Free Software on a Cheap Computer 625
Shell writes "Is this the solution to free software on a cheap computer? NetBSD and Yellow Dog Linux have both begun to support the Mac Mini. This article from IBM looks at open source operating system options on this new contender in the embedded PowerPC platform space." From the article: "This article looks at the current state of Linux and NetBSD support on the Mini. If you need all the hardware and options fully supported, these open source options won't do it for you ... yet. But, if all you need is a stable kernel, a C compiler, and network support, the code is high-quality and the price is unbeatable." This is part two in the series. Part One was covered a while back.
Sadly the support isn't complete (Airport) (Score:5, Interesting)
They lay the blame at Broadcom's door for keeping the spec a secret, but lots of manufacturer's don't publish specs but still end up being supported, either through reverse-engineering or emulation + non-native-driver
Can any informed person comment on why this is taking so long?
Debian too (Score:4, Interesting)
"Current releases of Yellow Dog, as well as of Debian and Gentoo (both of which run on the Mini), are stable enough for use."
What's wrong with the Debian running on the Mini platform? Is there any reason Ubuntu couldn't run, too?
Re:OS included? (Score:5, Interesting)
Free software (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:OS included? (Score:4, Interesting)
The mac mini is cool and all, but it's not the first solution to cheap machine with free software. Maybe the first powerPC machine, maybe the first that has a the fancy case design, but that's about it. This is not going to be the piece of hardware that finally brings linux to the third world masses. You'd have to bring the price down quite a bit more for that.
Re:Cheap? (Score:3, Interesting)
With the full version, even.
OFFTOPIC RESPONSE TO OFFTOPICNESS BEGINS
I mean, that big aluminum G5 "mini" tower (mini? wtf?)
mini, because a full tower is taller.
Man was he ever pissed off when he found out he can't display a movie fullscreen on his nearly two thousand dollar monitor.
Then he should try mplayer or VLC, or shell out for Quicktime Pro.
Really... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:hardware support (Score:3, Interesting)
1. The MySQL library for CPAN does not install automagically, but the procedure was figured out long ago and is accessible to anyone that knows how to GIS.
2. Apache2 was much harder for me to setup, but I also had trouble in freeBSD so the fault is obviously mine.
Except for those two things, everything else is great.
Re:You can get a PC for $89US at geeks.com (Score:3, Interesting)
Geekit [geeks.com]
And that's $199. Don't forget the RAM too, though it does have the keyboard and mouse, though only PS/2. Not a bad price, but it's not a Mac either, I already have PCs that are a lot better than that. That said, I wouldn't buy a Mac to run linux or a plain BSD, I'd buy it for OS X. In my opinion, as a desktop OS, OS X as a whole is lightyears ahead of any Linux or other BSD I've seen.
Re:Sunk cost (Score:3, Interesting)
Yes, but very few people own a Mac Mini, so in most cases there is no sunk cost. So the question really is it worth it to buy a computer with an OS you intend to replace.
That's a different scenario than what the poster presented (he used the phrase already paid). Now if you're wondering whether or not to buy a Macintosh machine, and if you intend on running Linux, then you should ignore the fact that the Mac comes with MacOS X, because there is nothing you can do about that. Of course, you could always complain to Apple, telling them that you are not buying their hardware because you feel that you are constrained to pay extra for an OS that you don't want, and that may get you somewhere, if enough people do it long enough. For many Linux users, having a decent piece of POWERPC hardware offsets the surcharge of MacOS X, assuming there even is one.
It may actually cost Apple more in terms of changing their manufacturing and business processes to *exclude* MacOS X from the machines at this point, so removing MacOS X from the machines it ships may *raise* the price of the units; business economics is funny this way.
More Grapes to IBM's Linux Vine (Score:3, Interesting)
If there's anything to the rumours, we'll be seeing Linux PPC desktops/laptops sometime soon. Wonder if they'll use their Thinkpad offshore, or the Taiwanese company already making the Mac Mini's, FoxConn http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20050114A7040.html [digitimes.com]
On topic I'd be interested to know if Apple has any exclusionary rights over the market for PPC desktop machines. I'd sure buy a PPC laptop if it came without the sugared fruit..
