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!

Learning UNIX for Mac OS X

timothy posted more than 11 years ago | from the this-is-unix-i-know-this dept.

Apple 163

Spencerian writes "I've become quite accustomed the depth of co-author Dave Taylor's writing on UNIX in previous books such as Teach Yourself UNIX in 24 Hours . As you can note from Dave's recent writing credits, his experience and knowledge of UNIX is vast and varied. That said, I was mildly disappointed with this latest offering that discusses the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X." Spencerian explains the logic underlying that conclusion in his complete review, below.

For starters, I was annoyed to find that the book's title implied a larger format than the 139 pages it comprises. The book has an audience problem because of its size. UNIX guys like thick books. Is this book mostly for newbies to OS X, to UNIX, or to Mac OS X's implementation of UNIX? Despite this targeting problem, the book's contents are still useful, but I think its audience is more geared to new UNIX users. The book just doesn't have much depth for even a reference title, especially for a topic such as UNIX, and particularly for a new, little-documented UNIX family operating system such as OS X.

While Mac OS X is a BSD variant, it has a few idiosyncrasies that may throw off a veteran UNIX user, and this book manages to address most, if not all of these notable problems. For instance, Dave notes problems in sendmail that prevent it from working from the command line in Mac OS X's Terminal application, and presents a fix for the problem. If you use command lines in UNIX all the time, the book does present good instructions on getting Lynx, IRC, newsgroups, pine, and the like up and running in Terminal. The book shies away (quite appropriately) from any graphic interface items unless required, such as when changing Terminal's preferences.

This book was very recently published (May 2002) but already has fallen behind with the release of Mac OS X 10.2 (Jaguar). Some components of Jaguar, such as CUPS support for stronger printing options, are completely missing from this book. If you have Jaguar installed on your computer, don't dive headlong into the NetInfo Manager steps for LPR printer configuration. Books typically don't age this fast, but in the case of this book, small changes seem to mean a lot to this title's usefulness -- the introduction of CUPS may have made Chapter 5's contents almost irrelevant.

Another small nag involves the lack of information on useful commands for Mac OS X users that weren't available (or were difficult to find) with the old Mac OS 9. One such command, cron, makes my life easier for handling some tasks on my home computer. It's not even mentioned in this book, nor will you find much information on shell scripting or compiling UNIX code you might happen to find. I guess I'm most annoyed at the lack of compile information since the Apple Developer Connection marked this book as a Recommended Title.

Despite our fondness for (and tolerance of the slightly-higher prices of) Macintosh computers, Mac users aren't made of money and don't like to buy a bookstore's worth of tomes for basic information. It would have made a lot of sense to talk more about compiling software since Apple's software or other GUI products don't meet or can configure all UNIX needs. And I won't even talk about the lack of coverage about XDarwin, an application that starts XFree86 within a Mac OS X installation, allowing X Window applications to run atop or in tandem with the OS X interface. XDarwin has become popular enough for it to become part of the stable XFree86 distribution. Given that not every UNIX user is a command-line freak, this is a pretty critical omission in my mind.

So, who should buy this book?

If you are completely new to UNIX and have been a gooey-kiddie who's used almost nothing except Mac OS 9, this is a very good reference to get your toes moist with UNIX. However, as drug dealers say, "the first taste is free." This book will leave you wanting more detailed information. More experienced UNIX users can probably find out what they need about Mac OS X's command line from a few free locations such as Mac OS X Hints.

One last thing: A pox upon Tim O'Reilly for not using the platypus for the animal on the book's cover. Given that the open-source core operating system of Mac OS X is named Darwin and has a nicely-modified take-off on the BSD mascot that depicts both the name of the OS and its BSD origins, I would think that O'Reilly would have jumped on this obvious cover.

You can purchase Learning UNIX for Mac OS X from Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.

cancel ×


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

Things to do today (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380460)

(1) Burn the flag.

Flags are nothing but colourful rags being unfurled every time the right wing politicians want to increase their wealth and influence by sending more young men to die abroad.

You should try burning a flag some time. It's a great feeling to see how upset some people can get over a petty symbol of nationalism (or more accurately: NAZIonalism).

All this flagwaving since 9/11 makes me sick!

IMPORTANT!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380463)

It has come to my attention that the entire Linux community is a hotbed of so called 'alternative sexuality,' which includes anything from hedonistic orgies to homosexuality to pedophilia.

What better way of demonstrating this than by looking at the hidden messages contained within the names of some of Linux's most outspoken advocates:

  • Linus Torvalds [] is an anagram of slit anus or VD 'L,' clearly referring to himself by the first initial.
  • Richard M. Stallman [] , spokespervert for the Gaysex's Not Unusual 'movement' is an anagram of mans cram thrill ad.
  • Alan Cox [] is barely an anagram of anal cox which is just so filthy and unchristian it unnerves me.

I'm sure that Eric S. Raymond, composer of the satanic homosexual [] propaganda diatribe The Cathedral and the Bizarre, is probably an anagram of something queer, but we don't need to look that far as we know he's always shoving a gun up some poor little boy's rectum. Update: Eric S. Raymond is actually an anagram for secondary rim and cord in my arse. It just goes to show you that he is indeed queer.

Update the Second: It is also documented that Evil Sicko Gaymond is responsible for a nauseating piece of code called Fetchmail [] , which is obviously sinister sodomite slang for 'Felch Male' -- a disgusting practise. For those not in the know, 'felching' is the act performed by two perverts wherein one sucks their own post-coital ejaculate out of the other's rectum. In fact, it appears that the dirty Linux faggots set out to undermine the good Republican institution of e-mail, turning it into 'e-male.'

As far as Richard 'Master' Stallman goes, that filthy fudge-packer was actually quoted [] on leftist commie propaganda site as saying the following: 'I've been resistant to the pressure to conform in any circumstance,' he says. 'It's about being able to question conventional wisdom,' he asserts. 'I believe in love, but not monogamy,' he says plainly.

And this isn't a made up troll bullshit either! He actually stated this tripe, which makes it obvious that he is trying to politely say that he's a flaming homo [] slut [] !

Speaking about 'flaming,' who better to point out as a filthy chutney ferret than Slashdot's very own self-confessed pederast Jon Katz. Although an obvious deviant anagram cannot be found from his name, he has already confessed, nay boasted of the homosexual [] perversion of corrupting the innocence of young children [] . To quote from the article linked:

'I've got a rare kidney disease,' I told her. 'I have to go to the bathroom a lot. You can come with me if you want, but it takes a while. Is that okay with you? Do you want a note from my doctor?'

Is this why you were touching your penis [] in the cinema, Jon? And letting the other boys touch it too?

