Nearly all dependencies are packed inside the.APP file. Generally only system libraries are made into Frameworks. I've never had a situation where a dependency was missing.
How does the system keeps track of dependancies, if you move around libs that are needed by an other program? a registry? an on the fly ldconfig?
Again, since everything is in the.APP, it goes with the program. Frameworks are registered by the system in a similar fashion to applications. The.framework folders usually get placed in the System folder with read-only permissions.
is the file you move around really the program, or a representation of it (the real program being stored elsewhere)?
When you move the program, you're really moving the whole thing. My understanding is that the OS hooks onto the i-node instead of the filename. This allows it to find files no matter where they get moved. It's kind of cool how many programs allow you to move a file while you have it open, then write to the new location as if nothing happened.
(and i still fail to see the use of being able to move and organise as i want programs. Under linux, i can even ignore where the programs are, or know where they are, i just move and organise the icons that represent it, whatever the desktop manager i use. As a matter of fact, as a user, i'm released from having to manage programs.)
Under Linux and Windows, you still have to manage your start menu icons. And if your kid comes along and moves a bunch of files, all your shortcuts, associations, and often the programs themselves are screwed up. Under OS X, you manage the Applications folder. If you want to launch a program, you open the Applications folder and find it. A psudeo-start button can be made by dragging the Applications folder to the Dock. In this way, all your programs really are in the start menu!
"Shortcuts" on the dock aren't really shortcuts per say. Instead, you simply make the icon stay in the dock when it isn't running. All running programs show up in the Dock.
FYI, the Dock is like the Windows taskbar on steriods. Instead of organizing a bunch of every shrinking titles, it shrinks a bunch of super-hires icons. As you pass your mouse over the dock, the icons get larger so you can see what program is what.
No, it wouldn't. Not any more than the rover itself. There's millions of tons of radioactive material impacting every planet in the solar system each year. A pound of Plutonium-238 won't make a lick of difference. Besides, it's not like the stuff leaks like radiator fluid or something. It's just a hot rock that sits in the center of its container.
4. The batteries will no longer be able to hold a charge inside of a year. 5. Wipers are added weight and complexity. 6. The same dust will jam the motors for the wipers.
This is an old discussion, so I would recommend you do a search to fully answer your question. Basically though, it came down to several facts:
1. The dust would most likely be statically charged. 2. Wipers would tend to damage the panels. 3. The extreme environment is slowly degrading the panels anyway.
The difficulty is in their solar panels. Eventually they collect so much dust that they don't generate enough power. Also, the rovers stay very still at night to conserve power.
Interestingly enough, the engineers nearly had an RTG working for the Rovers. Unfortunately, the outcry about Cassini pretty much killed that. It's too bad, because with an RTG, the power source would outlast the rest of the components by some 50 years!
Speaking of which, I wonder if they've fixed the issues with ISA sound cards? When I tried Mandrake 10.0, it just wasn't able to latch onto my Awe32 ISA sound card. Both Fedora and SuSE had no problem with it, so I don't understand why Mandrake insists on making users fool with the 'sndconfig' utility.
When Firefox 0.9 is out for the Mac, it will also be out for Debian.
Sure, it will be out for Debian. On the Mozilla download site. It will take the APT-GET guys a few days (or longer) to get it up to date. I was pointing out that users want to grab the latest software from the source, Going through a third party is a level of indirection that is unnecessary and unwanted by most users.
When ATI was better, nvidia said "Don't look at benchmark scores", oh, accusing benchmark developers of being bias torwardxs ati and so on.. how the tone has changed now
Surprisingly, their tune hasn't changed at all. All they said about the card is, "you'll see what we mean". Well, we saw. This is not just 20% more FPS on Quake III, this is simply the most impressive card ever created! It renders with lightyears better quality than the competition, and it does it at twice the speed of their poorer quality renderings. "You'll see what we mean" is right.
If you want another analogy, imagine compiling a Linux application for i386, with --prefix=/opt/appname (which means etc/, share/ everything gets under/opt/appname for that app), and shipping the/opt/appname tarball with some special files in it that will alow the unpacker on the target systems to do some nifty tricks with it.
