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!

O'Reilly Thinks Mac OS X May Be the 'Next Big Thing'

pudge posted more than 12 years ago | from the next-big-thing-in-a-nutshell dept.

OS X 99

Arkham writes "Tim O'Reilly gave a speech at WWDC called 'Watching the Alpha Geeks: Mac OS X and the next big thing', in which he suggested that Apple is doing the right things to be a big success. Specifically, Apple should continue to 1) adhere to standards, 2) keep things small and modular, and 3) document as you go -- man pages and RFCs. Anyone who has used Mac OS X can see that Apple is trying hard to be a good open-source citizen (for example, the new zero-config Rendezvous technology). The question is, at what point will these efforts pay off (more users, and thus more money)?" What is this "money" you speak of?

cancel ×

99 comments

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

Erm (1)

pumpkin2146 (317171) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495742)

Typo in the title ... ffs ...

/me hopes it is just some bad pun he doesn't get.

Yeah, Bay Be! (1, Funny)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495752)

O'Reilly Thinks Mac OS X Bay Be the 'Next Big Thing'
Posted by pudge on 2002.05.10 11:30
from the next-big-thing-in-a-nutshell dept.

... Pudge, those letters aren't even adjacent. What's your balfunction, boy!?

Re:Yeah, Bay Be! (3, Funny)

djtack (545324) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497577)

Pudge, those letters aren't even adjacent.

Obviously, he's using a dvorak keyboard, where they are adjacent.

Re:Yeah, Bay Be! (-1)

Serial Troller (556155) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499953)

Well, I don't know anything about your imaginary made-upgobbledygook keyboards, but on real boards, the B and the M are not adjacent.

Re:Yeah, Bay Be! (1)

TotallyUseless (157895) | more than 12 years ago | (#3501154)

john dvorak sucks, i cant believe he has his own keyboard!

Yo (-1)

Chinese Karma Whore (560174) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495756)

I wholeheartedly agree
Just wait for version 10.3
OS X Bay-be!

Never tried... (4, Insightful)

Komarosu (538875) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495764)

Never tried OSX yet, but i've heard too many good things to let it just slide by the and not be used. Hence this week im gonna grab a G4 from work to have a try on :)

Anyway apple are playing the Darwin core, and gettin the Open Source community to take a look at it...get the support of the people and you will have a excellent OS...linux for example :)

Re:Never tried... (2)

nexex (256614) | more than 12 years ago | (#3509124)

where do you work that you can just 'grab a g4' and use it?

i just wish osx ran on the piles of x86 hardware i have :)

In case the article gets slashdotted!!1! - Part 1 (-1)

hettb (569863) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495769)

Tim O'Reilly, CEO of O'Reilly & Associates, took center stage for a lunch time keynote at WWDC in San Jose. Tim's talk, "Watching the Alpha Geeks: OS X and the next big thing" was a stroll through lessons from the past leading to successful trends of the future.

Tim praised Apple's approach to building Mac OS X, not because he was speaking at WWDC, but because Apple appears to be following a proven positive approach to the design of its Unix-based platform -- characteristics shared by another modern success story: the Apache Web server. Tim's three keys to survival are:

  1. Adhere to standards.
  2. Keep things small and modular.
  3. Document as you go -- man pages and RFCs

He urged Apple developers to "think platform, not just application -- build in extensibility and interoperability," and to "play well with others -- it breeds success and you'll have more fun."

The one-hour talk wrapped up with questions from the audience. My favorite was, "If you had three wishes from Steve Jobs, what would they be?" Tim responded:

  • Keep speaking out on the fair-use issues that he's been addressing.
  • Keep doing the cool stuff because we're enjoying Apple's innovation.
  • Keep playing well with others by adhering to existing standards.

As a side note, the biggest applause of the talk was when Tim praised Steve Jobs' acceptance speech at the Grammys where he said that people are entitled to fair use of the music they legally purchase.

Tim's messages seemed to resonate well with the WWDC audience. At one point, after Tim had finished his talk and the applause died down, one attendee remarked, "Man, that talk was dense. My head's spinnin'."

Late breaking note: Apple has posted an article [apple.com] about Tim's talk on their WWDC site.

Other WWDC weblogs: Cafe Computing Goes Triple Shot [oreillynet.com] Rendezvous Is French for JXTA [oreillynet.com] Apple Not Resting on Its Mac OS X Laurels [oreillynet.com]

Derrick Story [slashdot.org] is the managing editor of the O'Reilly Network.

In case the article gets slashdotted!!1! - Part 2 (-1)

hettb (569863) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495787)

Tim O'Reilly on the Future of Mac OS X Computing

More than six hundred WWDC attendees listened to noted publisher Tim O'Reilly explain how the rules are changing for software development, and why the open source world and Mac OS X are where developers should be looking in the future.

In a talk titled, "Watching the Alpha Geeks," O'Reilly stated that disruptive innovation is again changing the computing landscape, as innovators and hackers are using the Web, wireless communication and built-in services to push aside the old paradigms. According to O'Reilly, information is being distributed more widely, reused in new ways, and applications are being built into the platform. O'Reilly painted a picture where there is less focus on ownership and more on letting the user determine an evolving "architecture of participation."

The founder and president of O'Reilly and Associates, and a long-time advocate of open source distribution, O'Reilly has become a strong advocate of the new Macintosh operating system, stating, "Mac OS X is a fantastic platform, with the future built-in." O'Reilly admitted he is "thrilled with what I see from Apple," from its (Apple's) commitment to open source software, and Steve Jobs' championing fair use rights for consumers, to the announcements at this conference on the new features included in Jaguar.

As a sign of his company's commitment to the Mac OS X platform, O'Reilly highlighted the upcoming conference on Mac OS X that will be hosted by O'Reilly and Associates in September.

Mac OS X has also been a strong business opportunity for O'Reilly & Associates-their title, "Mac OS X: The Missing Manual," written by long-time Mac advocate David Pogue, has been the best-selling new title for O'Reilly & Associates since 1993.

Quoting widely from his favorite books and personal contacts, O'Reilly confirmed that early adopters and industry leaders are adopting Mac OS X, including leading experts in the world of Perl, Java and bioinformatics. Because Apple understands and practices interoperability, extensibility, adheres to standards, and has learned to cooperate with major players such as Microsoft and AOL, O'Reilly sees Apple as a "next-generation player" in the new paradigm. In addition, he pointed to the new features in the upcoming Jaguar release as promising to strengthen Apple's viability in this new market. He emphasized that the integration of web services, expanded wireless features, and the new components of iChat and Rendezvous are adding to Mac OS X's already large set of services.

