I've personally sat and used OSX on a Dual G5 for around a year, got it up to 10.5 eventually and it was slow when I got there and it was slow when I left.
Well, if a Dual G5 is your basis for evaluating OS X performance, then yeah, I can see how you'd think it was really slow. The G5 had a nice FPU, but it was lackluster at best on integer code, and while the memory bandwidth was much improved over the G4, it was still anemic compared to what workstation-class x86 machines could do at the time. Any of the first-gen Intel Macs easily outclassed the G5.
Linux on the desktop has always been "more promising" than the alternatives, and looks set to be "more promising" for the indefinite future. Maybe one day it'll all come together and work the way software is supposed to, but personally I got bored of waiting. It'd be one thing if the problems were mostly technical, because then I (and I'm sure others) would be more than willing to help out. Alas, as this and other stories show, the biggest problems are all cultural, religious, and political, and most of them will probably never be fixed. Which is a shame, really, because there really is a ton of promise waiting to be realized on the Linux desktop.
Um, doesn't that pretty much agree with the parent post? Sure, you've apparently got a higher tolerance for grunt work, but that's a different topic entirely.
Even if every hardware maker wrote Linux drivers, the situation wouldn't be much different than it is now. There's a perfectly functional nVidia driver that no Linux vendor bothers to integrate properly (if they even ship it at all) because the source code isn't available. Does the average user care why that is? Would you buy a car that didn't come with tires because the manufacturer is above doing business with tire manufacturers? Would the reason even matter?
Linux has plenty of technical problems keeping it off the desktop, but the biggest reason it's a failure in the world beyond Slashdot is the childish politics. Microsoft and Apple don't have "access to the specs" either; the difference is that the Linux crowd treats closed-source vendors so badly that few of them bother. Shipping binary software for Linux is really hard, and that's no accident. And breaking binary-only drivers with every kernel point-release just takes the cake. I'm surprised anyone even tries.
But that's okay. Linux can survive just fine even if it never grows up; there's plenty of need for free Unix in the world, even if it's not useful on the desktop. The real lie is pretending that the hardware manufacturers are the biggest problem. The Linux community pretty clearly doesn't want much to do with closed-source software, and these are the consequences.
What if Apple only ships upgrade CDs for 10.5 retail, and the only full 10.5 installer is the restore CDs from 10.5-era Macs? Are you then entitled to pirate 10.4 or someone's 10.5 restore CD because "it's your business" and "Apple's fighting a battle they cannot win" in your opinion? Inquiring minds would like to better understand this logic.
Maybe Louisiana shouldn't let other states use their port, then? I'm sure all those landlocked Middle States would get along just fine shipping their goods overland to California or something. If you want to live in a low-risk area that's not self-sufficient, you have to pay to use other peoples' infrastructure.
No, I understand that world view perfectly, because I used to be one of you. I ran Linux exclusively for six years, and I'm well aware of what it can and can't do. To be honest, it did take me awhile to realize what strong Kool-Aid you guys are drinking, and having recovered fully I can say that it's much, much stronger stuff than the Macheads brew. At least those guys get stuff done. You guys just sit around and rationalize it away as "if it can't be done with Free Software, it's not worth doing." You don't even see that your platform is mostly useless outside of back-office server stuff and microbenchmarks because you're so excited that the desktop stuff you have now sucks less than the stuff you had last year.
Wake up, people. You're losing the war. Linux isn't on the desktop because the politics keep it from being useful on the desktop. Nobody outside Slashdot cares *why* you can't play multimedia or *why* Fedora won't ship nVidia drivers or *why* you guys still don't have audio support that doesn't suck or *why* everything has to be crap all the time year after year after year. It's ridiculous. It doesn't get work done, and nobody cares about the religion.
I graduated and got a job, I can afford better now, and I don't put up with the half-finished stuff anymore. There's more to life than my computer, so I don't see the point of living this cult-like lifestyle when I can just own a Mac and put the time saved into something more useful. Like, say, writing code. Writing music. Trying to get laid. Hell, just go outside and play. It's good for you.:-P
If performance is (work done) / (time), then there are lots of things that Linux loses at big time, because it's got a big fat zero in the (work done) variable (and usually a big number in the (time) variable.) Does Linux have audio software that doesn't suck yet? Last I bothered wasting time with it (this past winter), it was a bunch of half-finished, roll-your-own crap that was a total waste of time. Garageband, despite being a low-end toy, smokes all that junk, no contest. No special kernels or distro hacking required, and the UI is quite nice.
