Beta

×

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!

Torvalds: Free OS X Is No Threat To Linux

timothy posted about 9 months ago | from the craft-brewed-fair-trade-shade-grown-moka-beans-vs-airline-coffee dept.

OS X 314

jfruh writes "Apple is now offering upgrades to the latest version of OS X for free. When Linux inventor Linus Torvalds was asked whether this threatened Linux (presumably by someone who had only a passing knowledge of all the things 'free' can mean when applied to software) it gave him an opportunity for a passionate defense of open source. Torvalds also says that he'll keep programming until it gets 'not interesting,' which hasn't happened yet." The newest version of OS X may be gratis for Apple hardware buyers, but it's notably far from the original, (literally) un-branded sense of "mavericks."

cancel ×

314 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

FIRST (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224043)

Suck it

Linus Ducks Real Issue (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224099)

This is a clever ruse on Linus' part. The real issue, which he completely ignores, is the genuine threat to Linux provided by Microsoft's release of a free Windows 8.1 upgrade.

Even if he doesn't want to talk about it, at least publicly, I know he's scared shitless.

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (-1, Flamebait)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 9 months ago | (#45224137)

This is a clever ruse on Linus' part. The real issue, which he completely ignores, is the genuine threat to Linux provided by Microsoft's release of a free Windows 8.1 upgrade.

You said it's a free upgrade, which implies that one has to already have purchased a copy of Windows 8 to get the software.

I don't have to buy shit to get the a Linux distro, nor for updates. Kinda not even close to the same thing.

Even if he doesn't want to talk about it, at least publicly, I know he's scared shitless.

Yea, somehow I doubt that.

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (5, Funny)

SirGarlon (845873) | about 9 months ago | (#45224203)

Please recalibrate your sarcasm detector. :-)

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (5, Funny)

binarylarry (1338699) | about 9 months ago | (#45224335)

He tried, it's stuck on Asshole.

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224213)

WHOOOOOOSH!

W00O0O0O0OSH (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224241)

Re:W00O0O0O0OSH (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224471)

Saavik, two As.

Posted anonymously because pedants aren't appreciated.

Re:W00O0O0O0OSH (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224563)

Saavik, two As.

Posted anonymously because pedants aren't appreciated.

Have a cookie.

Milk?

They'll realize how important you are, one day.

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (-1)

frinkster (149158) | about 9 months ago | (#45224201)

This is a clever ruse on Linus' part. The real issue, which he completely ignores, is the genuine threat to Linux provided by Microsoft's release of a free Windows 8.1 upgrade.

Even if he doesn't want to talk about it, at least publicly, I know he's scared shitless.

Windows 8.1 was a free update to Windows 8 machines. If you don't have Windows 8 installed, you need to pay for Windows 8.1.

If Microsoft continues to offer updates at no cost, then eventually all (or close enough to be considered all) Microsoft users will be able to get free updates. But that is going to be many years from now, and Microsoft will still need to convince OEMs to ship machines with a valid copy of Windows as the OS. If they give that away for free, then it would definitely represent a challenge for desktop Linux adoption, especially outside the US and Europe.

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224511)

Whoosh
Please contact your local Clown Shop to have your humor/sarcasm detector serviced, as it is quite obviously broken. Or possibly was never installed.

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224207)

oops

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (2, Interesting)

vux984 (928602) | about 9 months ago | (#45224349)

The real issue, which he completely ignores, is the genuine threat to Linux provided by Microsoft's release of a free Windows 8.1 upgrade.

ROFLMAO

Only free to users of win 8, who got a raw deal having to use win8. :)

8.1 may not yet be perfect, but its a huge improvement. Right clicking the new start button gives you direct access to control panels, device manager, event viewer, computer management, powershell, add/remove programs, shutdown/restart... I hadn't realized this until a couple days ago as everyone had said the new start button is just brings up the win8 start screen. Even on the 8.1 preview -- it hadn't occured to me to right click it.