With these services as a reference, O'Reilly urged urged developers to "think platform, not just application" as they move from the shrink-wrapped, stand-alone model of software distribution to open source, interoperability, and web-based services.


Tim O'Reilly recommended the following books for further reading:
Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace by Lawrence Lessig, published by Basic Books

The UNIX Programming Environment by Brian W. Kernighan and Rob Pike, published by Prentice Hall Computer Books

Mac OS X: The Missing Manual by David Pogue, published by O'Reilly and Associates.

The Cathedral and the Bazaar : Musings on Linux and Open Source by an Accidental Revolutionary, by Eric S. Raymond and Bob Young, published by O'Reilly and Associates

The Structure of Scientific Revolutions, by Thomas S. Kuhn, published by the University of Chicago Press.

Building Wireless Community Networks: Building the Wireless Web, by Rob Flickenger, published by O'Reilly and Associates

Learning UNIX for Mac OS X, by Dave Taylor and Jerry Peek, published by O'Reilly and Associates

money? (0)

CheezeyWheezy (530001) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495811)

Apple isn't in it for the money.

What is this "money" you speak of... (4, Funny)

Eagle7 (111475) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495814)

I am just a simple Caveman... your money and technology frighten and confuse me. But there is one thing I can understand - user interfaces with built in Alpha blending are l33t.

Re:What is this "money" you speak of... (2)

BusterB (10791) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495869)

Wow, I really miss Phil Hartman..

Re:What is this "money" you speak of... (1)

notfancy (113542) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497402)

I do too...Just today I was watching an old (1992, I think) rerun of SNL...<sob>

Wives are evil.

My problem with OS X (3, Interesting)

Hemi Rodner (570284) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495827)

Yes, OS X has real multitasking, got a unix core, has transparent menus and it's nice and all, but unlike OS 9 and below, it does not support keyboard input of right-to-left languages (Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi, any other languages?)

As a result, it's uncommon to see people in the middle east who use OS X. Those people still use the now dead [slashdot.org] OS 9, or more likely, Windows.. (yes, how bad and evil MS are, I must admit they did a great thing when they forced everyone to use the unicode standard, which is harder to display, but makes sense in every other aspect - searching, sorting, etc)

Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi? (2, Interesting)

theolein (316044) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496014)

I know that Iran has no copyright laws, so MS doesn't earn a penny there. And although the major OS in the middle east is Windows, Linux is making good breakthroughs there. Companies like Hancom who develop explicitly with international users in mind (Asian, Middle east) are apparently quite popular.

Re:Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3499074)

I know that Iran has no copyright laws,

If this was true, wouldn't a lot of /.ers be moving there?

Re:Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi? (-1)

OsamaBinLager (532628) | more than 12 years ago | (#3500902)

God knows I want to. Once I get my degree.. pow, I'm outta here. Why hello you sexy Persian ladies, let's have some fun.

Re:Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3501908)

I would think hat a region with no copyright laws or lax copyright enforcement might be a reason to sell a an OS tied to a your own hardware platform.

Re:My problem with OS X (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3497134)

Yes, OS X has real multitasking, got a unix core, has transparent menus and it's nice and all, but unlike OS 9 and below, it does not support keyboard input of right-to-left languages (Hebrew, Arabic, Farsi, any other languages?)

To coin a joke I received via email recently... that's because Apple knows those languages won't be around much longer!

Re:My problem with OS X (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3498120)

To coin a joke I received via email recently

Really?

Did you send this joke to yourself, or did you mean "quote" instead of "coin"? Think before you speek, dipshit.

Re:My problem with OS X (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3497838)

I can't put out my name for obvious reasons, but I can tell you that Jaguar will support Right to Left languages, including Hebrew and Arabic.

Jaguar will support RTL languages? (1)

Hemi Rodner (570284) | more than 12 years ago | (#3503361)

So why isn't it mentioned in the site? I wish they had more details in their "new features" list.

Re:My problem with OS X (1)

ablair (318858) | more than 12 years ago | (#3505049)

Indeed, right-to-left language support is currently very weak on OS X but this is rumored to change with Jaguar. Certainly there's been talk of it already from Apple people before (eg. Peter Lofting @ the ATypI Conference [atypi.org] Copenhagen last year) You can of course use many right-to-left languages on MacOS 9 and with XWindows on OSX already (eg. AbiWord [abisource.com] ). From an implementation perspective, because of system-wide Unicode support it's certainly easier than ever - just get the language sets out the door at Apple. Additional language support should be quicker than with pre-OSX systems, and more uniform. Nice to see an another international ISO technology that Apple and Xerox started [unicode.org] coming back to help them. I never cease to be amazed at how innovative those two companies really were back in the 'day. And to a greater or lesser extent still are.

Re:My problem with OS X (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3558705)

Who gives a f.ck about people in the Middle East? Except the Jews, of course, but most of them are smart enough to learn English.

Documentation (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3495919)

Actually, if Apple could be convinced to write developer documentation it would be a blessing.

Too many APIs are are shoddily documented at present.

Re:Documentation (3, Informative)

Duck_Taffy (551144) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497603)

There is a new version of the Apple Developer's Toolkit, currently in beta, which has complete Cocoa documentation, so just wait a bit, and quit yer whining. I know they're still working on carbon docs, but in case you didn't catch the WWDC 2002 keynote highlights, Apple doesn't want developers using CFM anymore.

Re:Documentation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3500320)

Ummm.

CFM != Carbon

Carbon is the API that most people are using, or certainly at least most of the commercial Mac developers that are moving over from Classic - and this is the API that is woefully underdocumented.

So even if CFM is deprecated, lots of the developers important to the platform are going to be doing Carbon Mach-O apps.

Re:Documentation (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3501361)

Ugh. Compared to Cocoa, Carbon & associated friends stink worse than the inside of a bantha. Anyone who is seriously considering developing anything for the Macintosh would be well advised not to do it in Carbon. Apple agrees with me, as you know by now.

Money? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3495936)

What is this "money" you speak of?

I'm sure Apple is saying the same thing.

Where Apple is going (5, Insightful)

theolein (316044) | more than 12 years ago | (#3495992)

A few (obviuosly biased since I'm typing this in in OSX) points about Apple and OSX and it's relation to OSS.

