Re: Re(4): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Anuerin G. Diaz]

On Thu, 14 Feb 2002 10:30:17 -0600
"Mike Settle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> revealed these words to me:

> I thought this was supposed to be a Mandrake forum - For the last three
> days, all I've seen is Mac OS related !!!  Why don't you guys find a
> chatroom, or something.
> 

no disrespect meant, but the thread (while long and numerous) was very informational. 
No,this is not a Mandrake forum , it is a newbie-list (pun intended. ;-). The original 
question was _i think_ valid since it was looking for sources on comparison between 
Mac OSX and Linux. For somebody who have never touched a Mac, this exchange brought me 
a lot of info and insights.

i also understand that this may be take a little time to some subscribers which some 
have none to spare. I also find myself on that boat quite frequently, so may I 
introduce my two trusty mail companions: filters and delete. ;-)

sorry if some of my comments may seem smart-alecky but they were done in good humor.

have a good day!

-- 

"Programming, an artform that fights back."

=
Anuerin G. Diaz
Design Engineer
Millennium Software, Incorporated
2305 B West Tower, Philippines Stocks Exchange Center,
Exchange Road, Ortigas Center, Pasig City

Tel# 638-3070 loc. 72
Fax# 638-3079
=




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux - factual please

[Pascal Goguey]

Hello!

> Hi guys,
> Thanks for all your comments which, while very interesting, do not quite
> answer my maybe poorly formulated question.  So I will re-phrase it: do you
> know of any comparisons between MAC OS X and Linux which would look at
> aspects such as connectivity, multi-tasking, multi-user capability, telnet
> (how many simultaneous sessions), file system comparison (journalling),
> crash recovery, users and group administration, etc.
> Rather than a philosophical comparison with praise or blame I would simply
> seek an objective technical/factual comparison of the "compare and

May I remind you that the first philosophical comparison with praise / blame 
etc... came from you? Are expressions like "I don't think", "I don't trust"
objective / technical / factual for you?

>> For a very simple reason: I don't think that proprietary software is a
>> good thing.  Neither do I trust that Mac suddenly coming into Unices
>> and even open source with their next OS is anything but opportunism
>> born out of dire need.  As for their OS - look at Linus T's comments
>> about it in his book.

> _
> Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
> http://www.hotmail.com

> I would simply seek an objective technical/factual comparison of the
> "compare and ontrast" type.
> Many thanks in advance,
> Andrei

Pascal



Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: Re(4): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[NDPTAL85]

On Thursday, February 14, 2002, at 11:30  AM, Mike Settle wrote:

> I thought this was supposed to be a Mandrake forum - For the last three
> days, all I've seen is Mac OS related !!!  Why don't you guys find a
> chatroom, or something.

Have you actually been reading the emails? This entire thread stopped 
talking about Mac OS dozens of messages ago and is now talking about the 
Linux hardware support situation.






--
Mac OS X, FreeBSD, Mandrake Linux and Windows XP Pro are my OS's. I am 
GEEK, hear me roar.
--




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux - factual please

[Kenn Yahoo]

i DID see that post, i checked out the article you recommend, and it was
PHENOMENAL !!!

thought *slightly* slanted toward BeOS, it was one of the most informative
comparison of operating systems I've seen ...

thanks for the suggestion.

kennM


|
| I have not seen my post, so I repost :
|
| The best article to me is this one :
| http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421
| "Tales of the BeOS refugee"
|
| I is written by a famous BeOS power-user.
| This is more a BeOS / MacOS X comparision,
| than a Linux / MacOS X one.
| However, this is quite complete :
| it compares BeOS/MacOSX/Linux/Windows.
|
| Enjoy.
| Nyco
|
|
|






| Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
| Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
|


_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux - factual please

[Nicolas VERITE]

> On Thursday, February 14, 2002, at 03:16  AM, Andrei Raevsky wrote:
> 
>> Hi guys,
>> Thanks for all your comments which, while very interesting, do not 
>> quite answer my maybe poorly formulated question.  So I will re-phrase 
>> it: do you know of any comparisons between MAC OS X and Linux which 
>> would look at aspects such as connectivity, multi-tasking, multi-user 
>> capability, telnet (how many simultaneous sessions), file system 
>> comparison (journalling), crash recovery, users and group 
>> administration, etc.
>> Rather than a philosophical comparison with praise or blame I would 
>> simply seek an objective technical/factual comparison of the "compare 
>> and contrast" type.
>> Many thanks in advance,
>> Andrei

I have not seen my post, so I repost :

The best article to me is this one :
http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421
"Tales of the BeOS refugee"

I is written by a famous BeOS power-user.
This is more a BeOS / MacOS X comparision,
than a Linux / MacOS X one.
However, this is quite complete :
it compares BeOS/MacOSX/Linux/Windows.

Enjoy.
Nyco




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux - factual please

[Andrei Raevsky]