I now officially overall prefer the new start button/start screen more than windows 7 start menu, and think the start8/classic shell crowd are missing the boat.

I'm still not a fan of metro, but that's optional to use. And I still like the win7 start menu search widget for typing based "quick launch" -- and would like to see a powertoy for that; or even just to see that autocomplete/search functionality added to win+r.

Anyhow... as to Linus being afraid of a free 8.1 upgrade, or even OSX upgrades... it's absurd. OSX isn't free. Its a free upgrade for recent Macs. That's it.

Re: Linus Ducks Real Issue (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224491)

I already get free upgrades to Windows and always have. I just buy a new computer and it has a free copy of Windows on it. Easy, innit?

Re:Linus Ducks Real Issue (1)

ruir (2709173) | about 9 months ago | (#45225203)

yeah, yeah, Windows is really a threat to Linux and Apple. What memo do you failed the ones using Linux and Mac are using it because they want a quality product, and the ones that want to keep cost down "pirate" it? I don't see a threat anywhere. Anyway, Microsoft can't have the luxury of giving free upgrades because they don't sell hardware. Only if it is free upgrades for the surface, but nobody on his right mind buys a surface to run linux...

the second dose is free (1, Informative)

themushroom (197365) | about 9 months ago | (#45224101)

...but Apple users had to pay a bundle for the OS that they're upgrading to Maverick from, remember.

Re:the second dose is free (3, Informative)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 9 months ago | (#45224141)

...but Apple users had to pay a bundle for the OS that they're upgrading to Maverick from, remember.

Minimum upgrade point is Snow Leopard, which still only costs $30.

I guess "a bundle" has extremely varying values.

Re: the second dose is free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224259)

You assume that the person upgrading has hardware that's less than six years old. Any older and Apple kicks you out of the boat.

bonk (0)

themushroom (197365) | about 9 months ago | (#45224435)

That's what I was going for: I knew several versions of Mac's OS were costly even if the very latest couple were not, that's where I was coming from.

Post as Flamebait? Heh, only if you're an Apple fanboy. ;-)

Re:the second dose is free (4, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about 9 months ago | (#45224291)

> Minimum upgrade point is Snow Leopard, which still only costs $30.

You're forgetting the $600 minimum buy in from whatever Mac hardware allows you to run this OS.

It's not free. It's bundled with expensive hardware.

Some fanboy was really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this particular bit of propaganda. It makes it sound like they've run out of anything meaningful to say. It smacks of desperation.

Re:the second dose is free (3, Interesting)

_Ludwig (86077) | about 9 months ago | (#45224429)

No, the expensive hardware is bundled with it, not the other way around. You can go to the store and buy a copy with no hardware whatsoever, then install it on some used $200 Macbook from craigslist. I have one six or seven years old that runs it happily.

Re:the second dose is free (1, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | about 9 months ago | (#45224537)

No you can't. The hardware requirements of the newer versions of MacOS won't allow for it.

Every so often, those icky "specs" matter.

Plus you are contradicting that common bit of fanboy propaganda regarding "resale value".

Re:the second dose is free (4, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 9 months ago | (#45225225)

Er what? The hardware requirements [apple.com] of Mavericks says that an iMac from 2007 is compatible. As far as MacBooks, late 2008 is the oldest. So six year old desktops and five year old laptops are compatible. It's not six or seven years but it's close. If you haven't noticed, hardware from 5 or 6 years ago has been good enough for most consumers on the PC side. That's one reason people have stopped buying new PCs.

Second, how much does a 5 or 6 year old PC laptop go for? I can tell you it's often less than $200 considering new ones are not much more than that.

Re:the second dose is free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224845)

> You can go to the store and buy a copy with no hardware

Not anymore. Snow Leopard was the last version which came on physical media. (You can get a "genius" to copy newer versions on to a USB stick, but they will want proof of ownership.)