1. Apple has become very successful over the last few years because they started catering for those consumers who don't like to fight with the computer and who have difficulty comprehending computers. Most of us who have been at this for years with various OS's and computers (WinXXX, Mac OS XX, Linux, BSD , x86, PPC etc) have become used to working out how the things work. We all have that certain contempt for users who have difficulty comprehending how to use a contextual menu, a config file or the labyrinth of MS control panels. Apple addressed this with the iMacs, iBooks and Mac OSX IMO, by providing a simple "dumbed down" UI (and this will go even further with the next release of OSX, which has a "simple finder" option) and by continuing to use single button mice. Until you've seen a friend who uses windows and look at astonishment at you as you use the contextual menu, you won't be able to appreciate this.
2.Apple made a very wise decision to mix it's OS with an "OpenSource" core (Yes I know) and a propietry GUI. It gives Apple plus points with O'Reilly for instance and some possibilities for dvelopers to influence where the OS is going. At the same time Apple remains in control of the OS and GUI and can concentrate efforts and resources where they are needed.
3. Using NeXT's technology was a big bonus, because ObjC is not that much harder than Java and quite a lot easier than C++ (although many will still use C++).
4.Apple does actually sometimes seem to listen to their users (Spring loaded folders coming back) and does actually seem to bring useful innovations (Rendevouz, Ink, Firewire)into an industry which is scared of taking risks.
5.Also very importantly, and this is not brought up that often, Apple doesn't have the reputation of absolute ruthlessness that Microsoft does. Make no mistake, Apple is still a business and will go over the occasional body (Retailers) but compared to MS they are angels. They seem to have realised that brutal EULA'S only make for bad press and bad attitudes. Apple doesn't care if you run PPC Linux next to Mac OSX and doesn't care if you run an MS emulator, because you bought the hardware.
6. Apple's marketing is an order of magnitude better than MS'. Apple almost never brings technical details into the advertising and relies on celver associations. Compare this to the MS OfficeXP campaign where they showed the smart tabs on the shoulder of a naked woman. What were you supposed to think? OfficeXP = built in porn?
7.Apple does however have one extremely week point, and this is the CPU. NO amount of "Myth" marketing makes up for the fact that they are very far behind in terms of processor peformance. Their reliance on a floundering company, Motorola, for the core of their machines is dangerous. There is still no sign of the mythical G5 and nothing has been said about it for the near future. IMO Apple would be better off buying the PPC area from Motorola, but what do I know.

Re:Where Apple is going (3, Informative)

feldsteins (313201) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496553)

Apple has become very successful over the last few years

Well if by "few" you mean "twenty" then yeah :)

Apple addressed this with the iMacs, iBooks and Mac OSX IMO, by providing a simple "dumbed down" UI

Um...Again it sounds like you are unaware that Apple has been all about ease-of-use for the last two decades.

(and this will go even further with the next release of OSX, which has a "simple finder" option)

Yet again...this feature has been available for years in previous versions of the Mac OS. Quite useful, I'm told, for very young children.

Read what I wrote. (3, Insightful)

theolein (316044) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497449)

"Well if by "few" you mean "twenty" then yeah :)"

Apple was doing very badly in the mid '90s and losing a lot of money and customers until Jobs turned the company around. He did this mostly with the iMac at the time. He refined and simplified the product line which also helped a lot and introduced OSX which has done more to get users of other OS's to switch to Macs than any other previous OS (which tended to do the opposite)

"Um...Again it sounds like you are unaware that Apple has been all about ease-of-use for the last two decades"

OF course I know this, and agree that the classic Mac OS was easy to use. But the OS was very unstable and crash prone and quite backward. I sort of include not having to reboot your Mac three or four times a day under ease of use.

"Yet again...this feature has been available for years in previous versions of the Mac OS. Quite useful, I'm told, for very young children.
"
Again, I know this. I was referring to OSX, which hasn't had this until now.

OSX is the future on Macs. Classic Mac OS is not.

Re:Read what I wrote. (1, Offtopic)

feldsteins (313201) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498381)

I not only read what you wrote, I freakin' quoted you. Repeatedly. Basically what you're doing now is saying "what I wrote isn't quite what I meant," which may be true but isn't my problem. Perhaps you didn't mean to give the impression that you thought Apple just sprang up from nowhwere two years ago. Perhaps you didn't mean to give the impression that you thought Apple's present sucess is the only sucess they've had to speak of. But you did give that impression quite clearly. Be more careful next time.

And now you've been modded up a point for denying it. Consider yourself fortunate.

Re:Read what I wrote. (1, Offtopic)

theolein (316044) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499280)

Wow! You tell me to consider myself fortunate for trying to make a comment on Apples present success. Do you think the word "present success" has anything to do with what was happening to Apple in the mid '90s under Scully, Spindler or Amelio? This is 2002 and not 1995. The company has changed, as has the OS. I was trying to be somewhat positive and don't really understand your need to attack me. But if you need it and it solves some of your problems -fine.

Re:Read what I wrote. (0, Offtopic)

feldsteins (313201) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499855)

I invite you to examine yourself, man. I didn't come into this with a chip on my shoulder. The chip appeared when you replied to me.

But whatever. No hard feelings here. Misunderstandings maybe, and a dead thread besides. See ya round.

Re:Where Apple is going (2, Informative)

EddydaSquige (552178) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496696)

The latest issue of Macworld has a short blurb about the G5 (near the end of an article on the new Ghz chips). Apparently Motorola does sell G5's for embedded systems but has no imedate plans for G5 on the Mac. But they are out there.

Re:Where Apple is going (1)

lookitsbob (578811) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496795)

I usually give apple credit when it comes to innovation, but Windows XP already has handwriting recognition, so OSX has just finally caught up.

Re:Where Apple is going (2)

feldsteins (313201) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496872)

Apple brought this technology to market years ago in their Newton product. Nice try though :)

Re:Where Apple is going (3, Informative)

blakespot (213991) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497008)

Inkwell is based on Newton HWR technology. The 'Rosetta' print recognizer on the Newton 2.x devices, written in-house by Apple, has yet to be surpassed in the world of HWR technology. The second best I've seen is Calligrapher, originally written by Paragraph, who wrote the cursive recognier on the Newton 2.x devices. Today's Calligrapher is still no match for the 5+ year old Rosetta HWR engine.

Apple need not "catch up" with MS on this one...

(Reminiscent of MS's ClearType sub-pixeling technology. It was seen first on the Apple II [grc.com] , yet MS claims it as their own technology.)


blakespot

OSX always had HR technology (2)

theolein (316044) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497512)

If you restrict the topic to Mac OSX only and exclude Newtons, WinCE etc OSX has had the technology since the days of the Developers Preview releases. In the public beta days, just before OSX 10.0 came out Apple announced that it had "developed" handwriting recognition for the OS (No, I can't remember where, possibly Maccentral archives?) but didn't include it in the product at the time. The lack of tablet drivers and applications made it completely useless at the time. In XP it is also useless unless you have a tablet or a TabletPC. I assume that Apple will release it's own version of a tabletPC this year sometime.

