Jordan Hubbard Gives Last Intervew For Apple

acaben writes "MacSlash has posted what Jordan Hubbard says will be his last interview for Apple. Apple's Engineering Manager for the BSD Technology Group talks about the new BSDPorts initiative, his thoughts on working for Apple and Apple's Open Source strategy, and how Mac users new to Open Source can get involved and contribute to the community. He also gets delightfully geeky in comparing the differences between Darwin's VM envirnoment and FreeBSD's and explains that Darwin was built with things like working with Final Cut Pro in mind."

Re:Jordan Sold out. Tsarkon reports. JH SOLD SOUL.

[Noodlenose]

gosh, he does sound hurt, our little AC, doesn't he?

Think of JH's move to Apple as his opportunity to spread the gospel to a wider audience than FreeBSD (of all OS's).

....a much wider audience.

"delightfully geeky"?

[Matthew Weigel]

don't geeks go in for, ah, technical details?

Where was the technical detail in saying "Darwin's VM system has to take into account different memory usage patterns"?

(I enjoyed the article, I guess, but "geeky"?)

Re:I'm starting to love Apple.

[Lars T.]

If YOU can't see that this post is funny, you must be a retard. QED

Re:I realize this is a huge troll, but...

[daveschroeder]

Yes, it's in its infancy, as you an I both said. Which is precisely why there are no big shops running it. Not to mention the fact that Apple is new to enterprise, and is approaching it very humbly. It will take a long time for people to trust, much less use, Apple server hardware in many environments. Also, the Xserve isn't a high end server, as I'm sure you know. It's for low- to medium-duty use (comparatively), at most. It's obviously not in the same market as high end IBM or Sun hardware, or high-end Intel-based servers.

And yes, we have servers. Tons of them. Literally hundreds of servers running mostly Solaris, AIX, Windows, and some Linux. And now, Mac OS X Server is starting to creep in. When a Sun/IBM/Dell/etc blade server would be appropriate, people are now looking at, asking about, and BUYING and DEPLOYING Apple. And I never said you should do server management at the GUI of a single server. Want to manage Mac OS X Server from the command line? Even via a serial termserver connection? Go for it. Want to manage it with Apple's remote GUI tools? Go for it. Want to manage and monitor it with HP OpenView? Go for it.

As for PowerPC: anyone who doesn't admit we're languishing, and have been for a while, with Motorola is denying the truth. Yes, Motorola sucks now at getting new PowerPC chips and technologies out the door. And IBM's PowerPC 970 will be shipping soon enough...do you have any doubt it will be shipping next year? And when it does, it will be an amazing competitor to all the other 64-bit products. This is obviously a chip destined for Apple's machines, and we'll see it next year.

Re:Ran out of arguments...? tsarkon

[daveschroeder]

apple's hardware? overpriced, and inferior target for programming. x86 is better because of being ubiquitous. all the other high end stuff is more scaleable. apple is just - stupid.

Hasn't the Mac vs. PC argument gotten tired yet? I thought we were talking about Apple's BSD-based OS...

Yes, there's more PCs. A shitload more. So many more that it's ridiculous. So what?

Apple OS. OS 9 and below was an industry last place horrorshow. No need to talk of that.

Sure had a lot of users...*

*Note: just because Windows has more users doesn't mean make the millions of Mac OS users a small number.

OS X picked the wrong kernel

In your opinion.

implements 95 APIs

?

And since one of the APIs is BSD, which you seem to love...

doesnt even get games on it to speak of

You keep contradicting yourself. You talk of Jordan Hubbard as a sellout because he "left" FreeBSD, but now you're obviously talking about Windows, which belongs to the biggest "corporate" titan of them all! And now you're bringing up games...games are a big market, but I give a rat's ass about games.

and uses a crappy, slow kernel

Some people would say that the hardware abstraction is a worthy tradeoff...

makes users pay for service packs Calling 10.2 a "service pack" implies that it has the same content as Windows service packs. Mac OS X had been out for a year and a half with no paid updates. A year and a half. That's plenty within a reasonable timeframe to charge for an OS update. If Apple had called it 10.5 or OS XI, would it have made any difference? And for those who argue that OS X before 10.2 was pretty much a "beta" and Apple shouldn't have charged for it, well, I'd argue that Windows before 98 (in the consumer sector where over 50% of people still run 98) were "beta" too. Additionally, no one, including Apple, forced anyone to run OS X. Everyone could have used, and still can use, OS 9.x if they are so inclined. Mac OS X 10.1.x was good for many, and 10.2.x began the real push to Mac OS X. One paid upgrade every year and a half seems fine with me.

Re:Apple Laptop Keyboards Unsuitable for Unix User

[usr122122121]

I am a long-time Unix user. That means I need to have the Ctrl key to the left of the A key.

As such a long-time Unix user, when you get down off of your soapbox, you will have no problem spending the ten seconds it takes to redo your keymappings.

Then, you may eat your foot for a mid-afternoon snack.