There's a theoretical good reason to allow anonymous posts. Sometimes, an employee of a company could have something useful to add to the discussion which he or she doesn't want traced back to them (e.g., an Apple employee popping into a DRM discussion and saying "Oh, you can turn off the Mac-only protection on OSX/x86 by starting the install at exactly 4:20pm.")
Granted, the likelihood of this sort of situation actually happening are slim to none, while the chance of an anonymous poster saying "Oh, you can turn off the Mac-only protection on OSX/x86 by slathering Natalie Portman's beowulf cluster in hot grits in soviet Russia" approaches 100%, but still.
I actually decided to go ahead and read the article.
Their two problems are: (1) rsync takes a long-ass time to run when it has to compare a crapload of files. The solution they're working on is to build a better rsync that saves its state. (2) The i386 architecture sucks. FTFA: "master.kernel.org is still an i386 machine. It's constantly hurting for lowmem since the dentry and inode caches can only live in lowmem." The solution for that is to upgrade master.kernel.org to a 64bit machine.
1. BHAD ('Breach Hull, All Die'). When I'm writing code that I don't expect other people to use, this is the name I give to error-handling stuff.
2. "OH MY GOD BEAR IS DRIVING CAR!" is how I tend to label code that should Never Happen. I was working as a contractor at my current company and this ended up in some of my code. After they decided to hire me on as a full time employee, my boss mentioned that this comment was one of the primary factors in that decision. It's good to work for a company with a good sense of humor.:)
The parties involved with the building and sale of the Pegasos boards appear to not be financially sound enough or trustworthy enough to merit further development.
If you want to continue this argument, please respond to my main point (I.e., there are vastly more x86 PCs out there, and OpenDarwin will run *right now* on dirt cheap, extremely common PCs) rather than nitpicking the asides.
Mrmf, why must everything on Slashdot devolve into a flame war?
No, you're not imagining the PegasosPPC, but I covered that under Category 1, "Random little boards like the AmigaOne". If you think that the PegasosPPC has significant marketshare, you sure as hell are imagining it. I know a lot of computer geeks who collect weird and interesting hardware. Hell, I've even got a non-Mac PPC system sitting in my basement (IBM RS/6000 workstation). I've never met someone who owns a Pegasos system.
(Not even NetBSD and OpenBSD will run on the Pegasos--for interesting reasons--and they'll run on anydamn thing.)
The point I'm trying to make is, you can't go down to your local computer store and pick up a CHRP motherboard. The vast majority of people who have a computer of some sort have an x86 PC; the vast majority of people who have a computer but not an x86 PC have a Mac; the remainder probably have mostly things like Sun workstations, 68k Amigas, and their old Apple IIgs that's still chugging along like a trooper. I'm sure there are four or five people out there using a CHRP system as their primary computer, but I would be utterly shocked if said people didn't have a PC or a Mac sitting around as a backup machine.
So, do you honestly not see the difference between the hundreds of millions of x86 PCs out there and the four or five non-Apple, non-IBM, non-embedded PPC machines out there, in terms of impetus to get OSX running on them?
Throw enough bored computer geeks at a problem like this, and they'll crack it. The set of computer geeks with a spare x86 that they'd like to run OSX on is several orders of magnitude larger than the set of computer geeks with a spare CHRP system that they'd like to run OSX on.
And, for the record, OpenDarwin runs on standard x86 PC hardware, but it doesn't run on non-Apple PPC hardware.
"There weren't any gas stations around before there were mass produced cars. I don't see any fundamental change now."
The PowerPC machines that were around before were: 1. Random little boards like the AmigaOne 2. Hideously expensive workstations from IBM and a few others. 3. Macs too old to run OSX
People buying from group 1 were buying for a specific use; such boards were, in every case I heard of, more expensive than an equivalent Mac.
People buying from group 2 were, again, buying it to use as a workstation, not buying it to try to run OSX on it.
People from group 3... Well, people from group 3 got OSX running on their machines. Not all of them, and slowly, because there weren't many people working on it, but you can run OSX on several old Macs that Apple says can't run it.
So here's the fundamental change: There's a crapload of PCs out there that people don't have anything better to do with than to try to get OSX running on it. There are exponentially more hackers with too much free time and a spare PC than there are hackers with too much free time and a spare RS/6000. And, of course, the real kicker: The underlying OS is already running on commodity hardware. The trick will just be to move the GUI code over.
If they are using a standard motherboard chipset and BIOS and whatnot, it seems likely that they'll put some sort of Apple Hardware Widget on the board in addition to the standard stuff which OSX can query to see if it's allowed to run or not. This is really something too fundamental for Apple to fight with only lawyers.