Thanks for the info.  This answers my question very well.
Cheers,
Andrei


>Ok to save you some time the only differences are in the file system.
>Linux can use the ext2, ext3, JFS, ResierFS or XFS file systems. All
>except ext2 are journaling. Mac OS X can use the HFS+ (which is the
>recommended one) or the BSD UFS filesystem. At the moment there are no
>journaling capabilities available under OS X although FreeBSD's
>SoftUpdates are under consideration.
>
>As for the rest I'll run it down item by item
>
>Connectivity? What do you mean by that?
>
>Multi-tasking: Both Linux and Mac OS X have pre-emptive multitasking.
>
>Multi-user: Both OS's can have multiple users logged in at any one time.
>
>Telnet: Thats a setting that can be changed on either OS. Suffice it to
>say under normal circumstances no one will reach the limit on either OS.
>
>Crash recovery: What do you mean by this? It crashes, you reboot. You
>can use backup software/hardware with either OS.
>
>User and group administration: In addition to the normal Unix users and
>groups, you can use NIS on both OS's. OS X on its own has a unique
>Netinfo Domain Database system that can be used to admin networks
>consisting of clients of any OS. Additionaly SAMBA (SMB) can be
>installed and used on both to replicate Windows networking capabilities
>(PDC's BDC's...etc).
>
>Mac OS X is closely related to FreeBSD Unix (www.freebsd.org). The core
>of OS X (Darwin) inherited a lot of technology/features from FreeBSD.
>Since FreeBSD and Linux were already very similar (although not
>identical) the differences the user would see were already very little.
>This remains so on OS X. By comparing Mac OS X to Linux you're really
>just comparing one Unix to another, like Solaris to AIX or HP-UX to
>Tru64. What sets Mac OS X apart from other Unix's is its ability to run
>regular applications in addition to Unix apps. Things like Microsoft
>Office, Adobe Photoshop, Macromedia Freehand, Internet Explorer,
>Quicken, and video games such as Quake, Doom, StarCraft, WarCraftetc
>that are all native to the platform.
>
>And no I don't know of any sites that have an exact comparison, if
>anyone else does please post a link to it! It really would be redundant
>though since more or less *NIX is *NIX.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>--
>Blonde Klingons: Because it was a good day to dye!
>--
>
>
>Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
>Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com


_
Chat with friends online, try MSN Messenger: http://messenger.msn.com




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: Re(8): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Roman Korcek]

Hey,

> Do you know how GSM mobile phones became an international standard? The
> Nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Finland) agreed on
> a common standard for mobile phone communications. The Nordic countries
> don't have the largest populations of any countries in the world, nor are
> they necessarily the most advanced countries in every area. The only
> reason that GSM became a standard was through mutual agreement, rather
> than competition in the mobile phone area. No other country could agree
> on another standard, because all the different companies' and countries'
> interests were too divergent. In the states, they have yet to achieve
> even a nationwide GSM coverage because of all of the competing standards.
> Talk about a nightmare scenario!

Just to clarify, AFAIK the nordic countries established the NMT
standard, which stands for Nordic Mobile Telecommunication
(or Telephone?). GSM was created by the Group Speciale Mobile (sp?),
later renamed to Global Standard for Mobile communication.

Bye
Roman




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux - factual please

[NDPTAL85]

On Thursday, February 14, 2002, at 03:16  AM, Andrei Raevsky wrote:

> Hi guys,
> Thanks for all your comments which, while very interesting, do not 
> quite answer my maybe poorly formulated question.  So I will re-phrase 
> it: do you know of any comparisons between MAC OS X and Linux which 
> would look at aspects such as connectivity, multi-tasking, multi-user 
> capability, telnet (how many simultaneous sessions), file system 
> comparison (journalling), crash recovery, users and group 
> administration, etc.
> Rather than a philosophical comparison with praise or blame I would 
> simply seek an objective technical/factual comparison of the "compare 
> and contrast" type.
> Many thanks in advance,
> Andrei


Ok to save you some time the only differences are in the file system. 
Linux can use the ext2, ext3, JFS, ResierFS or XFS file systems. All 
except ext2 are journaling. Mac OS X can use the HFS+ (which is the 
recommended one) or the BSD UFS filesystem. At the moment there are no 
journaling capabilities available under OS X although FreeBSD's 
SoftUpdates are under consideration.

As for the rest I'll run it down item by item

Connectivity? What do you mean by that?

Multi-tasking: Both Linux and Mac OS X have pre-emptive multitasking.

Multi-user: Both OS's can have multiple users logged in at any one time.

Telnet: Thats a setting that can be changed on either OS. Suffice it to 
say under normal circumstances no one will reach the limit on either OS.

Crash recovery: What do you mean by this? It crashes, you reboot. You 
can use backup software/hardware with either OS.

User and group administration: In addition to the normal Unix users and 
groups, you can use NIS on both OS's. OS X on its own has a unique 
Netinfo Domain Database system that can be used to admin networks 
consisting of clients of any OS. Additionaly SAMBA (SMB) can be 
installed and used on both to replicate Windows networking capabilities 
(PDC's BDC's...etc).

Mac OS X is closely related to FreeBSD Unix (www.freebsd.org). The core 
of OS X (Darwin) inherited a lot of technology/features from FreeBSD. 
Since FreeBSD and Linux were already very similar (although not 
identical) the differences the user would see were already very little. 
This remains so on OS X. By comparing Mac OS X to Linux you're really 
just comparing one Unix to another, like Solaris to AIX or HP-UX to 
Tru64. What sets Mac OS X apart from other Unix's is its ability to run 
regular applications in addition to Unix apps. Things like Microsoft 
Office, Adobe Photoshop, Macromedia Freehand, Internet Explorer, 
Quicken, and video games such as Quake, Doom, StarCraft, WarCraftetc 
that are all native to the platform.

And no I don't know of any sites that have an exact comparison, if 
anyone else does please post a link to it! It really would be redundant 
though since more or less *NIX is *NIX.






--
Blonde Klingons: Because it was a good day to dye!
--




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

[newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux - factual please

[Andrei Raevsky]

Hi guys,
Thanks for all your comments which, while very interesting, do not quite 
answer my maybe poorly formulated question.  So I will re-phrase it: do you 
know of any comparisons between MAC OS X and Linux which would look at 
aspects such as connectivity, multi-tasking, multi-user capability, telnet 
(how many simultaneous sessions), file system comparison (journalling), 
crash recovery, users and group administration, etc.
Rather than a philosophical comparison with praise or blame I would simply 
seek an objective technical/factual comparison of the "compare and contrast" 
type.
Many thanks in advance,
Andrei

_
Join the world’s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. 
http://www.hotmail.com




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re(8): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Brian Durant]

>GNU/Linux hasn't gained the critical mass required to meet this challenge as
>well as MS. Most components work, though. Most modern video cards are
>supported, for example.

>Isn't this the same for any OS? MS rely on hardware manufacturers writing
>drivers for Windows. True, they don't have to lobby them or reverse engineer
>their own drivers, but the fact remains that they are at the mercy of
hardware
>manufacturers to provide support.

