Umm, how exactly can Mac OSX be number one anything other than maybe MacOS after having been out less than a year? Are you saying Mac OSX is supieror, more widely used, or even more robust than say BSD, Solaris, LINUX and other seasoned, platform specific unices? (AIX, Irix etc)?
* new and old world roms the require different boot loader installations
* Variating mac hardware without support for certain features (For example, later model ibooks (pre ib2) with no SOUND support, no touchpad tap support)
* Lack of PPC specific binaries which means you have to compile most software from source and THEN deal with compiler specifics that were meant for intel the intel architecture.
And i wont even mention the loss in performance for software packages that were optimized on intel platforms that you (usually) get because of hacks and tweaks you have to do to even get it to RUN on your mac platform. Now your saying a linux newbie should have deal with all that initially? I think not. Dont get me wrong, everyone's different and some people enjoy different levels of punishment but personally i can honestly say that if i were initially exposed to a PPC version of linux (years ago when such a thing was virtually non existant no less) i would have been extremely discourged with the linux OS. Im not knocking PPC linux at all but speaking strictly from my experience trying to get it to run on my own mac hardware (which i managed to do succesfully after much research and fiddling, and am quite pleased:).
I have to slightly disagree with you and go with the posters view. I was until recently a linux ppc newbie after having purchased an Ibook. One of the major PPC/linux issues i think is the fact that Linux PPC is significantly behind Linux intel support wise. What i mean by this is that driver support, platform specific support for mac hardware and software respectivley, isnt as close to the level it is for Intel linux. I for example spent at least 3 weeks wrestling with the installation process of LinuxPPC (the distro) after giving up and discovery yellow dog server (which i abandoned and eventually bought the shelf copy because of other miscellenous issues), then another couple trying to get version 4.1.0 of xfree to compile. Im comparing this to being able to install Redhat, slakware and other distros right out the box on an intel machine. Sure it isnt impossible but linux OS can be pretty complex itself and having installation problems is sure to frustrate and discourage certain people without your level of tech savvy. A complete linux newbie probably doesnt need to wrestle with something typically trivial as the installation process when there are a slew of other linux specifics to learn and master. Hell, linux intel installs on the majority of x86 machines out of the box (including the various laptops and proprietery servers) with no issues. Thats just because of its level of maturity. I have no doubt that Linux PPC with quickly achieve this level of interoperbility especially with the lower cost of mac hardware today. Meanwhile linux newcomers are better off spending their time mastering the linux os itself and then get a feel for using it under other architectures.
I tried debian PPC linux briefly but went came across issues with it on my IBook. Thats one thing i definatly like to see. A little more conformity on the PPC architecture across different linux distros. Yellow Dog and SUSE were both pretty good to me so far though..
Redhat specifically, "licensed" (*grin*) their products (rpm, up2date etc) to yellowdog for the purpose of handling the PPC linux area. Thats cool beans imho since you pretty much get red hat reliability for your Linux PPC needs (besides we wouldnt want to overwork the boys at RH as they climb the corporate ladder right?:). Im not sure but i dont believe mandrake works jointly with Redhat for either their linux intel/ linux ppc ports
I dont necessarily think its about the size of the company or the complexity of their projects that is key here. "SEE" is a pretty striaghtforward easy to use package that any company with organization, planning and delegation or deployment challanges will be delighted with. Sure there are other packages out there but im guessing VA wants to make use of whatever level of clientele they currently have and provide this solution via their name which in effect builds their credibility.
How do you know thats not what the concept of open source has always been? There was a lot of turmoil during the late 60's and all kinds of REVELOTIONS were being wrought on all fronts.. I wouldnt be surprised if in typical american government fashion, this was a clever attempt to indirectly manipulate and control those whom previously seemed unpredictable and a liablitly to the governments power. You've got people who want to rise up and stand under something psuedo moral and ethical.. a stand against fascists and corporate america, give it to them and slowly work your way from the inside. Ala, the open source model:) (then again maybe its time to lay of the frappa)...
Dont get me wrong, while I'm a firm backer of open source standards i believe theres a fine line to be drawn between profiting from your "intellectual property" for the sake of making a living and profiting simply for the sake of power and domination. Theres only so much money any single company needs to make before the "Race to success" becomes a power struggle to be on top, in the process of which often times the concept of technological and intellectual evolution of mankind gets muddled and lost.
Slashdot Mirror
yeah! I did that too.. I used to right loaders in pascal, ansi graphics in thedraw for my bbs.. Ahhh sweet memories.