Sound support (Score:1, Interesting)
There is a patch,
see http://www.pvv.org/~perchrh/macmini/
I'm using it to play my oggs now
Re:OS included? (Score:4, Interesting)
I stopped buying Apple right before OS 9.0 was released. When Apple decided that "beige was bad", no one should make clones and everything had to be clear plastic, I lost interest.
The Mac Mini is the first piece of Apple hardware that I have seriously considered buying since Steve Jobs returned.
It was a smart move. Now that there are linux distros trying to add support for the new hardware, it's just looking more attractive.
LK
Re:OS included? (Score:1, Interesting)
The point is that KDE supports multiple desktops and MacOSX doesn't.
The point is that KDE supports Unix-style copy/paste (pasting with MMB, and yes MacOS-style is also supported) and MacOSX doesn't.
The point is that I can have partially overlapped active windows in KDE and not in MacOSX (and neither in Windows btw.)
The point is it is impoosible in MacOSX (at least the version I tried which was IIRC 10.2) to switch off all animations (for example I could choose between 2 minimize-animation styles, but I couldn't turn them off)
The point is that Konqueror has a great session management, which means after logging in all windows are loaded at the exact positions and geometries and on the correct desktops just like they were when logging off. (I must admit that I didn't try Safari though, but since neither Mozilla nor IE have it, I doubt that Safari has session management. And Opera's session management sucks because it supports just one window (and also isn't aware of desktops))
In KDE I can jump a scrollbar with middle-click, not so in MacOSX.
Yes, I know that MacOSX is marketed and is supposed to be the most usable system out there. And indeed I was very impressed in the first 2 hours of use - but after you have seen all the shiny animations and they just slow you down. In day-to-day use I much prefer KDE over MacOSX even though I'm sure that MacOSX fares much better in demos.
Re:OS included? (Score:5, Interesting)
Why would I give a crap about a free OS for a computer which already comes with a better one as a standard feature?
I mean, if I'm building a cheap AMD tower for $300, then yes, load her up with Linux or BSD and save myself the "Microsoft Tax." By all means, great idea. I get a better OS, and save myself about a hundred bucks. Fantastic.
But the mini already comes with an OS which not only works better than any of the free alternatives, but will run most "free" software (plus a lot of apps which a Linux box won't.) What would be the point, unless I'm a "free as in speech" Stallmanist cult member?
Free = beer or Free in RMS-speak? Software or OS? (Score:4, Interesting)
Want free software? What's wrong with the following:? form_cat=309 [sourceforge.net]
Gentoo for OS X: http://www.metadistribution.org/macos/ [metadistribution.org]
Darwin Ports: http://darwinports.opendarwin.org/ [opendarwin.org]
Fink: http://fink.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
Freshmeat: http://osx.freshmeat.net/ [freshmeat.net]
Sourceforge: http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php
I need clarification. Are we discussing Open Source Software or Open Source GUIs?
Mac OS X has an open source kernel, a closed source GUI, OSX specific frameworks and some apple specific drivers. I don't see what the problem is. They have to have something extra to entice people to buy their OS. Fortunately, they support open standards and document their APIs very well. I consider "open standards to be far more important that open source software. as the former help to prevent vendor lock in while the latter does not necessarily do that. What good is it to have open source software if it does not support interoperability?
Running Linux or FreeBSD on a mini will gain you nothing for software availability and you will lose WiFi support so I really don't see what is the point to not run OSX.
Re:OS included? (Score:5, Interesting)
Mac hardware is excellent, but more expensive -- you could get a laptop similar to your iBook for about $300 less.
Depends on what you consider "similar".
I bought my wife an iBook for Christmas and researched it pretty thoroughly. At the end, I decided that I was paying something of a premium for the Apple hardware, but it wasn't $300.
First, if you want a small laptop (12") in the x86 world you're stepping into the realm of "ultralights", and they cost a lot more (and they're smaller and lighter than the iBook). My wife wanted small, but didn't need tiny, so in that respect I couldn't really find a truly comparable machine to her very specific needs.
Beyond that, I looked at many laptops around $800 that had similar specifications to the iBook, so on paper I figure I paid a premium of about $200 (and I was okay with that, see below). However, I don't think that's quite true, either. The iBook is a better machine than those $800 x86 competitors, in lots of ways that don't show up in the typical list of features.