If you notice in the article that I posted to the list: , the author
refers to Sharp (in this case) having to try and leverage the Linux
community to get Linux development for their PDA. I don't intend to harp
on this issue, but it actually is quite interesting. Does the Linux
community have a hard time leveraging hardware manufacturers to develop
drivers or provide info so third party drivers can be developed or is it
that manufacturers have a hard time leveraging the Linux community to get
their products supported, because the Linux community lacks enough focus
to support existing hardware?

>I've heard the "if there was only one gui..." argument many times, and it
>always seems to be coming from the people who are trying to apply the
>methodologies of other, closed source OSs onto GNU/Linux.

More focus does not necessarily mean that there should be a "one GUI"
policy as I propose, but for an outsider (newbie) looking in, it is hard
not to compare Linux to other OS's, as there seems to be a lack of
direction and a doubling of resources that could/should be used in other
areas that need extra resources. None of this should be considered a
criticism, but rather musings about a totally different world seen
(partially) from the outside, looking in, as well as some frustration.

>What would this entail, seeing that GNU/Linux can run on just about any
>platform? A "hardware standard" would be contrary to this, and would not
be in
>the spirit of freedom of choice.

>The desktop arena is based more on perceptions and marketing more than
>anything else. AmigaOS, BeOS, MacOS and GNU/Linux are all better than
Windows in most
>cases, but it is Windows with over 90% share. Most of this is due to good PR
>work, and everything snowballed from there. GNU/Linux can't deliver a good PR
>campaign to the average consumer because of the multitude of options
>available. This won't change, but I'm sure that GNU/Linux _will_ gain
market share on the
>desktop (albeit slowly).

If you notice, I referred to a desktop hardware standard, not a general
hardware standard. these are two very different things. I think it is
great that Linux can run on everything from watches and PDA's to IBM
mainframes. A desktop hardware standard would help homogenize the desktop
platform for Linux and would allow better control over the development of
hardware that Linux users use. Apple isn't really a model, but a move in
that direction would not hurt. It would not have to be proprietary, just
a set standard that could help leverage the platform.

Do you know how GSM mobile phones became an international standard? The
Nordic countries (Denmark, Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Finland) agreed on
a common standard for mobile phone communications. The Nordic countries
don't have the largest populations of any countries in the world, nor are
they necessarily the most advanced countries in every area. The only
reason that GSM became a standard was through mutual agreement, rather
than competition in the mobile phone area. No other country could agree
on another standard, because all the different companies' and countries'
interests were too divergent. In the states, they have yet to achieve
even a nationwide GSM coverage because of all of the competing standards.
Talk about a nightmare scenario! Competition can sometimes be a good
idea, but in reality a community like the Linux community should realize
that the community will only last as long as cooperation exists inside
the community, rather than competition. Why, because you are all mutually
dependent. Its time to leverage some of the mutual aid that exists in the
Linux community and tone down the competition.

>Perhaps you're not researching the right way? Have you tried asking on
>this list
>for some sites to visit? Here are a few:
>
>http://lhd.zdnet.com/
>http://www.linuxhardware.net/
>http://www.linuxhardware.org/
>http://www.linuxvoodoo.com/
>http://www.linuxtested.com/
>http://www.linux.com/enhance/hardware/
>
>You should be looking for _chipsets_, not card brands. I can't think of any
>major video chipset that isn't supported by GNU/Linux.

Thanks for the tip ;-) seen from my viewpoint, I would have thoght that
it would be the otherway around. Chipsets are one thing, but then
somebody gets the idea to throw all sorts of proprietary crap on the card
to make it "their" card.

Cheers,

Brian

"That is logic that even a chicken would understand." - Danish saying.




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Gary Montalbine]

Sridhar,
I am very new to Linux. I found your comments very well written and 
informative.

Thank you,
Gary




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?! (OT)

[Mohammed Arafa 2 Mailing Lists]

its unfortunate but linux still has a ways to go 
before its idiot friendly enough to become a mainstream desktop. why do i say 
this?
my understanding of the mac is that the os 
goes down on the mac and the hardware is identified and drivers installed: 
painless
windows is somewhat similar but u may have to 
fiddle around with drivers and search for them.
mandrake linux is getting there (a friend of mine 
spent a week installing suse 2/3 years back .. i gave him lm8.1 and now he only 
talks about mandrake as the install only took 2 hours) and yet there are 
problems.
mainly hardware, then education ..the howto's are 
there but they arent that simple to follow .. what if the howto's talk of a 
directory which isnt where its supposed to be? instead of being 
aaa/bbb/ccc/xxx/yyy/zzz its actually in aaa/zzz. the user might not know how to 
search for it.
what i am trying to say is mandrake is 
on the correct path to this 100% idiot friendly installation and use. they 
should implement lsb1.0 and li18nux1.1 as quickly as possible and then build up 
from there. take a step to the side so to speak and build up on the ease of use 
in other areas. there are lots of things that 
could be said but for the moment .. lm is "ishta"-creme de la creme of the linux 
world for me
 
"salam" - peace
 

  - Original Message - 
  From: 
  Andrei 
  Raevsky 
  To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
  Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 6:12 
  PM
  Subject: [newbie] Mac OS X versus 
  Linux?!
  
  
  
  
  Hi,
  I am looking for a good, thourough and detailed, technical comparison of 
  Mac OS X versus Linux.  A friend of mine is a really "religious" Mac user 
  and it will take a lot to make him try Linux.  I would like to help him 
  with this.
  Please send me any good articles (or links) you have.
  Thanks,
  Andrei
  ---
  
  Registered Linux user 
  226850
  
  
  Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.
  
  

  Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to 
  http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re(6): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Brian Durant]

>Is hardware support really as bad as you seem to make it sound? I've loaded
>various versions of Mandrake on a variety of different systems, and I've
never
>had any problems that I couldn't easily fix.

