×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Nokia N900 Linux Smartphone Running OS X

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the mr-johnson's-dog dept.

Operating Systems 251

Rovaani writes "There is a video floating around of a Nokia N900 smartphone running the full desktop Mac OS X 10.3. From the author, Tomi Nikkanen: 'I believe this makes the N900 the first smartphone ever to run a full version of Mac OS X (at any speed, slow or otherwise). As you can see from the heavily edited video, it took almost 2 hours to reach the "About my Mac..." window. Keep your eye on the time display as that will give you an impression of just how uselessly slow it is.'"

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

251 comments

horsecock, sodomy (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983686)

horsecock, sodomy

Useless commentary (5, Insightful)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983716)

What's with the "uselessly slow" commentary. The guy did it just to prove it could be done, which is pretty cool. I don't think he ever made any assertion that it would be a usable OS alternative for the N900...

Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983780)

I don't see why Mac OS X should run poorly on modern cell phones. After all, these phones now offer more resources than the high-end workstations that NeXTSTEP ran on in the late 1980s and early 1990s. NeXTSTEP was really snappy on that hardware.

And not all that much has changed between NeXTSTEP and Mac OS X. Anyone who used NeXTSTEP back in the day knows how remarkably little has changed since Apple took it over.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983846)

I think the processor architecture is also being emulated (notice the "pearpc" bit at the top of the screen).

OsX native to the Arm architecture would probably be an order of magnitude or more faster.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (4, Funny)

oronet commander (1084507) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984320)

OsX native to the Arm architecture would probably be an order of magnitude or more faster Just wonder, only 12 minutes to "About this Mac"... sweet!

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984420)

It is an order of magnitude faster, my iphone seems to run it perfectly well.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (2, Informative)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984482)

Your iPhone doesn't run OS X.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (3, Informative)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984844)

Yes it does.

Essentially, the iPhone runs a scaled down version of MacOS X optimized for a handheld device -- although Steve Jobs is insistent that it runs "real OS X" (Specifically, crashlogs indicate that the original iPhone ran "OS X 1.0" build number 1A543a.) -- but no iPhone models can run MacOS X applications regardless. On March 17, 2009, upon unveiling a developer's preview of the third version of the operating system, Apple started referring to it as the "iPhone OS".

http://www.everyipod.com/iphone-faq/iphone-runs-os-x-not-macos-x-cannot-run-macos-x-applications-skype-or-ipod-games.html [everyipod.com]

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985204)

I don't really care about Steve Job's word games. The functionality isn't even close to the same and they refer to it as iPhone OS, not OS X, in recognition of that.

Car analogy: The Chevy Corvette and the Chevy Chevette both had "vette" in their names, but they are hardy the same kind of car.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (0, Flamebait)

cheftw (996831) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984858)

How would you know?

Are you some sort of hacker psychic?

Try jailbreaking an iPhone -- it really is (3, Informative)

Jonathan (5011) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984968)

If you jailbreak an iPhone, you can open a terminal window running bash. If you type "uname -a" you'll see that iPhones run Darwin (the actual OS behind OS X), just like Macintoshes.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (1)

nine-times (778537) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985162)

It's not the full desktop version, but it's basically the same codebase, stripped down to what they wanted for the iPhone, recompiled for a different CPU, and with a UI designed for a small touchscreen.

I guess it depends on where you draw the line on what's the "same operating system". How many modifications can I make to FreeBSD before you say it's not FreeBSD anymore? I don't know.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (0)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984168)

Or are you just thinking that not that much has changed between NeXTSTEP and Mac OS X. One could say the same thing about Windows 95 and Windows 7, they kind of look alike. But the codebase grows as new features are being added. Those usually provide faster experience on newer machines with more power, but they don't work all that well on lower end machines. Not that they are bloat, but they use extra hardware features better and also require the base power to provide more power. Here's my graph [imageshack.us] on the issue, if it helps to understand the point.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984726)

sopssa, I know you're probably only 12 or 13 and never used NeXTSTEP. Now, unlike you, many of us here have. We know that Mac OS X is significantly closer to NeXTSTEP than Windows 7 is to Windows 95.

In fact, many of the changes that Apple has made have been nothing more than optimizations of very solid code. If anything, Mac OS X should run much faster than NeXTSTEP on comparable hardware, due to these performance improvements.

