I don't think that Linux has to support spoofing or disabling of the cpuid. Well, I can see that disabling it might be good... but I don't think that it is necessary at all. I think that having programs not use the cpuid is probably the best move. If you don't want to have anything use the cpuid, don't run the program that reads it.
Linux is developed for people to run Linux. Right. Need I remind you that Linux is just a kernel? what I choose to run under my kernel is entirely up to me. And being able to have a nifty kernel under my $10k piece of software. And I really laugh at your ``greedy software company.'' You must be one of those people that think that if a software company is charging $10k for a product that they don't need the extra 10 licenses that you and your friends would use. So you pirate it.
Why has slashdot turned into a WaReZ kiddie hangout? Oh, I pine for the days in which slashdot folk talked about interesting things like pipelined cache access and number theory. Now it's John Katz writing silly articles, people flaming him for it, and stupid people complaining about how the big bad software company that makes specialized software and spends millions in research won't give them a copy for free. GROW UP! If I spend three million on research on hardware synthesis tools and then have five companies that are interested in the product, you can be darn sure that I'm not going to release it under an open source license, and you can be darn sure that I am not going to want people pirating it and stealing money from me.
I hardly think that Linux is on the path for World Enlightenment. I think you're probably a tad delusional if you think that. It's currently one of the least-sucky OS's I've used. I currently use it on all my computers (except my NeXTStation) exclusively. But I think it's a good, inexpensive easy-to-use operating system. Not anything remotely relating to anything important, like God.
But, yes, I think that more companies would port to Linux. And if you're using high-priced tools, You're going to get inferior forms of host identification, like dongles (requires user level access to parallel port), MAC addresses (what if you're not using ethernet?), or disk info (which may need user level access to hardware -- a *really* bad thing).
So, I still say that the cpuid is a good thing for anti-piracy. I don't know if it's a real privacy concern, and I certainly think that if you only use software which you have the source to you can darn well compile out the necessity of having the cpuid even read.
Having a cpuid ISN't all that bad. Most non-intellish CPU's have one. They're great for software companies that want to give you an expensive piece of software and don't want you to pirate it. It works. It doesn't automatically distribute your credit card number everywhere. It doesn't send personal infomation to people.
I think that maybe having a top-notch UNIX (linux/freebsd) is great, but without a cpuid I think that many top-notch 3D, CAD, and hardware-simulation companies will be unwilling to port to Intel.
Therefore, I say that having a cpuid is a good thing. Not good for the things Intel Marketing is wanting it to be used for (web/portal/sales stuff) but I think that it is good for companies that want to protect their software.
Come on... CPUID isn't so bad. It's just what they wanted it to be used for.
Sparcs have had cpuids forever, and I think mips and PPC's do too... It's useful for copy protection of expensive programs. And although it's nice to have GPL'd stuff, if you're designing a specialized CAD program for a certain type of application, and you're only going to sell it to a few companies, you may very well need to sell it for $5,000 or more a license, and you'd want to be sure that you were getting all your money...
Anyway, it's not such a big problem, although if it was placed on mainstream computer parts I could see how it might be used for more sinister motives.
For apple to use the Linux kernel they would have to write a lot more code. Most of the code that is in OS X was bought from NEXTSTEP... writing MacOS on top of linux would involve LOTS of code.
And we ALL know how well apple creates new architectural code (not very well at all).
Also, there are lots of GPL'd programs that are used for talking to the kernel... nfsd, mount, ipfwadm... and lots lots more that include data from the kernel headers... and all these programs have to be GPL'd. So apple couldn't use their own version of mount.
More important things? Like what? Paying for unwed mothers to plop out children to get more child support? Paying for crooked politicians to flaunt each other's wickedness on national TV? Paying for the creation of stupid laws? Paying for Special Interest Groups fighting over which minority group can claim the most special benefits?
Sheesh.
If our money is going to be forcibly taken from us, the two best things that can be done with it are the military and scientific research. And we can't have enough of either.
There is no evidence at all to suggest there is a god, none.