We should also point out that Jon Katz refers to himself as 'Slashdot's resident Gasbag.' Is there any more doubt? For those fortunate few who aren't aware of the list of homosexual [] terminology found inside the Linux 'Sauce Code,' a 'Gasbag' is a pervert who gains sexual gratification from having a thin straw inserted into his urethra (or to use the common parlance, 'piss-pipe'), then his homosexual [] lover blows firmly down the straw to inflate his scrotum. This is, of course, when he's not busy violating the dignity and copyright of posters to Slashdot by gathering together their postings and publishing them en masse to further his twisted and manipulative journalistic agenda.

Sick, disgusting antichristian perverts, the lot of them.

In addition, many of the Linux distributions (a 'distribution' is the most common way to spread the faggots' wares) are run by faggot groups. The Slackware [] distro is named after the 'Slack-wear' fags wear to allow easy access to the anus for sexual purposes. Furthermore, Slackware is a close anagram of claw arse, a reference to the homosexual [] practise of anal fisting. The Mandrake [] product is run by a group of French faggot satanists, and is named after the faggot nickname for the vibrator. It was also chosen because it is an anagram for dark amen and ram naked, which is what they do.

Another 'distro,' (abbrieviated as such because it sounds a bit like 'Disco,' which is where homosexuals [] preyed on young boys in the 1970s), is Debian, [] an anagram of in a bed, which could be considered innocent enough (after all, a bed is both where we sleep and pray), until we realise what other names Debian uses to describe their foul wares. 'Woody' is obvious enough, being a term for the erect male penis [] , glistening with pre-cum. But far sicker is the phrase 'Frozen Potato' that they use. This filthy term, again found in the secret homosexual [] 'Sauce Code,' refers to the solo homosexual [] practice of defecating into a clear polythene bag, shaping the turd into a crude approximation of the male phallus, then leaving it in the freezer overnight until it becomes solid. The practitioner then proceeds to push the frozen 'potato' up his own rectum, squeezing it in and out until his tight young balls erupt in a screaming orgasm.

And Red Hat [] is secret homo [] slang for the tip of a penis [] that is soaked in blood from a freshly violated underage ringpiece.

The fags have even invented special tools to aid their faggotry! For example, the 'supermount' tool was devised to allow deeper penetration, which is good for fags because it gives more pressure on the prostate gland. 'Automount' is used, on the other hand, because Linux users are all fat and gay, and need to mount each other [] automatically.

The depths of their depravity can be seen in their use of 'mount points.' These are, plainly speaking, the different points of penetration. The main one is obviously /anus, but there are others. Militant fags even say 'there is no /opt mount point' because for these dirty perverts faggotry is not optional but a way of life.

More evidence is in the fact that Linux users say how much they love `man`, even going so far as to say that all new Linux users (who are in fact just innocent heterosexuals indoctrinated by the gay propaganda) should try out `man`. In no other system do users boast of their frequent recourse to a man.

Other areas of the system also show Linux's inherit gayness. For example, people are often told of the 'FAQ,' but how many innocent heterosexual Windows [] users know what this actually means. The answer is shocking: Faggot Anal Quest: the voyage of discovery for newly converted fags!

Even the title 'Slashdot [] ' originally referred to a homosexual [] practice. Slashdot [] of course refers to the popular gay practice of blood-letting. The Slashbots, of course are those super-zealous homosexuals [] who take this perversion to its extreme by ripping open their anuses, as seen on the site most popular with Slashdot users, the depraved work of Satan, [] .

The editors of Slashdot [] also have homosexual [] names: 'Hemos' is obvious in itself, being one vowel away from 'Homos.' But even more sickening is 'Commander Taco' which sounds a bit like 'Commode in Taco,' filthy gay slang for a pair of spreadeagled buttocks that are caked with excrement [] . (The best form of lubrication, they insist.) Sometimes, these 'Taco Commodes' have special 'Salsa Sauce' (blood from a ruptured rectum) and 'Cheese' (rancid flakes of penis [] discharge) toppings. And to make it even worse, Slashdot [] runs on Apache!

The Apache [] server, whose use among fags is as prevalent as AIDS, is named after homosexual [] activity -- as everyone knows, popular faggot band, the Village People, featured an Apache Indian, and it is for him that this gay program is named.

And that's not forgetting the use of patches in the Linux fag world -- patches are used to make the anus accessible for repeated anal sex even after its rupture by a session of fisting.

To summarise: Linux is gay. 'Slash -- Dot' is the graphical description of the space between a young boy's scrotum and anus. And BeOS [] is for hermaphrodites and disabled 'stumpers.'


What worries me is how much you know about what gay people do. I'm scared I actually read this whole thing. I think this post is a good example of the negative effects of Internet usage on people. This person obviously has no social life anymore and had to result to writing something as stupid as this. And actually take the time to do it too. Although... I think it was satire.. blah.. it's early. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well, the only reason I know all about this is because I had the misfortune to read the Linux 'Sauce code' once. Although publicised as the computer code needed to get Linux up and running on a computer (and haven't you always been worried about the phrase 'Monolithic Kernel'?), this foul document is actually a detailed and graphic description of every conceivable degrading perversion known to the human race, as well as a few of the major animal species. It has shocked and disturbed me, to the point of needing to shock and disturb the common man to warn them of the impending homo [] -calypse which threatens to engulf our planet.

You must work for the government. Trying to post the most obscene stuff in hopes that slashdot won't be able to continue or something, due to legal woes. If i ever see your ugly face, i'm going to stick my fireplace poker up your ass, after it's nice and hot, to weld shut that nasty gaping hole of yours. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Doesn't it give you a hard-on to imagine your thick strong poker ramming it's way up my most sacred of sphincters? You're beyond help, my friend, as the only thing you can imagine is the foul penetrative violation of another man. Are you sure you're not Eric Raymond? The government, being populated by limp-wristed liberals, could never stem the sickening tide of homosexual [] child molesting Linux advocacy. Hell, they've given NAMBLA free reign for years!

you really should post this logged in. i wish i could remember jebus's password, cuz i'd give it to you. -- mighty jebus [] , Slashdot

Thank you for your kind words of support. However, this document shall only ever be posted anonymously. This is because the 'Open Sauce' movement is a sham, proposing homoerotic cults of hero worshipping in the name of freedom. I speak for the common man. For any man who prefers the warm, enveloping velvet folds of a woman's vagina [] to the tight puckered ringpiece of a child. These men, being common, decent folk, don't have a say in the political hypocrisy that is Slashdot culture. I am the unknown liberator [] .

ROLF LAMO i hate linux FAGGOTS -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

We shouldn't hate them, we should pity them for the misguided fools they are... Fanatical Linux zeal-outs need to be herded into camps for re-education and subsequent rehabilitation into normal heterosexual society. This re-education shall be achieved by forcing them to watch repeats of Baywatch until the very mention of Pamela Anderson [] causes them to fill their pants with healthy heterosexual jism [] .

