Linux, MacOSX (was Re: [oclug] (no subject))

[Milan Budimirovic]

On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 19:16, Micheal Kelly wrote:

> In some ways it has - overnight Apple managed to become the largest 
> supplier of desktop Unix systems, an area where some people believe 
> Linux hasn't had much success (I am of the belief that's because nobody 
> in Linux-land has really, *really* tried until recently, and that Linux 
> could do quite well on the desktop)

That's missing the main point of the Linux exercise. Linux is free
software. OSX is not.

> Darwin is still the core, and is still open/free.  Download a version 
> for Intel if you want to play with it.  It's actually quite nice.  The 
> GUI is the proprietary bit.  I'd love for them to open it up, but I 
> imagine it's going to remain closed.
> 
> > I'm not sure I agree.  Commoditized hardware is important, too.  Also,
> > for me it's not really about Unix, finally; it's about open source/free
> > software libre, and about collaborating to build something genuinely new
> > and different.
> 
> Agreed.  Commoditized hardware is important.  But I also like well-built 
> hardware.  A lot of the commodity stuff simply isn't, and my Apple 
> hardware to this point has been.  As you said, for you it's about open 
> source / free software, and that's fine.  I have different priorities, 
> and the Apple hardware/software fits the bill in my case.  Note that two 
> years ago I wouldn't have thought I'd say that.  I was a 7x24 Intel 
> Linux user and developer.  Now, I couldn't part with my G4s, and develop 
> under both OS X and YellowDog Linux.
> 

On the other hand a lot of people feel that the shamelessly overpriced
hardware that Apple forces upon its customers is OSX's biggest drawback.
Once you get past the motherboard and CPU, Macs are built entirely with
off-the-shelf parts. Ordinary SDRAM, IDE drives, ATI and NVidia cards...
ho hum.