"Does Debian work on the iBook2 without screwing around?"
No. If you have an iBook2 and you don't like "screwing around", stay away from Debian like Bill Gates upon encountering a penguin in a dark alley. I've been at it for over three weeks (admittedly not full time every day, but for a good solid week at least) and have only managed to get rudimentary sound support a few days ago. If you want internal modem support and you have an iBook 600, forget it. Period. There are some beta drivers for x86, but who can say when we'll get some. (That's another reason it's taken me so long.)
(Before that gets modded down as flamebait, let me point something out. I'm having a hell of a great time doing this. Tinkering with this system and trying to get it running smoothly, and perhaps ultimately displacing the Mac OS entirely, is some of the most fun I've ever had. Alright, back to the real post...)
On the other hand, getting sound, ethernet, and airport working is a snap. Just download the source for BenH's kernel from ppckernel.org, find the iBook.config file on ibooklinux.net, type make oldconfig, and you're set. Finding and following a standard kernel compiling tutorial is no problem...I had no clue about any of this stuff, but I managed to stumble my way through, and feel fairly comfortable with it now. Most of the work is already done by other people; you just need to find their stories online. BenH's kernel has airport, ethernet, sound, etc, though some (VERY) minor digging will be necessary to get it working.
One last side note. Don't download all 3 ISOs. You only need the first one and the last two are full of packages that are out of date already. Just install a minimum system off the first ISO and use dselect to download the latest unstable stuff. Just make sure to print out every scrap of online documentation you can find BEFORE you try to install, and be ready for plenty of reformats.
This page should help a lot...though his "Sound" section is quite outdated now, everything else is very helpful: http://www.xiph.org/~jack/ibook/
Although now that I look back at your original post, I see that you don't want to have to bother with command line mumbo-jumbo and kernel compiling. Personally, that kind of stuff is a blast for me, but if it's not for you, trust me, Debian is not the way to go. On the other hand, if any other enterprising iBook user happens to be reading this, hopefully it'll help their day out a bit:)
Apple's operating systems will run Powerpoint! Therefore MS is not a monopoly!
Wait...that's right. The only reason MS hasn't cut development of Office for Mac is because Apple agreed to ship IE as its default browser. (Yes, I know that MS makes a great profit on Office for Mac, and they would lose money if they cut it, but in the long run, anyone who depended on Office for Mac would likely have to switch to Office for Windows in the future anyway...give a little, get a lot.)
Actually, OS X uses file extensions for ALL files, and you've probably just only ever seen systems with the "always show file extensions" feature turned off (which is the default). Go to the Finder and choose "Preferences" from the Finder menu and select the box labeled "always show file extensions". Now log out and back in and enjoy the splendor of mandatory file extensions. Try deleting the extension, then double click on the file and watch OS X trip all over that file. (FYI, turning this option off doesn't negate the use of file extensions, it just hides them from your view.)
It's called R&D. If there was only one PC manufacturer, and this manufacturer was responsible for developing the operating system AND the hardware, this PC manufacturer would find it very difficult to do so on the standard PC profit margins. Think about it.
The real question, I guess, is what they're actually going to do. Focusing on MSIE did give new users immediate access to a (somewhat) functional browser, but it did have the added bonus for MS of furthering their monopoly power. Their decision to focus on security could well follow the same pattern: a (debatable) benefit to some users while giving MS the keys to a much stronger position.
For instance: What if they patch the security for.NET, but only on their side (i.e., you only receive the benefits of their security features if you store your personal info on their servers; your home machine would be as insecure as ever)?
Or what if their focus on security means they cripple or remove networking support with any systems but their own? (I can imagine the justification: they have no control over the software running the *nix servers, so in order to ensure security, they only allow contact with servers running MS software.)
Plus, then you have to consider the upgrade prices (I doubt if MS will throw all that time and money into software revision and then give it away), and also, I imagine that they will somehow find some way to work this into their defense in the antitrust case...
MS has proven repeatedly that they cannot be trusted. I have a sinking feeling that this new focus on security will manage to lead only to bad things for the computing world as a whole. If I am proven wrong, I will be the first to admit it, but I fear that there is little chance of that.
Slashdot Mirror
"Does Debian work on the iBook2 without screwing around?"