Actually, that's not at all how scrotal inflation works. I understand it involves injecting sterile saline solution into the scrotum. I've never tried this, but you can read how to do it safely in case you're interested. (Before you moderate this down, ask yourself honestly -- who are the real crazies -- people who do scrotal inflation, or people who pay $1000+ for a game console?) -- double_h [] , Slashdot

Well, it just goes to show that even the holy Linux 'sauce code' is riddled with bugs that need fixing. (The irony of Jon Katz not even being able to inflate his scrotum correctly has not been lost on me.) The Linux pervert elite already acknowledge this, with their queer slogan: 'Given enough arms, all rectums are shallow.' And anyway, the PS2 [] sucks major cock and isn't worth the money. Intellivision forever!

dude did u used to post on msnbc's nt bulletin board now that u are doing anti-gay posts u also need to start in with anti-black stuff too c u in church -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

For one thing, whilst Linux is a cavalcade of queer propaganda masquerading as the future of computing, NT [] is used by people who think nothing better of encasing their genitals in quick setting plaster then going to see a really dirty porno film, enjoying the restriction enforced onto them. Remember, a wasted arousal is a sin in the eyes of the Catholic church [] . Clearly, the only god-fearing Christian operating system in existence is CP/M -- The Christian Program Monitor. All computer users should immediately ask their local pastor to install this fine OS onto their systems. It is the only route to salvation.

Secondly, this message is for every man. Computers know no colour. Not only that, but one of the finest websites in the world is maintained by a Black Man [] . Now fuck off you racist donkey felcher.

And don't forget that slashdot was written in Perl, which is just too close to 'Pearl Necklace' for comfort.... oh wait; that's something all you heterosexuals do.... I can't help but wonder how much faster the trolls could do First-Posts on this site if it were redone in PHP... I could hand-type dynamic HTML pages faster than Perl can do them. -- phee [] , Slashdot

Although there is nothing unholy about the fine heterosexual act of ejaculating between a woman's breasts, squirting one's load up towards her neck and chin area, it should be noted that Perl [] (standing for Pansies Entering Rectums Locally) is also close to 'Pearl Monocle,' 'Pearl Nosering,' and the ubiquitous 'Pearl Enema.'

One scary thing about Perl [] is that it contains hidden homosexual [] messages. Take the following code: LWP::Simple -- It looks innocuous enough, doesn't it? But look at the line closely: There are two colons next to each other! As Larry 'Balls to the' Wall would openly admit in the Perl Documentation, Perl was designed from the ground up to indoctrinate it's programmers into performing unnatural sexual acts -- having two colons so closely together is clearly a reference to the perverse sickening act of 'colon kissing,' whereby two homosexual [] queers spread their buttocks wide, pressing their filthy torn sphincters together. They then share small round objects like marbles or golfballs by passing them from one rectum to another using muscle contraction alone. This is also referred to in programming 'circles' as 'Parameter Passing.'

And PHP [] stands for Perverted Homosexual Penetration. Didn't you know?

Thank you for your valuable input on this. I am sure you will be never forgotten. BTW: Did I mention that this could be useful in terraforming Mars? Mars rulaa. -- Eimernase [] , Slashdot

Well, I don't know about terraforming Mars, but I do know that homosexual [] Linux Advocates have been probing Uranus for years.

That's inspiring. Keep up the good work, AC. May God in his wisdom grant you the strength to bring the plain honest truth to this community, and make it pure again. Yours, Cerberus. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

*sniff* That brings a tear to my eye. Thank you once more for your kind support. I have taken faith in the knowledge that I am doing the Good Lord [] 's work, but it is encouraging to know that I am helping out the common man here.

However, I should be cautious about revealing your name 'Cerberus' on such a filthy den of depravity as Slashdot. It is a well known fact that the 'Kerberos' documentation from Microsoft is a detailed manual describing, in intimate, exacting detail, how to sexually penetrate a variety of unwilling canine animals; be they domesticated, wild, or mythical. Slashdot posters have taken great pleasure in illegally spreading this documentation far and wide, treating it as an 'extension' to the Linux 'Sauce Code,' for the sake of 'interoperability.' (The slang term they use for nonconsensual intercourse -- their favourite kind.)

In fact, sick twisted Linux deviants are known to have LAN parties, (Love of Anal Naughtiness, needless to say.), wherein they entice a stray dog, known as the 'Samba Mount,' into their homes. Up to four of these filth-sodden blasphemers against nature take turns to plunge their erect, throbbing, uncircumcised members, conkers-deep, into the rectum, mouth, and other fleshy orifices of the poor animal. Eventually, the 'Samba Mount' collapses due to 'overload,' and needs to be 'rebooted.' (i.e., kicked out into the street, and left to fend for itself.) Many Linux users boast about their 'uptime' in such situations.

Inspiring stuff! If only all trolls were this quality! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

If only indeed. You can help our brave cause by moderating this message up as often as possible. I recommend '+1, Underrated,' as that will protect your precious Karma in Metamoderation [] . Only then can we break through the glass ceiling of Homosexual Slashdot Culture. Is it any wonder that the new version of Slashcode has been christened 'Bender'???

If we can get just one of these postings up to at least '+1,' then it will be archived forever! Others will learn of our struggle, and join with us in our battle for freedom!

It's pathetic you've spent so much time writing this. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I am compelled to document the foulness and carnal depravity [] that is Linux, in order that we may prepare ourselves for the great holy war that is to follow. It is my solemn duty to peel back the foreskin of ignorance and apply the wire brush of enlightenment.

As with any great open-source project, you need someone asking this question, so I'll do it. When the hell is version 2.0 going to be ready?!?! -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I could make an arrogant, childish comment along the lines of 'Every time someone asks for 2.0, I won't release it for another 24 hours,' but the truth of the matter is that I'm quite nervous of releasing a 'number two,' as I can guarantee some filthy shit-slurping Linux pervert would want to suck it straight out of my anus before I've even had chance to wipe.

I desperately want to suck your monolithic kernel, you sexy hunk, you. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

I sincerely hope you're Natalie Portman [] .

Dude, nothing on slashdot larger than 3 paragraphs is worth reading. Try to distill the message, whatever it was, and maybe I'll read it. As it is, I have to much open source software to write to waste even 10 seconds of precious time. 10 seconds is all its gonna take M$ to whoop Linux's ass. Vigilence is the price of Free (as in libre -- from the fine, frou frou French language) Software. Hack on fellow geeks, and remember: Friday is Bouillabaisse day except for heathens who do not believe that Jesus died for their sins. Those godless, oil drench, bearded sexist clowns can pull grits from their pantaloons (another fine, fine French word) and eat that. Anyway, try to keep your message focused and concise. For concision is the soul of derision. Way. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

What the fuck?