Hardware support has gotten amazingly good, actually. However, in fifteen
to twenty minutes, I can do some research on the net, ask on an e-mail
list and ask some friends and come back with a fairly good idea of the
main issues that I need to consider if I am going to have a Win PC built.
That doesn't mean that I don't need to continue with some more research
before I actually willing to balls on go out and tell my tech guy what
kind of mainboard, processor, video card and sound card I want, but it is
a lot more straight forward than with Linux. Despite this great list, I
still have absolutely no idea what kind of video card to get.
Installation on complete systems has on the other hand improved dramatically.

>Is Linux really "too dependent on hardware manufacturers"? After all,
>there are
>open source drivers for most major pieces of hardware, developed
independently
>of the manufacturers. Even ATI and Nvidia video cards have open source
drivers
>(in addition to proprietary ones from the companies themselves).
>
If the Linux community has a difficult time convincing hardware producers
to provide specs for those that would like to code drivers or if the
companies don't provide them themselves without a massive lobbying
effort, or where reverse engineering has to be used to develop a driver,
than yes, the Linux community IS too dependent.

>I'm not sure if I'm understanding you correctly, but are you suggesting
>that the
>open source community make their own hardware products from scratch? In most
>cases, this is far more trouble than it's worth, and we'd be better off
simply
>lobbying manufacturers to support GNU/Linux. There are some products made
>specifically to run GNU/Linux, like the Zaurus (as you have mentioned). The
>closest thing to your proposal would be the Simputer (http://
>www.simputer.org).
>It would be economically unfeasible (and unnecessary) for a group of
people to
>join together and decide to produce, say, a sound card. Even if it were
>possible, they would never reach sufficient economies of scale to make a
>decent
>return on the investment. There is more to a company than technical
expertise,
>with or without external funding. It would be much simpler to make GNU/Linux
>drivers for an ordinary device. Why should I buy a new graphics card
>simply so I
>can use GNU/Linux? I want my existing hardware to work, as do most other
>people
>(particularly newbies).

In many cases, yes it would be economically unfeasible to produce Linux
specific products (but not all) and yes, I would like my existing
hardware to work on Linux as well. This is a quandary that all "small"
OS's face when dealing with a desktop market dominated by Microsoft and
there is no simple solution. Less competition on GUI related apps,
despite the historical differences between KDE and GNOME, would free up a
lot of resources for other projects and in the long term would create a
GUI that had a uniform structure, regardless of app. Things like uniform
copy, cut and paste that were the original issues that led to this list
discussion. A uniform workstation hardware standard would help as well.
Linux has a larger desktop install base than Apple, but is unable to
leverage as well.

>There are few reasons to install Mandrake 8.0 when 8.1 is the latest
>version. I
>agree that a downloadable list might be nice, though. There are also
plenty of
>GNU/Linux sites that have lists of supported hardware and descriptions on
>how to
>get particular pieces of hardware to work.

Again, yes there probably are many sites that have these lists, but if I
like Mandrake, why should I have to look any other place than the
Mandrake site for info that I need? Maybe this is another of the
differences between the Mac and Linux communities. The Mac community is
used to using a few sites/e-mail lists that provide 99.9% of the
information that they need. Newbies to Linux would benefit from this as
well. My Mac experience living abroad has taught me to be resilient and
to try to solve hardware and software problems to a large degree by
myself. There are large black holes in the world, where you no longer can
get Mac support on site, unlike ten years ago. None of this has prepared
me for what should be a relatively simple task, trying to find out which
video cards on sale in Indonesia, have Linux drivers available. This
isn't a rant, just a fact. Maybe others on the list will think that I am
just whining, but the fact is that I have visited the first twenty sites,
searched Google and am still as much in the dark as I was to start with.
This isn't user friendly, not to mention newbie friendly.

My 0.02 Euros,

Brian




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: Re(4): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Sridhar Dhanapalan]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:57:07 +0700, Brian Durant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >You trivialise the issue. Drivers are supposed to be written by hardware
> >manufacturers (who actually know what the hardware is about), not by
> >software/OS designers (who must reverse engineer the hardware to know
> how it works).
> 
> Yes, you are of course correct in this, but I don't feel that I am
> trivialising the issue. The reality, for someone like myself, is that we
> in principle would gladly buy into the Open Source concept, but we want
> something that will work. Not necessarily out of the box, but something
> that is not "voodoo" for 99% percent of newcommers to the OS. You don't
> do that in the Mac OS and you don't do that in Windows.

Is hardware support really as bad as you seem to make it sound? I've loaded
various versions of Mandrake on a variety of different systems, and I've never
had any problems that I couldn't easily fix.

> >Manufacturers are reluctant to write Linux drivers, forcing the community to
> >come up with their own. Why is this the case? First and foremost, there is no
> >commercial incentive to support an OS that only has a few percentage
> points of
> >the desktop market. This problem applies to all but one x86 OS.
> Secondly, many
> >manufacturers misunderstand how GNU/Linux works, believing it is somehow
> >'viral' (to use MS terminology). To them, releasing drivers means
> letting their
> >intellectual property secrets out into the open, which elimiates any
> >competitive edge that company may have had.
> 
> This is really where the problems start to come to light. Apple, while
> dependent on 3rd. party companies to provide certain hardware (and
> software), largely controls both the hardware specs and the UI, making a
> far more homogenous package. M$ leverages hardware as well due to its
> large installation base and in some cases has produced or has had
> hardware produced under the M$ name to M$ specs, sometimes in a duopoly
> with Intel. This is also where the Linux business model is partially
> faulty. Linux is too dependent on hardware manufacturers, as well as
> splitting efforts too often between, similar GUI or programs. A viable OS
> is not just based on hardware or software, but a combination of both.

Is Linux really "too dependent on hardware manufacturers"? After all, there are
open source drivers for most major pieces of hardware, developed independently
of the manufacturers. Even ATI and Nvidia video cards have open source drivers
(in addition to proprietary ones from the companies themselves).

> Linux has not succeeded in leveraging hardware developers to any
> meaningful extent as far as I am concerned.