Intentionally or not, this prevents any Psystar-like companies from trying to sell Hackintoshes.

Re:the second dose is free (1)

lowen (10529) | about 9 months ago | (#45225155)

Not anymore. Snow Leopard was the last version which came on physical media.

Lion was available on a USB stick. Search for it on eBay; still some sellers selling it (607-9072; found three on eBay just now for $55.95).

Re:the second dose is free (1, Insightful)

CanHasDIY (1672858) | about 9 months ago | (#45224565)

> Minimum upgrade point is Snow Leopard, which still only costs $30.

You're forgetting the $600 minimum buy in from whatever Mac hardware allows you to run this OS.

It's not free. It's bundled with expensive hardware.

The fact that it's a free upgrade kind of implies you already have the hardware.

As for "expensive hardware," I have an '08 Macbook that meets the minimum specs for Mavericks (except that I never upgraded to Snow Leopard) - cost me about an hour of labor for a buddy who owns a pawn shop.

Some fanboy was really scraping the bottom of the barrel with this particular bit of propaganda. It makes it sound like they've run out of anything meaningful to say. It smacks of desperation.

All well and good, but of all the things I could be called, Apple Fanboy definitely isn't one of them.

Re:the second dose is free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224571)

Oh my god. You clueless yob. It's bundled with decent hardware you dumbass; that's not free or cheap.

Every time I go to build a linux box because I'm sick of OS X, I find myself $1500 into it for building something that will be fast and last a while.

What the real question here is, why do we care what Torvalds thinks anymore than iWoz(someone)? It's like asking Ashton Kutcher what he thinks about the new batman movie? Who fucking cares?

Re:the second dose is free (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 9 months ago | (#45224807)

You're forgetting the $600 minimum buy in from whatever Mac hardware allows you to run this OS.

If someone is upgrading to Snow Leopard from previous OS X, they already have the hardware. That being said, you can install OS X on a new PC if you have the right compatible hardware. Just don't expect it to be easy or trouble-free or supported.

Re:the second dose is free (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45225055)

That being said, you can install OS X on a new PC if you have the right compatible hardware. Just don't expect it to be easy or trouble-free or supported.

Or legal.

Re:the second dose is free (2, Interesting)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 9 months ago | (#45225307)

It's perfectly legal no matter what Apple says. Creating a business to redistribute like Psystar did isn't legal. A hobbyist should have full rights to create a hackintosh.

Re:the second dose is free (1)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 9 months ago | (#45225231)

It's not free. It's bundled with expensive hardware.

No. It's free. It's bundled with expensive hardware. As it so happens, with expensive hardware that is worth the money.

Re:the second dose is free (1)

atlasdropperofworlds (888683) | about 9 months ago | (#45225319)

Actually it's more like $300 to $1300, depending on which hardware you bought to run it on.

Re:the second dose is free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224157)

If I remember it was $20 US or thereabouts. I'd be interested to know how that can be classed as a 'bundle'?

Re:the second dose is free (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224359)

Well, to the kind of people who settle for Linux, twenty bucks can be a month's worth of ramen noodles.

Re:the second dose is free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224425)

Hah! "Settle" for Linux?

I have a paid for copy of Windows 8 (which, BTW, I have not even booted into used for over 6 months). I have two Apple laptops (one from work, and an older one for home). Despite this, my primary home computer is a desktop running Debian. Guess which OS I prefer... yep, Linux. The user experience for me is far better than Windows (i.e., there is no contest there), and overall better than OSX (OSX does have some advantages, but overall I pick Debian).

(And ramen is too unhealthy for me... Oatmeal is cheaper and tastes far better!)

$20 bundle (1)

themushroom (197365) | about 9 months ago | (#45224409)

...compared to free,

Today's caviat is that I admit not knowing how much OS X 10.8 cost off the shelf. Do know that previous versions cost well above that, and when I was looking up 10.4 for a blueberry iMac it cost more than 10.8.