I have a sig that quotes a song I once heard... ``Every time I hear a newborn baby cry, touch a leaf or see the sky, I remember why I believe.'' Have you ever been outside and seen the sky and grass and wondered how it is so beautiful? Have you ever seen a baby and asked yourself where such a wonderful gift has come from? Have you ever asked yourself why you can enjoy music?
There is a God. I'm sorry you don't see him.
If there is a god, you are likely worshipping the wrong one, maybe you will be punished for eternity for worshipping the incorrect one.
Why do you think we are worshipping the wrong one? Do you have a personal relationship with God, has he told you that Christianity is wrong?
Atheists are just like Christians, we reject all other gods except we don't make any exceptions like Christians.
No, Atheists believe in no God. Christians have a personal relationship with God. There is an extreme difference. In fact, I'd have to say that Athiests are the opposite of Christians.
Personally, if god is willing to punish somebody for eternity simply because that person didn't believe in the correct god and had no way to determine which was the correct god during the course of his life, I find no difference between that and Satan? It would be morally wrong of me to worship such an abomination.
Ha. YOU know what is right and wrong? Silly mortal.
Have you ever read much by C.S. Lewis? In The Last Battle Lewis conjectures that those who repent of their sins to God, trust in God, and believe that God has forgiven them are saved. Regardless if they call Christ by name.
Now, I don't know how right Lewis is -- although I find his works to be fairly right-on in general -- but it does say what is more important and what is less important in Christianity... going to church is less important than realizing your shortcomings and bringing them to God for forgiveness.
Anyway, I can see why you don't think Christianity is all that... we humans tend to muff up God's glory. Sorry about that. And I'm sorry you haven't seen God at work. Try to get outside once in a while.
Uuuh.... these aren't targeted at end users, dude. And 5.25 full height disks don't fit well in arrays. Nope, you'll want to plug fourteen of these into a Sun Storage Array with Fibre going to your enterprise server. 2 storage units x 4 arrays x 14 drives x 100GB under an Enterprise Server x000 == 44.8 TB of data. Actually it'd be less than that, because you'd want to do RAID-5. So you get 3 or 4 of them for companies with somewhat-large storage needs. I think we'd of needed two or three to house the data where I used to work...
well, gee, nobody does want that (except for NT victims who don't know any better). but then again, is that actually true of Mac OSX, or what? you don't strike me as somebody who'd actually know that kind of thing about an OS that you hate and fear so much.
Have you ever used a macintosh? You can't do things remotely on it. You can't telnet to it. It's not running X. You HAVE to go up to it to administrate it.
Have you ever used a NEXTSTEP machine? You pretty much must HAVE to go up to it to adminstrate it because normal administrative things (passwd, etc) don't work on the crappy broken backwards NEXTSTEP way of doing things... they have an entire different library for doing user things that you have to use different commands on. And the network stuff doesn't work well either.
As for your entire article, why don't you answer some of my valid points (IE Macintosh computers are not useful for mission-critical systems, only little we-don't-care-if-it-goes-down servers and workstations).
Oh, now I see, you can't think of responses. I'm right. So you say ``flaming the [poor] mac users and macs is [really mean!]'' and think that's a retort. And then say that being a sysadmin for workstations and servers that MUST NOT GO DOWN is not a ``real job.'' Maybe you think it is a ficticious job (as people who think Macs are good server platforms usually don't qualify for them) but it is certainly not an EASY job. Like being on call 24/7 to go out and swap out processor boards (yes, processor boards SHOULD be warm swappable -- they are on Enterprise Servers). Like putting up a clone system so that if a machine ever has to be taken down for upgrades or parts replacement, you can do so with fractional-second downtime. Like making sure that the generators kick in within 5 minutes if the power ever goes off. No, not an easy job. But I consider it a good job. Much more than going around rebooting Macintoshes for some lame magazine company.
Since when is OS X server WAY cheaper than my copy of Solaris? I paied $10 or so for it. I'd gamble it probably does less and crashes more. And if your company can afford a new mac and OS X server and downtime, why don't they hire a decent system administrator and get an Ultra 10 instead?
OSX == OS10 GOD WHY CAN"T MORONS UNDERSTAND THIS!!!
I understand this perfectly. It just doesn't make sense for apple to change the name umptee-ump times.