One thing I noticed right away was the quickness that the machine resumes from sleep. That may be hardware-related, or it may be OS-related, I don't know, but it's very nice. From the moment you open the lid, the machine is ready to use in two seconds, tops.
The sleek design is obviously another issue, one more important to my wife than it would be to me, but it is an issue. It's a pretty computer, and she likes that. You can get pretty x86 laptops also, but not for $800. It also has all sorts of other little goodies, like the design of the power adapter -- sleek, functional, clever -- the "heartbeat" sleep mode indicator, the battery status indicator build into the battey, etc.
The machine also *feels* like a well-built piece of equipment, rather than some cheap POS. I don't know if that will translate into corresponding reliability, but I actually expect it will.
All of that said, I still think I paid a bit of a premium for the Apple logo, but less than it would appear on paper.
I did it because I knew that I absolutely did not want her to have a laptop running Windows. I had just eliminated the last Windows machine in my house, and I didn't want the support burden of adding another one. My Linux laptop is pretty high-maintenance, but that's because I choose to mess with it a lot. I pretty much ignore the rest of the Linux PCs in my house (server, media PC, my desktop, kids' desktop) except to run the occasional "apt-get upgrade", but I seemed to spend way too much time fixing Windows boxes when I had them. OS X has turned out to be as pleasantly low-maintenance as I expected. It requires a bit more than my Linux boxes but that's mainly because I don't know the OS as well.
So from my maintenance-focused perspective, an x86 laptop running Linux would probably have been ideal, except that I'd have to be careful that all of the hardware had Linux drivers available. That, plus the fact that I haven't yet found a good Printshop-like application for Linux made me opt for the Mac. Oh, and the fact that the Mac came with Quicken (unfortunately, we later found out that Quicken for Mac sucks).
On balance, she likes the iBook, and so do I (though I'd put Linux on it if it were mine), so I think it was a good purchase decision.
Re:Free software (Score:3, Interesting)
What do you mean by the right price? Maybe I want the hardware only, and am willing to pay $400 for that, instead of $500 for both. But I don't have that option from Apple
Re:OS included? (Score:3, Interesting)
I'm not satisfied by OS/X, and I'm no free software zealot. I don't want complete tweakability and control (KDE drives me nuts for that reason) either, though I do want some minimal control - turn off all the godamm "eye candy", mostly.
I'm not satisfied with it because I need a UNIX platform for most of my work, and MacOS/X is not UNIX. It has a UNIX/BSD compatible subsystem, but uses a different binary format, "interesting" linker arguments, has different shared library handling, and has a relatively poorly integrated X11 environment (X11 its self works great, but launching apps etc is PITA) that isn't installed by default. It's UNIX-compatible enough that apps need little porting to run under X11, but it ain't UNIX.
My solution to this is very simple - don't buy Apple hardware. I don't see the point in buying an Apple machine only to try to kludge Linux onto it - it'll never work particularly great (Apple aren't big on open sourcing drivers or releasing specs) and it'll cost more for the power you get.
So
Re:OS included? (Score:2, Interesting)
I wouldn't consider putting linux on my powerbook because I would lose the instant-on feature that makes the powerbook such a convenient laptop (I'd also lose MS Office, which is a requirement for work, and Open Office still doesn't properly open most word documents I try due to the presence of arrows and other non-alphabet characters).
I wouldn't put linux on my dual G5 because I couldn't use a number of my commercial applications (Lightwave, Flash, iTunes), as well as devices (don't know if my printer, scanner, camera, iPod, airport, etc. have linux drivers).
I might consider linux on the mini, but my girlfriend uses that computer and I have no real reason to switch... so I probably won't.
As far as considering linux: I probably wouldn't replace my linux boxes with macs. I use them as headless servers, and they compile and run the programs I want without hassle. Minor corruptions are easy to fix (manually repairing a corrupted NetInfo database is a pain).
Additionally, I can't drop my windows machine, even if I would like to. If the occasional side job comes in with "we need you to modify our windows device driver to do Y", it is much easier to do that with a windows development machine than without.
BTW, I know two science geeks who run linux on their powerbooks. One is even running GNUstep / WindowMaker, which seems really backwards to me.