Umm, how exactly can Mac OSX be number one anything other than maybe MacOS after having been out less than a year? Are you saying Mac OSX is supieror, more widely used, or even more robust than say BSD, Solaris, LINUX and other seasoned, platform specific unices? (AIX, Irix etc)?
Dude you have:
:).
* new and old world roms the require different boot loader installations
* Variating mac hardware without support for certain features (For example, later model ibooks (pre ib2) with no SOUND support, no touchpad tap support)
* Lack of PPC specific binaries which means you have to compile most software from source and THEN deal with compiler specifics that were meant for intel the intel architecture.
And i wont even mention the loss in performance for software packages that were optimized on intel platforms that you (usually) get because of hacks and tweaks you have to do to even get it to RUN on your mac platform. Now your saying a linux newbie should have deal with all that initially? I think not. Dont get me wrong, everyone's different and some people enjoy different levels of punishment but personally i can honestly say that if i were initially exposed to a PPC version of linux (years ago when such a thing was virtually non existant no less) i would have been extremely discourged with the linux OS. Im not knocking PPC linux at all but speaking strictly from my experience trying to get it to run on my own mac hardware (which i managed to do succesfully after much research and fiddling, and am quite pleased
I have to slightly disagree with you and go with the posters view. I was until recently a linux ppc newbie after having purchased an Ibook. One of the major PPC/linux issues i think is the fact that Linux PPC is significantly behind Linux intel support wise. What i mean by this is that driver support, platform specific support for mac hardware and software respectivley, isnt as close to the level it is for Intel linux. I for example spent at least 3 weeks wrestling with the installation process of LinuxPPC (the distro) after giving up and discovery yellow dog server (which i abandoned and eventually bought the shelf copy because of other miscellenous issues), then another couple trying to get version 4.1.0 of xfree to compile. Im comparing this to being able to install Redhat, slakware and other distros right out the box on an intel machine. Sure it isnt impossible but linux OS can be pretty complex itself and having installation problems is sure to frustrate and discourage certain people without your level of tech savvy. A complete linux newbie probably doesnt need to wrestle with something typically trivial as the installation process when there are a slew of other linux specifics to learn and master. Hell, linux intel installs on the majority of x86 machines out of the box (including the various laptops and proprietery servers) with no issues. Thats just because of its level of maturity. I have no doubt that Linux PPC with quickly achieve this level of interoperbility especially with the lower cost of mac hardware today. Meanwhile linux newcomers are better off spending their time mastering the linux os itself and then get a feel for using it under other architectures.
I tried debian PPC linux briefly but went came across issues with it on my IBook. Thats one thing i definatly like to see. A little more conformity on the PPC architecture across different linux distros. Yellow Dog and SUSE were both pretty good to me so far though..
Redhat specifically, "licensed" (*grin*) their products (rpm, up2date etc) to yellowdog for the purpose of handling the PPC linux area. Thats cool beans imho since you pretty much get red hat reliability for your Linux PPC needs (besides we wouldnt want to overwork the boys at RH as they climb the corporate ladder right? :). Im not sure but i dont believe mandrake works jointly with Redhat for either their linux intel/ linux ppc ports
Later
-The Hog
Oh for cripes sake.. Im spending my hard earned thrid world country child labor points on "an lcd panel with depth"?????
I dont necessarily think its about the size of the company or the complexity of their projects that is key here. "SEE" is a pretty striaghtforward easy to use package that any company with organization, planning and delegation or deployment challanges will be delighted with. Sure there are other packages out there but im guessing VA wants to make use of whatever level of clientele they currently have and provide this solution via their name which in effect builds their credibility.
How do you know thats not what the concept of open source has always been? There was a lot of turmoil during the late 60's and all kinds of REVELOTIONS were being wrought on all fronts.. I wouldnt be surprised if in typical american government fashion, this was a clever attempt to indirectly manipulate and control those whom previously seemed unpredictable and a liablitly to the governments power. You've got people who want to rise up and stand under something psuedo moral and ethical.. a stand against fascists and corporate america, give it to them and slowly work your way from the inside. Ala, the open source model :) (then again maybe its time to lay of the frappa)...
Dont get me wrong, while I'm a firm backer of open source standards i believe theres a fine line to be drawn between profiting from your "intellectual property" for the sake of making a living and profiting simply for the sake of power and domination. Theres only so much money any single company needs to make before the "Race to success" becomes a power struggle to be on top, in the process of which often times the concept of technological and intellectual evolution of mankind gets muddled and lost.
-Ciao