Re:Where Apple is going (1)

BitGeek (19506) | more than 12 years ago | (#3504080)

Every point you made was excellent, except for the last one.

The only "myth" about performance is that the speed of the processor is the speed of its clock. this is false. Given that a PowerPC does so many instructions in a given clock cycle, its very easy for an 800MHz PPC chip to exceed the performance of a 1.8GHz Intel chip. (And I'm an intel share holder, but not a motorola one. I know where the money is, but I recognize that the product that makes the most money is not the better one, paralleling the OS world.)

Look a the distributed.net results. Look an any reasonable, rational comparison.

Try to encode MPEG -2 in real time on a PC box, then try it on a Mac. What will you see?

If you run software that actually uses the PowerPC's processing capabilities, you have the fastest X on the planet. Apple ships the fastest laptop on the planet (even more so since a 1GHz laptop using Intel actually runs at 250MHz when on battery power.) The fastest desktop for the price, etc. etc.

Also, I heard that SGI was goign to the PowerPC, but I have not been able to confirm that rumor .

The competition is dying-- alpha which got far less done per a clock than the intel, is dead. AMD can barely keep afloat, and has no path out of the position of depending on Intel, MIPs is dead. Even Merced seems stillborn. PA-RISC is dead. UltraSparc seems dead.

All of these processors were killed by the either the market control of Intel, or the speed superiority of Motorola. Many who relied on them switched to Intel hardware, rather than PowerPC, but the PowerPC still rules the power domain.

Re:Where Apple is going (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3544803)

Look an any reasonable, rational comparison.

Anything using double precision (90% of all scientific software) absolutely crawls on the PowerPC.

Also, for single precision you could compare the ATLAS linear algebra packages (BLAS) which is heavily used by other programs. There are both Altivec cores for PowerPC and SSE/SSE2 for x86, and the x86 actually outperforms PowerPC even in single precision.

In general, the PowerPC with Altivec is about the same speed as a Pentium with SSE, but when it comes to general compiled code the x86 is much faster, and double precision floating point is basically unuseable on PowerPC. G4 peaks at 1 Gflop while the P4 2.4 GHz can do 4.8 Gflop. The classical definition of "flop" is actually double precision floating point operation, so it's close to fraud by Apple to market the CPU as doing 8 Gflop without telling it is only single precision perfectly matched & vectorized multiply-add combinations.

Re:Where Apple is going (1)

Omega996 (106762) | more than 12 years ago | (#3559650)

double precision 'crawls' on the g4 because it uses the regular fp units, not the vector processors. an application would have to be modified to use the vector operations to get the speed boost from the altivec units, similar to the need for an application to be coded with the newer instructions to use SSE2. a lot of commercial software available doesn't take advantage of any sort of SIMD instruction for either ia32 or ppc.

apple finally published a paper on doing multiprecision floating point (octuple precision, in the paper) just recently using the altivec, but the amount of information available for correctly using the altivec isn't much, i grant.

one big difference between ia32 and ppc and altivec is that while ia32 have integer and flaoting point units, the ppc chips have integer, floating point, and vector processing units. SSE and SSE2 are performed in your fp units.

i'm not one of those hysterical people who insanely insists that the G4 is superior to everything, but i think a lot of software isn't optimized properly for altivec (especially when it's a port from the ia32 platform).

Apple Makes Insanely-Bad Input Devices (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3508862)

Apple does actually sometimes seem to listen to their users

But unfortunately, for more than 12 years [google.com] , Apple has been ignoring unix users who want Apple hardware with a usable keyboard... namely a Ctrl key to the left of the 'A', and/or the ability to re-map the CapsLock key on their keyboards.

Even though they now have a true Unix OS, Apple has still not satisfied unix users; their entire line of laptops still has horrible ADB keyboards. For more info, see this Slashdot post [slashdot.org] .

Re:Apple Makes Insanely-Bad Input Devices (2)

theolein (316044) | more than 12 years ago | (#3519869)

Not entirely true. Apple didn't have a unix system for a long time (A/UX was dropped many years ago in the early '90s) and all Macs these days have USB keyboards and mice.

From a 'Beta Geek' (5, Insightful)

Erasei (315737) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496084)

I am not really an Alpha Geek, more of a Beta Geek really. I am in software development, and use a Solaris workstatation with emacs, Perl, and MySQL, so I am all about OpenSource.


I do not hate Microsoft, nor do I worship Apple. I think MS could be a little more friendly, but business is business, as long as it's legal of course.


So, having said that, when I was in the market for a new laptop a few months back, I compared all of reasonable laptops on the market, regardless of who made it and what OS it ran.


I finally went with the 14.1 LCD'ed iBook for several reasons, and I can honestly say that I have not been unhappy with any feature, whether hardward or software, and that is saying something.


OS X is the best OS I have ever used. It has the darwin core so I can program while out of the office (I have apache, mysql, php, perl, and emacs, it's more of a server-top really). Plus you get the beautiful GUI front-end and excellent gaming support for when you need to relax.


All in all, the best OS I have ever used.

Apple Laptop Keyboards Unusable in GNU Emacs (& (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3508879)

I am in software development, and use a Solaris workstatation with emacs, Perl, and MySQL, so I am all about OpenSource.

Bzzzzt. I do not believe you.

Note: I might believe you if you told me that you started using computers relatively recently (since the early-mid 1990's), started on MS OSes, and never used a proper keyboard until you were horribly mistrained on an IBM PC AT keyboard (with the Ctrl key in the wrong place).

If you were a true emacs user, and/or a long-time Sun user, you would demand that the Ctrl key be to the left of the 'A' key, where it is ergonomically useful.

All Apple laptops still have ADB keyboards, and it is not possible to remap the CapsLock key. [slashdot.org] This makes it generally unusable for unix users.

Apple, a good open source citizen ? (1, Interesting)

bug1 (96678) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496270)

"Apple is trying hard to be a good open-source citizen"

What projects do they contribute open source code to ?

All ive heard is that they use *bsd code, do they improve and contribute the code upstream ?

What other projects do they contribute to ?

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3496480)

gcc, tcl, and apache just to name a few

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (2, Informative)

jasonwileymac.com (560445) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496609)

Maybe you should visit the Darwin Project [apple.com] page and learn about how much they have improved.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (3, Informative)

overunderunderdone (521462) | more than 12 years ago | (#3496775)

What projects do they contribute open source code to ?

All ive heard is that they use *bsd code, do they improve and contribute the code upstream ?