So these days I work on music, not my computer, which is really the way it should be. That is what Apple sells. Apparently, it's not a life strategy that many on Slashdot understand. Around here, missing the forest for the trees is the status quo. "Yay! I got NetBSD running on my answering machine! It doesn't do anything except play Tetris on the LED, but OMG! It's open source!" How can you guys make fun of Mac fanboys with a straight face? You must not look in the mirror very often.
In any case, caring how fast your OS can fork() or open and close files is lame. Who gives a shit about any of that if your computer can't actually do what you want to do? If you're not doing anything with your computer besides running lmbench and putzing around with benchmarking mysql and apache, then you have much bigger problems than OS performance.
Yes, there is a very good reason to prevent OS X from being run on just any computer: Apple is not in the business of selling operating systems. That's an even worse business model today than it was during the times of Be, NeXT, and so on. For one, they're not going to unseat Microsoft regardless of how good their product is, and the vast majority of people (including many Slashdotters who claim "I'd pay for it!") are going to pirate it. That's not a very good market to be in as an innovator. It costs way too much money to be more than a copycat, and for Apple, that money comes from selling hardware.
If OS X is so great, why isn't it worth paying for the hardware to go with it? Obviously, to you it's not worth even the price of a Mini.
If I'm Apple, I keep the DRM but also stick some weird chips in the new machines (say, a G3) and use them for some critical system component. You "I bought the 10.5 upgrade, and I can do whatever I want with it!" people would then have to go suck it. Seriously, you weren't going to give Apple much if any money anyway, so what rational reason do they have for serving you and your sense of self-entitlement?
Yeah, true. I do remember Quartz and CoreImage and NeXTStep and all the iApps being tarball downloads on SourceForge back in the day. Good thing Apple came along and pointed out all these great, polished, not-stuck-in-alpha projects hiding in broad daylight, otherwise Linux desktops would still be using X11, gtk, QT, and esd!
DRM is just getting started. I wouldn't count it out quite so soon.
And no, this is not the companies' fault. They wouldn't need to do this were it not for widespread piracy. If you don't think something's worth your money or don't agree with the terms it's being offered under, then don't buy it. Strangely, it seems much of the world has great difficulty with that kind of emotion-free, principled thinking.
In your humble opinion, of course. They may not be immediate or hugely obvious, but there most certainly are consequences to your piracy. The megacorps are only interested in DRM technology because of your kind of thinking, and we're all going to suffer for it. Thanks.
Slashdot Mirror
I've personally sat and used OSX on a Dual G5 for around a year, got it up to 10.5 eventually and it was slow when I got there and it was slow when I left.
Well, if a Dual G5 is your basis for evaluating OS X performance, then yeah, I can see how you'd think it was really slow. The G5 had a nice FPU, but it was lackluster at best on integer code, and while the memory bandwidth was much improved over the G4, it was still anemic compared to what workstation-class x86 machines could do at the time. Any of the first-gen Intel Macs easily outclassed the G5.
Linux on the desktop has always been "more promising" than the alternatives, and looks set to be "more promising" for the indefinite future. Maybe one day it'll all come together and work the way software is supposed to, but personally I got bored of waiting. It'd be one thing if the problems were mostly technical, because then I (and I'm sure others) would be more than willing to help out. Alas, as this and other stories show, the biggest problems are all cultural, religious, and political, and most of them will probably never be fixed. Which is a shame, really, because there really is a ton of promise waiting to be realized on the Linux desktop.
Um, doesn't that pretty much agree with the parent post? Sure, you've apparently got a higher tolerance for grunt work, but that's a different topic entirely.
Even if every hardware maker wrote Linux drivers, the situation wouldn't be much different than it is now. There's a perfectly functional nVidia driver that no Linux vendor bothers to integrate properly (if they even ship it at all) because the source code isn't available. Does the average user care why that is? Would you buy a car that didn't come with tires because the manufacturer is above doing business with tire manufacturers? Would the reason even matter?
Linux has plenty of technical problems keeping it off the desktop, but the biggest reason it's a failure in the world beyond Slashdot is the childish politics. Microsoft and Apple don't have "access to the specs" either; the difference is that the Linux crowd treats closed-source vendors so badly that few of them bother. Shipping binary software for Linux is really hard, and that's no accident. And breaking binary-only drivers with every kernel point-release just takes the cake. I'm surprised anyone even tries.
But that's okay. Linux can survive just fine even if it never grows up; there's plenty of need for free Unix in the world, even if it's not useful on the desktop. The real lie is pretending that the hardware manufacturers are the biggest problem. The Linux community pretty clearly doesn't want much to do with closed-source software, and these are the consequences.