Lastly why the HELL isn't apple products good for "anything close to mission critical" what is NT??
Apple products aren't good for anything close to mission critical because
They (currently) have no preemptive multitasking or memory protection.
They have not proven themselves to be able to handle mission critical tasks
Their hardware is no where near the quality of hardware I would consider for near-mission-critical tasks (I'd take a Sun Enterprise x000 with entirely-hot-swappable parts and a dual-channel RAID solution for something near-mission-critical). The iMacand the G3 Powermac do NOT qualify as mission-critical-quality hardware.
Have you ever used NEXTSTEP? I would not consider that a mission-critical system -- it is not designed to be one. It's more stable than MacOS, but that's not saying much.
I may be wrong, Apple may make OS (x|10) server a nice server platform -- but it's going to take a lot of proving before I would consider anything from Apple for a near-mission-critical situation. The same way it took most people a long time to consider Solaris stable -- not because it wasn't very stable, just because it was not SunOS4.X.
Oh, and I don't consider NT stable enough to do my homework on. Much less stable enough to do anything near mission-critical work.
Sure linux is growing, but it remains a hurdle for a huge number of even power users to use and doesn't have (at least yet) the advantages of backward compatible and comercial software products!!
What sort of backwards-compatable SERVER software for MAC do you have? You say at the top of your post that OS X SERVER is for use as a SERVER. You don't run Photoshop on a SERVER. You run nfs, ftp, dns, httpd, samba, and maybe a mac network fileserver. Tell me, what out of that list you can't compile for whatever platform you want?
Linux is really easy to learn for anyone with Unix adminstration knowledge. Those are the people (well, maybe VMS guys) that should be running your servers. Or you're dumber than I thought.
People need to understand OSX server IS a threat to linux, faster processors, more user freindly, more powerful, all the features of *nix, a fully upgradable BSD core, yes a propritory kernal, but from what I have heard they are going to announce some AMAZING tech that has not yet been publicially talked about, yet.
YOU need to understand that OS X server will NOT replace solaris as a server platform any time soon. Anyone in IT with any sort of a clue would not trust apple for anything now, and they are correct to wait for quite a while before switching to OS X. Although, I still don't think that it offers anything special -- no X, slower architecture (Linux runs on G3's, as well as UltraSparcs and Alphas -- both of which are much faster than your silly macs), less easy to use (you have to walk to the server to administrate it? Who wants that?) Many of the features of BSD (although not of solaris or linux), a fully upgradable BSD core when you buy OS (XI|11), a kernel that is propriatery and that won't get fixed in minutes if a security problem is found, and I'll bet that your ``AMAZING'' technology is not nearly so amazing as you say. I've yet to see anything really cool come out of Apple.
So please stop spreading mis-information and trolling about a product you know nothing about, I expected more from a "news for nerds" web page and that can say I have been here from the begining and/. has gone down hill. We all have our own prefrences and no one should be bashing our choices!!
So why don't YOU stop mis-informing people with your blatant lack of knowledge about how to run computers that need to stay up, and trolling about a product (linux, solaris, OS (10|X)) that you know nothing about. I expected more from a ``news for nerds'' web page. I can say that not only can I speak and write fluently in English, but I have also been here for many years. And I, too, have slashdot go downhill, where once people knew what they were talking about and could discuss the threadedness of linux 2.0x, 2.1x, and Solaris and how well they scaled. Where once people had intelligent discussions on processor architecture. Where once people realized that Macs shouldn't be used for anything mission critical (I'd use it in an elementary school, maybe) and didn't have to sit and respond to stupid Mac-User-Anonymous-Coward posts.
Yes, developers are going to code on MacOSX Server for Yellow box. What the hell else are they going to program on? That's like saying Win32 programmers are going to program on Windows or NT.
Most people who want a vegetable-proof OS don't care if it's from Redmond or not.
Universities (well, decent universities, and even most of the bad ones I've seen) don't use Macs for anything except clusters. The file servers for the Macs are suns. You can't trust MacOS for anything anywhere near mission critical. And i would fire anyone who says otherwise.
