On Tuesday, October 22, 2002, at 10:05 AM, Jeremy Derr wrote: >> I'm reading a "History of Unix for Dummies" kind >> of >> article for my web development class. It suggests that Unix held or has >> the promise of running on any kind of computer. What is being done to >> OS >> X to make its Unix code machine specific? Is something in the code >> specific to the processor? Is it the specifications of the GUI laid >> over >> the Unix code that makes it incompatible with anything but a mac? > > most UNIX distributions are specific to a fairly limited scope of > hardware. SunOS/Solaris, for instance, runs on Sun machines and i386 > machines. a little background on programming would probably help > understand this better. > > programs are written in code that's human readable. in this form, it's > portable to any machine you want. however, it's not very useful in this > form. it has to be compiled. after compiling, it's machine readable > code. the bummer with compiling is that it makes a program > machine-dependent AND OS-dependent. in order to get your code to run on > a different OS or a different machine, you have to compile it > specifically to run on that hardware/OS. > > OS's are just the same. for all we know, Apple has written OS X so that > it'll run on Macs, PCs, mainframes, UNIVAXen, your car, and several > popular brands of toaster ovens. however, the CD they're selling only > contains the machine-code for Mac hardware. The OS X CD (and any > application CD you own) contains machine code ... Apple (or Intuit, or > Adobe) is not going to distribute their apps in human-readable code, > because that would allow (a) people to modify the code, (b) their > competitors to learn possible company secrets, and (c) someone to make > superficial changes and sell their product under a different name. > > HTH > Jeremy >
Does this mean that the act of compiling is always hardware specific? Is RedHat Linux compiled to work only on Wintel/IBM machines? YellowDog compiled for mac processors? Is the "compiling" a kind of encryption AND a way to translate it into a machine readable form? And the machine readable form is not universal but hardware specific? What about open source code/software? Is this code that is not compiled and therefore open for enhancement? How does one then make it machine readable? By using a compiling program? Are some Unix/Linux programs and software then not "compiled"? I got a vague and most probably incorrect impression from the article on Unix that C and C++ was a language developed to move toward platform independent coding. Am I way off here? Again, it sounds like a company like Microsoft might have to open up some of its code due to the courts. This means they just reveal what they have to and leave the rest of the software compiled? Isn't Apple's OS X somewhat open? Are companies like Macromedia given legal access to how Apple compiles (I keep thinking that this must be a kind of encryption along with making it machine-specific readable). Aren't some of the shareware/freeware things out there on version tracker the result of getting at Apple's "proprietary" coding/compiling? Apologies if I'm misconstruing the concepts here (esp. "compiling") Donald -- G-Books is sponsored by <http://lowendmac.com/> and... Small Dog Electronics http://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks | & CDRWs on Sale! | Support Low End Mac <http://lowendmac.com/lists/support.html> G-Books list info: <http://lowendmac.com/lists/g-books.html> --> AOL users, remove "mailto:"; Send list messages to: <mailto:G-Books@;mail.maclaunch.com> To unsubscribe, email: <mailto:G-Books-off@;mail.maclaunch.com> For digest mode, email: <mailto:G-Books-digest@;mail.maclaunch.com> Subscription questions: <mailto:listmom@;lemlists.com> Archive: <http://www.mail-archive.com/g-books%40mail.maclaunch.com/> Using a Mac? Free email & more at Applelinks! http://www.applelinks.com