What if Apple only ships upgrade CDs for 10.5 retail, and the only full 10.5 installer is the restore CDs from 10.5-era Macs? Are you then entitled to pirate 10.4 or someone's 10.5 restore CD because "it's your business" and "Apple's fighting a battle they cannot win" in your opinion? Inquiring minds would like to better understand this logic.
Maybe Louisiana shouldn't let other states use their port, then? I'm sure all those landlocked Middle States would get along just fine shipping their goods overland to California or something. If you want to live in a low-risk area that's not self-sufficient, you have to pay to use other peoples' infrastructure.
No, I understand that world view perfectly, because I used to be one of you. I ran Linux exclusively for six years, and I'm well aware of what it can and can't do. To be honest, it did take me awhile to realize what strong Kool-Aid you guys are drinking, and having recovered fully I can say that it's much, much stronger stuff than the Macheads brew. At least those guys get stuff done. You guys just sit around and rationalize it away as "if it can't be done with Free Software, it's not worth doing." You don't even see that your platform is mostly useless outside of back-office server stuff and microbenchmarks because you're so excited that the desktop stuff you have now sucks less than the stuff you had last year.
:-P
Wake up, people. You're losing the war. Linux isn't on the desktop because the politics keep it from being useful on the desktop. Nobody outside Slashdot cares *why* you can't play multimedia or *why* Fedora won't ship nVidia drivers or *why* you guys still don't have audio support that doesn't suck or *why* everything has to be crap all the time year after year after year. It's ridiculous. It doesn't get work done, and nobody cares about the religion.
I graduated and got a job, I can afford better now, and I don't put up with the half-finished stuff anymore. There's more to life than my computer, so I don't see the point of living this cult-like lifestyle when I can just own a Mac and put the time saved into something more useful. Like, say, writing code. Writing music. Trying to get laid. Hell, just go outside and play. It's good for you.
If performance is (work done) / (time), then there are lots of things that Linux loses at big time, because it's got a big fat zero in the (work done) variable (and usually a big number in the (time) variable.) Does Linux have audio software that doesn't suck yet? Last I bothered wasting time with it (this past winter), it was a bunch of half-finished, roll-your-own crap that was a total waste of time. Garageband, despite being a low-end toy, smokes all that junk, no contest. No special kernels or distro hacking required, and the UI is quite nice.
So these days I work on music, not my computer, which is really the way it should be. That is what Apple sells. Apparently, it's not a life strategy that many on Slashdot understand. Around here, missing the forest for the trees is the status quo. "Yay! I got NetBSD running on my answering machine! It doesn't do anything except play Tetris on the LED, but OMG! It's open source!" How can you guys make fun of Mac fanboys with a straight face? You must not look in the mirror very often.
In any case, caring how fast your OS can fork() or open and close files is lame. Who gives a shit about any of that if your computer can't actually do what you want to do? If you're not doing anything with your computer besides running lmbench and putzing around with benchmarking mysql and apache, then you have much bigger problems than OS performance.
Yes, there is a very good reason to prevent OS X from being run on just any computer: Apple is not in the business of selling operating systems. That's an even worse business model today than it was during the times of Be, NeXT, and so on. For one, they're not going to unseat Microsoft regardless of how good their product is, and the vast majority of people (including many Slashdotters who claim "I'd pay for it!") are going to pirate it. That's not a very good market to be in as an innovator. It costs way too much money to be more than a copycat, and for Apple, that money comes from selling hardware.
If OS X is so great, why isn't it worth paying for the hardware to go with it? Obviously, to you it's not worth even the price of a Mini.
If I'm Apple, I keep the DRM but also stick some weird chips in the new machines (say, a G3) and use them for some critical system component. You "I bought the 10.5 upgrade, and I can do whatever I want with it!" people would then have to go suck it. Seriously, you weren't going to give Apple much if any money anyway, so what rational reason do they have for serving you and your sense of self-entitlement?
No, it's not just you. Maxtor sucks.
Yeah, true. I do remember Quartz and CoreImage and NeXTStep and all the iApps being tarball downloads on SourceForge back in the day. Good thing Apple came along and pointed out all these great, polished, not-stuck-in-alpha projects hiding in broad daylight, otherwise Linux desktops would still be using X11, gtk, QT, and esd!
DRM is just getting started. I wouldn't count it out quite so soon.
And no, this is not the companies' fault. They wouldn't need to do this were it not for widespread piracy. If you don't think something's worth your money or don't agree with the terms it's being offered under, then don't buy it. Strangely, it seems much of the world has great difficulty with that kind of emotion-free, principled thinking.
In your humble opinion, of course. They may not be immediate or hugely obvious, but there most certainly are consequences to your piracy. The megacorps are only interested in DRM technology because of your kind of thinking, and we're all going to suffer for it. Thanks.