Dumping LinuxPPC For MacOS X?

batobin writes: "In the PowerPC industry, MacOS is the mainstream OS. When a user needs features that the mainstream cannot provide, they seek alternatives. In the past years, many Mac users have sought out Linux for a number of reasons. Whether they were looking for a system that was open source, faster, or more reliable, Linux was a viable alternative. But now Apple is close to releasing MacOS X, and it solves many of the problems that drove Apple customers away from MacOS. Will these LinuxPPC users switch back to Apple's OS when OS X comes out? This article tackles the subject."

Multimedia vs. Networking

The main reason a non-Graphics professional would want to buy a Mac or other PPC machine would be because of the hardware. An intense speed boost given to certain kinds of math-intensive work: e.g. Run Photoshop or Premeire on a G4 500 and an Athlon 500. They simply run faster on the Mac. Anyone have experience with non-MM apps on PPC platforms?

I think that it can be sucessfully argued that while Linux in any incarnation is a powerful OS for servers, development and office work, it falls critically short for multimedia creation. If you install LinuxPPC, it's because you want the powers for the first three and not the latter. This is going to be LinuxPPC's chokehold over OSX. I'm not saying that they'll lose it to OSX's *nix parts, I'm just saying that that's what they got right now.

witless mac users.

For most Mac users, the last thing they want to use is the "tech-savvy" requirements of a Linux desktop

they wouldn't have used linuxppc in the first place, and the question is, after all, would they switch back. personally, the mac is my favored platform -- and i'm also running netbsd and getting together a linux box.

and no, i don't like graphics work either. see? we're not all poncy art students, just like linux users aren't all socially maladjusted virgins.

--saint
----

my personal experience

As a regular user of Mac OS X I can say that it has staved off any desire for me to jump ship to LinuxPPC. I'm aware of some limitations and quirks with Mac OS X, however it satisfies enough of my need for more power to settle my restlessness. Before Mac OS X I almost always had my mac set to dual boot into some other OS, but these days I live in comfort with one OS on my mac. Of course, I admin a bunch of other boxen so my fingers don't get rusty to other systems, but I think it is a good workstation OS for my purposes.

Speaking as a Mac User

Couple years ago, before I sold my Performa 6116CD and bought my Rev C iMac, I tried installing MKLinux to see if I could breath new life into it. I found out, in a word, no. I could not breath new life into it. I didn't have the time to learn how to "properly" set up "linux". Then I tried LinuxPPC 2K on my iMac, just to see if that progressed. Nope, couldn't do that either. Then, 5 months ago, I built a x86 based PC to use as an additional web browser (MacOS X PB running NATD sharing PPP). I downloaded BeOS R5, Mandrake 7.1, RedHat 6.5, RedHat 7.1. I couldn't get any of the Linux distribs to what i consider a useable state. All supported hardware. I could get BeOS to a useable state in a matter of minutes.

Point of the story. I wanted Linux to work. I wanted to try it. I'm not uneducated. I work on IRIX 6.5 all day at work (3 years now). I just don't want to think about my home computer. Linux made me think significantly more than MacOS X (which by the way, the ONLY thing I set up was PPP, the rest "just worked").

So, I would expect MacOS users to choose MacOS X over Linux any day. I will buy a G4 to get the most out of MacOS X, even if it is more expensive than a PC. At least with a Mac I wont have to struggle to work with my computer, the computer will work for me.

Since when does Linux run Mac software?

...In the past years, many Mac users have sought out Linux for a number of reasons. Whether they were looking for a system that was open source, faster, or more reliable, Linux was a viable alternative.

Excuse me, but since years there are just a few reasons why people buy Apple Macintoshes and not other software: 1) some markets are mainly Apple: print, DTP etc 2) people like the ease of use of an apple and the logic and design of the OS.

Since when is Linux then an alternative? it's not, it cannot offer the same functionality just because it's a total different OS. So I find it very hard to believe 'many mac users' were looking for an alternative to MacOS.

Sure, the few die-hard macfans who ran their servers using MacOS server were perhaps changing to LinuxPPC, but than again... is LinuxPPC able to produce the same AppleTalk performance as MacOS server can? Dunno, but I think the ONLY people who ran LinuxPPC on a Mac were those who were liking the PPC hardware more than the x86 and didn't have the money to buy an alpha or sparc powered machine. I mean.. if you want to run linux, what hardware do you get? 1) an expensive G4 2) an x86 based PC (and very cheap compared to 1)) 3) an alpha workstation/server and 4) a sun workstation. I bet a lot will say: 2), because I get the most hardware for the least amount of money. I also bet not a lot will say: 1), because I think Apple makes the best hardware there is.

So LinuxPPC is not an OS variant with millions of possible users. If you think about the reasons why most macusers bought a mac in the first place, you'll also know that MacOSX is the nail on LinuxPPC's coffin, except for those (all 3 of them) who keep the G4 AND linuxPPC.
--

already done

well as i've already commented here [slashdot.org], i have a lot of trouble finding a good reason to use LinuxPPC over MacOS X

i've used many incarnations of Linux on Apple computers, including LinuxPPC and Yellow Dog. i found that in both cases they were akward and buggy compared to similar Linux installations on my x86 box. i run linux regularly on this x86 machine but after years of trying LinuxPPC, i have given up on it completely except when i absolutely need it.

i found that just about every software program that i use on x86, including relatively "critical" software, like my window managers and GUI (WindowMaker, KDE, Gnome) were completely unusable due to the number of bugs i encountered. Linux PPC was outright useless on my Powerbook G3, as i would experience at a kernel panic every couple of days. and despite getting help from the Usenet, mailing lists and web boards, i just couldn't find a suitible fix for the problem. i've been a linux user since 1994, and i have never had as many problems running linux x86 in all those years as i've had running LinuxPPC in the last two years.

with regards to MacOS X, i've been running it since DP3, and i've been very happy with it. it's been very stable, i'm quite fond of Aqua (though it did take some getting used to) especially with the recent changes in the latest developer builds. it runs all my old MacOS 9 programs, it's got all the command-line utilities i could ever want, and Project Builder is a joy to develop in.