From what I have heard YES, apple has contributed code back to the projects they have used: gcc, apache, perl, freebsd, mysql, emacs, openssh etc.

Then of course there are their own projects that have been released under the APSL. There is a lot of debate about whether this license is "open source" or not. Whatever your opinion on it they have used it to release the Darwin OS, the Darwin Streaming Server (for streaming Quicktime content) OpenPlay (a network abstraction layer based on Apple's old NetSprockets technology) and HeaderDoc (A tool for generating HTML reference documentation from comments in C, C++ and Objective-C header files..)

emacs? (2)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497645)

Any chance of a Cocoa emacs or xemacs with variable width font support from Apple?

I don't like running emacs from the terminal, and running xemacs through the integrated X-Window system just shows how shoddy the fonts are that we've been tolerating for so many years :-(.

I'd even be willing to pay for that (although I shouldn't have admitted that or RMS would have me shot). I know the standard answer is to dive into the code and do it yourself, but I'm simply not familiar enough with emacs or x-windows internals to give it a shot.

D

Re:emacs? (2, Informative)

TTop (160446) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497732)

There's a pretty decent Cocoa-ized version of emacs 21.1 at http://www.porkrind.org/emacs [porkrind.org] .

I don't think it uses variable-width fonts, but it's better then the terminal version, IMHO.

Re:emacs? (2)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 12 years ago | (#3503906)

Hey, thanks!

Curiously enough, it can use variable width fonts, but they render in a similar way to Carbon applications instead of Cocoa - in other words, badly. So Optima (my favourite font when rendered well) still looks ugly, but Palatino isn't half bad.

Thanks for the link - it definitely helped get my MacOS X emacs use out of the stone age :-).

D

Re:emacs? (1)

Erik K. Veland (574016) | more than 12 years ago | (#3508977)

What about looking at BBEdit? [bbedit.com] It can do everything emacs can (and a lot more), and you can even set it to the emacs keybindings. It's carbon, but truly a coders dream of a GUI-text editor.

Re:emacs? (1)

BinxBolling (121740) | more than 12 years ago | (#3519391)

What about looking at BBEdit? [bbedit.com] It can do everything emacs can (and a lot more)

Forgive me if I find this hard to believe.

Re:emacs? (2)

Valdrax (32670) | more than 12 years ago | (#3574644)

As a long-time user of BBEdit who works with an expert emacs user, I'll have to scoff at that assertion. BBEdit is a wonderful text editor, but I've seen my coworker do some pretty amazing stuff with emacs without having to lift his fingers from the keyboard once. You can open UNIX shells in line with a window with a text file you have open. You can interpret LISP directly from within the editor. You can open and compare two or more files in the same window. Plus, there are a lot more applications with bindings for emacs in the UNIX world than there are made to work with BBEdit in the Mac world.

Personally, for actually editing files, I vastly prefer BBEdit, but emacs is definitely more of a comprehensive tool. All those features are the reason it's so huge and bloated as to have been nicknamed "Eight Megs And Constantly Swapping."

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (2)

dhovis (303725) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499183)

There is a lot of debate about whether this license is "open source" or not.

There is no debate about APSL being an "open source" licence. The source is available, it does not cost anything, and you can make changes. ESR and the OSI have certified it as such.

What the debate is about is whether or not it is a "free software" licence. RMS and the FSF have rejected APSL from their certification because they don't like some of the provisions, such as the fact that if you redistribute the source with any changes, you must provide Apple with a copy.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (2)

overunderunderdone (521462) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499236)

What the debate is about is whether or not it is a "free software" licence.

Actually that's basically the way I see it as well. But there are a lot of people on /. that conflate the terms "open source" and "free software" and I left it up to the reader to decide whether releasing code under the APSL constituted "giving back to the community".

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (1)

BitGeek (19506) | more than 12 years ago | (#3504134)



That's good. I rejected RMS and FSF from *my* certification many years ago when they called for a boycott of Apple (but not Microsoft) for not releasing their source code.

Apple doesn't pretend that its in the free-software business, other than the fact that they have done more to support free software than Stallman has during the 90s. (The 80s are another matter).

Apples open source software is open source.

RMS has stated his non-belief in intellectual property, and I suspect this is underlied by a non-belief in real property.

But the rest of the world realizes that Open Source allows people to make money and use some of that money to contribute back to the software, so everyone does better.

Economically, Free (as in BSD) and Open (as in Open) source software will always beat closed (as in RMS and FSF) software that doesn't let you use it in proprietary work. This is the equivilent of Microsofts "we own it and you can't use it, unless you're using it for our profit".

Stallman made the mistake of trying to force everyone to believe as he did, and as you seek, the freer environments are flourishing while the GPL is on the wane. The only reason stallman is still around is he had many years of head start-- but pretty soon, Apple alone will have released more truely-free code than he has.

People who wonder about whether apple is giving back to the community seem to ignore that they open sourced their entire Os. Is the ocmmunity giving back to apple?

Never mind the fact that they open-sourced a streaming media player, when the market says these are worht $8,000 a year per stream capacity.

In every area where apple is using open source, they have contributed changes. Can you say that about yourself?

And on top of that, they have open sourced new technologies, and old ones a like.

Rendezvous is revolutionary.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (2)

King Babar (19862) | more than 12 years ago | (#3511849)

That's good. I rejected RMS and FSF from *my* certification many years ago when they called for a boycott of Apple (but not Microsoft) for not releasing their source code.

Actually, this is NOT why the FSF asked for a boycott of Apple. What the FSF was disgusted by was Apple's lawsuit against Microsoft (and previously others) asserting copyright violations for appropriating the Macintosh's "Look and Feel". This issue really went deep to the heart of what the FSF was/is all about, since if you could prevent people from writing code (from scratch) that implemented a particular kind of interface (in this case a UI, but think about MS's relationship with Samba these days...) because somebody asserted a copyright/IP claim similar to Apple's, then the whole free and open software communities were at grave risk.

I think some people were annoyed by the FSF stand against Apple (but pretty silent on MS) because they believed that MS was or would be the greater threat to free and open computing in the future. (And it would probably be tough to argue that it wasn't using today's hindsight.) But while mere software hording and embrace/extend were not going to win MS any friends at the FSF, at least they weren't filing lawsuits whose success could only lead to big problems for almost all free software.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3544856)

People who wonder about whether apple is giving back to the community seem to ignore that they open sourced their entire Os. Is the ocmmunity giving back to apple?

No, they didn't "open source their entire OS". They took a free software kernel (Mach) and free software OS layer (BSD), and released a couple of minor improvements. (Yes, compared to the rest of the Kernel and OS the changes are really minimal).