I've read your gay conspiracy post version 1.3.0 and I must say I'm impressed. In particular, I appreciate how you have managed to squeeze in a healthy dose of the latent homosexuality you gay-bashing homos [] tend to be full of. Thank you again. -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Well bugger me!

ooooh honey. how insecure are you!!! wann a little massage from deare bruci. love you -- Anonymous Coward, Slashdot

Fuck right off!

IMPORTANT: This message needs to be heard (Not HURD [] , which is an acronym for 'Huge Unclean Rectal Dilator') across the whole community, so it has been released into the Public Domain [] . You know, that licence that we all had before those homoerotic crypto-fascists came out with the GPL [] (Gay Penetration License) that is no more than an excuse to see who's got the biggest feces-encrusted [] cock. I would have put this up on Freshmeat [] , but that name is known to be a euphemism for the tight rump of a young boy.

Come to think of it, the whole concept of 'Source Control' unnerves me, because it sounds a bit like 'Sauce Control,' which is a description of the homosexual [] practice of holding the base of the cock shaft tightly upon the point of ejaculation, thus causing a build up of semenal fluid that is only released upon entry into an incision made into the base of the receiver's scrotum. And 'Open Sauce' is the act of ejaculating into another mans face or perhaps a biscuit to be shared later. Obviously, 'Closed Sauce' is the only Christian thing to do, as evidenced by the fact that it is what Cathedrals are all about.

Contributors: (although not to the eternal game of 'soggy biscuit' that open 'sauce' development has become) Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, phee, Anonymous Coward, mighty jebus, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, double_h, Anonymous Coward, Eimernase, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward, Anonymous Coward. Further contributions are welcome.

Current changes: This version sent to FreeWIPO [] by 'Bring BackATV' as plain text. Reformatted everything, added all links back in (that we could match from the previous version), many new ones (Slashbot bait links). Even more spelling fixed. Who wrote this thing, CmdrTaco himself?

Previous changes: Yet more changes added. Spelling fixed. Feedback added. Explanation of 'distro' system. 'Mount Point' syntax described. More filth regarding `man` and Slashdot. Yet more fucking spelling fixed. 'Fetchmail' uncovered further. More Slashbot baiting. Apache exposed. Distribution licence at foot of document.

ANUX -- A full Linux distribution... Up your ass!

Re:IMPORTANT!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380502)

You really need something to occupy your time...

Mac users aren't made of money (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380467)

Well, that's news to me!

All these Mac articles... (0, Offtopic)

LionHeartCJ (567027) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380480)

make me wanna drop 3 grand on a new shiny titanium powerbook

Re:All these Mac articles... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380947)

You can have my scuffed up, dented one for 1 grand.

UNIX guys like thick books--wrong (1)

stuff-n-things (89988) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380481)

I for one usually read O'Reilly books on any given subject because they are smaller, more to the point and less filled with useless graphics (usually screen shots), than most publishers. Granted O'Reilly isn't always that way (how many shots of -borderwidth did "Learning Perl/Tk" need?), but as a rule they are better than most publishers (cough*Oracle Press*cough).

Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong (1)

GeekSoup (447371) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380520)

I only buy the OReilly 'Pocket Reference' guides these days!
Minute Rice? Who has the time?

Re:UNIX guys like thick books (1)

Meech (166762) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380544)

One of the thickest books I own is the O'Reilly Unix Power Tools book.

Re:UNIX guys like thick books (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380629)

> One of the thickest books I own is the O'Reilly Unix Power Tools book.

Do you realize how dumb that sounds?

Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380648)

O'Reilly books are nice but basically a rip-off when you can get all the same information from the web for practically zilch.

Okay, if you want to collate it, stick a picture of some cute critter on the cover and print it, it'll cost you your time, ink and paper but hell, the days when I pay $35 for some programming tome are long gone!

Stupid screenshots... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380723)

trying to convey information visually in an easy to understand format! I'll show them!

I for one usually read O'Reilly books on any given subject because they are smaller, more to the point and less filled with useless graphics (usually screen shots), than most publishers. publishers (cough*Oracle Press*cough).

Re:UNIX guys like thick books--wrong (3, Insightful)

Golias (176380) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380729)

It sounds to me like the review was a result of misunderstanding. He was hoping for a "OS X UNIX for UNIX geeks" book, when it sounds to me like it's actually meant to be a "the basics of UNIX for OS X n00bs" book, which certainly has its place. A lot of MacOS 7-9 users are totally new to sed, awk, grep, cron, and the common UNIX directory layout. A simple UNIX primer from a good publisher like O'Reilly Press could be very handy for some of them.

It was a typo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381737)

It should have said:

Linux guys like thick cocks

Here we go again: @# +1; Informative #@ (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380490)

We had this debate a couple of weeks ago. I
don't think I need to cite the article.

Again: "Unix for Mac OS X" is NOT Unix!!

Note: The BSD m4 Macro processor is dated as
1991 and is nowhere as powerful as the GNU m4.

Be Patriotic: Smoke Amerikan Grown Ganja!!!!

Re:Here we go again: @# +1; Informative #@ (1)

SeanWithoutPants (593762) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380630)

I'll bite

Nowhere near as powerful? Perhaps-I'm ignorant of the differences. Regardless, the Open Group seems to think OS X is unix. Check out ix_specification.html#platform []

Not that this really matters to me, I'd enjoy OS X even if it were labeled as Belly Button Lint.

Note the highly agressive, early moderation here (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380501)

Practically everything is Offtopic or Troll!

Re:Note the highly agressive, early moderation her (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380511)

It'll be some little jerk on a power trip coz he's got mod points - whoooo!

OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but... (1)

BluBrick (1924) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380761)

Hey, numbnuts! Do ya reckon the rapid moderation might be because you really are off topic? Just maybe? No?

Well, what the hell does early moderation have to do with:
thick books,
big ticket hardware,
attempting to make newbie guides relevant to Unix gurus,
deluding long-time Mac freaks into believing that they are using a real operating system,
or Disney rip-off cartoon platypii(*)?
profit!!! (oops, Freudian typo - sorry folks!)

(*) Does anyone else see the Huey/Dewey/Louie -> Hexley similarity?

Re:OK, I'm feeding the trolls, but... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380852)

Hey, dickhead!

The moderation here is getting stupid. For example, some guy posts a perfectly reasonable (almost insightful) comment entitled:-

"Why would anybody in the 21st century like any book? Thick or thin?"

This is almost immediately modded as "-1 Offtopic".

How can this be 'offtopic' when we are discussing friggin books here?