GNU/Linux runs on almost any hardware platform imaginable, from tiny embedded
devices to mainframes and supercomputers. Windows and MacOS can't do this, and
for the most part they are tied to x86 and PPC respectively. GNU/Linux may not
have much desktop market share, but it is incredibly strong in other areas (e.g.
servers). IBM, for example, are adopting it for its entire hardware line,
literally ranging from wristwatches to supercomputers. Sun, Compaq and HP are
adopting it as well, and they all have pumped significant amounts of money into
open source development. Last year, IBM spent about $US1 billion on GNU/Linux,
and in that same period they recouped almost all of it. If that isn't
"leveraging hardware developers" then I don't know what is.

> >The reality is somewhat different: Linux (i.e. the kernel) is licensed
> under a modified GPL which allows proprietary binary-only modules.
> Companies like Nvidia have taken advantage of this, and
> >have released very capable drivers. 3dfx and Matrox went one step further by
> >openly co-operating with open source hackers to produce open drivers.
> >
> >Why does Windows seemingly have such great hardware support? Because it
> >has over 90% of the desktop OS market, it cannot be ignored by hardware
> >manufacturers. Do you really think that MS write their own hardware drivers?
> 
> This does not ignore the fact that most Linux advocacy is done in the
> area of trying to get hardware producers  to support open specifications
> for Linux drivers or to use Linux in the embedded chip market. What
> prevents a dedicated Linux group from producing a sound card, video card,
> etc. that is made for the Linux market? The same goes for PDA's. Sharp's
> new Zaurus prototype using Linux looks great, but who says that others
> can't build a better mouse trap? Is it maybe because the market isn't
> there yet? I'm not sure, but Linux advocacy reminds me a lot of the Mac
> advocacy that I saw some years ago, when Apple kept losing market share.
> Lastly, coding for Linux projects, whether they are for the kernel or
> specific software such as drivers or other things can easily be shared on
> the Internet. If someone drops out or burns out, there is usually someone
> else that joins the team and helps out. Physical production can't

Re(4): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Brian Durant]

>You trivialise the issue. Drivers are supposed to be written by hardware
>manufacturers (who actually know what the hardware is about), not by
>software/OS designers (who must reverse engineer the hardware to know
how it works).

Yes, you are of course correct in this, but I don't feel that I am
trivialising the issue. The reality, for someone like myself, is that we
in principle would gladly buy into the Open Source concept, but we want
something that will work. Not necessarily out of the box, but something
that is not "voodoo" for 99% percent of newcommers to the OS. You don't
do that in the Mac OS and you don't do that in Windows.

>Manufacturers are reluctant to write Linux drivers, forcing the community to
>come up with their own. Why is this the case? First and foremost, there is no
>commercial incentive to support an OS that only has a few percentage
points of
>the desktop market. This problem applies to all but one x86 OS.
Secondly, many
>manufacturers misunderstand how GNU/Linux works, believing it is somehow
>'viral' (to use MS terminology). To them, releasing drivers means
letting their
>intellectual property secrets out into the open, which elimiates any
>competitive edge that company may have had.

This is really where the problems start to come to light. Apple, while
dependent on 3rd. party companies to provide certain hardware (and
software), largely controls both the hardware specs and the UI, making a
far more homogenous package. M$ leverages hardware as well due to its
large installation base and in some cases has produced or has had
hardware produced under the M$ name to M$ specs, sometimes in a duopoly
with Intel. This is also where the Linux business model is partially
faulty. Linux is too dependent on hardware manufacturers, as well as
splitting efforts too often between, similar GUI or programs. A viable OS
is not just based on hardware or software, but a combination of both.
Linux has not succeeded in leveraging hardware developers to any
meaningful extent as far as I am concerned.

>The reality is somewhat different: Linux (i.e. the kernel) is licensed
under a modified GPL which allows proprietary binary-only modules.
Companies like Nvidia have taken advantage of this, and
>have released very capable drivers. 3dfx and Matrox went one step further by
>openly co-operating with open source hackers to produce open drivers.
>
>Why does Windows seemingly have such great hardware support? Because it
>has over 90% of the desktop OS market, it cannot be ignored by hardware
>manufacturers. Do you really think that MS write their own hardware drivers?

This does not ignore the fact that most Linux advocacy is done in the
area of trying to get hardware producers  to support open specifications
for Linux drivers or to use Linux in the embedded chip market. What
prevents a dedicated Linux group from producing a sound card, video card,
etc. that is made for the Linux market? The same goes for PDA's. Sharp's
new Zaurus prototype using Linux looks great, but who says that others
can't build a better mouse trap? Is it maybe because the market isn't
there yet? I'm not sure, but Linux advocacy reminds me a lot of the Mac
advocacy that I saw some years ago, when Apple kept losing market share.
Lastly, coding for Linux projects, whether they are for the kernel or
specific software such as drivers or other things can easily be shared on
the Internet. If someone drops out or burns out, there is usually someone
else that joins the team and helps out. Physical production can't be
shared on the Internet for obvious reasons (Beam Me Up Scotty)!, it
requires financial investment, etc. Another kind of commitment is
required. All of this is obvious to everyone, yet it seems to me that it
is here where Linux' weakest link exists.

>Apple are in a similar situation. They have their own little hardware
market, of which they
>would have about 99% share (with Darwin and GNU/Linux making up much of the
>remainder). They make their own boxes, giving them ultimate control over the
>entire platform. Consequently, hardware designed for Macs works exceptionally
>well (often better than how they work in Windows).

In reality, I don't think that we disagree as such, except maybe with
regards to how user friendly the Linux experience should be for newbies.
This discussion has been fruitful for me, if for no other reason, that I
now know that I should look more closely at Nvidia, 3dfx and Matrox video
cards ;-) Finally, I think that Mandrake could improve their site for
people doing research about what video card/sound card to buy, by
providing a text file or PDF that provides a list of all of the drivers
for recognized cards that are available at install for each version i.e.
what cards are recognized when installing Mandrake 8, 8.1, 8.2, etc. on a
new system. While the categories of "known" and "tested" hardware are
useful, it really doesn't provide the whole picture.