Also, I stick by what I was trying to say: any price > free and thus the whole premise of competition regarding a free upgrade to an OS you paid for (X 10.9 or Win 8.1) to the truly free-of-charge is kind of silly.

Re:$20 bundle (1)

lowen (10529) | about 9 months ago | (#45225241)

...compared to free,

Today's caviat is that I admit not knowing how much OS X 10.8 cost off the shelf.

I paid $19.99 for both Lion and Mountain Lion, straight from the App Store (need to be at 10.6.8 first). Snow Leopard was a bit more expensive; I think it might have been $29.99 for the DVD. Leopard and prior were (and are, on eBay at least) quite a bit more than that.

Re:the second dose is free (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224197)

$20?

Re:the second dose is free (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45225391)

$20?

Awwww. But I wanted a peanut!

Re:the second dose is free (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | about 9 months ago | (#45224443)

There was a time when Apple users did not pay for upgrades and they still never got over 10% market share.

Re:the second dose is free (1)

cheesybagel (670288) | about 9 months ago | (#45224467)

The answer was fairly obvious. Plainly overpriced hardware, glued together parts (good luck decoupling the monitor on your desktop), plus Steve Jobs quirks like high res black and white screens over low res color screens, or his penchant for fanless computers even if it meant reduced lifetime or melting components, etc.

It's not Free Software (2)

Arker (91948) | about 9 months ago | (#45224891)

It's not Free Software, it's just a free binary. Really says it all.

Whiplash Article (4, Funny)

Rob Riggs (6418) | about 9 months ago | (#45224115)

That article jerked around from one disjoint topic to another, and appears to have been written by someone who is functionally illiterate in computer technology.

Come on... (3, Insightful)

wbr1 (2538558) | about 9 months ago | (#45224117)

It is 'free' if you own OSX. Therefore it is a free update. In terms of the number of changes it may be larger, but in actuality it is no different than windows 8.1 or a Service Pack.

Open source (free as in speech), as a different beast entirely, and we are doing very well, TYVM.

Re:Come on... (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about 9 months ago | (#45224167)

It's free if you own a sufficiently new preceding version of OSX. If your current version is too old, you have to buy an intermediate version, upgrade to that, then upgrade to that again. Odds are, however, that such a machine doesn't meet the system requirements anyway.

The power management changes are genuinely a Big Deal this time around. They've learned a lot from mobile. Be interesting to see if MS tries something similar in 8.2.

Re:Come on... (1)

FreonTrip (694097) | about 9 months ago | (#45224299)

Timer coalescing's been a feature in x86/x86_64 versions of Windows since Windows 7, and was added to Linux a bit before that.

Re:Come on... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224455)

Not only that, you need reasonably new hardware. All those early Intel 64bit quad xeons have been dropped off the OS lists and rendered non upgradable by Apple. They do this with each OS release, the next level of hardware mysteriously gets abandoned. There is absolutely no excuse for mac pros to not handle an OS update, it's fscking UNIX for god's sake. Intel Macs are no different from PCs other than some built in obsolescence and non-standard PCIe requirements. Apple had to do this to ensure their hardware wasn't identical to generic PCs so people buy their hardware that has rather high profit margins.

Not true. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224463)

You don't have to have an intermediate version, just Apple hardware. On the other hand, how you would install it without an earlier version of OS X already installed [or getting it from a friend], I have no idea.

So it's true that there is a huge difference between just supporting their hardware versus releasing OS X on their website for anyone to attempt to use.

Re:Come on... (2)

gnasher719 (869701) | about 9 months ago | (#45225337)

It's free if you own a sufficiently new preceding version of OSX. If your current version is too old, you have to buy an intermediate version, upgrade to that, then upgrade to that again. Odds are, however, that such a machine doesn't meet the system requirements anyway.