Also keep in mind that unlike Microsoft, Apple knows how to write good software. The only reason Windows 7 doesn't run well on old hardware is because Microsoft has embraced .NET, which encourages bloated software. Apple, on the other hand, uses the tried-and-tested Cocoa stack that is written in a natively-compiled language (Objective-C) and encourages the development lightweight, memory-efficient applications.

I didn't even bother to look at your image, since I know it's bullshit if you created it. If you want to argue, at least try to have a somewhat valid point of view. And for fuck's sake, don't cite images hosted at ImageShack. Really.

Re:Phones more powerful than NeXTstations! (0, Troll)

obarthelemy (160321) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984982)

Could you please elaborate on which parts of 7 use the .NET VM ? Or any non-natively compiled code for that matter ?

PS Ad Hominem is fail.

GNUstep? (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984356)

Sure, GNUstep is not NeXTSTEP proper, but it has its heart in the right place.

There shouldn't be many problems with installing it on N900, which after all runs basically just Debian on ARM (perhaps GNUstep is already in some appropriate ARM repository). Without any emulation needed and GNUstep being very light, this should be actually quite snappy.

Re:GNUstep? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30985012)

This is no troll, but GNUstep is anything but 'snappy', mostly because of the general kludginess of the app integration.

GWorkspace is dangerously buggy. GNUmail.app is similarly challenged.

Re:Useless commentary (4, Interesting)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983786)

OS X 10.3 was PowerPC-only. The N900 has an ARM CPU. The 'uselessly slow' commentary comes from the fact that it's running in an emulator (QEMU? I didn't RTFA), so it's not like the phone is running the OS, the phone is running the emulator and the emulator is running the OS. Remember the people running PowerPC OS X emulated on P3/P4 CPUs before the first Intel release? It's going to be even slower than that.

Re:Useless commentary (1)

marcansoft (727665) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983884)

The emulator used is PearPC. I'm not sure if it does JIT/Dynamic Recompilation, but I seriously doubt it has an ARM backend, so chances are it's running in full software emulation mode, which is going to be ridiculously slow.

Re:Useless commentary (1)

Nursie (632944) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983940)

It's not even an OS for the n900, it's on an emulator.

No lack of kudos for it, but it's not like it's native... I have heard of one dual booting Maemo and Android, which I thought was pretty cool.

Re:Useless commentary (3, Insightful)

Cederic (9623) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984136)

Whoa - where?

I want an Android VM for Maemo, hooked into the phone hardware. Then it's the best phone on the market bar none.

As it is, it's the best phone on the market except for the application support; I'm still hoping that comes good.

Re:Useless commentary (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984426)

I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a Mac Pro with two 2.26GHz Quad-Core Intel Xeon "Nehalem" processors and 6GB of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

In addition, during this file transfer, Warcraft will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even Safari is straining to keep up as I type this.

I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 2x 2.26Ghz 8-core machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

Re:Useless commentary (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984918)

Man, you sure don't work much. "...I've been sitting here at my freelance gig.. Warcraft will not work...Safari is straining to keep up as I type this... "

Re:Useless commentary (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984506)

The guy did it just to prove it could be done, which is pretty cool.
If I poop off a 200m cell phone tower would you be impressed to?

Re:Useless commentary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984638)

...Who wouldn't be impressed by that??

Not useless (5, Interesting)

Renegade Lisp (315687) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983726)

Maybe uselessly slow, yes, but this is the kind of tinkering that any device should allow if it is to be called a computer.

There's a direct link to a free information society from these kinds of experiments -- something that is very much endangered by the current trend towards unmodifiable devices and appifization.

New word accepted (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983840)

appifization v.

The application of DRM by vendors, to create lock-in and walled gardens for software.

Re:Not useless (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984012)

I guess it's not a computer unless it can violate licensing restrictions.

Re:Not useless (2, Insightful)

Haxzaw (1502841) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984140)

Nobody cares about licensing restrictions.

Re:Not useless (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984610)

Since the grandparent poster clearly does care about licensing restrictions, your statement is wrong on the face of it.

Why some bozo moderated an incorrect statement "insightful" just demonstrates that they'll hand out mod points to almost anybody.

Re:Not useless (1)

tsa (15680) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984818)

I think the Nokia N900 is the coolest smartphone out there at the moment, partly because it's so open. But even when you don't want to tinker with it, it blows the iPhone away in terms of multitasking, bluetooth, keyboard and lots of other things.

