviously read ever piece of Star Wars-related literature ever published, and analyzed it extensively.