Cheers,

Brian




Want to buy your Pack or Services f

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Pascal Goguey]

2002 2? 13 ??? 13:40??:

> > Id depends on what you want. For most of the people of this list
> > (including me), Mandraje provides everything for the daily use.
> > As for my frustrations:
> > - No consistent cut & paste;
>
> This can be frustrating if you use different toolkits. The
> select-and-middle-click method works in most places, though.

Most of the places doesn't mean all the places. I know that the
middle button has a higher success likelyhood, and that's why I
use it all the time. But what I am saying is that some applications
use ctrl-c / ctrl-v and some other don't. Just imagine: you're a
new user coming from MacOSX (where cut&paste is a key feature)
and you land in an OS without this feature. What do you do then?
You buy another Mac.
Note that I am not saying that Linux is bad, otherwise I would
not use it and not even bother writing here. Linux improves
constantly. Among the distribs I have used, Mandrake is the most
advanced in terms of user-friendness, and I am really looking
foreward to more consistency which will make it an unbeatable
office machine.

So to summarize what I mean by non-consistent cut&paste:
Most of the applics work with select-middle button. -> some fair consistency.
Some accept ctrl-c / x / v, some don't some other use a different
key combination -> the general case is no consistent cut&paste.
If you want to add more consistency, then remove the ctrll-c / x/ v
from all the applications that support it and replace that with select /
middle button or do the opposite. I am aware that this cannot be solved
by Mandrake. At least not Mandrake alone.

> > - No way to reassign the shortcuts consistently to mimick Mac's
> > behaviour. At least not in KDE, and the changes don't apply consistently
> > everywhere.
>
> Have you looked for alternatives? If KDE doesn't suit your needs, then try
> something else. Have you looked at GNOME and/or WindowMaker? KDE isn't the
> whole world, you know.

I know. But I was replying to a person who wants to convince a Mac
addict to switch to Linux, Mandrake or other.
Just imagine the guy who buys the CDs or downloads them. Since
he doesn't know anything about Linux, he just chooses the default
options. As you may know, KDE is the default of Mandrake (I mean,
if you press enter to all the questions you don't know during installation,
you will end up with a KDE environment). As a new user, you don't know
the difference between KDE and Gnome, do you? And as an average
user who does not want to bother reading the docs (90% of the users,
including me), you just try an see.
So to summarize the situation, as a default config (in KDE), you are not
able to configure the keys. At least it does not work consistently,
system-wide. If you want system-wide settings, I guess you have to
provide these settings at some level earlier than the window manager,
be it gnome or kde. I don't know if this can be done by environment
variables, but something like that may work.
export LINUX_COPY_KEY="ctrl-C"
export LINUX_PASTE_KEY="ctrl-V" (or the same configs with alt)

etc...

and all the window managers should refer to the same settings.
I am not saying it's simple or even feasible with the current OS
status...

> > - Fonts / encoding problems as soon as you don't use an english
> > platform. I am still unable, for instance, to send a message that
> > contains French AND Japanese in the same page. Either the accents or the
> > kanjis are unsuported.
>
> Internationalisation suport in GNU/Linux is supposed to be very good.

Is supposed, yes, once you manage to configure it properly, which is
(I think) beyond beginner's capabilities.

> Again, have you tried different apps to see if one suited your needs? I
> hear that Pango (the GNOME2 internationalisation library, used by GNOME2
> apps) handles this sort of thing quite well. Also, make sure you're using
> Unicode fonts.

Again, if you think as a new user would, you just take all the defaults.
Here is my Mandrake 8.1 experience:
- I clean installed 8.1 with Japanese option from the installer;
- Everything went pretty well until the installation finishes. A few messages
came out in English, which may bring some trouble for the non-english
speakers, but the localization ratio is very good.
- At reboot time, I had no fonts at all (this means no menus or at best
a few garbage characters)
- I had to choose fonts blindly (fortunately there were some icons). After
a few restarts of KDE, I got the menus working. Now I opened kmail.
As it was the first time I used the mail, I think the app could have taken
the font parameters I had setup for kde, but no, I had to configure fonts for
kmail as well.

Now, my config works rather well. Both the OS and me have made a step
towards each other (I got a more or less working config, and I have
adapted myself to what I cannot configure).

At one point after receiving 8,1, I sent quite a lot of reports to the
i18n group, and I hope 8.2 will have made some fixes. 

But

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Andrei Raevsky]

>
>okay, i'm curious .. WHICH linus t book?
>
>
"Just for fun"

cheers,



_
MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: 
http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: Re(2): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Sridhar Dhanapalan]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 12:43:37 +0700, Brian Durant <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >That's true. I'm sure free software will get there; it'll just take some
> >time :)
> 
> Apps may get there, but drivers for video cards, sound cards, etc. is a
> friggin nightmare without end! Here you have some very nice and
> technically skilled programmers that are trying to play catch up with
> commercial products. On sites like , they
> openly state not to ask about when there will be driver support for x or
> xx card! This unfortunately will not change in the foreseeable future, as
> far as I am concerned, unless the business model for Linux changes
> drastically. Difficulty in finding a videocard on the local market that
> has Linux drivers is close to what we in the old days on the Mac OS
> called "SCSI Voodoo". I am so fed up with this "Linux Driver Voodoo" that
> I am regretting having started on my Linux box project at all! As I
> haven't purchased any hardware yet, maybe I will just buy one of those
> new "Luxor" iMacs and be done with it!

You trivialise the issue. Drivers are supposed to be written by hardware
manufacturers (who actually know what the hardware is about), not by software/OS
designers (who must reverse engineer the hardware to know how it works).
Manufacturers are reluctant to write Linux drivers, forcing the community to
come up with their own. Why is this the case? First and foremost, there is no
commercial incentive to support an OS that only has a few percentage points of
the desktop market. This problem applies to all but one x86 OS. Secondly, many
manufacturers misunderstand how GNU/Linux works, believing it is somehow 'viral'
(to use MS terminology). To them, releasing drivers means letting their
intellectual property secrets out into the open, which elimiates any competitive
edge that company may have had. The reality is somewhat different: Linux (i.e.
the kernel) is licensed under a modified GPL which allows proprietary
binary-only modules. Companies like Nvidia have taken advantage of this, and
have released very capable drivers. 3dfx and Matrox went one step further by
openly co-operating with open source hackers to produce open drivers.