Of course, for truly mission critical things (like phone switches) I'd say that neither NT, nor Linux, nor Solaris is stable enough.. but I digress.
Apple has been yelling lots of things for a long time. Like that Rhapsody would be released for Intel. Like that Rhapsody would not be released for Intel. Like that OS X Server would be rhapsody. Like that OS X Server is going to be renamed OS 10 Server.
Oh, and viscious lies like ``The Apple Macintosh is the only computer to have built-in support for the Year 2000''... VMS boxes have had this for a long time, and Unix boxes are pretty free from bugs, too.
So, maybe in all the changes of things, maybe I didn't hear.
NetBooting is an Apple invention? Ha!
Here's an answer to you: Apple invested very little money and effort into MkLinux compared to (NextStep|Rhapsody|OSX|OS10). They hope, however, to get into the Unix market. Real unix people won't want OSX. It has the apple GUI and won't behave like their friendly UNIX box with their window-manager-of-choice. So they hope to get pointy-haired-people to get their Unix guys Macs, and hope that they will choose to install MkLinux/LinuxPPC instead of sticking to their aging Sparc10s.
I need something that runs on better-price-performance (Read: Intel) hardware.
I need something that lets me upgrade my software to fix bugs for free (Upgrade to OS8! It's more stable? Why should I have to pay for stability?)
I don't like mach. It's slow. Forces too much stuff into the server world (you know, server==parts of the kernel not in the kernel, like filesystems and networking and stuff)
Hmmm... made my dad a Celeron-300A system for $600. Had good parts in it. It's no less stable than any other Win system I've seen, is pretty fast, and was half the price of any sort of Mac I could get.
But you want to talk about bad parts? Well, I bought a AMD K5-90 on a no-name motherboard for $120 three years ago. It has a generic 256k isa video card in it, along with two $15 PCI NE2000 controllers. Oh, and a $10 sound card. 32 megs of generic RAM. The only quality parts were my two Western Digital hard drives (and I guess that's debatable). Let's see how it's doing:
Yup, looks like it's doing OK. It runs everything from matlab to rc5des to amp. Had to take it down a while ago, the power went out for more than half an hour. Previous uptime was about 120 days, and that was because I had to move it. I can't remember the last time it stopped working was...
I don't think it's usually crappy parts that make things crash, I think it's crappy OS's.
And besides, don't give me crap about how Mac hardware is great. I got 8 megs of the correct type of memory to put in my Centris 650. Put in the SIMM. The computer recognised it fine... and two hours later turned off for no reason. So I took it out -- and the random-turnoffs continued. It won't even turn on at all now. I tried swapping the battery, no help. The Apple guy said he couldn't do anything besides sell me a new Mac.
Less to maintain than what? I worked at UNIX workstation/server support in a major company this summer... we had six or seven people for ~2500 machines, and did printing and backups and VAXen, too... with my experience in Mac's, having seven people to administrate 2500 mac workstations, servers, and printers over a large land area just wouldn't cut it.
Not to mention I don't see many multi-terrabyte disk solutions for the Mac.
might you actualy consider looking at a new version of the MacOS (ie OS X).
Not if it has the same crappy interface as OS N nX.
Not if it doesn't have pre-emptive multitasking.
Not if it doesn't have memory management and protection.
Not if it boots into a single-user mode.
Not if it doesn't have X builtin.
In short, if Apple really puts a Unix in MacOS, I might look at it. If they basterdize it then I'm going right back to where I claim that MacOS is worthless to me.
Silly biped, Motorola chips can't do floating point. If you want Intel chips to have floating point, get them to use Alpha or UltraSparc or even MIPS10k technology.
Actually, i guess the PPC's in the RS6k's aren't too bad... I'd still pick out an Alpha or US though...
And if you were referring to the silly chips they put into Mac's then I'm laughing at you right now.
here is nothing wrong with the windows desktop, it works ok andlots of people are happy with it, but YES, the underlying windwos OS is crap and shit, but the idea/design of the front end shell is workable and usefull!, cant say that for many WM's or crapp CDE or so called other poor attepts by lamers at semi usefull filemanagers/environments....
What is KDE?