This Darwin part is still just another Unix-clone. The important part is the GUI that Apple surely spent 99% of the OS X development costs on, and that's not even close to free software.

Most, if not all, of Apple's contributions are only minor modifications of existing programs. The only reason they released the Objective-C frontend for gcc was that FSF threatened with legal action if they didn't follow the GPL. Apple have recieved several orders of magnitude more code from the community than they are contributing back.

RMS has stated his non-belief in intellectual proprty, and I suspect this is underlied by a non-belief in real property.

If you had followed the discussion a little better over the last 20 years you would know better than to think RMS is a communist.

Economically, Free (as in BSD) and Open (as in Open) source software will always beat closed (as in RMS and FSF) software that doesn't let you use it in proprietary work. This is the equivilent of Microsofts "we own it and you can't use it, unless you're using it for our profit".

Funny then that Apple are compiling their entire OS with the Gnu compiler toolchain provided by FSF. If these compilers had been released under BSD-style licenses we would have 30 different and incompatible versions for different CPUs now. Thanks to the GPL this isn't the case, but we have one version that can cross-compile code for any of the CPUs.

I completely respect and understand why Microsoft and Apple prefer BSD-style licenses, since it's much better for THEM (Yes, Microsoft has repeatedly stated that they LOVE BSD-style licenses - but in that case I guess you think it is bad?). Please don't confuse the better for Apple or you with the better for the community.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3544870)

Economically, Free (as in BSD) and Open (as in Open) source software will always beat closed (as in RMS and FSF) software that doesn't let you use it in proprietary work.

You can use any GPL code as much you want in your proprietary product, the only caveat is that you have to give your users the same rights as you got.

If you think that's unfair you probably haven't realized that any open software projects released by Apple *require* you to give Apple rights to any modifications you make, no matter if you distribute them or not, and you can't even charge for it.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (3, Informative)

stevenprentice (202455) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497343)

Read the release notes for FreeBSD 4.5. It mentions a number of filesystems bugs that were found and fixed because of a file system test application that Apple contributed.

Re:Apple, a good open source citizen ? (1)

billvinson (135790) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497961)

I think this is a common mistake within the open-source and free software communities. Being a 'good citizen' is not only about contributing code, but it is also about sticking to openly defined standards and making sure to implement them cleanly.

Not to say code contribution isn't needed, but some companies can't or won't do it for business reasons and I am not going to blast them for taking that stance. However, not 'embracing & extending' standards is being a good citizen and it allows Linux, *BSD, etc. to easily interoperate which is one of my big goals.

I don't necessarily care if they contribute tons of code, but if they make it easy to mix mand match platforms to suit my needs by embracing standards then I am all for it...

Bill

Good points (1)

bug1 (96678) | more than 12 years ago | (#3500120)

My question wasnt meant as a troll, Thanks for the constructive responses.
It would be nice if in time, apple could change their license to be Free one, at least they are in the right ballpark.

Re:Good points (1)

Erik K. Veland (574016) | more than 12 years ago | (#3508974)

Yeah, I don't see why this was modded as flamebait. It was an honest question and I learned a lot from it.

As a Mac OS X-user I was delighted to learn that Apple has contributed to the underlying technologies and the OS-community at large.

Re:Good points (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3512418)

I am not saying the original post is a troll, but it is a standard troll technique to ask easily self answered questions to stir the pot.

reality check (3, Insightful)

feldsteins (313201) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497120)

Hey don't get me wrong. I'm delighted - yes delighted - that O'Reilly likes OS X. And everything he outlines as being good ideas really are good ideas.

But there is a slight element of ridiculousness to this whole post. The idea that what Apple needs to do to be "a big sucess" and make "more money" is create more man pages is absurd.

Golly gee, maybe they can be as sucessful as Linux next! Do ya think??

If you don't even understand the irony of the above line then you really need a reality check.

Anyhow, like I said I am positively giddy about O'Reilly's love for OS X. I myself benefitted directly from the Apache Web Serving In OS X [oreillynet.com] series of articles which appeared under the O'Reilly banner not long ago. But still...the idea that pandering to the uber-geek is going to do wonders for Apple's marketshare or bottom line is absurd on it's face. They should still do it...but it's consumer products like iMovie, pricing and marketing that affect the bottom line, not man pages.

Re:reality check (2)

daviddennis (10926) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497242)

By catering to alpha geeks, they can get lots of wonderful new applications. There are many great things that were done on Linux.

People need the big guys (Photoshop, Final Cut Pro, After Effects, Office, etc), but there's plenty of room for the little ones, too.

So yes, what Jobs is doing here has a strategic purpose, just as making the GUI super easy to use does.

D

Re:reality check (2, Informative)

tadghin (2229) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498899)

Actually, the brief report didn't quite capture the thrust of my remarks (which will be up in some form on oreillynet.com within a day or two).

My point was this: if you look at the "alpha geeks", you often can see the shape of the future long before it's obvious in the commercial market. This was true with the PC (which was derided as a toy by the establishment), with the web (ditto), and so on with many new technologies.

Hackers push the envelope to make technologies do what they want before vendors and entrepreneurs package them for other people. My point is that a lot of the things that the hackers and other alpha geeks have been incorporating into their lifestyle for some time - wireless, chat, web services (even if only created by web spidering and screen scraping), peer-to-peer (rendezvous), etc. - are all starting to show up in a nice package.

So to me, this is a good predictor that Apple is really on the right track.

The second part of the talk was somewhat unrelated. It was advice for the future based on what has been successful for Unix, the internet, and open source.

I like OS X too.. but.. (1, Flamebait)

josepha48 (13953) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497417)

.. I can get decent pc hardware cheaper. Okay I saw the onay vs mac comparison where Sony was only a little better than the Mac and Mac was 1/2 as expensive, but I paid 800 for my current computer almost a year ago, including OS (RH 7.1 at the time). I don't think I could have gotton a Mac for that price. Okay I probably could have gotton a Mac for that price, but not one with 512Meg of RAM. Not NEW. 1.2Ghz CPU, 32Meg video card, NIC, 52x cdrom, SB live sound card.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (1)

blakespot (213991) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497608)

But then you can't run OS X, so you lose. I can sew my mouth shut to make my head more aerodynamic, as a runner--but then I can't eat.

blakespot

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3497738)

hehehe...tired of these bottom feeders...you saved a couple hundred bills but you still have just a PC! and why are you telling us this? get out of the food lines and get a Mac and watch your posts start to change their tune!

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3498055)

change their tune slowly, you mean.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (0)

Theom (567303) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498702)

A Macintosh IS a Personal Computer (PC).