First, the.APP is a directory, not an archive. It has a complete structure inside of it for all files, libraries and dependencies. That means that there's no need to extract it.
Second, while you can most certainly put all your programs under/opt (the true-purple Unix way), you can't move them once they're installed. Any desktop associations and shortcuts will break as soon as you reorganize your folders. (e.g./opt/openoffice gets moved to/opt/office/openoffice) The Mac always knows where the program is and is not affected by spatial relocation. Also, all program associations happen the moment the application exists on the drive, and they get disassociated the moment the application is emptied from the Trash.
So it's not such a different thing from a.deb or a.rpm package, it just puts a different twist on the user experience.
Unfortunately, RPMs and DEBs are not standalone programs. Instead, they are special archives that exist to build a dependency tree. They must be extracted to be installed, and without the package database, the ability to remove these files will not exist. Mac programs are 100% self contained. It's a bit hard for most people to grasp without trying it, but I really mean it when I say that nothing breaks on Macs. They just work. About the only thing you could do to a Mac (from the command line, running 'sudo') is to delete the Frameworks folders from the system library. That's about the only way to actually break the system. Otherwise it always maintains a consistent state by virtue of using discrete, self contained components.
For the purpose of my own enlightenment, can you develop this 2 points (i cant afford a mac to find by myself what are the difference with apt or urpmi):
When you go to a software download page, you download a file called a "DMG". This file is a filesystem-in-a-file which automatically mounts on your desktop. i.e. User clicks, sees download bar, DMG mounts and opens folder.
Once the folder is open, the icons are usually arranged so that they are in line with a background image. The background image usually says stuff like "Drag this to your Applications folder."
The user is able to run the application out of the DMG, or drag it anywhere on their drive. Just by the fact that the application exists (no installer!) all file associations will be updated to make it the primary or optional secondary program.
As for this point, it wouldnt take long to implement it through kde, i could easily add it to my right click contectual menu and without putting mount in the users right (i would ask for an admin password). How is it done on the mac? Is the mounting of isos separated from the regular mount?
Simply double-click on the ISO, and a CD icon will appear on your desktop. It looks exactly as if you had inserted a CD into the drive. Root privileges are *not* required.
I don't understand how this is a feature? I don't need to move programs, please again, share some light: * Filesystem features (move a program on a Mac, and the OS can still open files associated with it.)
Since the Mac makes the program appear as a file, I can move it anywhere on my disk and still have all the associations set up correctly. A common example of this is organizing the Applications folder. Let's say that I want to move all my games into one folder and all my web browsers into another. I can rearrange them by dragging them where I want them to go. Nothing (absolutely NOTHING) will break by this procedure. Even if you have a shortcut on your dock, it will still launch the program correctly. Compare that to trying to organize your "Program Files" directory after the fact. Or move all your linux software into categories under "/opt".
you take the 'ultra-dummy mode' for the linux, but not for the mac, allow me to fill in the mac bit with equal 'ultra-dummyness'
No, the user is of about the same level in both cases. For example, the user did eventually get apt-get to work. It just didn't have what he wanted. And being an experienced user myself, *I* sometimes wonder where my programs went after an install. Especially in KDE 3.1 where the menu doesn't update until I've logged out and logged back in. Many older packages wouldn't even create an icon. The software would be magically installed, but there'd be no way of finding it. On the Mac, there's a clear chain of events. I click on the download, a progress bar appears, and then the DMG folder opens (usually with nice graphical instructions in the background).
-should be simple enough, as long as they haven't turned off automount, since were assuming an idiot user, they haven't Double-click on "FireFox" -Which one do I doubleclick on, no, no, no, no, ahh there (by now has every single file into the DMG open!)
People who are 100% new to computers are just going to have these sorts of troubles. Just be *glad* you don't have to support apt-get:
Tech: "Type 'apt-get install FireFox' into the terminal." Cust: "Ok: 'aptdashgetspaceinstallspaceFireFox'. It says 'Command not found'" Tech: "What did you type?" Cust: "I typed exactly what you told me, 'apt dash get space install space FireFox'" Tech "That's odd..."
