Linux vs MacOSX

Message

riprjak · Post by **riprjak** » Tue Apr 20, 2004 5:32 am

Shan wrote: I'd heard (unofficially) that OSX was supposed to be using a [Free|Open]BSD kernel, but I wasn't aware that it so closely cloned Linux (or Unix, whatever you prefer) Cron, init, CUPSd, file system layout (/etc /usr, et al). Am I the only person who didn't know this? and how did Apple get away with this without infringing on the liscencing?

And since it basically seems that its a Linux distro core made for PPC, just with everything hidden, wheres the console? Hell even a virtual console would be nice for exploring the system a bit more in depth....

Umm, They didnt *clone* linux at all... all of that comes from *nix, indeed Gentoo tends to "clone" BSD style inits and crontabs; so in that case linux more correctly is said to copy BSD unix and, hence, FreeBSD.
Darwin (the actual operating system, where "OSX" is more correctly the combination window manager and windowing system and gui skins) is a port of FreeBSD (and does indeed maintain the copyright notices and references the regents of the university in bootup, check dmseg). My GF has an ibook and I fiddled for a while

So I dont see where licensing or anything comes into it... or were you unaware of the origin of *nix flavours and standards and linux's minix heritage (although most distros tend to favour berkely style structure).

err!
jak

zojas · Post by **zojas** » Tue Apr 20, 2004 1:07 pm

the actual kernel in OS X is a mach microkernel with a BSD compatibility component. If you try to write any code which uses the system itself (like looking up process information) you quickly find yourself having to do native mach system calls.
(see the code for OS X's 'ps' for example).

at apple.com you can sign up for a free developer account. then you can check out the source code to pretty much everything which doesn't have a gui from their cvs server. it's all available under apple's open source license, which the fsf now lists as being a Free Software license.

there are people that run the OS with just the programs that have the source available (Darwin). and Darwin runs on ppc or x86.

Ian Henderson · Post by **Ian Henderson** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:23 pm

Has anybody here used the Apple developer tools? Cocoa and Objective-C are the best combo I've found for developing applications. I was a 100% linux user before I discovered this; now I'm only a 50% linux user. ^_^

ebrostig · Post by **ebrostig** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:28 pm

It's just amazing that people volontarily uses a propriatary product like OSX

Erik

Athas · Post by **Athas** » Wed Apr 21, 2004 7:57 pm

ebrostig wrote:It's just amazing that people volontarily uses a propriatary product like OSX

Erik

Not everyone are free software idealists like, apparently, us.

Some people just want the damn stuff to work... now where's the fun in that?

ebrostig · Post by **ebrostig** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 2:34 pm

Athas wrote:
ebrostig wrote:It's just amazing that people volontarily uses a propriatary product like OSX

Erik
Not everyone are free software idealists like, apparently, us.

Some people just want the damn stuff to work... now where's the fun in that?

Linux --- doesn't work??

hssshhhh.... Don't tell that to my computers! They might hear you and start wondering what they are doing wrong since they just *gasp* works!

I would really love to know what it is that I'm supposedly is able to do with a Mac that I can't do with Linux and that I really need to do?

Erik

Athas · Post by **Athas** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:13 pm

ebrostig wrote:I would really love to know what it is that I'm supposedly is able to do with a Mac that I can't do with Linux and that I really need to do?

Don't get me wrong, I prefer GNU/Linux for everything, but I still wouldn't present a long-time Windows user, or a complete newbie to computing, for that matter, to Gentoo and expect them to set it up and use without any problems whatsoever.

Due to Apple controlling everything just faintly related to the Macintosh, you can be pretty certain that your Mac-{hard|soft}ware will work nicely.

zojas · Post by **zojas** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 3:43 pm

I'm a fan of apple, but I do believe that if one of us hard-core geeky types set up a nice gentoo box and a nice user environment for a noob, they could use it easily. now administering it would be another issue, but that's what us geeky types are for.

since I'm posting anyway, I'll go ahead and say I like OS X because it's convenient. a lot of things I like to do on computers are easy to do in OS X (from a desktop standpoint). now server type stuff, I'm not at all interested in OS X for that.

regeya · Post by **regeya** » Thu Apr 22, 2004 4:48 pm

I think I can sum up most the detractors' posts here: Lies, Damn Lies, and FUD.