Actually, no. You must own an Apple branded computer (that's the license requirement), and obviously you must have a Mac that is capable of running 10.9. In that case, it is free. If your current OS is too old to support the app store, it's a bit more difficult to get it, but not impossible. (Basically, ask someone else to download the installer for you and put it on a memory stick).

Re:Come on... (1)

Theaetetus (590071) | about 9 months ago | (#45224489)

It is 'free' if you own OSX. Therefore it is a free update. In terms of the number of changes it may be larger, but in actuality it is no different than windows 8.1 or a Service Pack.

It's more like an upgrade from Windows 7 or XP to Windows 8 - it's a complete OS installer, not a mere upgrade, and you can do a clean install [mashable.com] .

Re:Come on... (2)

H0p313ss (811249) | about 9 months ago | (#45225039)

Exactly, it's an apples and oranges example.

And the oranges are free... :)

Wrong Mavericks (5, Informative)

Sockatume (732728) | about 9 months ago | (#45224119)

The S is in there for a reason.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mavericks_(location) [wikipedia.org]

Re:Wrong Mavericks (0, Troll)

Score Whore (32328) | about 9 months ago | (#45224187)

If you've spent much time on the site, you'd realize that they operate with a very special kind of stupid around here. And by special kind of stupid, I mean about 1,000x the normal human amount.

Re:Wrong Mavericks (5, Funny)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about 9 months ago | (#45224353)

If you've spent much time on the site, you'd realize that they operate with a very special kind of stupid around here. And by special kind of stupid, I mean about 1,000x the normal human amount.

Yes, but it is free and open source stupidity; so that if you have some special need you can adapt it to your particular use of stupid. Some folks simply use it as is with a pre-existing build that they can cut and paste in replies, others make minor modifications and some fork it into a whole new type of stupidity because they think they have a better way to be stupid.

Re:Wrong Mavericks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224441)

Apple said their new operating software generations would be named after places in California that have inspired them.

I can't wait to see all the great new features coming in OS X San Berdu

Re:Wrong Mavericks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224371)

The newest version of OS X may be gratis for Apple hardware buyers, but it's notably far from the original, (literally) un-branded sense of "mavericks." [wikipedia.org]

They should have saved the confusion and just gone with the alternate term hairy dick[2]

2^ Adams, Ramon F. (1989). The Old-Time Cowhand. University of Nebraska Press. p. 157. ISBN 978-0-8032-5917-1.

Re:Wrong Mavericks (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224529)

That's a quantitative difference, not a qualitative difference.

Re:Wrong Mavericks (1)

Vitriol+Angst (458300) | about 9 months ago | (#45224499)

You are expecting journalists with a passing knowledge of technology to research things before they express opinions?

And why is Apple starting to copy Microsoft on using Locations to name the OS rather than Cats? We haven't run out of cat species have we? I was hoping for Ocelot or something for the next release.

God forbid we get Mac OS Longhorn -- no the animal, not the location!

Real surfer here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224569)

It is somewhat of a tradition that surf spot names appear "plural", but this is usually just a bastardization of the possessive form. For example, "Mavericks" really should be "Maverick's", but for some reason the apostrophe just wasn't cool enough. Hence we get "Mavericks", which appears plural to the untrained eye, but is actually possessive.

In the end, it doesn't have to make sense. If other surfers repeat it, it sticks.

Re:Real surfer here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224723)

Correct, it's really "Maverick's"

However, dropping the apostrophe isn't "surfing tradition", it's the government (USGS) policy for place names. For example, "Pikes Peak".

Re:Real surfer here (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224981)

I assure you, 99.99% of surfers are completely unaware of that. They simply don't pay much attention to grammar.

Free as in mousetrap cheese. (5, Funny)

SchroedingersCat (583063) | about 9 months ago | (#45224145)

OSX - free as in mousetrap cheese.