Why does Windows seemingly have such great hardware support? Because it has over
90% of the desktop OS market, it cannot be ignored by hardware manufacturers. Do
you really think that MS write their own hardware drivers? Apple are in a
similar situation. They have their own little hardware market, of which they
would have about 99% share (with Darwin and GNU/Linux making up much of the
remainder). They make their own boxes, giving them ultimate control over the
entire platform. Consequently, hardware designed for Macs works exceptionally
well (often better than how they work in Windows).

-- 
Sridhar Dhanapalan

"I'm a stupid git. I even remember thinking about the syncing issues at some
point, and then obviously just forgetting about it completely."
-- Linus Torvalds



Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re(2): [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Brian Durant]

>That's true. I'm sure free software will get there; it'll just take some
>time :)

Apps may get there, but drivers for video cards, sound cards, etc. is a
friggin nightmare without end! Here you have some very nice and
technically skilled programmers that are trying to play catch up with
commercial products. On sites like , they
openly state not to ask about when there will be driver support for x or
xx card! This unfortunately will not change in the foreseeable future, as
far as I am concerned, unless the business model for Linux changes
drastically. Difficulty in finding a videocard on the local market that
has Linux drivers is close to what we in the old days on the Mac OS
called "SCSI Voodoo". I am so fed up with this "Linux Driver Voodoo" that
I am regretting having started on my Linux box project at all! As I
haven't purchased any hardware yet, maybe I will just buy one of those
new "Luxor" iMacs and be done with it!

Cheers,

Brian




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Sridhar Dhanapalan]

On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 12:47:57 +0900, Pascal Goguey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> > >Sorry, I forgot to ask this in my first reply but why do you feel the need
> > >to convert your friend to Linux if he is happy with Mac OS X?
> >
> > For a very simple reason: I don't think that proprietary software is a good
> > thing.  Neither do I trust that Mac suddenly coming into Unices and even
> > open source with their next OS is anything but opportunism born out of dire
> > need.  As for their OS - look at Linus T's comments about it in his book.
> 
> Id depends on what you want. For most of the people of this list
> (including me), Mandraje provides everything for the daily use.
> As for my frustrations:
> - No consistent cut & paste;

This can be frustrating if you use different toolkits. The
select-and-middle-click method works in most places, though.

> - No way to reassign the shortcuts consistently to mimick Mac's
> behaviour. At least not in KDE, and the changes don't apply consistently
> everywhere.

Have you looked for alternatives? If KDE doesn't suit your needs, then try
something else. Have you looked at GNOME and/or WindowMaker? KDE isn't the whole
world, you know.

> - Fonts / encoding problems as soon as you don't use an english
> platform. I am still unable, for instance, to send a message that contains
> French AND Japanese in the same page. Either the accents or the
> kanjis are unsuported.

Internationalisation suport in GNU/Linux is supposed to be very good. Again,
have you tried different apps to see if one suited your needs? I hear that Pango
(the GNOME2 internationalisation library, used by GNOME2 apps) handles this sort
of thing quite well. Also, make sure you're using Unicode fonts.

> We (on this list) can cope with this, but as for a person coming from
> MacOSX world where the 3 points above work perfectly, I guess it is
> not easy and for them, Mac is still the only solution that works out of
> the box, without any other config.

That's true. I'm sure free software will get there; it'll just take some time :)

-- 
Sridhar Dhanapalan

"De gustibus non disputandum."
  -- Linus Torvalds



Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[NDPTAL85]

> On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:04:56 -0500, NDPTAL85 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
>> Meanwhile ArsDigita has closed up shop
>
> http://www.arsdigita.com/
>
> All the links seem to work. Maybe you meant ADUniversity? The ACS is 
> still
> open source and still available, though it's been converted from TCL to 
> Java.


Yeah its closed. Went out of business. It was announced on Slashdot last 
week. There's OpenACS too but who knows where that will lead.






--
Computers come in two styles - prototype and obsolete!
--




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Pascal Goguey]

Hello,

> >Sorry, I forgot to ask this in my first reply but why do you feel the need
> >to convert your friend to Linux if he is happy with Mac OS X?
>
> For a very simple reason: I don't think that proprietary software is a good
> thing.  Neither do I trust that Mac suddenly coming into Unices and even
> open source with their next OS is anything but opportunism born out of dire
> need.  As for their OS - look at Linus T's comments about it in his book.

Id depends on what you want. For most of the people of this list
(including me), Mandraje provides everything for the daily use.
As for my frustrations:
- No consistent cut & paste;
- No way to reassign the shortcuts consistently to mimick Mac's
behaviour. At least not in KDE, and the changes don't apply consistently
everywhere.
- Fonts / encoding problems as soon as you don't use an english
platform. I am still unable, for instance, to send a message that contains
French AND Japanese in the same page. Either the accents or the
kanjis are unsuported.

We (on this list) can cope with this, but as for a person coming from
MacOSX world where the 3 points above work perfectly, I guess it is
not easy and for them, Mac is still the only solution that works out of
the box, without any other config.


Pascal



Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Chris Keelan]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:04:56 -0500, NDPTAL85 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Meanwhile ArsDigita has closed up shop 

http://www.arsdigita.com/

All the links seem to work. Maybe you meant ADUniversity? The ACS is still
open source and still available, though it's been converted from TCL to Java.


- C



Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Sridhar Dhanapalan]

On Tue, 12 Feb 2002 17:04:56 -0500, NDPTAL85 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Meanwhile ArsDigita has closed up shop and months ago the company that 
> housed the original PostgreSQL developers shut down. Oh yeah Loki shut 
> down too. When these companies shut down, the software doesn't die 
> because its GPL, but thats really no consolation. If they can't afford 
> to work on it any longer then the software really doesn't go anywhere. 
> It just lingers and gets more and more out of date.