I'te pretty clear reading most the replies here that we've had people ignorant of the facts replying, but that hasn't stopped anyone, of course.

Apple copying from GNOME? PUH-LEEEEZE! Could we turn off the GNOME Zealot B.S. Machine for a second? OS X, the desktop edition, can't function as well as a server as Linux? What part of "workstation O.S." is so hard to understand? OS X is FreeBSD? Um, sorry, no.

It's simple: OS X is a good (not excellent) workstation OS, lightyears ahead of previous MacOSes in stability but not perfect. OS X Server is okay, but I wouldn't use it for anything more than what I use it for now, which is a small office. Does that make it bad? Nope.

Just as I wouldn't hand a graphic designer a Gentoo box with GNOME installed (eww) I wouldn't inflict OS X on an uber-l33t d00d with extreme stability needs. I might not even recommend Linux, for that matter.

The point? OS X can be great or a flaming pile of crap, depending on your needs. Do you need Photoshop, Illustrator, etc. and need to work in a Mac-only environment? If so, you're going to love OS X. I'm typing this in a Safari window right now, come to that. If you want a machine to keep 10 terminals open along with Emacs and run an anonymous FTP server, Web server, and a few other services besides, you're going to hate OS X with a passion.

EDIT: in response to ebrostig's comment about people volontarily[sic] using proprietary software: some of us believe in the freedom to use whatever the hell you want to use, provided you have the right to use it.

bzImage · Post by **bzImage** » Mon May 03, 2004 5:50 am

ebrostig wrote:It's just amazing that people volontarily uses a propriatary product like OSX

Erik

Propietary ???

www.opendarwin.org

Can't change themes ???

http://www.unsanity.com/haxies/shapeshifter

Does not have a Unix feeling ???

Just open the terminal.app

OSX its what linux want's to be, no Linux graphical interface comes closer to aqua.

mugget · Post by **mugget** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:19 pm

yes in OS X you can change themes and the system font.

ShapeShifter for themes and also from Unsanity, Silk, for changing the fonts. -> http://unsanity.com/haxies/silk.

i don't know how i'd live without being able to change the theme...

Given M. Sur · Post by **Given M. Sur** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:28 pm

bzImage wrote:OSX its what linux want's to be, no Linux graphical interface comes closer to aqua.

What? Maybe in your opinion.

IMHO, any interface without virtual desktops is inferior to any interface with virtual desktops. Expose is cool and all, but if you keep things orginized in the first place (which requires virtual desktops) it's useless.

bzImage · Post by **bzImage** » Mon Jun 14, 2004 8:34 pm

00420 wrote:
bzImage wrote:OSX its what linux want's to be, no Linux graphical interface comes closer to aqua.
What? Maybe in your opinion.

IMHO, any interface without virtual desktops is inferior to any interface with virtual desktops. Expose is cool and all, but if you keep things orginized in the first place (which requires virtual desktops) it's useless.

Virtual desktops like this:

http://wsmanager.sourceforge.net/

or This :

http://www.codetek.com/ctvd/

mugget · Post by **mugget** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 5:10 am

yes, Desktop Manager is great. i've used that a bit. very nice, especially with the cube transition effect.

CodeTek Virtual Desktop i've found offers nothing that DM can't do (except maybe for pre-Panther compatibility

) and it costs money as well!

truekaiser · Post by **truekaiser** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 7:57 am

so for the themeing and the font changeing with mulitple desktops the choice boils down to if you want to pay for a program that does it or install a freeware app(mac os and windows) or if you want these things to come built in(linux).

mugget · Post by **mugget** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:10 am

truekaiser wrote:so for the themeing and the font changeing with mulitple desktops the choice boils down to if you want to pay for a program that does it or install a freeware app(mac os and windows) or if you want these things to come built in(linux).

exactly right.

just dont' say that 'you can't have x feature in OS X'.

Given M. Sur · Post by **Given M. Sur** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:15 am

bzImage wrote:
00420 wrote:
bzImage wrote:OSX its what linux want's to be, no Linux graphical interface comes closer to aqua.
What? Maybe in your opinion.