Re:Free as in mousetrap cheese. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224243)

Thanks! That was my first thought as well but your choice of words are just great!

Re:Free as in mousetrap cheese. (1)

pete-classic (75983) | about 9 months ago | (#45224919)

A couple of points of fact.

1. You can run non-MacOS software on Mac hardware. (E.g. Windows, Linux.)
2. You can run MacOS on non-Apple hardware (though it is a violation of the license agreement).

I take your point, but I think it would be more apt to say "free as in bar mix". Yes, it's figured into the overall bill. Yes, it makes you want more of the product for sale. But it's not really a trap. More of a loss leader.

How anyone would think it's related to Linux? (0)

loonycyborg (1262242) | about 9 months ago | (#45224151)

They only offer UPGRADES for free? Then nothing changed, really. You'd still need to buy a Mac to use it legally. In fact it's kinda stupid OS updates were paid for in the first place.

Re:How anyone would think it's related to Linux? (4, Interesting)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | about 9 months ago | (#45224503)

They only offer UPGRADES for free? Then nothing changed, really. You'd still need to buy a Mac to use it legally. In fact it's kinda stupid OS updates were paid for in the first place.

Yea, the question really wasn't that insightful since OSX and Linux really don't compete for the same user base; it's really a marketing shot at MS as well as a way to get people onto the new OS so as Apple decides to move in certain directions that can be assured much of their user base is on the latest OS.

Oddly enough, Apple has come full circle from its early Apple ][ days when every OS release was free; it wasn't until MacOS came out did they eventually start charging. I forget what release was the first paid update. Of course, many programs were the same way, HyperStudio for example let any user upgrade to the latest version for free. I wonder if Apple is thinking it is better to tie users into the least versions and to your software by giving it away so that you can make money on devices and services; and they're betting that keeping everyone up to date will bind them even tighter into their closed ecosystem.

Re:How anyone would think it's related to Linux? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224527)

Tell Redhat that. It does affect the GNU linux community after all!

Seriously, OS development is rather time consuming. It's unappreciated work and people expect it to be free and they expect it now. Linux, BSD or any other OS project developers get shit for not supporting their work. Apple only gave this away because Microsoft did it first. I expect OS X to become a third class citizen to iOS very soon anyway.

Re:How anyone would think it's related to Linux? (1)

coinreturn (617535) | about 9 months ago | (#45225269)

They only offer UPGRADES for free? Then nothing changed, really. You'd still need to buy a Mac to use it legally. In fact it's kinda stupid OS updates were paid for in the first place.

I know, right? I've upgraded for free from Windows 3.1, 98, ME, XP, Vista, 7, and 8, not!

Free OS X Is No Threat To Linux (3, Informative)

Savage-Rabbit (308260) | about 9 months ago | (#45224175)

Free OS X Is No Threat To Linux

Since Mavericks only runs on Apple hardware unless you hack the OS, I'd say that's pretty obvious so why get up on a soap box and make noise about it? And just for the record the OS X core components [wikipedia.org] are open source.

Re:Free OS X Is No Threat To Linux (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45225117)

why get up on a soap box and make noise about it?

He didn't. Some clueless "journalist" interrupted Linus's life to ask him about it.

Where is the Tuppe666 remark bashing Apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224185)

Apple is closed! Google is open!

Re:Where is the Tuppe666 remark bashing Apple (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224793)

Hosts files! Etc!

Pointless point (4, Insightful)

King_TJ (85913) | about 9 months ago | (#45224239)

The fact is, most Linux users get interested in installing/using it because they've got (typically older) hardware in front of them that they'd like to make useful without spending more money on it.

The only Mac system users I've encountered who ran Linux were using very old "legacy" Macs that have long since been abandoned by Apple with software updates or support.

So generally, the use-cases for OS X or Linux just don't really cross much.

Re:Pointless point (0)

jedidiah (1196) | about 9 months ago | (#45224457)

The value of being able to avoid hardware with a fruity logo is far more interesting than using "older" hardware.