Nokia N900 comes out of the closet (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983730)

the only reason they are fighting for the marriage thing is just to bitch
about something, if they get the right to marry theyll bitch about something
else nothings good enough for homosexuals and various forms of coloreds. not
only do they have forced equality but they have extra benifits and weak
minded people tiptoeing around them trying to be PC. and then they try to
force beliefs onto people. its ok for them to disagree and feel and think
what they want, but then they try to enact various forceful tactics on
people who are equally but oppositely off the norm as they are, such as
racists. they have just as much right to feel the way that they do as a
homosexual does to feel the way they do. marraige is not a civil right, but
the ability to hate something is

To make OS X useful (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983738)

use "terminal". That 's Unixese for CLI.

Yours In MInsk,
Kilgore T.

Somewhat ironic (5, Insightful)

Soulfarmer (607565) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983754)

I find it somewhat ironic that iPhone's competitor can run Apple's OS and iPhone/iPad most probably will never be able to run Mac OS.

Re:Somewhat ironic (3, Insightful)

TheRaven64 (641858) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983808)

It's running it in an emulator. Apple won't allow emulators in the store, but if you had a dev kit and ported QEMU to the iPhone it would run OS X too. It would, of course, be equally useless.

Re:Somewhat ironic (1)

Arthur Grumbine (1086397) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984768)

It's running it in an emulator. Apple won't allow emulators in the store, but if you had a dev kit and ported QEMU to the iPhone it would run OS X too. It would, of course, be equally useless.

And with some sugar and water we can make lemonade - if we had some lemons...

Re:Somewhat ironic (1, Offtopic)

LWATCDR (28044) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983812)

Actually the iPhone does run OS/X just a different flavor of it.
I guess that one could port a VM to the iPhone or iPad if you had the dev kit for it or jail broke it.
I would say it is possible but not sanctioned.

Re:Somewhat ironic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984210)

Actually the iPhone does run OS/X just a different flavor of it.

While that's technically correct (the best kind of correct!), it completely misses the point.

Re:Somewhat ironic (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984400)

Actually, it's not just technically correct. Mac OS X (which is the correct rendering of the name...OS/X is just wrong) and the iPhone OS run the same kernel, a hybrid of monolithic and micro kernel designs. Seeing as how the core is the same code base, I don't see how "technically" is applicable.

Re:Somewhat ironic (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984422)

Perhaps because the two have an entirely different userland, which tends to affect the arguement.

Re:Somewhat ironic (1)

jbeaupre (752124) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985046)

By your logic, my 8088 was running a version of Windows 7, just a different flavor of it.

Re:Somewhat ironic (0)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983922)

Your definition of 'run' is being stretched a bit to find that irony.

Re:Somewhat ironic (1)

MobileTatsu-NJG (946591) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984292)

Your definition of 'run' is being stretched a bit to find that irony.

Overrated? Really? Okay. Obviously somebody with a mod-point didn't understand what I was saying, so I will be clearer. It takes two hours to boot. To say you are 'running OSX on a Nokia phone' is not all that different from saying "I can brick my Nokia phone for two hours". At the end of the day, you're not doing anything productive with OSX on either platform. It is so crappy, in fact, that the iPhone OS's basis in OSX is actually a lot more meaningful and destroys the 'irony' of that statement.

Sorry to suck the fun out of the statement, but the use of the word 'run' is being stretched to make that irony seem meaningful.

Re:Somewhat ironic (2, Interesting)

fredmosby (545378) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984716)

The iPhone and iPad run the multi-touch version of OSX. Calling it the 'iPhone OS' is poor marketing on Apple's part, but it really is full OSX with a different (better in terms of usability) interface.

He's only half done (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983770)

Next step is to hook it up to a car battery and use liquid helium to cool the chip. Overclocked I'm sure he can get the boot up under an hour.

Not impressed (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983788)

Two hours to boot Mac OS X? My Nokia N900 boots the Atari 800 OS in 2 seconds.

Surprised at the time required (0)

swanzilla (1458281) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983804)

The n900 has 256 MB SDRAM and 768 MB virtual memory with a 600 MHz processor...you can Hackintosh a ghetto netbook with 8 GB solid states with OS X that will boot in no time.

Re:Surprised at the time required (3, Insightful)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983838)

Do you not see the difference between Mac OS running under emulation and Mac OS running natively?

Re:Surprised at the time required (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983862)

I'd like to see you do it in "no time" on an ARM netbook.

Atom @ 1+ GHz vs. ARM @ 600MHz (1)

itomato (91092) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985334)

Surprised at the time? How about being surprised that the n900 is a phone running a PowerPC emulator, which, when initially released didn't run OS X any faster.