None of these companies wrote GPL software as their main product (if at all).
Most of Loki's offerings were closed source. These died with Loki. Other pieces
of software live or die according to their license. PostgreSQL will not die any
time soon -- there are far too many companies and individuals using it for that
to happen. Red Hat have their own database software based on PostgreSQL. If
there is enough interest in the product, the software will live. Just look at
Nautilus: Eazel failed last year but Nautilus development is alive and well. The
original developers don't have to be there; the GPL makes it simple enough for
anybody to take over if necessary. I have seen this happen time and time again
with GPL projects.

The beauty of the GPL and some other open source licenses is that they are
almost totally divorced from business cycles. Sure, some corporte input can be a
bonus, but it is hardly necessary. GPL software only really began to be noticed
by corporations in 1998, but they had been in active development since 1984. In
that time, a complete operating system had been written, complete with a
developer tools and a multitude of applications.

-- 
Sridhar Dhanapalan

"Life does not end at 2.4.0. Think of
it more as a "no more excuses" release."
-- Linus Torvalds



Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Kenn Yahoo]

okay, i'm curious .. WHICH linus t book?


- Original Message -
From: "Andrei Raevsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 1:38 PM
Subject: Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!


|
| >
| >Sorry, I forgot to ask this in my first reply but why do you feel the
need
| >to convert your friend to Linux if he is happy with Mac OS X?
| >
| For a very simple reason: I don't think that proprietary software is a
good
| thing.  Neither do I trust that Mac suddenly coming into Unices and even
| open source with their next OS is anything but opportunism born out of
dire
| need.  As for their OS - look at Linus T's comments about it in his book.
|
| Cheers,
|
| Andrei
|
| _
| Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.
|
|
|






| Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
| Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
|


_
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Andrei Raevsky]

>
>Sorry, I forgot to ask this in my first reply but why do you feel the need 
>to convert your friend to Linux if he is happy with Mac OS X?
>
For a very simple reason: I don't think that proprietary software is a good 
thing.  Neither do I trust that Mac suddenly coming into Unices and even 
open source with their next OS is anything but opportunism born out of dire 
need.  As for their OS - look at Linus T's comments about it in his book.

Cheers,

Andrei

_
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[NDPTAL85]

On Tuesday, February 12, 2002, at 11:12  AM, Andrei Raevsky wrote:

Hi,

I am looking for a good, thourough and detailed, technical comparison of Mac OS X versus Linux.  A friend of mine is a really "religious" Mac user and it will take a lot to make him try Linux.  I would like to help him with this.

Please send me any good articles (or links) you have.

Thanks,

Andrei

Sorry, I forgot to ask this in my first reply but why do you feel the need to convert your friend to Linux if he is happy with Mac OS X?






--
Artificial intelligence is no match for natural stupidity.
-- 

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[NDPTAL85]

 On Tuesday, February 12, 2002, at 11:12  AM, Andrei Raevsky wrote:

Hi,

I am looking for a good, thourough and detailed, technical comparison of Mac OS X versus Linux.  A friend of mine is a really "religious" Mac user and it will take a lot to make him try Linux.  I would like to help him with this.

Please send me any good articles (or links) you have.

Thanks,

Andrei

I use both Mac OS X and Mandrake Linux. Either one is fine for desktop usage. Let him stick to what he has, there really is no need for you to convince him to switch. Mac OS X is an excellent Unix by the way. There isn't much you can do with one that you can't do with the other.



--
Mac OS X, FreeBSD, Mandrake Linux and Windows XP Pro are my OS's. I am GEEK, hear me roar.
--

RE: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Jason Ditri]

Title: Message



Now, I 
ask:
 
Have 
you ever come across a Mac user whom is not religious about 
it?
 
 
I am 
getting that way about (Mandrake) Linux...
 
 
 
Also, 
thanks to all the people who replied to "Speed... or lack of?" post, I added 
256MB of RAM, and I hardly notice any slow down.  I read about updating my 
kernel, I don't know if I need to just yet.
 
 
Thanks 
again!
 
 

  
  -Original Message-From: Andrei Raevsky 
  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2002 11:13 
  AMTo: [EMAIL PROTECTED]Subject: [newbie] Mac OS 
  X versus Linux?!
  
  
  
  Hi,
  I am looking for a good, thourough and detailed, technical comparison of 
  Mac OS X versus Linux.  A friend of mine is a really "religious" Mac user 
  and it will take a lot to make him try Linux.  I would like to help him 
  with this.
  Please send me any good articles (or links) you have.
  Thanks,
  Andrei
  ---
  
  Registered Linux user 
  226850
  
  
  Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.

Re: [newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Nicolas VERITE]

Andrei Raevsky wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am looking for a good, thourough and detailed, technical comparison 
> of Mac OS X versus Linux.  A friend of mine is a really "religious" 
> Mac user and it will take a lot to make him try Linux.  I would like 
> to help him with this.
>
> Please send me any good articles (or links) you have.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Andrei
>
The best document I've ever read is "Tales of the BeOS refugee".

This compares not only MacOS X and Linux,
but also Win and BeOS.
In fact, it is a comparison of BeOS and MacOS X,
with a look at Linux and Win.
The point of view is : "the power-user".

Really a reference document to me !

http://www.osnews.com/story.php?news_id=421
You can also read comments,
there is a "feedback version" of this doc somewhere,
but I can't find it...

Enjoy !

Nyco




Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com

[newbie] Mac OS X versus Linux?!

[Andrei Raevsky]

Hi,
I am looking for a good, thourough and detailed, technical comparison of Mac OS X versus Linux.  A friend of mine is a really "religious" Mac user and it will take a lot to make him try Linux.  I would like to help him with this.
Please send me any good articles (or links) you have.
Thanks,
Andrei
---

Registered Linux user 226850
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com.


Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? 
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com