Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses Operating Systems BSD

Hard Drives Preloaded With GNU-Darwin 246

Posted by timothy from the hurd-drives-next-year dept.
proclus writes "A 40 gig Maxtor 3.5 inch, ATA/EIDE hard drive ready to go with GNU-Darwin OS pre-installed, plus GNU-Darwin Office, plus a full ports tree and select distfiles. This bundle includes Darwin-6.0.2, GNOME desktop, AbiWord, PyMOL, The GIMP, gdFortran, parallel computing, and much more. A triple CDR set is also included. Available now for ppc and x86 computers. The PPC version includes OpenOffice-1.0.1 and Mozilla-1.0. Compatibility is as specified for our OS installer CDs. Check out our updated ordering web page. (Mirror one mirror two.) You want it."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Hard Drives Preloaded With GNU-Darwin More

Hard Drives Preloaded With GNU-Darwin

Comments Filter:

  • How is this news? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by JanusFury ( 452699 ) <kevin.gadd@nospam.gmail.com> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:39AM (#4765879) Homepage Journal
    This doesn't even attempt to not look like an ad! A hard disk filled with (mostly) free software? How is this news?

    • Re:How is this news? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by ender81b ( 520454 ) <wdinger.gmail@com> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:44AM (#4765894) Homepage Journal
      Well it's just like any new distro coming out. I mean they post that and they are basically ads. How is this any different? People are interested in buying it so why not.

      A distro is nothing more than a hard disk filled with mostly free software.

      • Re:How is this news? (Score:2, Insightful)

        by jmacgill ( 547996 )
        But there has been no attempt here to write this as an editorial, to comment on why this disk distribution idea is good/bad etc.

        A biased post that talks about a new distro comming out is still way better than this article which is a straight advert.

        CLUE - visit OUR web site....
    • Duh,
      Because most hard drives you buy now are empty and some are even *gasp* completely unformatted.
    • This doesn't even attempt to not look like an ad! A hard disk filled with (mostly) free software? How is this news?
      From the article:
      You want it.

      This is news. Its about telepathy "you want it"

    • As anybody who knows the PBS guidelines knows, that description could air on PBS without being called an ad because it didn't contain a price or mention of a competitor. Which reminds me, how much more expensive is this compared to a blank Maxtor drive?

  • Advertisement? (Score:5, Funny)

    by redgekko ( 320391 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:39AM (#4765880) Homepage Journal
    What's the current rate for slash-er-tisements?

  • OS Pushing (Score:1, Funny)

    by dasheiff ( 261577 )
    And I though Microsoft was pushing it's operating system.
    • I tried the installing the gnu-darwin package on mac os X and had to remove it. The main problems with it are.

      2)Unlike fink which stays out of the way of the operating system direcories like /bin and so forth. This think has all the worst chararistics of unix installs, spraying its files everywhere wiht no warning mechanisms, road maps, and no unistalls.

      3) The installation interface and its dependency checking is only for the advnaced user, unless you want to just install it all. Then watch-out. Updating or selectively updating or patching is a nioghtmare in my opinion--wehn compared with FINK

      I suspect this last property is the reason they are offering (forcing) people to get the whole install pre-done.

      Fink is vastly superior in user experience and now in coverage of useful programs. The fink update experiece is a dream compared to Gnu-darwin. Gnu-darwin is a relic of how not to do things given the fresh start in apple unix.

      On the otherhand, I'm being unfair here. Unlike FINK, Gnu-darwin has another agenda. Gnu-darwin is not trying to be compatible with the OSX way of doing things. It is not even trying to be sybmiotic as FINK is. instead GNU darwin is trying to replace OSX. And to do so it needs to put files where it thinks they belong. This does not excuse the crudeness of the delivery and update mechanisms. But if you are going to install the WHOLE distribution as you probably would od if you are using it as an OSX replacement, then it is perhaps not so bad.

    • Microsoft? I thought this was RMS pushing his agenda.

      Let's see: Darwin, so it's in the Apple section; OK, I get that. Darwin, so it's got the BSD icon; OK, I get that. Darwin, so it's released under the Apple-like BSD license (or is that the BSD-like Apple license?); WTF has this got to do with GNU?