Moderators? Shit 'em!

platypus (1)

ChristTrekker (91442) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380503)

Hexley does seem the obvious choice, but all the Apple-themed O'Reilly books have a dog motif. I guess they thought consistency was better.

Not dogs, Dogcows. (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380537)

They need Dogcows on their books. Dogcows go Moof!

What, no dogcows? (4, Funny)

BJH (11355) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380552)


Re:platypus (1)

Anonymous Cowrad (571322) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380641)

Here you go [] .

OSX and Unix (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380504)

How many times do I have to say it OSX is *NOT* UNIX. even apples own site admits they have changed the kernel from the proper unix one to another, and that doesn't begin to start on configuring the thing its so different.

rememeber the power of a unix system is something that microsoft dont want you to have, and they wont allow osx to be a proper unix ever (yes microsoft as microsoft own 51% of shares in apple since 1996 i think)

Re:OSX and Unix (2, Informative)

skwirl42 (262355) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380555)

Microsoft owns nowhere near 51% of Apple's shares. The shares they bought in 1996 were a) non-voting and b) maybe a percent, at the very most. Although I believe the shares have been converted to voting shares at this point, but still, incredibly far from being controlling shares. Not to say Microsoft still doesn't hold sway over Apple in some way.

Re:OSX and Unix (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380589)

I think you might be mistaken as i have a friend who is high up in the industry who assures me OS X is microsoft

Re:OSX and Unix (2, Funny)

BitHive (578094) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380595)

Yes, your friend sounds very high indeed.

Re:OSX and Unix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381020)

Don't bo-guard that joint

Re:OSX and Unix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381042)

It's "bogart." As in Humphrey.

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

Melantha_Bacchae (232402) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381121)

skwirl42 wrote:

> Microsoft owns nowhere near 51% of Apple's shares.
> The shares they bought in 1996 were a) non-voting
> and b) maybe a percent, at the very most. Although
> I believe the shares have been converted to voting
> shares at this point, but still, incredibly far
> from being controlling shares.

The shares were dumped on the market back in Fall of 2000, which together with a big loss reported that quarter seriously tanked Apple's stock. While the rest of the industry crowed about Apple's eminent demise, the earnings warnings started rolling in.

The next quarter, Apple had returned to the black. The computer industry was a shattered landscape, where only a single tree still stood proud. It was Apple's turn to laugh.

> Not to say Microsoft still doesn't hold sway
> over Apple in some way.

Sorry, the agreement expired in August. Microsoft is just a third party developer and a competitor now. While pundits talk of patching up the marriage, Apple has gone to war!

Even if Apple should loose Office, Microsoft themselves will give Apple its biggest selling point. When Palladium comes, users will flee to the Apple that has pledged to fight for their fair use rights.

Windows: "Go talk to my friend, an 800 pound monopoly-abusing gorilla!"
Mac: "And here's my good buddy, the 66,000 ton Godzilla!"
Godzilla: Stomp! ;)

G Countdown: 26 days (

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

wolftrap (603693) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380561)

Microsoft doesn't even own 5% of apple. OS X has all the power of Unix and more.

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

BJH (11355) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380568)

MS owns 51% of Apple?

"+1, Interesting"?

"-10, Pure bollocks" is more like it.

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

Slaveway (562761) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380590)

I believe Microsoft has sold their 'Non Voting' shares in Apple.
Microsoft, as a show of faith purchased $150,000,000 worth of Apple shares. In no way does Microsoft own %51 of Apple.

Re:OSX and Unix (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380597)

Nice troll. I'd like to kill whomever modded it as "+1 Interesting".

Re:OSX and Unix (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380599)

Troll. Idiot. Microsoft bought 150M USD Apple stock in 1996 or 1997 to ward off a lawsuit. They have long since sold this stock at a handsome profit.

Secondly Microsoft could not care less about "the power of a unix system". They are worried about Linux but for reasons entirely different from it being "a UNIX".

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

Green Light (32766) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380601)

I can't believe that this idiotic^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpost got modded up.

Microsoft has nothing to do with MacOS X, and no, Microsoft does not own 51% of Apple.

Note to moderators: the parent post is a "Troll", not interesting, insightful, or anything positive...

Re:OSX and Unix (2)

danamania (540950) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380608)

microsoft own 51% of shares in apple since 1996 i think

Was it nice crack?

a grrl & her server []

Re:OSX and Unix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381163)

Hey you spelled girl wrong! ;-)

Re:OSX and Unix (2, Informative)

imperator_mundi (527413) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380616)

From yahoo finance [] => Institutional ownership: 59%

as long as Microsoft is not an institution is quite hard that it can own 51% of apple shares

Re:OSX and Unix (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380620)

It was August 1997, MSoft ponied up something like $168 million. Apple at that time was a $10 Billion (with a B) company - so that is less than 2%, and as the previous poster mentioned, it was non-voting stock anyway.

Reminds me of some of the truly moronic comments I got at the time. "So what are you gonna do now that Bill Gates has bought Mac?" Sheesh.

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

russellh (547685) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380637)

That's right. Gnu's Not Unix, either. What is Unix? Perhaps it is but a dream..

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380667)

Unix is an Ideal, a Perfect Form that only exists in the world of the Forms. Some operating systems participate in that Form more than others...

This is all explained in Second Timaeus, alas the dialog appears to have been lost...

Re:OSX and Unix (0, Offtopic)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380700)

Oh, for mod points...

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

CableModemSniper (556285) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380788)

Oh come on, why didn't you blow that mod point on modding the grandparent up instead of parent down? What a waste.

Re:OSX and Unix (5, Interesting)

MouseR (3264) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380652)

yes microsoft as microsoft own 51% of shares in apple since 1996 i think

Jesus! What kinda smoke have you been inhaling?

MS bought 150M $ USD worth of NON-voting shares of Apple back in 1996. That's peanuts. Apple was worth net 2.1 billion at that time.

That's nowhere near 51%.

Besides, you're factually wrong to start with. BSD was a set of tools that sat on top of AT&T's Unix. It eventually grew so large it required only a few files to become it's own OS. That was the kernel. They eventually got that.

Mac OS X (or, Darwin, actually) is entirely FreeBSD (some tidbits of NetBSD too), except for the microkernel, which is Mach (no relation to "Mac").

And YES, Darwin/Mac OS X *IS* Unix, as it has licensed the trademark from the Open Group, the rightful owner of the trademark.

What makes a Unix is not the kernel. It's how the package operates and how well is follows the standards (such as but not limited to Posix). The Unix trademark is awarded upon proper registration and evaluation of the OS. There are costst involved, is is pretty much the only thing that keeps Linux being called a real Unix.