A file manager? Here is my filemanager. I say it is not only more powerful but, for me, easier to use than the kfm.
Wed Jan 27, 23:28:13 - 0 mesgs. 022-erich.users-/var/media/mp3 fozzi:169->
KDE has an application launcher panel? I have an application launcher, too. I say it is more powerful than yours, and I feel it is more elegant. It looks something like this:
Wed Jan 27, 23:28:13 - 0 mesgs. 022-erich.users-/var/media/mp3 fozzi:169->
You say KDE has a window manager? I have one too. You can get it here. You say KDE has a crappy web browser? I have one too, it's called ``netscape.'' And it only loads when I tell it to.
I wish someone could explain to me why it is so much better to be able to double click-on-your-mp3-directory-then-double-click-on-y our-catagory-folder-then-double-click-on -your-artist-then-drag-a-box-around-your-titles-th en-double-click-then-wait-for-x11-amp-to -load-and-play-your-mp3 then it is to type amp mp3/Cl<tab>Bee<tab>9th*<enter> I just don't understand. Maybe easier to learn but certainly not easier to use.
So, what you're saying is that KDE is a substitute for learning how to do things better. I can see that. I don't think it's right, but I can see that.
After replying nicely to 90 emails that day about how patrick should move to libc6, you'd be pissed off, too. He gets angry about people emailing him to include qmail, too... he can't do it (licesning issues), and gets a zillion requests, and so gets rather angry.
Silly sengan, don't you realize that if it wasn't for weapons, your precious european country would be the German Empire? Evil people can use force, so we must have the ability to use force so those evil people don't own us.
I sleep better at night knowing that the US has the strongest military in the world. I think that it's great that we're going to have a kick-butt F22 and kick-butt JSF planes. And you people who think that the military is unnecessary are the same people who will want it when it is needed.
Slashdot Mirror
Linux is developed for people to run Linux. Right. Need I remind you that Linux is just a kernel? what I choose to run under my kernel is entirely up to me. And being able to have a nifty kernel under my $10k piece of software. And I really laugh at your ``greedy software company.'' You must be one of those people that think that if a software company is charging $10k for a product that they don't need the extra 10 licenses that you and your friends would use. So you pirate it.
Why has slashdot turned into a WaReZ kiddie hangout? Oh, I pine for the days in which slashdot folk talked about interesting things like pipelined cache access and number theory. Now it's John Katz writing silly articles, people flaming him for it, and stupid people complaining about how the big bad software company that makes specialized software and spends millions in research won't give them a copy for free. GROW UP! If I spend three million on research on hardware synthesis tools and then have five companies that are interested in the product, you can be darn sure that I'm not going to release it under an open source license, and you can be darn sure that I am not going to want people pirating it and stealing money from me.
I hardly think that Linux is on the path for World Enlightenment. I think you're probably a tad delusional if you think that. It's currently one of the least-sucky OS's I've used. I currently use it on all my computers (except my NeXTStation) exclusively. But I think it's a good, inexpensive easy-to-use operating system. Not anything remotely relating to anything important, like God.
But, yes, I think that more companies would port to Linux. And if you're using high-priced tools, You're going to get inferior forms of host identification, like dongles (requires user level access to parallel port), MAC addresses (what if you're not using ethernet?), or disk info (which may need user level access to hardware -- a *really* bad thing).
So, I still say that the cpuid is a good thing for anti-piracy. I don't know if it's a real privacy concern, and I certainly think that if you only use software which you have the source to you can darn well compile out the necessity of having the cpuid even read.
I think that maybe having a top-notch UNIX (linux/freebsd) is great, but without a cpuid I think that many top-notch 3D, CAD, and hardware-simulation companies will be unwilling to port to Intel.
Therefore, I say that having a cpuid is a good thing. Not good for the things Intel Marketing is wanting it to be used for (web/portal/sales stuff) but I think that it is good for companies that want to protect their software.
NT drops connections randomly, so it doesn't have this problem.
Sparcs have had cpuids forever, and I think mips and PPC's do too... It's useful for copy protection of expensive programs. And although it's nice to have GPL'd stuff, if you're designing a specialized CAD program for a certain type of application, and you're only going to sell it to a few companies, you may very well need to sell it for $5,000 or more a license, and you'd want to be sure that you were getting all your money...