-I can't find mozilla! (user has never bothered copying to there menu bar, and dosen't know how to locate applications again!)
Do yourself a favor. Have the user drag the Applications folder onto the Dock. It will make a nice psuedo-start button for him where he can find all of his programs.
The first betas I got from them were quirky, as you say. But the most recent release (which I believe became the final one) is very slick. They even have a JDS skin for Mozilla so that it fits with your desktop.
apt-get install/remove 'program name' (wow that was difficult and it got my dependencies too!)
Duh. Where do I type this? I type it, but a bunch of my desktop icons keep turning blue. Are you sure that's the right thing to do? I can't even see what I'm typing!
(Assuming our valient user figures out that he has to run the Terminal program:)
Duh. "apt-get install Microsoft Office" doesn't work. Do I have to put my credit card in this slot here?
mount a cd/dvdrom is done typically fresh from install, iso you say? ok, I'll bite
Ok, now make it happen when I double click on it. And make it part of the default install so that I don't have to be "adding features" myself. And then show me one of those DMG (HPFS or UFS/FFS filesystem) files mount.
as for your bookmarks, I'd say, bookmark them your mp3's DRAG them to your folders Airline tickets, hmmmm.... how did you get those on your filesystem? Oh wait, web-based tickets, PRINT them or save the files.
I don't have them on my filesystem. Sherlock lets me take care of them. As well as bidding on EBay, or checking stocks. And iTunes lets me buy music, and automatically organizes my music. All these things happen as soon as I use my system for the first time. And I don't even need 500 programs to do it!
-- User mode off --
You forgot about Quartz rendering, automatic file associations, and other wonderful Mac features. And the Mac delivers these in a single, consistent platform. The features are not spread across three *different* desktops, the user *does not* need to custom build their system to add them, and all the features interact with one another in a consistent manner.
Do yourself a favor. Put your religous zealotry aside for a moment, and go try out a Mac. It really is a pleasent experience. You'll thank yourself for it.
It's much easier. You don't need to know where to get the application, you don't need to go download the DMG file. Everything done for you, just type "apt-get install mozilla" and wait. Local mirrors of everything for added speed.
-- Semi-dummy mode on --
Ok. So I see my desktop. Where do I type this? I have to launch "Terminal"? What's terminal? Umm... okay, I found it with a search. I've opened the terminal. I want FireFox 0.9, just released two days ago.
"apt-get install FireFox"
Ok, how do I launch this thing? What's that? It's in the "K" menu? Ok, (pokes around for 10 minutes, eventually logs out and logs back in, finds it under Internet/Web Browsers/FireFox). Hey, that's FireFox 0.8! I wanted 0.9 with the cool new Mac Metal look! Screw this:
Click Safari http://www.mozilla.org Download FireFox (FireFox-0.9.dmg downloads, auto-mounts, and opens the folder) Double-click on "FireFox"
Hey! This is a great application! I think I'll keep it!
Drags FireFox icon to Applications
-- Semi-dummy Mode Off --
You can't expect an average user to use the command line. There's simply no flow from one task to the next. "Ok, I installed it, now where is it?" Besides, how is he supposed to get "for-pay" software like Office X? With Office X, an end user can pop the CD in the drive and drag the applications to his Applications folder. Even APT isn't that simple.
Does Apple support anything like apt-get? Do they even *offer* anything like it?
You can use Fink for APT packages, but to be perfectly honest, I'm trying to figure out how to get that mess off my hard drive. It's completely unnatural to the Mac environment. All the OS software I use is either from OpenDarwin's WebDAV server, or from Mac apps that integrate Open Source software (e.g. KHTML -> Safari, LAME -> MP3 Encoder, CDRecord -> ToastCD, VideoLAN, etc.).
Mac apps are usually installed by dragging the application from the mounted DMG file (a compressed file system) into the Applications folder. Much easier than apt-get or Windows installers.