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

aWalrus (239802) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380910)

Microsoft, IIRC, is a non voting member of the Apple board, which means they don't have a say in Apple's policy (would probably break up their best defense against the monopoly argument). They just invested money in the company, but can't control it. Besides, there IS a certain level of compatibility between OSX and other unixes, as attested by projects like fink []


Re:OSX and Unix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381124)

I think a Saudi Prince is the biggest investor in Apple. I saw an article on him. He is seen as one of the savviest investors in the world. He was against the selling of US stocks, and urged other Saudi not to sell.

GIMP runs well in OSX.

Re:OSX and Unix (1)

gnuadam (612852) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381282)

Not that I disagree with the jist of what you're saying, but fink does not a unix make.

Cygwin sits on top of windows and provides most of what fink does (minus the snazzy apt-get functionality) but no one would argue windows is unix.

Mac OS X is a unix IMHO, but fink is not the reason.

Re:OSX and Unix (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381558)

but no one would argue windows is unix.

Although it is nominally POSIX compliant. Which I usually take as an example of how weak the POSIX standards really are, rather than any endorsement of windows.

classic 1) 2) ??? 3) PROFIT!!!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380505)

1) Become mildly disappointed with this latest offering that discusses the UNIX underpinnings of Mac OS X.
2) ???
3) PROFIT!!!!

speaking of learning... (-1)

Trolling Stones (587878) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380518)

y'all should learn to eat more often at Subway. For less than 5 dollars american, you get a giant, filling, foot-long sub, piled high with fresh meats and cheeses, mouth-watering veggies, and a smorgasbord of topings, like the new southwest southern chili steak sauce.

g to the oatse
c to the izzex
fo shizzle my nizzle just for the disclaimer, I don't have subway stock.

Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380522)

Yeah, you must be a real hardcore techie.

Read dummies books too?

Re:Teach yourself Unix in 24 hours? (1)

principio (558251) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381182)

Hey, I love those dummies books. They have funny cartoons and helped me find the "Any" key.

Its a shame its not 10.2 (3, Insightful)

Hunts (116340) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380530)

I've been having major problems with OS X Server 10.2 thats driving me insane.

Thinking in a more unix way, I starting trying to hunt down the proccess involved..but all to no avail. I couldnt find any proccesses that seemed to be having problems..and was told by a friend in the know that my issue was more of a mac gui thing...something I know nothing about :/

A good decent book on OS X Server 10.2 would be really nice at the moment

Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 (1)

Halo1 (136547) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380696)

All the "mac gui things" are also processes. You may want to subscribe to a mailing list (such as macosx-admin [] ) and actually mention what the problem is that you are having, it might help.

Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 (0, Troll)

rampant mac (561036) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380697)

Have you tried downloading the admin guide from Apple? []

It's 622 pages worth of pretty useful information, like setup, maintenance, and troubleshooting.

Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 (1, Troll)

Graff (532189) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380709)

Let me start by saying that I think MacOS X Server is totally awesome. The GUI tools to administrate the server both locally and remotely are very well done and you have a lot of power.

That being said, the documentation is slim. I managed to totally bork my authentication services on my MacOS X Server box because I didn't totally understand LDAP and Netinfo. That was fun, couldn't login to the GUI or use the admin tools at all - it's a good thing I wasn't working on the main server and that I had lots of stuff backed up.

Right now I have everything working nicely, with the exception of not being able to serve out IMAP mail services. I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, the documentation just doesn't explain enough for me to understand it fully.

I wanted to take one of the courses on MacOS X Server that Apple offers, but the course is $2,500. That might be par for the course, but I work for a non-profit and we can't afford to spend that much money on one training course. What we could do is to spend a few hundred on proper documentation and then teach ourselves.

Re:Its a shame its not 10.2 (2)

Spencerian (465343) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380811)

I agree--having to shuck a few thousand down for a class is a pain in the patootie.

I've already written one book. [] I'm hoping to take these classes and write study guides for the various Mac OS tests so we can all save a few bucks but get the training we need.

I've recently played with an Xserve and 10.2 Server for a few weeks. It does rock, but Apple really needs stronger and enterprise-based documentation. They write too often with consumers in mind, not IT people.

RTFM? 622 page maual (2, Informative)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380958)

I've been reading the 622 page admin guide. My first impression was "622 pages!!!! that is not why I bought an apple." After reading it two things are clear. First they are very gentle so even a unix weaking can understand both the big picture and the little picture. Second, it is not a unix manual,instead it focuses on using gui tools and a fixed, thought rather broad, set of tasks (e.g.setting up LDAP, mounting a disk). It still does not teach unix. A book teaching command line unix that specialized in mac's has stillnot been written (Yes I am aware of the various attempts). My third impression is that it needs a second edition. There are a lot of incompletely explained concepts that only an experienced NeXSTstep user would understand or descriptions that dont quite match the actual gui-tools. But it's wonderful to have a reference now.

Re:RTFM? 622 page maual (3, Interesting)

Graff (532189) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381501)

I have been looking through the admin guide and I realized one big thing: dead tree docs are so much better than electronic docs! I am seriously thinking about printing the whole damn guide and binding it. The only thing holding me back is just what you said, the guide is way too general.

I want a very in-depth guide, or set of guides, similar to the old Inside Macintosh series, but for MacOS X Server admin. So what if it covers Unix topics, or GUI topics? Cover it all and break it down into modules that you can buy and read as you want. Have an intro book for general topics, have a book on mail, a book on web serving, a book on firewalls and NAT, etc. I'm sure Netinfo and LDAP will take a book just by themselves.

The point is that these introductory Mac books just don't cut it any more. They are all pretty much clones of each other and they tell you simple stuff like how to set up your web browser. That's great for the home user, but it does nothing for the professional system administrator looking to use Macs.

taming unix (2, Insightful)

goombah99 (560566) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380760)

It's like the chinese curse "my you live in interesting times". Mac OsX has given us a wonderful set of opportunities and pitfalls. Books are sorely needed, and needed quickly. Most of all are books that point out the pit falls of assuming linux and macOSX work the same way.

Apple gave us a lot of power but has not told us how to use it. In the mean time We are encouraged not to use them until they are documented, but being geeks we cant resist poking and prodding. And assuming that because we know linux or BSD that we know Mac OSX. Then we get MAD when we get into trouble from our uniformed meddling or we discover some bit of uglyness behind the veil that we dont like exactly how apple has implemented it. Whereas before we were bilssfully unaware and untempted. It seems like all the anti-apple slashdot critiques that are at leaset slightly based on experience are along the lines of "well linux doesn't do it that way, so apple is wrong."