      I dropped Linux and switched to OpenBSD because I got sick and tired of people falling for the propaganda and saying I was running "GNU-Linux". Now this. What's next? "GNU-OS X"? If people start saying "GNU-OpenBSD" I'm switching back to Windows!

      • *sigh* its gnu-Darwin for the same reason its GNU/Linux or GNU/Hurd, because it is essentially the GNU operating system (gcc, glibc, binutils, fileutils, findutils, gettext etc.) plus the specified kernel. OS X has some GNU utilities in it (gcc i believe), but its mostly a BSD-derived system with the proprietary apple GUI on top. GNU/Darwin just shares the open source kernel and only a few common GNU apps with it.

  • Novel Idea (Score:5, Insightful)

    by BoBaBrain ( 215786 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:43AM (#4765892)
    But who's it for? The type of people who build their own PCs are also the type who shun all things pre-installed.

    Unless there's a strain of pure hardware geeks out there...
    • Yeah, I'd much rather have the CDs and install it myself, if I were interested. Especially since I already have Mac OS X on my PowerMac G3

    • Re:Novel Idea (Score:5, Insightful)

      by longbottle ( 537395 ) <delphine@twcn[ ]r.com ['y.r' in gap]> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @07:05AM (#4766162) Homepage
      There are. I am one.

      Not everyone enjoys fucking with software to get it working. That's one of the reasons I'm a big fan of Mac OS and BeOS, and still use Windows.

      I'd much rather spend the free time I have playing with my hardware, coming up with new and novel configurations and ideas.

      Software is only what enables you to use your sweet hardware. Don't forget that, bub.

      • Re:Novel Idea (Score:3, Insightful)

        by BoBaBrain ( 215786 )
        Thanks for answering my question. It's good to know that there are hardcore hardware guys out there doing their thing.

        Software really isn't anything more than a configuration tool for the big electron maze in the box. :)

  • OS Pushing? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Graelin ( 309958 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:45AM (#4765900)
    Wow, didn't anyone see this coming? Sorry we can't ship an OSS system with a computer (thanks Microsoft) but we can ship it on an HD?

    Of course, Aunt Em is gunna be pissed when she upgrades and looses everything on her machine and now has to log in to it...

    'What's this root crap? I just want my Yahoo!'

    • Re:OS Pushing? (Score:1, Informative)

      by Alan Partridge ( 516639 )
      congratulations!

      by misspelling LOSES for the nth+1 time, you've tripped the hidden switch that will cause the USA to culturally self destruct once and for all. Your new masters will be able to fucking spell.
    • It's an interesting method; if an OEM can't sell a linux PC, they sell a Windows machine with an option to swap out the hard drive for a linux image.

      The problem is that the MS tax is still levied, so the linux option would still be more expensive, unless you can justify it through lower support costs.

    • Re:OS Pushing? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by racermd ( 314140 )
      What I find rather amusing is that I'm able to buy an OEM copy of Windows at my local computer parts shop with the purchase of a $.05 case screw, else I'm required to pay for the full retail price. Specifically, they state "OEM only, Must be purchased with a piece of hardware." When I inquired as to what the minimum hardware purchase is to qualify for the OEM copy of Windows XP Pro ($159 for those wondering), a sales rep replied that their $.05 case screw is all that's required.

      And, please, no jokes about how Windows XP is the item screwing the case...

      My point is that if an OEM copy of Windows can be accompanied with a $.05 part, why not allow another OS be accompanied by (or installed on) a new hard disk?

  • Hmmm. I tried to figure out what they actually offer. It *sounds* like it includes apple's desktop-on-top-of-unix, a kernel, tools/programs around it, etcetera.

    But I can't find any real info on their site. I'm suspecting it to be just a collection of those few programs mentioned (gimp, fortran) that can be gotten from other locations too...

    Darwin OS on the x86? I don't remember apple doing that...

    Reinout

    • Re:No faq, no real info (Score:4, Interesting)

      by lvdrproject ( 626577 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @05:01AM (#4765950) Homepage
      Actually, Apple did do that [slashdot.org].