Ok, never mind. I admit it, I flubbed. He was saying that only the DIY software is not supported. The OS still is. Mentioning the warranty was what threw me. It made it sound like they simply wouldn't support your system any more.
it's not like you call microsoft when AOL breaks. You call America Online. Or when photoshop breaks you call Adobe, it wouldn't make sense to call Microsoft, nor would it make sense to call Element when fluxbox breaks. Email fluxbox, get it?
And it's not like Microsoft won't help you fix a video driver or startup problem if you install AOL. According the article, ION will.
Um , NO, read your own quote smart guy, it says that those packages will be unsupported, not void your support, there is a huge difference.
As I said, draconian. Voiding a warranty over "unapproved" software is tantamount to not replacing a broken CD player because the last disk it played was published by a non-RIAA label. In other words, it defeats the point of the device.
If all I wanted was the programs provided by the company I bought it from, I'd buy a pocket organizer or an Audrey.
Ok, that's about the luniest conspiracy theory I've heard yet. If that was really Sun's intention, why go through the trouble of building a triple A+ OS? A very expensive endevour to say the least. Especially when they could have simply bought out a vendor. After all, Novell just bought SuSE, the distro JDS is based on, and IMHO one of (if not the) best Linux desktop currently on the market.
If they follow apple's lead on hw/sw integration and keep the prices reasonable, this could be a very nice way to show Linux as a user-friendly option.
From the article:
We "allow", but don't support DIY apt-get functionality, apt is configured to pull from our selected sources, not the standard Debian apt repositories. An experienced user can easily add standard Debian repositories and install packages themselves, though our tracking system will pick it up and those self-tested, self-installed packages will not be supported by the std warranty/support.
So they're "bringing the Apple experience" by only letting you install the software they want you to. Doesn't that seem a little draconian? That's like if Microsoft changed Windows so you couldn't install Mozilla, or Apple only let you install products via their "software update" functionality. That's just not user friendly.
User friendly is coming up with an application packaging method that doesn't suck. Apple did it with.APP, why is it so hard for Linux vendors to understand? Even some Linux users are trying to replicate Apple's success with the Zero Install project.
I know you're trying to be funny, but I have a hard time picturing any Linux distribution as being similar to "the Apple experience". Modern Linux Desktops are getting close to a Windows/Unix fusion experience, but they seem to be completely lacking in the areas of:
* Ease of software installation
* Ease of dependency management
* Information consolidation (e.g. iTunes, Sherlock)
* Advanced rendering APIs (Quartz PDF renderer)
* Filesystem integration (double click on a DMG or ISO and it's automatically mounted)
* Filesystem features (move a program on a Mac, and the OS can still open files associated with it.)
Now I understand that these are not easy features to implement. They may not even be what the ION developers want in their system. But if that's the case, they shouldn't be extolling their systems as "like the Mac experience".
Sir, you are missing the point. Of course I found everything I needed in the end. A large number of the missing packages were available from rpmfind. Unfortunately, that just isn't good enough for your average user. Your average user should be able to download one file and install by double clicking or dragging and dropping.
On Linux, a user can do neither. Instead they have to go through the process of collecting all the packages they need (some of which take some research to identify) and install each one individually. Alternatively, they can chase around 10 different package managers trying to find the one that had all the stuff they need. This is not a usable design. If that offends your personal preference, then I'm sorry. That's just the way it is.
People think with their feelings and not with their head. My favorite "conspiracy theory" is that Sun sold out to Microsoft to defeat Linux. Right after they released one of the *best* Linux desktops on the market. Go figure.
Slashdot Mirror
what happens when a library is missing?
.APP file. Generally only system libraries are made into Frameworks. I've never had a situation where a dependency was missing.
.APP, it goes with the program. Frameworks are registered by the system in a similar fashion to applications. The .framework folders usually get placed in the System folder with read-only permissions.
:-)
Nearly all dependencies are packed inside the
How does the system keeps track of dependancies, if you move around libs that are needed by an other program? a registry? an on the fly ldconfig?
Again, since everything is in the
is the file you move around really the program, or a representation of it (the real program being stored elsewhere)?