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (4, Insightful)

Binky The Oracle (567747) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498279)

You have to realize, though, that you aren't Apple's target market. You're willing to take the time to futz around with putting a PC together piecemeal. After you spend $800 on hardware, you're still going to spend several hours installing and configuring the OS and apps. You're willing to track down and fix problems that occur when you want to add hardware, etc.

For you, time is less expensive than cash, and that's cool. You probably enjoy the process as well (I know I do) and most importantly, you have the ability to do the work.

Most of Apple's target market are people who don't have the ability or who don't want to spend the time screwing around with the OS and applications. They just want the computer to work.

With OS X, Apple has provided a fantastic system for people who "just want it to work" as well as providing the hood latch for people who want to get in and get their hands dirty. For you, that might not be worth the price, but the point of the article is that for a growing number of "alpha geeks" it is.

Yes, you can get a barebones Dell or build a FrankenPC for $800. But you won't get the Apple OS, all of the included applications, etc. Estimate the amount of time it would take you to build a system with all of the same features and applications as a $1200 iMac and multiply times standard consulting rates. The savings might not be as large as you think. Especially when you factor in the time it took you to learn the skills that allow you to assemble the box in the first place. It might still be cheaper, but not $400 cheaper.

An iMac with a DVD burner, 512 megs of RAM and its included software is very close in price to a similarly equipped brand-name PC. And both platforms have their strengths and weaknesses. And you could make the same argument for building your own $800 PC vs. buying a loaded Dell or Gateway.

I don't see the point in trying to compare a brand-name computer that's shooting for a seamless out-of-box experience with the roll-your-own crowd... the priorities and benefits are too dissimilar.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (2)

josepha48 (13953) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498550)

Truthfully thought it takes me about 30 minutes to build a pc from parts, maybe an hour tops. To install RH 7.1 or later is about another hour and about an hour to config the OS. However you also have to configure Mac OS X as well so the last hour is not counted. When I say configure, I mean set up ppp and make your desktop you and select your theme and preferences and things. Shut off or turn on services. Hey you have to do that on any OS.

So then 2 hours of my time is not worth the extra $400+ for the Mac to me. Yes I am thinking about me.

There is no reason Mac could not sell OS X on a PC. Darwin is the core of the system and it works on intel so cocoa and carbon should be portable as well. Of course Apple would want to make this port and they are in the business of selling hardware not just software. If they ever do port to intel the whole OS X then yeah I would be willing to spend about 100 bucks on buying OS X for a pc. Until that happens or I'll stick to building my own pc. I would hover recommend this for my mother or father who would certainly benifit from OS X.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3500405)

Darwin might run on x86, but the rest of the system? Nope. That'd be an uphill port. And Carbon is mostly based on legacy MacOS APIs, some dating back to the early 1980s, so don't count on ease of portability there.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (2)

TotallyUseless (157895) | more than 12 years ago | (#3501143)

just taking a guess, but if Apple ever *does* port to x86 hardware, I bet the OS will cost more than $100. I would be willing to guess 300-400. Or, more likely in my opinion, they would sell Apple x86 macs, and try their hardest to figure out a way to make sure Mac OSX only ran on Apple PCs.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (1)

Blackbox42 (188299) | more than 12 years ago | (#3507128)

Apple ported there last os over in a project named pink. It seams to me that they should only realise it (or rather the os x equivalent) if there hardware sales attempt to drive them out of business. As a last ditch effort they could release a copy of OS X for the x86 hardware.

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (1)

BinxBolling (121740) | more than 12 years ago | (#3521049)

Truthfully thought it takes me about 30 minutes to build a pc from parts, maybe an hour tops.

And how long did it take you to acquire the knowledge required to do this?

Re:I like OS X too.. but.. (4, Insightful)

dutky (20510) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499502)

I can get decent pc hardware cheaper

I think you misspelled the word adequate. Even the best x86 PC hardware is far from decent: it doesn't have a real bootloader/monitor in ROM, it can't handle booting to anything but a small handful of archaic video modes (much less boot to a serial console) and it has all kinds of wierd kludgery in the essential hardware (gate A20 cruft, default unidriectional parallel ports, no standard on-board sound or ethernet, etc.). It is no suprise that you can get your PC stuff at a significant discount.

I will easily admit that you can't get the highest MHz CPU, or the flashiest video chipset, in a Mac, but you get better quality hardware at a comparable price to other name brand computers (if you are comparing an Apple to a machine you threw together from parts or bought from a parts-shop hole-in-the-wall, you probably haven't considered the warrantee price).

All of this said, I run a few x86 PCs at home, along side my Macs (the house is evenly split: 3 PCs, 3 PowerMacs, 1 Compaq LTE and 1 PowerBook) mostly because an x86 box was the best choice fo Linux until a few years ago (LinuxPPC is damn nice these days, though it lacks some support for some browser plug-ins). Still, I've always been frustrated by the things I can't do on a stock x86 PC that take no effort at all on a Mac.

No "but"... (2, Interesting)

ryochiji (453715) | more than 12 years ago | (#3504740)

...for me, it's ALL about the OS. I guess it depends on what you do, but most people interact more with the OS and software than the hardware.

Quite frankly, I could care less what the underlying architecture is, as long as it runs an OS and software I like working with.

Sure, I know I can get faster, more expandable, and cheaper PCs. But I won't get a PC because none of them run MacOS X. It's not that I'm not famliar with anything else (I use Windows at work, tinkered with Linux+GNOME, and use a Solaris box at school), it's just that I prefer using a Mac over any other alternative.

My Big Thing... (2, Insightful)

dasspunk (173846) | more than 12 years ago | (#3497771)

Aside from rescuing my drowning Apple stock, I'm not concerned whether OS X is the "next big thing", rather, that it's my thing.

Since OS X came out, I have seen some changes that could be perceived as fodder for the "next big thing" argument, even here on Slashdot. For instance:
  • Apple now has it's own section [slashdot.org] on Slashdot
  • There seems to be a little less Apple FUD in posts
  • There are more OS X specific information sites like O'Riely's [oreillynet.com]
  • There are a ton of new OS X books [amazon.com]

The reasons for these changes are, to be sure, numurous and loaded with opinion such as those in my own case: No more switching back and forth from Mac to Linux just to get a "full featured" desktop machine. Open a Word doc, make a movie, use your firewire and USB peripherals, surf with IE if you want, jump on the command line, drag and drop, run Apache, MySQL, PHP, Perl, Bash, Grep, etc.... All this and I get hardware that was designed as if someone read my mind (iBook).

Actually becoming the "next big thing" would be great for Apple and it's users but seeing how I've been waiting for years for the next Beatles and the next Michael Jordan, I'm not holding my breath.