Really? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224267)

How is an OS that one has to initially pay for and only runs on proprietary hardware going to be a threat to a freely downloadable OS that runs on commodity hardware?
 
No, the true issue here is the quality of the software that runs on the OS, not the OS itself.

Silly article (3, Insightful)

onyxruby (118189) | about 9 months ago | (#45224331)

Free OS X doesn't compete with Linux except on a very limited basis - it's free.

Unless you build a hackintosh and blatantly violate the license you can't even install OS X anywhere except a Mac. It's very distinctly not open source and arguably just as proprietary as Windows. It's free, but only if you purchased the hardware to begin with, and Apple has never been accused of making price competitive hardware by anybody except a fanboy.

You can certainly run Linux on your Mac, but that's a pretty limited subset of people to begin with. Considering the last Mac OS only cost $20 to begin with and you likely didn't have too many people holding out for cost reasons alone. In other words, the people that wanted to have the Mac hardware with Linux almost certainly made that move a while ago. This really doesn't impact much of anyone.

Re:Silly article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224713)

and blatantly violate the license**

**License clause invalid in some juridictions

Re:Silly article (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45225163)

Which jurisdictions? Apple is the copyright holder, so you can't legally copy their bits without their permission.

Just because an OS upgrade is free... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224361)

... doesn't mean the software that runs on that OS is free.

No overlap in audience (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224373)

I think the people who use Macs, and the people who use Linux, have very different goals for their computer use. Mac users typically want multimedia and online sharing, while Linux users are software developers. True, some Linux users may use Macs because they're UNIX laptops (I'm guilty) but they aren't really the content consumption/cloud sharing/app buying audience Apple is milking. Apple doesn't care about the upgrade, because they want people to buy stuff online.

desktop (3, Insightful)

globaljustin (574257) | about 9 months ago | (#45224439)

When I read about the OS X Maverick's free release...

I didn't think about how it would affect Linux on the desktop at all...thought never crossed my mind...

Linux is just irrelevant to the desktop market. Is that harsh? Not intended to be...I still hate M$ and think Apple is a little fruity...

But srsly...after 8 years on /. reading ridiculous thread after thread debating Debian vs Red Hat or w/e (try Gentoo!)...

The open source world just hasnt' evolved the maturity to make a universal desktop OS **that people use**

It's totally possible...it *will* happen...but Linux destop fanbois need to rethink some shit

Re:desktop (2)

jedidiah (1196) | about 9 months ago | (#45224617)

> Linux is just irrelevant to the desktop market.

So is MacOS really. This was true even when it was competing with MS-DOS of all things.

So any "helpful suggestions" will likely be total nonsense.

Computing history is littered with the corpses of companies that conformed to whatever "advice" you care to come up with.

Re:desktop (2)

globaljustin (574257) | about 9 months ago | (#45224753)

So is MacOS really. This was true even when it was competing with MS-DOS of all things.

we should probably just say "The desktop market is irrelevant" right?

that's what always got me, going way back to the olden days...you brought up DOS...I remember when Windows 3.x came out I really didnt' understand what the big deal was...it was just a staging area to run the actual programs you wanted to use...that's what the OS does (heh not saying its easy to make one!)

i love that an Open Source desktop option exists...if i had disposable income i'd donate...i'll even say that Linux killed Microsoft...

none of that contradicts that the OS is mostly a functional, boring, workmanlike piece of software in the computing world...it's like an actual desk in that way...

we couldn't work w/o them, and people can spend millions on it...but it's really just a surface to do other things

advice: don't base your profit model on selling desktop operating software ;)

Re:desktop (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45225461)

Keep posting more anti Apple posts in this article. You'll feel happier.