ARM > PearPC > XNU

Atom > XNU

No direct comparison may be made. XNU runs natively on Atom cores (or used to). For the n900, XNU PPC is running on an *emulated* cpu, running on a low-power, essentially PDA-class CPU.

Personally, I am downright impressed with the time required. My n810 would barf.

So where is BeOS? (4, Funny)

rimcrazy (146022) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983806)

Come on, if your going to do worthless things why not go for the whole enchilada?

Re:So where is BeOS? (1)

the linux geek (799780) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984058)

I can't think of any reason why it wouldn't work, since Maemo runs QEMU. Probably a hell of a lot faster than OSX, too.

FAIL (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30983818)

Way too slow for any type of practical purpose. This is useless.

O_o (4, Funny)

SixDimensionalArray (604334) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983950)

Now if I could just get Windows Vista booting on my TI-82!

Love It (5, Interesting)

LearnToSpell (694184) | more than 4 years ago | (#30983986)

I hate to sound like the eternal nuthugger, but I'm having so much fun with my N900. Just threw on the cifs-mounting stuff, and that combined (alternated, really) with sshfs means I can take my entire music collection wherever I go. 1.5TB, ripped to flac on a server in my basement, so why would I want to have to choose what albums I take with me to the gym or work or wherever? Just mount the thing and play. Plus, there's an FM transmitter built-in, so I can just plunk it down next to (~15 feet) a radio, and fire it up.

The "it's so slow" comments are kind of silly. This is obviously a POC, and a pretty nice one. Any phone that can run Asterisk, Apache, nmap and OSX is cool in my book. :)

Re:Love It (1, Informative)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984092)

Nokia pissed me off to no end with the N900. I was waiting for the thing, postponing any phone related purchases .... and when it comes out it turns out that it does not support the 3G system offered in Canada by Rogers (and apparently also by AT&T in the US). EDGE only. Which at the price tag the thing comes with renders the entire excercise rather pointless (and no WiFi is not an acceptable fall-back for many of us).

All I can say is: Fucketey Fuck!

Re:Love It (5, Informative)

shutdown -p now (807394) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984344)

Nokia pissed me off to no end with the N900. I was waiting for the thing, postponing any phone related purchases .... and when it comes out it turns out that it does not support the 3G system offered in Canada by Rogers (and apparently also by AT&T in the US). EDGE only.

Nokia is a European company, so they use European UMTS frequency bands [wikipedia.org] (which, by the way, also happen to be used in most of the world). Blame North America for trying to be different there, not Nokia for going for the largest worldwide coverage.

In USA, you still have the option of T-Mobile, anyway.

Re:Love It (2, Interesting)

Verdatum (1257828) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984588)

Should we blame Nokia? Should we blame the telcos? Or should we blame the standards organization, ISO? NO! Blame Canada! Blame Canada! (and so on)

Re:Love It (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984626)

It's not really USA's fault they are "different" - when they picked the frequencies there was no standard, and now they are stuck with it.

Re:Love It (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984836)

In USA, you still have the option of T-Mobile, anyway.

Wonderful. /sarcasm

T-Mobile: No bars in more places!

Re:Love It (1)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985390)

Blame North America for trying to be different there, not Nokia for going for the largest worldwide coverage

Nokia could have made a phone that supports all the global standards, many such phones exist. They chose not to do so. What you are saying is that we should blame England when some car maker decides not to make a Right Hand Drive car for Japanese or New Zealand market. It is the maker's choice, the "responsiblity" is not on the whole historical chain of decisions that lead to the establishment of a particular national system.

Re:Love It (1)

wjbaird (20705) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984406)

I bought a N900 to use on Rogers a week and a half ago... Of course, I'd prefer having 3G, but I have wifi the majority of places I spend a lot of time, and the EDGE access is Ok for emergency web browsing when I don't have wifi...

Of course, I was coming from a openmoko freerunner that only did GPRS, not even EDGE, so EDGE seems pretty speedy...

YMMV

Re:Love It (2, Interesting)

roju (193642) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984468)

I've read that WIND uses the right frequencies to use the N900 at 3G speeds. Apparently they may even be bringing it to Canada officially. People are running it right now though, just self-imported from the States.

Re:Love It (1)

IgnoramusMaximus (692000) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985424)

WIND is at this point a startup, covering some parts of Toronto only. It will be years before they have a national coverage to speak of.