Re:My Big Thing... (1)

inertia@yahoo.com (156602) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498232)

  • Apple now has it's own section [slashdot.org] on Slashdot
Correction, Apple now has it's own custom graphical aqua-like section [slashdot.org] on Slashdot.

Tim O'Reilly keynoting MacHack (2)

ubiquitin (28396) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498128)

Tim O'Reilly is keynoting this year's MacHack [machack.com] . It will be interesting to see what all this *nix influence will do to MacHack [machack.com] attendance, easily the most intense Mac-specific wireless LAN party on the planet. ;) See you here!

Re:Tim O'Reilly keynoting MacHack (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3501373)

Hey, does anyone mind if I spread my legs a bit and whore out MacHack.com? I promise to try to keep the stench down.

A Kernel Hacker said... (2)

Archeopteryx (4648) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498772)

One FreeBSD Kernel Hacker I know (and I don't have permission to use his name, so he will for now be anonymous) said to me "Cocoa is what X-windows should have been." I think that it is fair to say that he is a convert...

Re:A Kernel Hacker said... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3501369)

Then this "Kernel Hacker" is an official DIPSHIT. Cocoa is the name that Apple uses for Openstep, and X11 is a network transparent display. Maybe he said Quartz is what X11 should have been. Or did he say that Aqua is what Gnome should have been?

OSX (1)

Dizzutch (578793) | more than 12 years ago | (#3498837)

What i like about OS X and Aqua, as an unexperienced linux user, is that it helps really well bringing linux to people who don't know how to use it that well, there is no need to use shell at al, but if you want to you can use it, in 'normal' linux that's not the case, there the shell is always a large part of the operation. and people like my dad who love Aqua, but can't work with Linux cans till feel the power, without knowing any specific commands etc.

Re:OSX (2)

Valdrax (32670) | more than 12 years ago | (#3574704)

It's worth mentioning that what lies beneath Mac OS X is not Linux. It's BSD, another form of UNIX, the OS family which Linux is a clone of. Though they are very similar, there are a few differences between them in the usage of common command-line tools.

To be even more precise, Darwin (Mac OS X's variant of BSD) is actually a Mach microkernel with a BSD-clone kernel implemented on top of it and BSD and GNU userspace tools running on top of that.

Tim O'Reilly on his WWDC talk (2, Interesting)

Idmat (54742) | more than 12 years ago | (#3499561)

In his blog today,(http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/1395)Tim says more about his WWDC keynote, including:

Hackers push the envelope to make technologies do what they want before vendors and entrepreneurs package them for other people. My point is that a lot of the things that the hackers and other alpha geeks have been incorporating into their lifestyle for some time - wireless, chat, web services (even if only created by web spidering and screen scraping), peer-to-peer (rendezvous), etc. - are all starting to show up in a nice package with OS X.

So to me, this is a good predictor that Apple is really on the right track with some big trends.

Won't Buy from Apple Until Keyboard Problem Fixed (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3508820)

I am in Apple's target market. I am a long-time Unix user. I appreciate quality! I lust after their laptops. But I just can't buy one, yet.

This is because I can't use their laptops' keyboards. I need the key to the left of the 'A' to be a Ctrl key. This is not just a want; it is a genuine need based upon ergonomic reasons.

Apple's cost to satisfy my keyboard desires is small: re-design their laptops to use USB keyboards just like the rest of their line. Unfortunately for me, Apple hasn't done this yet. Their laptops still use the ADB keyboards, which are horribly broken-by-design. ADB keyboards are a vestage of the old insanely-bad input devices days, when Apple didn't have an industrial-strength unix core.

Apple: Please fix your laptop keyboards! Please re-design your laptop motherboards to use a modern up-to-date USB keyboard, to go along with your robust and mature modern up-to-date unix OS!!

Note: is is now possible to use the keyboard with Debian GNU/Linux [debian.org] , but as of yet, Apple has not made it possible for unix old-timers to use with OSX.

My standard rant follows:

Apple Laptop Keyboards are Unacceptable to Unix Users

Apple designs horrible keyboards. ADB keyboards (which are still used on all of Apple's laptops) are unusable to unix users who need a Ctrl key to the left of the 'A'.

Proper Keyboard Design

  • When a key is pressed, the keyboard sends a keyPress event.
  • When a key is released, the keyboard sends a keyRelease event.
  • Each key is assigned a different keycode.
Nothing more, nothing less.

ADB Keyboard Mis-design

  • When the key to the left of the 'A' (CapsLock) is pressed, the ADB keyboard sends both a keyPress event and a keyRelease event.
  • When the CapsLock key is then released, the ADB keyboard sends NO events.
  • When the CapsLock key is next pressed, the ADB keyboard sends NO events.
  • When the CapsLock key is then released, the ADB keyboard sends both a keyPress event and a keyRelease event.
  • The above cycle repeats over and over.
This is WRONG ! Apple's ADB keyboards are broken by design.

Unix Users Cannot Use Apple's ADB Keyboards

What this means is that unix users who need the key to the left of the 'A' to be a Ctrl key cannot use Apple ADB keyboards. You can easily reprogram the CapsLock key to be a Ctrl key and get rid of the badness of the CapsLock key, but you can't get the required goodness of the Ctrl key to the left of the 'A'.

Apple Loses Sales to Unix Users

All Apple laptops have the horrible broken-by-design ADB keyboards which are unusable to unix users. I want to buy an Apple laptop, but I cannot and will not until Apple builds input devices usable by unix users.

Re:Won't Buy from Apple Until Keyboard Problem Fix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3509000)

Mod this ever-repeated, redundant, ill-informed post down.

Re:Won't Buy from Apple Until Keyboard Problem Fix (1)

bllx (551515) | more than 12 years ago | (#3523140)

this post is really getting on my nerves he repeats it everywhere

Re:Won't Buy from Apple Until Keyboard Problem Fix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3574736)

You must be one of those filthy Solaris users. Filthy, filthy, filthy! Why don't you get a keyboard from a real UNIX vendor, like HP, IBM, or SGI? Heck, even DEC used standard keyboards before Compaq swallowed them.

Want to save the "drowning stock"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 12 years ago | (#3508873)

For those of us that use Macs, and want to show some support for Apple stock (which has _always_ been badmouthed by investors, although that may have changed a bit), a good idea is to buy one share.

Go to Oneshare [oneshare.com] and buy just one share of apple stock.

Since these stocks aren't resold, it's a way of inflating the price a bit; provided enough of us buy a share or two. Since I'm not an investor I'm not sure how many people it would take to actually make a dent though.

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?