On the other hand, I was damn near certain that they'd be going with Intel-made PPCs instead of switching to x86, so what do I know?:)
1. Apple will not be allowing OSX to run on standard PC hardware. Part of this will almost certainly be because of incompatible hardware, but Apple's had language in its EULAs saying you can only run MacOS on Apple hardware ever since the end of the clone era. 2. Given that Darwin, the underpinnings of OSX, runs quite well on stock PC hardware, it seems unlikely to me that someone won't figure out how to get OSX/x86 running on standard PCs. 3. Therefore, would it be against the Apple EULA to run OSX/x86 on a standard PC motherboard shoehorned into an old Mac?
Of course, this is all theoretical right now since OSX/x86 isn't really shipping yet.
Well, that makes sense. I mean, skin makes a much more durable writing material than wood pulp; vellum from the middle ages is still readable today--even palimpsests (manuscripts that have been erased and written over)--and Apple is enough of an Earth-conscious company that they wouldn't want to use calf skin. In addition, the historic feel of it would be very stylish, something that Apple certainly likes.
So yeah, human skin. Very functional and stylish. I'm just surprised that Apple hasn't already started printing up all of its documentation on that.
Re, OpenFirmware: Not OpenFirmware (doesn't say they'll be using a standard PC BIOS--and, in fact, there's good reason to believe they won't--but it does say they won't be using OF)
Granted, I haven't personally checked these, 'cause I'm too lazy to download and R the FM, but they wouldn't let people post things to Slashdot that weren't true, would they?
For the record, I don't think it was really evil, I was just going for the joke.
(Although I do think that moving specifically to IA32 instead of x86-64 is dumb. And the move away from OpenFirmware is dumb. And I think the x86 architecture is dumb.)
Slashdot Mirror
Don't want to waste space in Slashdot's DB with accounts that'll only be used once? Just plain lazy?
(Yeah, I see your point)
Would you have created your account earlier if you hadn't been able to post without one?
There's a theoretical good reason to allow anonymous posts. Sometimes, an employee of a company could have something useful to add to the discussion which he or she doesn't want traced back to them (e.g., an Apple employee popping into a DRM discussion and saying "Oh, you can turn off the Mac-only protection on OSX/x86 by starting the install at exactly 4:20pm.")
Granted, the likelihood of this sort of situation actually happening are slim to none, while the chance of an anonymous poster saying "Oh, you can turn off the Mac-only protection on OSX/x86 by slathering Natalie Portman's beowulf cluster in hot grits in soviet Russia" approaches 100%, but still.
Let's DDOS them! That'll show them that they can't impugn the good names of Slashdot readers!
I actually decided to go ahead and read the article.
Their two problems are:
(1) rsync takes a long-ass time to run when it has to compare a crapload of files. The solution they're working on is to build a better rsync that saves its state.
(2) The i386 architecture sucks. FTFA: "master.kernel.org is still an i386 machine. It's constantly hurting for lowmem since the dentry and inode caches can only live in lowmem." The solution for that is to upgrade master.kernel.org to a 64bit machine.
I've got one word for you:
Thundercougerfalconbird.
(Blatantly ripping off this guy)
xtracto's post just said "before Microsoft Excel existed", which is true. Nowhere did he claim that Excel was the first spreadsheet.
Why does everyone on Slashdot have to be so argumentative?
1. BHAD ('Breach Hull, All Die'). When I'm writing code that I don't expect other people to use, this is the name I give to error-handling stuff.
:)
2. "OH MY GOD BEAR IS DRIVING CAR!" is how I tend to label code that should Never Happen. I was working as a contractor at my current company and this ended up in some of my code. After they decided to hire me on as a full time employee, my boss mentioned that this comment was one of the primary factors in that decision. It's good to work for a company with a good sense of humor.
That's a stupid way to pick a username.
--AC
I hope to one day see a Google Maps hack that lets you track the cast of Cheers in real time...
There Is No Cabal.
Now if they just take away a couple of those buttons, it'll be perfect for my Mac!
(I kid, I kid! I use a three-button mouse on my Mac and support Apple's decision to stick with a one-button mouse)
The list of OpenDarwin supported hardware is orders of magnitude larger than the amount of companies making PPC PCs.
Quick example: the ECS K7S5A. It's on the list of supported hardware. It's dirt cheap. I've got one. I have a friend who has one.
How many people do you know with a PegasosPPC?
The point I've been trying to make is that the fact that there will be *vastly* more interest when it's x86 is a fundamental change.
If you want to continue this argument, please respond to my main point (I.e., there are vastly more x86 PCs out there, and OpenDarwin will run *right now* on dirt cheap, extremely common PCs) rather than nitpicking the asides.
Mrmf, why must everything on Slashdot devolve into a flame war?