When you move the program, you're really moving the whole thing. My understanding is that the OS hooks onto the i-node instead of the filename. This allows it to find files no matter where they get moved. It's kind of cool how many programs allow you to move a file while you have it open, then write to the new location as if nothing happened.
(and i still fail to see the use of being able to move and organise as i want programs. Under linux, i can even ignore where the programs are, or know where they are, i just move and organise the icons that represent it, whatever the desktop manager i use. As a matter of fact, as a user, i'm released from having to manage programs.)
Under Linux and Windows, you still have to manage your start menu icons. And if your kid comes along and moves a bunch of files, all your shortcuts, associations, and often the programs themselves are screwed up. Under OS X, you manage the Applications folder. If you want to launch a program, you open the Applications folder and find it. A psudeo-start button can be made by dragging the Applications folder to the Dock. In this way, all your programs really are in the start menu!
"Shortcuts" on the dock aren't really shortcuts per say. Instead, you simply make the icon stay in the dock when it isn't running. All running programs show up in the Dock.
FYI, the Dock is like the Windows taskbar on steriods. Instead of organizing a bunch of every shrinking titles, it shrinks a bunch of super-hires icons. As you pass your mouse over the dock, the icons get larger so you can see what program is what.
Any other questions?
The problem is RTG could contaiminate the planet.
No, it wouldn't. Not any more than the rover itself. There's millions of tons of radioactive material impacting every planet in the solar system each year. A pound of Plutonium-238 won't make a lick of difference. Besides, it's not like the stuff leaks like radiator fluid or something. It's just a hot rock that sits in the center of its container.
Forgot a few:
4. The batteries will no longer be able to hold a charge inside of a year.
5. Wipers are added weight and complexity.
6. The same dust will jam the motors for the wipers.
This is an old discussion, so I would recommend you do a search to fully answer your question. Basically though, it came down to several facts:
1. The dust would most likely be statically charged.
2. Wipers would tend to damage the panels.
3. The extreme environment is slowly degrading the panels anyway.
The difficulty is in their solar panels. Eventually they collect so much dust that they don't generate enough power. Also, the rovers stay very still at night to conserve power.
Interestingly enough, the engineers nearly had an RTG working for the Rovers. Unfortunately, the outcry about Cassini pretty much killed that. It's too bad, because with an RTG, the power source would outlast the rest of the components by some 50 years!
Speaking of which, I wonder if they've fixed the issues with ISA sound cards? When I tried Mandrake 10.0, it just wasn't able to latch onto my Awe32 ISA sound card. Both Fedora and SuSE had no problem with it, so I don't understand why Mandrake insists on making users fool with the 'sndconfig' utility.
When Firefox 0.9 is out for the Mac, it will also be out for Debian.
Sure, it will be out for Debian. On the Mozilla download site. It will take the APT-GET guys a few days (or longer) to get it up to date. I was pointing out that users want to grab the latest software from the source, Going through a third party is a level of indirection that is unnecessary and unwanted by most users.
When ATI was better, nvidia said "Don't look at benchmark scores", oh, accusing benchmark developers of being bias torwardxs ati and so on.. how the tone has changed now
Surprisingly, their tune hasn't changed at all. All they said about the card is, "you'll see what we mean". Well, we saw. This is not just 20% more FPS on Quake III, this is simply the most impressive card ever created! It renders with lightyears better quality than the competition, and it does it at twice the speed of their poorer quality renderings. "You'll see what we mean" is right.
If you want another analogy, imagine compiling a Linux application for i386, with --prefix=/opt/appname (which means etc/, share/ everything gets under /opt/appname for that app), and shipping the /opt/appname tarball with some special files in it that will alow the unpacker on the target systems to do some nifty tricks with it .
.APP is a directory, not an archive. It has a complete structure inside of it for all files, libraries and dependencies. That means that there's no need to extract it.
/opt (the true-purple Unix way), you can't move them once they're installed. Any desktop associations and shortcuts will break as soon as you reorganize your folders. (e.g. /opt/openoffice gets moved to /opt/office/openoffice) The Mac always knows where the program is and is not affected by spatial relocation. Also, all program associations happen the moment the application exists on the drive, and they get disassociated the moment the application is emptied from the Trash.