When I first got OS X beta, I nievely tried to set /etc/fstab and /etc/exports. Got steamin mad. Then discovered netInfo. (I vaguely knew where to look from NeXTstep) Thought that was truly wonderful and sorely needed unification of unix configuration. Blessed apple. But apple had not issued the manual. No matter, I waded in, did some cool things, and by the end of the day my computer was unbootable from one leeetle mistake. (had to re-install). Cursed Apple for not documenting this. (I had called them on the phone and they warned me not to meddle with it!) But within 6 months the NetInfo manual was indeed out along with some idiot proof gui "training wheel" tools for making changes to certain records.

My experience with OSX has been extremely positive. I make some whopper mistakes, but that was really y fault. mac unix is unix but its not LINUX and HFS+ is NOT UFS. But that does not make it worse. In fact on the whole I think its much better. But if you assume that cp and mv do the same thing they do in linux, well you will eventually get a surprise.

Why? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380543)

Why would anybody in the 21st century like any book? Thick or thin?

Hang on to the past!

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380587)

1. Books don't need batteries.

2. You can make notes in the margings (books have better built-in handwriting recognition).

3. Books are made from sustainable, recycleable materials.

5. Books look nice on your shelves and smell nice :)

forgot something... (2, Interesting)

Mage Powers (607708) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380548)

Why should MacOSX Users learn UNIX? The other review of this book I read said that that point wasn't covered.

Re:forgot something... (2)

King Babar (19862) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380966)

Why should MacOSX Users learn UNIX? The other review of this book I read said that that point wasn't covered.

Do you mean the "explaining why you might want to learn about Unix" part, or do you mean that the book doesn't do a good job of teaching parts of Unix that are of interest to most users of OS X? If it's the latter, I would agree that most Mac OS X users probably don't care; they're going to buy the "Missing Manual" series or something. If it's the former, that might be more of a problem.

My guess is that the average reader of this book is somebody who was really into Mac OS X, and then saw somebody perform a Unix command line magic trick that saved tham a whole day's work. This does happen, and it does have an effect on the witnesses, who then go forth, intrigued, to the bookstore. But, lo: the Unix books are written for the high priests! Ah, here's a book for an acolyte like even says "Mac OS X" in the title. :-)

Time will tell if there really is an audience for this or not.

the oreilly 'gotta get something published' model? (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380554)

IT seems that this book is of the 'Gotta get something published on this topic NOW'. Hey, see if JimBob can write a 100 pages on topic X!

I'm seen this example with this book and with things like Rob Flickenger's 'community wireless networks'.

It's not at all that they AREN'T good books, or not informative, but they are, indeed, lean and seem to be something just to get published.

After all, we now have OSX: the missing manual (second edition coming soon) and other OSX manuals (which I can't name cause it aint out yet) that are more of the OReilly 'tome' size (400 + pages)

I am not a publisher and I really dont know how the publishing business really works, but as an end user and a buyer of dozens of Oreilly books, this 100 page short book thing seems to be a way to get a book, ANY book, to the market ASAFP while larger tomes are worked on.


Mac OS X for Unix Geeks (5, Informative)

CMU_Nort (73700) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380564)

It sounds like the book he really wanted to get was O'Reilly's Mac OS X for Unix Geeks [] . It includes a lot of his gripe topics like:

* A quick overview of the Terminal application

* Understanding Open Directory (LDAP) and NetInfo

* Issues related to using the GNU C Compiler 9GCC

* Library linking and porting Unix software

* An overview of Mac OS X?s filesystem and startup processes

* Creating and installing packages using Fink

* Building the Darwin kernel

* Running X Windows on top of Mac OS X

Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks (2)

Spencerian (465343) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380689)

That's exactly the content I was expecting to find in this first OS X/UNIX book that O'Reilly offered. I did scan the book before I bought it and knew it didn't have what I was really looking for. It never hurts to have Yet Another Useful Reference Book, however.

Don't get me wrong--it's an excellent book. But in the past year or so, I've already outgrown it's content. I've dived into the UNIX innards of OS X quite often, and you can't help but learn the basics that way. This book was really for someone who has never used UNIX before but knows a bit about Mac OS.

The "UNIX Geeks" book definitely requires a read for me.

Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks (3, Interesting)

King Babar (19862) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380832)

Don't get me wrong--it's an excellent book. But in the past year or so, I've already outgrown it's content. I've dived into the UNIX innards of OS X quite often, and you can't help but learn the basics that way. This book was really for someone who has never used UNIX before but knows a bit about Mac OS.

Well, I was baffled about why you didn't think the title made this very clear. O'Reilly "Learning" books are for beginners (in some sense), and the title of this one is "Learning Unix for Mac OS X". What is the intended audience? Beginners. What will they learn? Unix, in the context of Mac OS X. Believe me, there are thousands of those people around, including many who don't usually buy many computer books and therefore have not come to expect the "brick of verbosity" tomes that some people really seem to want.

Having said that, I have to confess that I fell into a similar trap back in the day with "Learning Perl/Tk". Now there's an O'Reilly book that earned something approaching scorn in the geek community, and the reason why is because that one really didn't have much of the audience intended (beginners wanting to learn Perl/Tk), but instead was the only real book for *anybody* to buy that really talked about Perl/Tk...and most of the actual buyers were complete geeks in search of something that would augment the then sparse-ish documentation for the toolkit. But all's well that ends well; we now have "Mastering Perl/Tk", and I think we're all happy again. :-)

The "UNIX Geeks" book definitely requires a read for me.

Me too. I'm guessing that this book if it turns out to be as good as we'd hope will sell a *lot* more copies than you might expect given the rate of adoption by geeks of (T)iBooks. When I went to YAPC in St. Louis, i was floored by the number of those being used during talks...

Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks (2)

Spencerian (465343) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381000)

I agree with your comments completely. I guess I'm falling into that UNIX trap of geekness. I expected this book to be deeper because UNIX is deep, period. I guess I felt as if I got a tutorial book on quantum physics and felt cheated because they left out a section on building your own toroid quantum particle accelerator.

I wrote the review with /. folks in mind, of course. The book would have a glowing review otherwise--it's just not the book for most /.ers.

yup (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380710)

My farts are plentiful and foul today. Be glad you aren't in my office.

Mmmm, stinky.

Re:Mac OS X for Unix Geeks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381208)

Yes, I have been waiting months for this one. At WWDC, they said it would be out in August but now it's supposed to be October. Not out yet. Grrr.

24 Hours? (2, Funny)

skaffen42 (579313) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380577)

I didn't know Mac users had that kind of attention span!


Oh boy! from +3 Funny to -1 Flamebait in minutes! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380669)

Too bad!

Re:Oh boy! from +3 Funny to -1 Flamebait in minute (1)

skaffen42 (579313) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380734)

Yeah, well. Sounds like they "switched" off their sense of humour!

Can't these people take a joke? :p

Re:Oh boy! from +3 Funny to -1 Flamebait in minute (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380897)

Clearly not!