No, you're not imagining the PegasosPPC, but I covered that under Category 1, "Random little boards like the AmigaOne". If you think that the PegasosPPC has significant marketshare, you sure as hell are imagining it. I know a lot of computer geeks who collect weird and interesting hardware. Hell, I've even got a non-Mac PPC system sitting in my basement (IBM RS/6000 workstation). I've never met someone who owns a Pegasos system.
(Not even NetBSD and OpenBSD will run on the Pegasos--for interesting reasons--and they'll run on anydamn thing.)
The point I'm trying to make is, you can't go down to your local computer store and pick up a CHRP motherboard. The vast majority of people who have a computer of some sort have an x86 PC; the vast majority of people who have a computer but not an x86 PC have a Mac; the remainder probably have mostly things like Sun workstations, 68k Amigas, and their old Apple IIgs that's still chugging along like a trooper. I'm sure there are four or five people out there using a CHRP system as their primary computer, but I would be utterly shocked if said people didn't have a PC or a Mac sitting around as a backup machine.
So, do you honestly not see the difference between the hundreds of millions of x86 PCs out there and the four or five non-Apple, non-IBM, non-embedded PPC machines out there, in terms of impetus to get OSX running on them?
Throw enough bored computer geeks at a problem like this, and they'll crack it. The set of computer geeks with a spare x86 that they'd like to run OSX on is several orders of magnitude larger than the set of computer geeks with a spare CHRP system that they'd like to run OSX on.
And, for the record, OpenDarwin runs on standard x86 PC hardware, but it doesn't run on non-Apple PPC hardware.
"There weren't any gas stations around before there were mass produced cars. I don't see any fundamental change now."
The PowerPC machines that were around before were:
1. Random little boards like the AmigaOne
2. Hideously expensive workstations from IBM and a few others.
3. Macs too old to run OSX
People buying from group 1 were buying for a specific use; such boards were, in every case I heard of, more expensive than an equivalent Mac.
People buying from group 2 were, again, buying it to use as a workstation, not buying it to try to run OSX on it.
People from group 3... Well, people from group 3 got OSX running on their machines. Not all of them, and slowly, because there weren't many people working on it, but you can run OSX on several old Macs that Apple says can't run it.
So here's the fundamental change: There's a crapload of PCs out there that people don't have anything better to do with than to try to get OSX running on it. There are exponentially more hackers with too much free time and a spare PC than there are hackers with too much free time and a spare RS/6000. And, of course, the real kicker: The underlying OS is already running on commodity hardware. The trick will just be to move the GUI code over.
Oh, and for the record, my comment was about the article posted pre-update. So no, I didn't read the article you're asking incredulously if I read.
Crap! You're right!
Nevermind.
First Apple-related Slashdot post in days to not make reference to the x86 switch in the blurb.
If they are using a standard motherboard chipset and BIOS and whatnot, it seems likely that they'll put some sort of Apple Hardware Widget on the board in addition to the standard stuff which OSX can query to see if it's allowed to run or not. This is really something too fundamental for Apple to fight with only lawyers.
:)
On the other hand, I was damn near certain that they'd be going with Intel-made PPCs instead of switching to x86, so what do I know?
Raises an interesting question:
1. Apple will not be allowing OSX to run on standard PC hardware. Part of this will almost certainly be because of incompatible hardware, but Apple's had language in its EULAs saying you can only run MacOS on Apple hardware ever since the end of the clone era.
2. Given that Darwin, the underpinnings of OSX, runs quite well on stock PC hardware, it seems unlikely to me that someone won't figure out how to get OSX/x86 running on standard PCs.
3. Therefore, would it be against the Apple EULA to run OSX/x86 on a standard PC motherboard shoehorned into an old Mac?
Of course, this is all theoretical right now since OSX/x86 isn't really shipping yet.
I was just looking at his picture, an I'm *way* fatter than he is.
What? Oh. Nevermind.
Well, that makes sense. I mean, skin makes a much more durable writing material than wood pulp; vellum from the middle ages is still readable today--even palimpsests (manuscripts that have been erased and written over)--and Apple is enough of an Earth-conscious company that they wouldn't want to use calf skin. In addition, the historic feel of it would be very stylish, something that Apple certainly likes.
So yeah, human skin. Very functional and stylish. I'm just surprised that Apple hasn't already started printing up all of its documentation on that.
Re, IA32 vs x86-64: IA32
Re, OpenFirmware: Not OpenFirmware (doesn't say they'll be using a standard PC BIOS--and, in fact, there's good reason to believe they won't--but it does say they won't be using OF)
Granted, I haven't personally checked these, 'cause I'm too lazy to download and R the FM, but they wouldn't let people post things to Slashdot that weren't true, would they?
--AC
For the record, I don't think it was really evil, I was just going for the joke.
(Although I do think that moving specifically to IA32 instead of x86-64 is dumb. And the move away from OpenFirmware is dumb. And I think the x86 architecture is dumb.)