.deb or a .rpm package, it just puts a different twist on the user experience.
First, the
Second, while you can most certainly put all your programs under
So it's not such a different thing from a
Unfortunately, RPMs and DEBs are not standalone programs. Instead, they are special archives that exist to build a dependency tree. They must be extracted to be installed, and without the package database, the ability to remove these files will not exist. Mac programs are 100% self contained. It's a bit hard for most people to grasp without trying it, but I really mean it when I say that nothing breaks on Macs. They just work. About the only thing you could do to a Mac (from the command line, running 'sudo') is to delete the Frameworks folders from the system library. That's about the only way to actually break the system. Otherwise it always maintains a consistent state by virtue of using discrete, self contained components.
For the purpose of my own enlightenment, can you develop this 2 points (i cant afford a mac to find by myself what are the difference with apt or urpmi):
When you go to a software download page, you download a file called a "DMG". This file is a filesystem-in-a-file which automatically mounts on your desktop. i.e. User clicks, sees download bar, DMG mounts and opens folder.
Once the folder is open, the icons are usually arranged so that they are in line with a background image. The background image usually says stuff like "Drag this to your Applications folder."
The user is able to run the application out of the DMG, or drag it anywhere on their drive. Just by the fact that the application exists (no installer!) all file associations will be updated to make it the primary or optional secondary program.
As for this point, it wouldnt take long to implement it through kde, i could easily add it to my right click contectual menu and without putting mount in the users right (i would ask for an admin password). How is it done on the mac? Is the mounting of isos separated from the regular mount?
Simply double-click on the ISO, and a CD icon will appear on your desktop. It looks exactly as if you had inserted a CD into the drive. Root privileges are *not* required.
I don't understand how this is a feature? I don't need to move programs, please again, share some light:
* Filesystem features (move a program on a Mac, and the OS can still open files associated with it.)
Since the Mac makes the program appear as a file, I can move it anywhere on my disk and still have all the associations set up correctly. A common example of this is organizing the Applications folder. Let's say that I want to move all my games into one folder and all my web browsers into another. I can rearrange them by dragging them where I want them to go. Nothing (absolutely NOTHING) will break by this procedure. Even if you have a shortcut on your dock, it will still launch the program correctly. Compare that to trying to organize your "Program Files" directory after the fact. Or move all your linux software into categories under "/opt".
you take the 'ultra-dummy mode' for the linux, but not for the mac, allow me to fill in the mac bit with equal 'ultra-dummyness'
No, the user is of about the same level in both cases. For example, the user did eventually get apt-get to work. It just didn't have what he wanted. And being an experienced user myself, *I* sometimes wonder where my programs went after an install. Especially in KDE 3.1 where the menu doesn't update until I've logged out and logged back in. Many older packages wouldn't even create an icon. The software would be magically installed, but there'd be no way of finding it. On the Mac, there's a clear chain of events. I click on the download, a progress bar appears, and then the DMG folder opens (usually with nice graphical instructions in the background).
-should be simple enough, as long as they haven't turned off automount, since were assuming an idiot user, they haven't Double-click on "FireFox" -Which one do I doubleclick on, no, no, no, no, ahh there (by now has every single file into the DMG open!)
People who are 100% new to computers are just going to have these sorts of troubles. Just be *glad* you don't have to support apt-get:
Tech: "Type 'apt-get install FireFox' into the terminal."
Cust: "Ok: 'aptdashgetspaceinstallspaceFireFox'. It says 'Command not found'"
Tech: "What did you type?"
Cust: "I typed exactly what you told me, 'apt dash get space install space FireFox'"
Tech "That's odd..."
-I can't find mozilla! (user has never bothered copying to there menu bar, and dosen't know how to locate applications again!)
Do yourself a favor. Have the user drag the Applications folder onto the Dock. It will make a nice psuedo-start button for him where he can find all of his programs.