Re:Love It (1)

Neil Watson (60859) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984486)

The N900 will work on Windmobile's [windmobile.ca] network at full speed. Wind is rumored to be selling the phone soon but for now they say you can use your own N900 with their SIM cards. Dave Wireless [davewireless.com] is supposed to run on the same frequencies as Wind but Dave is not on line yet.

Re:Love It (1)

Clueless Moron (548336) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984562)

It will probably work with the new WIND mobile network though. They use UMTS AWS band IV (1700/2100). My Nokia E90 picks up the 2100 downlink.

Personally I use the Wifi on the E90 quite a bit. VoIP calling is really cheap.

Re:Love It (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984630)

Sour grapes. It's not like the information about supported networks is difficult to find. Maybe next time you'll do your research before irresponsibly throwing down your dollars.

T-Mobile is the only carrier you can use it on in the U.S and get full 3G connectivity. The girl in the T-Mo store was able to cancel my Verizon account, retain my phone number, and even transfer my contacts from my old phone to my SIM card. When I got the N900 I installed the SIM, imported my contacts, and everything was peachy.

T-Mobile service in NYC has been fine so far, and the N900 is *amazing*.

complain to Congress (2, Interesting)

pydev (1683904) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984812)

That's not Nokia's fault. In order to cover the US market, they would have to offer different versions for AT&T, T-Mobile, Verizon, and Sprint. Each of those versions would require separate FCC approval. And the reason for that mess is because the FCC and Congress have failed to set standards for mobile telecommunications.

That's one of the many reasons the US mobile market is so terribly backwards and overpriced: there is no competition, and monopolies are enforced through technology.

Re:Love It (-1, Redundant)

alen (225700) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984264)

i have a 32GB iphone. i have only 80GB of music. if i listened to music on my iphone 24x7 it would take me weeks to listen to everything once. who cares about having access to your entire music collection if it's going to take you 5 years to listen to it?

i don't even listen to full albums anymore. i have a bunch of smart playlists with different conditions and one with only my favorite songs from the entire collection. and my faves playlist is over 1000 songs and if i could i would cut it down to 100 or so to sync to my iphone but maybe in a future version of itunes.

Re:Love It (1)

mister_playboy (1474163) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984628)

i have a 32GB iphone. i have only 80GB of music. if i listened to music on my iphone 24x7 it would take me weeks to listen to everything once. who cares about having access to your entire music collection if it's going to take you 5 years to listen to it?

He said he collection was in FLAC, so it will take up much more space than your (most likely) mp3s. Probably not "5 years worth" of music.

i don't even listen to full albums anymore. i have a bunch of smart playlists with different conditions and one with only my favorite songs from the entire collection. and my faves playlist is over 1000 songs and if i could i would cut it down to 100 or so to sync to my iphone but maybe in a future version of itunes.

Whole albums have an important place in many kinds of music I like, such as progressive metal and classical. I always listen to whole albums at a time (or pick up where I left off if I have to split the session up). The usefulness of albums is mainly dictated by your favorite genre of music.

Re:Love It (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984342)

1.5TB

Impressive. Equally impressive is the amount of MONEY you spent on ALL THAT MUSIC! (Even if it is losslessly compressed).

Re:Love It (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984498)

All the money? For all we know it might be music licensed under Creative Commons for free or or anyother license that lets him keep get it for free or even may music he composed on his own.

Ahh people and their conclusions.

Probably includes ripped DVDs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984510)

And it's easy to get 1.5TB with 80 TV series on DVD.

Re:Love It (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984856)

Hey, by the way, did you know Nokia makes this model of phone, the N900, that runs Linux? And incidentally, you can use the Nokia N900, which runs Linux, which is better than $CURRENT_DISCUSSED_PHONE. Oh, there's also the N900, a Linux smartphone, which runs Linux, and is Linux and Linux and Linux and Linux and Linux.

Seriously, I'm pretty well a Linux diehard, I like open systems, I like cool systems, and I like things that use Linux, but when I hear N900 fanatics crowbar their phone into any discussion about any phone, anywhere, at any time, it makes me question my OS of choice. And now we actually have a Slashdot article involving the N900. Ye gods, this is going to be an infinite loop unless someone added some check in your hard-wired brain to not start a new evangelizing thread if someone actually mentions the N900 itself.

do {
if($TOPIC eq "Cell Phones") evangelize();
} while($slashdot->getNextArticle());

What the heck! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984040)

I just watched that video and I was sucked into a time vortex, I experienced a feeling of time standing still for what must have been over 5 minutes, and poof, according to the video 2 hours had past.
*YAAaaawn*

realistic Mac performance (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984158)

"uselessly show" sounds like pretty realistic Mac performance.