.config file on ibooklinux.net, type make oldconfig, and you're set. Finding and following a standard kernel compiling tutorial is no problem...I had no clue about any of this stuff, but I managed to stumble my way through, and feel fairly comfortable with it now. Most of the work is already done by other people; you just need to find their stories online. BenH's kernel has airport, ethernet, sound, etc, though some (VERY) minor digging will be necessary to get it working.
:)
No. If you have an iBook2 and you don't like "screwing around", stay away from Debian like Bill Gates upon encountering a penguin in a dark alley. I've been at it for over three weeks (admittedly not full time every day, but for a good solid week at least) and have only managed to get rudimentary sound support a few days ago. If you want internal modem support and you have an iBook 600, forget it. Period. There are some beta drivers for x86, but who can say when we'll get some. (That's another reason it's taken me so long.)
(Before that gets modded down as flamebait, let me point something out. I'm having a hell of a great time doing this. Tinkering with this system and trying to get it running smoothly, and perhaps ultimately displacing the Mac OS entirely, is some of the most fun I've ever had. Alright, back to the real post...)
On the other hand, getting sound, ethernet, and airport working is a snap. Just download the source for BenH's kernel from ppckernel.org, find the iBook
One last side note. Don't download all 3 ISOs. You only need the first one and the last two are full of packages that are out of date already. Just install a minimum system off the first ISO and use dselect to download the latest unstable stuff. Just make sure to print out every scrap of online documentation you can find BEFORE you try to install, and be ready for plenty of reformats.
This page should help a lot...though his "Sound" section is quite outdated now, everything else is very helpful:
http://www.xiph.org/~jack/ibook/
Although now that I look back at your original post, I see that you don't want to have to bother with command line mumbo-jumbo and kernel compiling. Personally, that kind of stuff is a blast for me, but if it's not for you, trust me, Debian is not the way to go. On the other hand, if any other enterprising iBook user happens to be reading this, hopefully it'll help their day out a bit
Apple's operating systems will run Powerpoint! Therefore MS is not a monopoly!
Wait...that's right. The only reason MS hasn't cut development of Office for Mac is because Apple agreed to ship IE as its default browser. (Yes, I know that MS makes a great profit on Office for Mac, and they would lose money if they cut it, but in the long run, anyone who depended on Office for Mac would likely have to switch to Office for Windows in the future anyway...give a little, get a lot.)
Actually, OS X uses file extensions for ALL files, and you've probably just only ever seen systems with the "always show file extensions" feature turned off (which is the default). Go to the Finder and choose "Preferences" from the Finder menu and select the box labeled "always show file extensions". Now log out and back in and enjoy the splendor of mandatory file extensions. Try deleting the extension, then double click on the file and watch OS X trip all over that file. (FYI, turning this option off doesn't negate the use of file extensions, it just hides them from your view.)
I would like to think even Microsoft's PR whores would know better than to try that kind of stuff here. At least you would like to think so...
My take on the parent post was that it was meant to be clever, bitter, blatant, but slightly unoriginal, sarcasm.
It's called R&D. If there was only one PC manufacturer, and this manufacturer was responsible for developing the operating system AND the hardware, this PC manufacturer would find it very difficult to do so on the standard PC profit margins. Think about it.
The real question, I guess, is what they're actually going to do. Focusing on MSIE did give new users immediate access to a (somewhat) functional browser, but it did have the added bonus for MS of furthering their monopoly power. Their decision to focus on security could well follow the same pattern: a (debatable) benefit to some users while giving MS the keys to a much stronger position.
.NET, but only on their side (i.e., you only receive the benefits of their security features if you store your personal info on their servers; your home machine would be as insecure as ever)?
For instance: What if they patch the security for
Or what if their focus on security means they cripple or remove networking support with any systems but their own? (I can imagine the justification: they have no control over the software running the *nix servers, so in order to ensure security, they only allow contact with servers running MS software.)
Plus, then you have to consider the upgrade prices (I doubt if MS will throw all that time and money into software revision and then give it away), and also, I imagine that they will somehow find some way to work this into their defense in the antitrust case...
MS has proven repeatedly that they cannot be trusted. I have a sinking feeling that this new focus on security will manage to lead only to bad things for the computing world as a whole. If I am proven wrong, I will be the first to admit it, but I fear that there is little chance of that.