On 21 Nov 2007, at 3:00 pm, Robert G. Brown wrote:
On Wed, 21 Nov 2007, Tim Cutts wrote:
I have to say I have some sympathy with that view. Much though I
love OS X as a desktop OS, I have to wonder why anyone would jump
through hoops building a cluster running just Darwin, when they
could probably have done it much more easily, and with much more
community support, if they used Linux... It just seems like a lot
of extra pain and difficulty for no tangible benefit.
And at premium prices for the hardware. Apple's OS is constrained,
as I
understand it, to run only on Apple hardware.
While that's true of OS X, it is not true of Darwin, AFAIK. I believe
you can run Darwin on pretty much any PC hardware.
One day Apple will make up its mind about whether it is a hardware
company or a software company. I vote soft, and thought that once
they
supported generic Intel even their main company management would "get
it".
It didn't work for Mac OS X's previous incarnation, though, in the
form of NextSTEP, did it? Selling that platform as an OS and
abandoning hardware manufacture did not save NeXT.
And with open source operating systems not far behind in many
respects, I don't know how much future there really is in basing a
business on operating system software unless, as in Microsoft's case,
you already have an effective monopoly.
Tim
--
The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is operated by Genome Research
Limited, a charity registered in England with number 1021457 and a
company registered in England with number 2742969, whose registered
office is 215 Euston Road, London, NW1 2BE.
_______________________________________________
Beowulf mailing list, [email protected]
To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit
http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