Anyway, it's not such a big problem, although if it was placed on mainstream computer parts I could see how it might be used for more sinister motives.
And we ALL know how well apple creates new architectural code (not very well at all).
Also, there are lots of GPL'd programs that are used for talking to the kernel... nfsd, mount, ipfwadm... and lots lots more that include data from the kernel headers... and all these programs have to be GPL'd. So apple couldn't use their own version of mount.
Sheesh.
If our money is going to be forcibly taken from us, the two best things that can be done with it are the military and scientific research. And we can't have enough of either.
There is a God. I'm sorry you don't see him.
Why do you think we are worshipping the wrong one? Do you have a personal relationship with God, has he told you that Christianity is wrong? No, Atheists believe in no God. Christians have a personal relationship with God. There is an extreme difference. In fact, I'd have to say that Athiests are the opposite of Christians. Ha. YOU know what is right and wrong? Silly mortal.Have you ever read much by C.S. Lewis? In The Last Battle Lewis conjectures that those who repent of their sins to God, trust in God, and believe that God has forgiven them are saved. Regardless if they call Christ by name.
Now, I don't know how right Lewis is -- although I find his works to be fairly right-on in general -- but it does say what is more important and what is less important in Christianity... going to church is less important than realizing your shortcomings and bringing them to God for forgiveness.
Anyway, I can see why you don't think Christianity is all that... we humans tend to muff up God's glory. Sorry about that. And I'm sorry you haven't seen God at work. Try to get outside once in a while.
Uuuh.... these aren't targeted at end users, dude. And 5.25 full height disks don't fit well in arrays. Nope, you'll want to plug fourteen of these into a Sun Storage Array with Fibre going to your enterprise server. 2 storage units x 4 arrays x 14 drives x 100GB under an Enterprise Server x000 == 44.8 TB of data. Actually it'd be less than that, because you'd want to do RAID-5. So you get 3 or 4 of them for companies with somewhat-large storage needs. I think we'd of needed two or three to house the data where I used to work...
Have you ever used a macintosh? You can't do things remotely on it. You can't telnet to it. It's not running X. You HAVE to go up to it to administrate it.
Have you ever used a NEXTSTEP machine? You pretty much must HAVE to go up to it to adminstrate it because normal administrative things (passwd, etc) don't work on the crappy broken backwards NEXTSTEP way of doing things... they have an entire different library for doing user things that you have to use different commands on. And the network stuff doesn't work well either.
As for your entire article, why don't you answer some of my valid points (IE Macintosh computers are not useful for mission-critical systems, only little we-don't-care-if-it-goes-down servers and workstations).
Oh, now I see, you can't think of responses. I'm right. So you say ``flaming the [poor] mac users and macs is [really mean!]'' and think that's a retort. And then say that being a sysadmin for workstations and servers that MUST NOT GO DOWN is not a ``real job.'' Maybe you think it is a ficticious job (as people who think Macs are good server platforms usually don't qualify for them) but it is certainly not an EASY job. Like being on call 24/7 to go out and swap out processor boards (yes, processor boards SHOULD be warm swappable -- they are on Enterprise Servers). Like putting up a clone system so that if a machine ever has to be taken down for upgrades or parts replacement, you can do so with fractional-second downtime. Like making sure that the generators kick in within 5 minutes if the power ever goes off. No, not an easy job. But I consider it a good job. Much more than going around rebooting Macintoshes for some lame magazine company.
Since when is OS X server WAY cheaper than my copy of Solaris? I paied $10 or so for it. I'd gamble it probably does less and crashes more. And if your company can afford a new mac and OS X server and downtime, why don't they hire a decent system administrator and get an Ultra 10 instead?
- They (currently) have no preemptive multitasking or memory protection.
- They have not proven themselves to be able to handle mission critical tasks
- Their hardware is no where near the quality of hardware I would consider for near-mission-critical tasks (I'd take a Sun Enterprise x000 with entirely-hot-swappable parts and a dual-channel RAID solution for something near-mission-critical). The iMacand the G3 Powermac do NOT qualify as mission-critical-quality hardware.