The first betas I got from them were quirky, as you say. But the most recent release (which I believe became the final one) is very slick. They even have a JDS skin for Mozilla so that it fits with your desktop.
-- User mode on --
apt-get install/remove 'program name' (wow that was difficult and it got my dependencies too!)
Duh. Where do I type this? I type it, but a bunch of my desktop icons keep turning blue. Are you sure that's the right thing to do? I can't even see what I'm typing!
(Assuming our valient user figures out that he has to run the Terminal program:)
Duh. "apt-get install Microsoft Office" doesn't work. Do I have to put my credit card in this slot here?
mount a cd/dvdrom is done typically fresh from install, iso you say? ok, I'll bite
Ok, now make it happen when I double click on it. And make it part of the default install so that I don't have to be "adding features" myself. And then show me one of those DMG (HPFS or UFS/FFS filesystem) files mount.
as for your bookmarks, I'd say, bookmark them
your mp3's DRAG them to your folders
Airline tickets, hmmmm.... how did you get those on your filesystem? Oh wait, web-based tickets, PRINT them or save the files.
I don't have them on my filesystem. Sherlock lets me take care of them. As well as bidding on EBay, or checking stocks. And iTunes lets me buy music, and automatically organizes my music. All these things happen as soon as I use my system for the first time. And I don't even need 500 programs to do it!
-- User mode off --
You forgot about Quartz rendering, automatic file associations, and other wonderful Mac features. And the Mac delivers these in a single, consistent platform. The features are not spread across three *different* desktops, the user *does not* need to custom build their system to add them, and all the features interact with one another in a consistent manner.
Do yourself a favor. Put your religous zealotry aside for a moment, and go try out a Mac. It really is a pleasent experience. You'll thank yourself for it.
It's much easier. You don't need to know where to get the application, you don't need to go download the DMG file. Everything done for you, just type "apt-get install mozilla" and wait. Local mirrors of everything for added speed.
-- Semi-dummy mode on --
Ok. So I see my desktop. Where do I type this? I have to launch "Terminal"? What's terminal? Umm... okay, I found it with a search. I've opened the terminal. I want FireFox 0.9, just released two days ago.
"apt-get install FireFox"
Ok, how do I launch this thing? What's that? It's in the "K" menu? Ok, (pokes around for 10 minutes, eventually logs out and logs back in, finds it under Internet/Web Browsers/FireFox). Hey, that's FireFox 0.8! I wanted 0.9 with the cool new Mac Metal look! Screw this:
Click Safari
http://www.mozilla.org
Download FireFox
(FireFox-0.9.dmg downloads, auto-mounts, and opens the folder)
Double-click on "FireFox"
Hey! This is a great application! I think I'll keep it!
Drags FireFox icon to Applications
-- Semi-dummy Mode Off --
You can't expect an average user to use the command line. There's simply no flow from one task to the next. "Ok, I installed it, now where is it?" Besides, how is he supposed to get "for-pay" software like Office X? With Office X, an end user can pop the CD in the drive and drag the applications to his Applications folder. Even APT isn't that simple.
Does Apple support anything like apt-get? Do they even *offer* anything like it?
You can use Fink for APT packages, but to be perfectly honest, I'm trying to figure out how to get that mess off my hard drive. It's completely unnatural to the Mac environment. All the OS software I use is either from OpenDarwin's WebDAV server, or from Mac apps that integrate Open Source software (e.g. KHTML -> Safari, LAME -> MP3 Encoder, CDRecord -> ToastCD, VideoLAN, etc.).
Mac apps are usually installed by dragging the application from the mounted DMG file (a compressed file system) into the Applications folder. Much easier than apt-get or Windows installers.
Ease of installation and dependencies?
Wow, you must have never heard of debian and apt-get!
You'll have to explain to me how that's easier than dragging the application out of the DMG file into the Applications folder.
Filesystem integration?
Kde and gnome can be configured to do automounting (heck with the proper not-hard-to-find app, windows does this)!
* AKAImBatman double-clicks on ISO file on KDE desktop.
"Select a program from the list below"
Sorry, Apple's still got it.