Cool, but..... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984230)

.....but does it run Linux?

Mac 2010 is now Vista (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984470)

it took almost 2 hours to reach the "About my Mac..." window. Keep your eye on the time display as that will give you an impression of just how uselessly slow it is.

People used to say, "Windows 95 is Mac 84." The roles have now reversed.

Re:Mac 2010 is now Vista (1)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984984)

it took almost 2 hours to reach the "About my Mac..." window. Keep your eye on the time display as that will give you an impression of just how uselessly slow it is.

People used to say, "Windows 95 is Mac 84." The roles have now reversed.

"Mac 10.3 is Windows 7"?

Re:Mac 2010 is now Vista (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30985314)

I'd say Snow Leopard is Windows 7 and iPhone 3G-S is BlackBerry 8520.

Somewhat unrelated, but (5, Informative)

nightfire-unique (253895) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984582)

Though this isn't directly related to running OSX on the n900, I just wanted to add that.. I'm not surprised.

A while back I posted a story that was rejected, asking if any fellow /.'ers had any experience with the n900 from a Unix admin's perspective. To me it seemed like a dream-come-true device: high-res screen, fast CPU, lots of ram... and most importantly, running Debian.

I had to find out, so I bought one about 3 weeks ago. It really, truly is a dream-come-true device.

I swear I'm not affiliated with Nokia in any way; I'm a Unix admin for a largish web firm. But if anyone else is wondering, yes it runs a Debian-derived OS. Yes, you can SSH into it as root, over 3G/GPRS, even if the phone is "off." Yes, crond works. Yes it runs native X11 and you can run your X11 apps (ie. directory manager, xterms, vncviewer, pidgin, openoffice/koffice, etc). Yes it's stable. The keyboard is usable, the UI is quick, and task switching is a breeze. The filesystem layout is mostly sensible, and you can apt-get dist-upgrade to get updates directly from Nokia (and other repositories)!

That blew me away when I first saw it so let me say it again: Nokia is using apt to send updates OTA to the phone! Proper version tagging and dependency management, on a phone!

It doesn't suspend like the crappy Zaurus did... when you hit the power switch, it shuts off the screen and (I believe) encourages the processor to drop to a very slow cycle rate (unless something heavy is running). So your apps continue to run. Battery life is ~16-24h with a constant GSM data/wifi connection, so you must charge every night. But it's so worth it.

Everything about it is done the way this 15-year Linux/Solaris admin thinks it should be done.

So, back (slightly) on-topic.. it doesn't surprise me in the least that they got OSX to boot under an emulator. The n900 is quite literally a pocket Debian workstation that happens to have a GSM radio onboard.

Re:Somewhat unrelated, but (1)

Nexus7 (2919) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984808)

I don't take issue with most everything you said, in fact I and my N900 whole-heartedly agree (although N900 had me at 'df -h').

But, "crappy Zaurus"?

It (my SL6000) ran Linux, tethered to my Nokia over Bluetooth and let me surf the web at EDGE on a train on a gorgeous 4" VGA screen, had a very usable (for thumbing) keyboard, and SSH too... and all that in 2004.

You just didn't like that it couldn't use .debs, right?

Re:Somewhat unrelated, but (1)

CortoMaltese (828267) | more than 4 years ago | (#30985194)

Everything about it is done the way this 15-year Linux/Solaris admin thinks it should be done.

Ah, I see that you're still on honeymoon with your N900. It's got its wrinkles. Try 'cat /etc/sudoers' for a start. But I do agree with most of what you say. It is an amazing device.

n900 - port iphone os to it! (1)

ardiri (245358) | more than 4 years ago | (#30984872)

10.3 was powerpc specific - and you can see from the screen shot that they are using pearpc - a powerpc emulation engine.

what would be much more interesting is to port iphone os to the n900 - it has an ARM cpu and should be able to run about the same speed as the iphone itself - that is more a challenge. putting msdos on symbian, android, iphone os, windows mobile is simply a matter of porting dosbox or so; when will someone take on the true challenge :) take a recovery image and flash it to an ARM device with similar specs.. should be doable :)

Linux? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30984884)

If it's OS X it 'aint Linux. It's Darwin and that's BSD. If it's Debian (apt-get, etc.), then it's Linux. Make up your minds, please!

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...