- Have you ever used NEXTSTEP? I would not consider that a mission-critical system -- it is not designed to be one. It's more stable than MacOS, but that's not saying much.
I may be wrong, Apple may make OS (x|10) server a nice server platform -- but it's going to take a lot of proving before I would consider anything from Apple for a near-mission-critical situation. The same way it took most people a long time to consider Solaris stable -- not because it wasn't very stable, just because it was not SunOS4.X.Oh, and I don't consider NT stable enough to do my homework on. Much less stable enough to do anything near mission-critical work.
What sort of backwards-compatable SERVER software for MAC do you have? You say at the top of your post that OS X SERVER is for use as a SERVER. You don't run Photoshop on a SERVER. You run nfs, ftp, dns, httpd, samba, and maybe a mac network fileserver. Tell me, what out of that list you can't compile for whatever platform you want?Linux is really easy to learn for anyone with Unix adminstration knowledge. Those are the people (well, maybe VMS guys) that should be running your servers. Or you're dumber than I thought.
YOU need to understand that OS X server will NOT replace solaris as a server platform any time soon. Anyone in IT with any sort of a clue would not trust apple for anything now, and they are correct to wait for quite a while before switching to OS X. Although, I still don't think that it offers anything special -- no X, slower architecture (Linux runs on G3's, as well as UltraSparcs and Alphas -- both of which are much faster than your silly macs), less easy to use (you have to walk to the server to administrate it? Who wants that?) Many of the features of BSD (although not of solaris or linux), a fully upgradable BSD core when you buy OS (XI|11), a kernel that is propriatery and that won't get fixed in minutes if a security problem is found, and I'll bet that your ``AMAZING'' technology is not nearly so amazing as you say. I've yet to see anything really cool come out of Apple.So why don't YOU stop mis-informing people with your blatant lack of knowledge about how to run computers that need to stay up, and trolling about a product (linux, solaris, OS (10|X)) that you know nothing about. I expected more from a ``news for nerds'' web page. I can say that not only can I speak and write fluently in English, but I have also been here for many years. And I, too, have slashdot go downhill, where once people knew what they were talking about and could discuss the threadedness of linux 2.0x, 2.1x, and Solaris and how well they scaled. Where once people had intelligent discussions on processor architecture. Where once people realized that Macs shouldn't be used for anything mission critical (I'd use it in an elementary school, maybe) and didn't have to sit and respond to stupid Mac-User-Anonymous-Coward posts.
Yes, developers are going to code on MacOSX Server for Yellow box. What the hell else are they going to program on? That's like saying Win32 programmers are going to program on Windows or NT.
Most people who want a vegetable-proof OS don't care if it's from Redmond or not.
Universities (well, decent universities, and even most of the bad ones I've seen) don't use Macs for anything except clusters. The file servers for the Macs are suns. You can't trust MacOS for anything anywhere near mission critical. And i would fire anyone who says otherwise.
Apple has been yelling lots of things for a long time. Like that Rhapsody would be released for Intel. Like that Rhapsody would not be released for Intel. Like that OS X Server would be rhapsody. Like that OS X Server is going to be renamed OS 10 Server.Oh, and viscious lies like ``The Apple Macintosh is the only computer to have built-in support for the Year 2000'' ... VMS boxes have had this for a long time, and Unix boxes are pretty free from bugs, too.
So, maybe in all the changes of things, maybe I didn't hear.
NetBooting is an Apple invention? Ha!
Here's an answer to you: Apple invested very little money and effort into MkLinux compared to (NextStep|Rhapsody|OSX|OS10). They hope, however, to get into the Unix market. Real unix people won't want OSX. It has the apple GUI and won't behave like their friendly UNIX box with their window-manager-of-choice. So they hope to get pointy-haired-people to get their Unix guys Macs, and hope that they will choose to install MkLinux/LinuxPPC instead of sticking to their aging Sparc10s.
Just a guess.
I need X.
I need focus-follows-mouse.
I need something that runs on better-price-performance (Read: Intel) hardware.