I guess the run-of-the-mill slashbots modded you up then the humor-impared elitist apple mac nazi assholes modded you down.

C'est la guerre!

Re:24 Hours? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381280)

It's harder to tell since they don't usually have to spend that kind of time configuring drivers or clicking through 'wizards.'

Oh I don't know (3, Insightful)

Drath (50447) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380584)

UNIX guys like thick books

That's a misnomer, My Kernighan & Ritchie C book gets a lot of use and it's only ~280 pages. Large does not espessially mean better.

Re:Oh I don't know (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380618)

"Large does not espessially mean better."

You go on and keep telling yourself that. Meanwhile, your girlfriend will be spending another night with me.

Re:Oh I don't know (1)

osu-neko (2604) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380636)

That's a misnomer

Not really. It is a falacy, though...

My Kernighan & Ritchie C book gets a lot of use and it's only ~280 pages. Large does not espessially mean better.

Indeed. K&R is probably the best book in existence for learning C, precisely because of its lack of excessive and distracting crud...

Re:Oh I don't know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380823)

That's a misnomer

Not really. It is a falacy, though...

Not really. It is a misconception.

Re:Oh I don't know (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380773)

Indeed. Two of the most used books on my desk are K&R (2nd Edition) and POSIX : A Programmers Guide. K&R is, as you say, ~280 pages, and POSIX is ~450, ~350 of which are purly reference.

Thick books just make for anoying indices that you can't grep ;)

Sad news ... Stephen King dead at 55 (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380585)

I just heard some sad news on talk radio. Horror/Sci-Fi author Stephen King was killed this morning when his parachute failed to open on a routine skydiving trip. Mr. King plummeted to his death from 16,000 feet; he fell through a barn and killed two cattle upon impact. Even if you never read any of his books, you probably have some of his painting hanging in your home. Truly an American icon.

The Logic Underlying that Conclusion (-1, Offtopic)

Alexander (8916) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380626)

Well, it's so clean!

It's certainly not contaminated by cheese.

Venezuelan Bever Cheese?

Not today sir, know.

Ah. How about Cheddar?

Alan Thicke - DEAD!! (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380647)

I just heard the sad news on CBC radio. Comedy actor/writer Alan Thicke was found DEAD in his home this morning. Even if you never liked his work, you can appreciate what he did for 80's television. Truly a Canadian icon. He will be missed :(

Show me That Smile (The Growing Pains Theme Song):
Show me that smile again.
Ooh show me that smile.
Don't waste another minute on your crying.
We're nowhere near the end.
We're nowhere near.
The best is ready to begin.

As long as we got each other
We got the world
Sitting right in our hands.
Baby rain or shine;
All the time.
We got each other
Sharing the laughter and love.

Re:Alan Thicke - DEAD!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380727)

maybe he got killed by steven king

Not familiar with O'Reilly books? (4, Interesting)

wunderhorn1 (114559) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380673)

Too me, "Learning UNIX for Mac OS X" implies a book for newbies to UNIX. Definitely not a reference volume, they would save that for an "... In a Nutshell" book. (For example, "Learning Perl : 300 pages. "Perl in a Nutshell": 800 pages.)

Also, O'Reilly already used a platypus for "Web Database Applications with PHP and MySQL", so no dice there.
However, I just got an idea to somehow play off of the BSD Daemon/Apple connection by using a picture of the story of the devil offering Eve fruit from the tree of knowledge. Also sort of a connection to Darwin via the evolution/creationism debate.

OK, so it's a pretty big stretch ;-)

I suck (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380680)


not too good with vi, either (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380726)

i suck

"Audience Problems"?? (5, Insightful)

vi-rocks (611108) | more than 11 years ago | (#4380686)

The review stated:

The book has an audience problem because of its size. UNIX guys like thick books. Is this book mostly for newbies to OS X, to UNIX, or to Mac OS X's implementation of UNIX? Despite this targeting problem.....

This is crazy!!! There is no "targeting problem" -- the book is written for people who are new to UNIX -- that is the target audience. The book is right on for this crowd. As mentioned by others, there are other books that the UNIX savvy will find useful. -- Why would someone who owns "Unix PowerTools" or "Essential System Administration" even consider bying a book with "Learning Unix" in the title???

Re:"Audience Problems"?? (1)

vi-rocks (611108) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381430)

(-1) --- TROLL -- Your fucking kidding me, right?

As of 58 Posts: 25 Kharma Points (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4380725)

That means that the trolls have taken at least 33 kharma points away from the value of this discussion. Keep up the good work, trolls!

might be worth looking at (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381022)

I thought it was interesting.

Online UNIX tutorial for OS X (3, Informative)

phatvibez (518108) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381030)

Here is a MacOS X UNIX tutorial I just found yesterday. If you're an old time Mac user or just want to learn some UNIX commands then this is something you might want to check out... []

A Really Thick Book on OS X (5, Informative)

Melantha_Bacchae (232402) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381199)

If you want a really, seriously, thick book on OS X (probably a bit dated post-Jaguar), try "OS X Unleashed". It covers both the Mac and Unix sides. The X Window System is covered, as is setting up a mail or ftp server, programming in Perl, using MySQL, even installing Lynx (if you want a text based browser).

It makes a great reference book, and comes in real handy whenever you need a heavy, if slightly soft, weight around the house. ;)

"Godzilla's coming"
Io, "Godzilla 2000" (US version dialog)
G Countdown: 26 days (

'smart' quotes in articles (1, Redundant)

SCHecklerX (229973) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381244)

Why is it that we get ?'s on the main page, but when you read the article, stuff displays properly on that page? Please either reject people who insist on submitting with this crap, or fix it consistently throughout slashdot.

Mac OS X and UNIX... (-1, Flamebait)

bsdparasite (569618) | more than 11 years ago | (#4381268)

I thought Mac OS X was a consumer OS (despite the old BSD kernel), pointed toward those who do not want to use the command line. Why the hell is anyone even bothering to rig this set up to compile Darwin and X? Thoroughly stupid if you ask me. Just use the goddamn machine for doing things. If you really want to know how to use UNIX, get a *real* UNIX box instead.

stick an Apple in my rectum (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 11 years ago | (#4381782)

Dear Apple,

I am a homosexual. I bought an Apple computer because of its well earned reputation for being "the" gay computer. Since I have become an Apple owner, I have been exposed to a whole new world of gay friends. It is really a pleasure to meet and compute with other homos such as myself. I plan on using my new Apple computer as a way to entice and recruit young schoolboys into the homosexual lifestyle; it would be so helpful if you could produce more software which would appeal to young boys. Thanks in advance.

with much gayness,

Father Randy "Pudge" O'Day, S.J.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

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>