MacOS X isn't perfect of course: it's quite sluggish and requires a lot of RAM, but this is getting better with each new build, and isn't a problem at all if you don't need to run classic (and with any luck, the applications i'll need will be carbonized soon, and i can do away with classic all together). actually the speed of MacOS X without running classic is completely reasonable, even on my old G3.

what it comes down to is that Linux is really meant for x86. all major development is done for Intel first, and porting to PPC is an afterthought at best. this is certainly true for any third-party applications. i can't see using LinuxPPC as a server, as that seems like a job that would be more cost-effective done on an x86 box. and as a desktop machine, MacOS X beats it hands down. i will glady throw away LinuxPPC as soon as a reliable X-Server can be run on MacOS X.

so remind me again why i should be running LinuxPPC? maybe it sounds like i've been drinking the Apple Kool-Aid, but i'm completely sold on MacOS X.

- j

A note

The point of the article was not whether people would switch from LinuxPPC to Mac OS in general but whether they'd switch to Mac OS X. You are correct that Mac OS 9 and previous versions are inadequate for the kind of person who would be in a position to consider the switch -- namely, people who are running LinuxPPC now, the power user folks -- but OS X ameliorates (get it? HAW!) many of those deficiencies. With the Darwin panties under its Aqua skirt, OS X provides a platform that combines the interface friendliness of the historical Mac with the ability to install the vast quantity of free|opensource software that we have come to expect...oh, and it also gives you stuff like a modern QuickTime for viewing those sweet movie trailers, like the full-screen one for "Cast Away"...where was I?

(What I found most interesting about the article was the lack of a prominent mention of the fact that at present, you don't get Mac OS X without getting Aqua, and that alone is sufficient to keep me from switching back.)

Re:MacOSX is already a failure

Perhaps because you're running a beta? In-development OS's aren't tuned, they're still in the process of being assembled. From all reports the later internal releases of MacOS X are an order of magnitude faster then the general beta releases.

Tell, me - do you complain about the texture of a cake when you've pulled it from the oven 1/2-baked?

Re:Speaking as a Mac User

As a final note, I think it's pretty sad that you do not wish to think about your home computer. To expect everything to work and not know what your computer does and why it does it is just ignorance, and no one should desire that.

Like the original poster, I work in a unix environment most of the time, and I work in w2k the rest of the time. Lately I've been working 6 days a week, 12-14 hour days.

At this point, my machine at home is used for nothing but occasional surfing and email. It's an appliance, a communications device.

I shouldn't have to think about it. Once I've installed the OS and added DNS, and IP address and a gateway, I shouldn't have to think any further.

Most of the population isn't interested in hacking. Maybe on IRC and on /. they are, but outside, the people you meet in the Big Blue Room don't want to have to think about it.

I'm looking for a simple appliance to put into the kitchen which will handle email and looking up recipes and occasionally checking web pages. I'd like to plug it in, just like the toaster, to an electrical outlet, then plug in the ethernet cable, maybe set the IP settings, and be done. Plain and simple.

This is not sad. This is reality.

You're missing some people

While everyone's talking about Mac users who switched to Linux, you all seem to be forgetting Linux users who want to use Macs. Put me in the latter category.

Fact is, Macs are some nice hardware. If you studiously avoid the cube, they're not even that much more expensive than equivalent x86 machines. They run cool, some run silent, they're zippy on those big glibc compiles, the towers come in great cases, and they look pretty swank sitting on my desk.

But until OS X, I've been prevented from appreciating Macs by their horrible operating (sic) system. And to be frank, OS X doesn't quite do it for me, either, though I'll readily grant that it's a major leap forward for MacOS. I like my whole system free... I know and am comfortable with my linux OS of choice (guess), and have no overriding desire to use another. I'll dual-boot MacOS to play the occasional DVD (for the time being), but that's about it.

I have the GUI I want under Linux, I have all of the tools I want under Linux, I can accomplish all of my tasks (and waste my time effectively with the occasional game) under Linux, and with Linux my OS is consistent across my x86 and ppc platforms. (And if I want to pick up a SPARC or Alpha system, well, it's pretty much the same OS there, too.)

Now, other than perhaps some better hardware support (my only current problem is AWACS sound, and I haven't tried 2.4.x yet...), why would I want to take a step backward and use MacOS (X or otherwise)?

Re:linux has a _better_ interface than MacOS X

Linux??? Although I use linux daily, I find that it has almost the most unintuitive, steep-learning-curve interface of anything. (and believe me, I've used 'em all!)

It ain't great. It ain't even good. Pity on a fairly robust OS, but Win98SE with Active Directory turned off is so far ahead of Linux that the latter is strictly a pretender in the Desktop OS race.