I need something that lets me upgrade my software to fix bugs for free (Upgrade to OS8! It's more stable? Why should I have to pay for stability?)
I don't like mach. It's slow. Forces too much stuff into the server world (you know, server==parts of the kernel not in the kernel, like filesystems and networking and stuff)
Is that a good enough start?
But you want to talk about bad parts? Well, I bought a AMD K5-90 on a no-name motherboard for $120 three years ago. It has a generic 256k isa video card in it, along with two $15 PCI NE2000 controllers. Oh, and a $10 sound card. 32 megs of generic RAM. The only quality parts were my two Western Digital hard drives (and I guess that's debatable). Let's see how it's doing:
3:30pm up 133 days, 5:13, 4 users, load average: 1.00, 1.00, 1.00
Yup, looks like it's doing OK. It runs everything from matlab to rc5des to amp. Had to take it down a while ago, the power went out for more than half an hour. Previous uptime was about 120 days, and that was because I had to move it. I can't remember the last time it stopped working was...
I don't think it's usually crappy parts that make things crash, I think it's crappy OS's.
And besides, don't give me crap about how Mac hardware is great. I got 8 megs of the correct type of memory to put in my Centris 650. Put in the SIMM. The computer recognised it fine... and two hours later turned off for no reason. So I took it out -- and the random-turnoffs continued. It won't even turn on at all now. I tried swapping the battery, no help. The Apple guy said he couldn't do anything besides sell me a new Mac.
No thanks.
Not to mention I don't see many multi-terrabyte disk solutions for the Mac.
Not if it has the same crappy interface as OS N nX.
Not if it doesn't have pre-emptive multitasking.
Not if it doesn't have memory management and protection.
Not if it boots into a single-user mode.
Not if it doesn't have X builtin.
In short, if Apple really puts a Unix in MacOS, I might look at it. If they basterdize it then I'm going right back to where I claim that MacOS is worthless to me.
Actually, i guess the PPC's in the RS6k's aren't too bad... I'd still pick out an Alpha or US though...
And if you were referring to the silly chips they put into Mac's then I'm laughing at you right now.
A file manager? Here is my filemanager. I say it is not only more powerful but, for me, easier to use than the kfm.
Wed Jan 27, 23:28:13 - 0 mesgs. 022-erich.users-/var/media/mp3
fozzi:169->
KDE has an application launcher panel? I have an application launcher, too. I say it is more powerful than yours, and I feel it is more elegant. It looks something like this:
Wed Jan 27, 23:28:13 - 0 mesgs. 022-erich.users-/var/media/mp3
fozzi:169->
You say KDE has a window manager? I have one too. You can get it here. You say KDE has a crappy web browser? I have one too, it's called ``netscape.'' And it only loads when I tell it to.
I wish someone could explain to me why it is so much better to be able to double click-on-your-mp3-directory-then-double-click-on-y our-catagory-folder-then-double-click-on -your-artist-then-drag-a-box-around-your-titles-th en-double-click-then-wait-for-x11-amp-to -load-and-play-your-mp3 then it is to type amp mp3/Cl<tab>Bee<tab>9th*<enter> I just don't understand. Maybe easier to learn but certainly not easier to use.
So, what you're saying is that KDE is a substitute for learning how to do things better. I can see that. I don't think it's right, but I can see that.
After replying nicely to 90 emails that day about how patrick should move to libc6, you'd be pissed off, too. He gets angry about people emailing him to include qmail, too... he can't do it (licesning issues), and gets a zillion requests, and so gets rather angry.
It's his life and he can be stingy if he wants to. He has no obligation to come, and you have no power to force him to come.
It just makes it SEEM longer.
Silly sengan, don't you realize that if it wasn't for weapons, your precious european country would be the German Empire? Evil people can use force, so we must have the ability to use force so those evil people don't own us.
I sleep better at night knowing that the US has the strongest military in the world. I think that it's great that we're going to have a kick-butt F22 and kick-butt JSF planes. And you people who think that the military is unnecessary are the same people who will want it when it is needed.
:-)
Yeah! Go Nortel!
They give jobs to my friends.
AOL dies in 2003! Just 5^H4 more years!