IMHO, any interface without virtual desktops is inferior to any interface with virtual desktops. Expose is cool and all, but if you keep things orginized in the first place (which requires virtual desktops) it's useless.
Virtual desktops like this:

http://wsmanager.sourceforge.net/

or This :

http://www.codetek.com/ctvd/

Yeah, like that

I would still prefer to have the features built in, but that's cool that it's possible.

placeholder · Post by **placeholder** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 8:32 am

To me Mac OSX has way too much eye candy. Small amounts are nice and they make a comfortable atmosphere, but when it comes down to it it's annoying to have almost every part of the GUI having an animation.

Mac OSX also sounds annoying to me mainly because you have to activate the root account and there are the ever annoying "admins". The higher-up group on my system is called the elites, because to me it just sounds better. I don't know why I hate the idea of an admin thing so much, I suppose maybe it's because of my Windows days. lol

bzImage · Post by **bzImage** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 3:51 pm

00420 wrote:
bzImage wrote:
00420 wrote:
bzImage wrote:OSX its what linux want's to be, no Linux graphical interface comes closer to aqua.
What? Maybe in your opinion.

IMHO, any interface without virtual desktops is inferior to any interface with virtual desktops. Expose is cool and all, but if you keep things orginized in the first place (which requires virtual desktops) it's useless.
Virtual desktops like this:

http://wsmanager.sourceforge.net/

or This :

http://www.codetek.com/ctvd/
Yeah, like that

I would still prefer to have the features built in, but that's cool that it's possible.

Technically speaking, Linux does not include a graphical environment, or tools or desktop managers for that matter, is just a kernel.

So, the graphical environment is not built in into linux, is added by the packer/distribuitor.

In other words, linux does not include a graphical environment, but a linux distribuition can.

OSX is different, OSX INCLUDES a graphical environment, a kernel (darwin) and tools (BSD compat tools), is like the happy meal

mugget · Post by **mugget** » Tue Jun 15, 2004 11:08 pm

he he.

yeah, the Happy Meal.

i was also just thinking... in Gentoo you have to add in anything you want yourself. nothing is included really... so what's the difference if in OS X you have to get some third party apps for virtual desktop or whatever? linux users are so used to adding functionality themselves that you'd think that doing the same in OS X wouldn't be such a big deal.

sindre · Post by **sindre** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 1:38 am

Linux not being suitable for ppc, must be the most undocumented fud I've heared since the sco case. Linus himself uses a ppc-box afaik.

Match · Post by **Match** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 6:29 am

My plan in the future: get a PowerMac and dual-boot OSX with Gentoo. Best of both worlds. As people have already said, it all comes down to preference. Yes. even for those who prefer Windows (though that's 99% of the time through ignorance it seems

)

ralph · Post by **ralph** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 7:13 am

Match wrote:My plan in the future: get a PowerMac and dual-boot OSX with Gentoo. Best of both worlds. As people have already said, it all comes down to preference. Yes. even for those who prefer Windows (though that's 99% of the time through ignorance it seems )

Good plan. And make sure to give MOL a try, it's great.

screwjack · Post by **screwjack** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 7:56 am

Pwnz3r wrote:To me Mac OSX has way too much eye candy. Small amounts are nice and they make a comfortable atmosphere, but when it comes down to it it's annoying to have almost every part of the GUI having an animation.

Mac OSX also sounds annoying to me mainly because you have to activate the root account and there are the ever annoying "admins".

just out of curiosity, how is needing to enable root in OSX significantly more effort than needing to add a user to the wheel group before they can su to root in gentoo? It really just requires making a selection from a pulldown menu in the NetInfo Manager. and just FYI - the vast majority of the eye candy in Aqua can be turned on and off very easily.

I use OSX as well as various bsd and linux flavors regularly. Licensing religions aside, all three systems have their own various strengths and weaknesses. one size will never be a perfect fit for everyone; there is no one OS to rule them all. That said, for me the consistency of the Aqua environment and the richness of the Xcode and Interface Builder development tools (Objective-C, baby!) give OSX a clear edge.Now I dig gentoo as much as the next guy and I know it sounds ridiculously fanboyish, but for me at least OSX is a kind of computing nirvana: the stability and power of unix underneath an extremely well integrated GUI environment, both coupled with an exceptional native development environment. Tough to beat.

craftyc · Post by **craftyc** » Wed Jun 16, 2004 10:11 am

screwjack wrote:...

Tough to beat.

Microsoft apparntly has them beat.

Linux vs MacOSX

Re: Linux vs MacOSX