Re:desktop (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224815)

Even Linus himself has expressed his frustration at developers that focus on fancy new "UX" stuff and ignore making standards that everyone can use. I think it was in that "Linus thinks SteamOS is great for the same reasons everyone else does" fluff piece that ran a day or two ago. It was a notable quote and something of a rebuke of a vocal portion of the Linux community. It seems that every week there's a new UI layer, windowing engine, or other fancy graphic enhancement that is incompatible with everything in existence, and Linus made it pretty clear it gets on his nerves.

How can someone... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224461)

...confuse prohibition (no beer) with fascism (control of speech and thought)? This is free as in beer, not free as in speech.

Linus and pissing matches (3, Insightful)

sl4shd0rk (755837) | about 9 months ago | (#45224523)

In my recollection, Linus has never been much for getting worked up in fanbois pissing matches (pertaining to platform "greatness" or market share) What gets him riled up is stupid brain-dead code stupidly done by stupid people for stupid reasons. That stuff he'll take issue with regardless and argue about forever.

Open Apple (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224561)

Its not a threat until Apple starts to un-tether its OS from its hardware. If Apple were to have the driver database that Linux has, then Linus may sing a different tune.

Apple hardware only (1)

Nethead (1563) | about 9 months ago | (#45224611)

So you're saying that it won't be free for my Franklin Ace [oldcomputers.net] ?

Umm (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224621)

In fact, one of the reasons Torvalds uses the term open source instead of free software because there is a difference between open and free, he said.

While Apple's Mavericks update might be free it is not open source and people still need expensive hardware to use the OS, he said.

I think RMS' head just exploded

What does the name have to do with anything? (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 9 months ago | (#45224645)

Apple has always said "Mavericks" is named after the surfing site not animals, not persons. Just like Longhorn was not named after the animal but a bar like Whistler.

Why ask Linus? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224695)

Isn't OS X BSD based and not Linux?

Debugging brick wall. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45224701)

Price isn't the issue for me. The issue is that with Linux, you can always dig deeper when debugging and hacking. With Windows, OSX, or any other system without full source, the debugging will hit a brick wall at system calls.

What people have to realize is that... (4, Insightful)

bennomatic (691188) | about 9 months ago | (#45224715)

...Apple does not have to fail for Linux to succeed, nor visa versa.

The comments on this thread remind me of heated conversations I had as a 13 year old, when my friends and I couldn't agree on which was better, the Commodore 64, the Apple IIe or the Atari 800. Anyone who's read my previous comments probably knows that I was firmly in the Commodore 64 camp.

Re:What people have to realize is that... (1)

billcarson (2438218) | about 9 months ago | (#45224985)

But the C64 disk drive was terribly slow. And expensive, I might add.

Re:What people have to realize is that... (1)

H0p313ss (811249) | about 9 months ago | (#45225443)

This is why I try to keep my hand in all the pots at the same time... I say try, I just can't justify the cost of having enough hardware to be mucking around with iOS, Android and Linux on tablets at the same time.

I should just give in and get me one of those cheap nexus 7 tablets and accept that it won't be a production system in my dirty little hands.

Same ol same ol Microsoft. (1)

Vince6791 (2639183) | about 9 months ago | (#45225189)

Microsoft is a joke when it comes to licensing their products. Why couldn't they just release the Windows 8.1 pro for $99 3 license. Instead we get standard, pro, pro packs, family packs, upgrade 8.1 to 8.1 pro, etc.... Make it fucking simple for the regular joe. I can't blame people(not into gaming, adobe products, or windows development) for leaving MS for Linux which is $0 cost. Now, people complaining of issues when upgrading from 8 to 8.1. They should of allowed their customers who bought a windows 8 copy to download a full 8.1 ISO instead of the upgrade broken path. Shitheads. Corporations always ripping of their fucking customers, just ask Time Warner Cable.

 

Are they actually competitors? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 9 months ago | (#45225267)

Is there anybody out there that is actually debating between a Mac or a Linux box? It really seems like two separate markets.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

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>