Information Consolidation?
Move them to the appropriate directories yourself (not hard)
Huh? I'm supposed to move EBay, Airline tickets, Music Stores, AND my MP3 files to a directory? Wow. That's one cool filesystem you've got there.
And as for providing an 'Apple Expirience' I've heard from resellers and pissed off users NO THANKS!
Seeing as you're posting as Anonymous Cow Orker, you'll have to forgive me if I find you lacking in the credibility department.
I got it. Must be getting too late for me. :-/
Ok, never mind. I admit it, I flubbed. He was saying that only the DIY software is not supported. The OS still is. Mentioning the warranty was what threw me. It made it sound like they simply wouldn't support your system any more.
it's not like you call microsoft when AOL breaks. You call America Online. Or when photoshop breaks you call Adobe, it wouldn't make sense to call Microsoft, nor would it make sense to call Element when fluxbox breaks. Email fluxbox, get it?
And it's not like Microsoft won't help you fix a video driver or startup problem if you install AOL. According the article, ION will.
Get it?
Um , NO, read your own quote smart guy, it says that those packages will be unsupported, not void your support, there is a huge difference.
As I said, draconian. Voiding a warranty over "unapproved" software is tantamount to not replacing a broken CD player because the last disk it played was published by a non-RIAA label. In other words, it defeats the point of the device.
If all I wanted was the programs provided by the company I bought it from, I'd buy a pocket organizer or an Audrey.
Ok, that's about the luniest conspiracy theory I've heard yet. If that was really Sun's intention, why go through the trouble of building a triple A+ OS? A very expensive endevour to say the least. Especially when they could have simply bought out a vendor. After all, Novell just bought SuSE, the distro JDS is based on, and IMHO one of (if not the) best Linux desktop currently on the market.
If they follow apple's lead on hw/sw integration and keep the prices reasonable, this could be a very nice way to show Linux as a user-friendly option.
.APP, why is it so hard for Linux vendors to understand? Even some Linux users are trying to replicate Apple's success with the Zero Install project.
From the article:
We "allow", but don't support DIY apt-get functionality, apt is configured to pull from our selected sources, not the standard Debian apt repositories. An experienced user can easily add standard Debian repositories and install packages themselves, though our tracking system will pick it up and those self-tested, self-installed packages will not be supported by the std warranty/support.
So they're "bringing the Apple experience" by only letting you install the software they want you to. Doesn't that seem a little draconian? That's like if Microsoft changed Windows so you couldn't install Mozilla, or Apple only let you install products via their "software update" functionality. That's just not user friendly.
User friendly is coming up with an application packaging method that doesn't suck. Apple did it with
I know you're trying to be funny, but I have a hard time picturing any Linux distribution as being similar to "the Apple experience". Modern Linux Desktops are getting close to a Windows/Unix fusion experience, but they seem to be completely lacking in the areas of:
* Ease of software installation
* Ease of dependency management
* Information consolidation (e.g. iTunes, Sherlock)
* Advanced rendering APIs (Quartz PDF renderer)
* Filesystem integration (double click on a DMG or ISO and it's automatically mounted)
* Filesystem features (move a program on a Mac, and the OS can still open files associated with it.)
Now I understand that these are not easy features to implement. They may not even be what the ION developers want in their system. But if that's the case, they shouldn't be extolling their systems as "like the Mac experience".
Sir, you are missing the point. Of course I found everything I needed in the end. A large number of the missing packages were available from rpmfind. Unfortunately, that just isn't good enough for your average user. Your average user should be able to download one file and install by double clicking or dragging and dropping.
On Linux, a user can do neither. Instead they have to go through the process of collecting all the packages they need (some of which take some research to identify) and install each one individually. Alternatively, they can chase around 10 different package managers trying to find the one that had all the stuff they need. This is not a usable design. If that offends your personal preference, then I'm sorry. That's just the way it is.
People think with their feelings and not with their head. My favorite "conspiracy theory" is that Sun sold out to Microsoft to defeat Linux. Right after they released one of the *best* Linux desktops on the market. Go figure.