      As for "desktop-on-top-of-unix"... if you meant by that that it comes with the Aqua GUI, i don't believe it does. That's proprietary, if i'm not mistaken.

      I actually tried installing Darwin 6.0 on a laptop i got lying around here, a few weeks back. But, because the disc wouldn't boot (i made the mistake of using WinRAR to unzip and un-ISO the image), i can't really offer anything more specific about Darwin. I believe other people on Slashdot, however, are indeed running it (for x86, that is).

      For all intents and purposes, it's just a BSD distro, i guess.

      :Lav

    • You can get it from Apple's site or from www.opendarwin.org

    • No Desktop, and it's not GNU. (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @05:04AM (#4765958)

      Nope. No desktop, apart from XFree86 I'd imagine. Apple are not going to open-source their GUI layer (and quite right too IMHO - god knows how crap it would end up if the bad GUI designers of the current Linux desktops started 'contributing' to the design). Darwin is Apple's FreeBSD/Mach 3.0 hybrid operating system and works on PPC (naturally) and on x86. You can get the source code from Apple's Public Source Site [apple.com] and at OpenDarwin [opendarwin.org] set up by the Internet Software Consortium and Apple.

      This is just a bad advert for someone's cobbled together install, and an out-of-date one at that. I doubt it's based on Darwin 6.0.2 (basis of Mac OS X 10.2 Jaguar), the Mozilla included is old and so on...

      Finally, one big gripe. The operating system is not called GNU-Darwin! Apple will be very pissed off (as will GNU I hope) at this rebranding of the operating system. Sure, there is a GNU-Darwin Ports structure, but the actual OS has nothin to do with GNU. It's under a BSD-style licence from Apple.

      • I doubt it's based on Darwin 6.0.2...

        RTFA:
        "[PPC] A bootable operating system installer CD for OSX-capable Apple computers, which installs Darwin-6.0.2 and includes our enhancements. Available soon!

        "GNU-Darwin-x86 operating system A bootable operating system installer CD for Intel-based computers, which installs Darwin-1.4 and includes our enhancements."

  • seems pretty pointless (Score:4, Interesting)

    by g4dget ( 579145 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:47AM (#4765903)
    Installing a 40gig hard drive is supposed to be less work than installing GNU Darwin from an installer CD? The only thing that suggests to me is that the GNU Darwin installer CD needs work.

    There is some use for disk-based OS distributions: eventually, external USB2.0/FireWire drives may become a reasonable choice. You plug them in and boot from them, and you get your complete environment. However, unfortunately, most BIOSes don't support that yet, so the best you could do right now is to use a DOS or Windows chain loader.

    • All New World Macs boot from a firewire drive (Score:2, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      All New World Macs boot from a firewire drive

    • Re:seems pretty pointless (Score:5, Informative)

      by Maskirovka ( 255712 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @05:09AM (#4765964)
      You plug them in and boot from them, and you get your complete environment. However, unfortunately, most BIOSes don't support that yet, so the best you could do right now is to use a DOS or Windows chain loader.

      I'm not sure if openfirmware is considered a 'bios' or not, but it gives you considerably more flexibility in this area.
      On a mac you can select the boot device at startup by holding down the option key. It even checks to see if there's more than one OS installed on a specific device. I havn't tried USB, but it works great for firewire hardrives and ipods 8). On a side note, does anyone know if openfirmware used in any non-ppc machines?

    • "Installing a 40gig hard drive is supposed to be less work than installing GNU Darwin from an installer CD?"

      it IS on an El Capitan PowerMac...

  • This could be great for OS-newbies... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by dagg ( 153577 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:50AM (#4765914) Journal
    When I first installed Linux on my PC, I performed these 2 main tasks:
    1. Went out and bought a new hard drive.
    2. Downloaded and installed a linux distribution.
    This hard drive/OS bundle reduces that to one step... right? That seems kind of cool.
    --

    I don't know my sex. [tilegarden.com]

  • You want it. (Score:4, Funny)

    by Simba ( 15214 ) <simba&linux,com> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:57AM (#4765934) Homepage
    No. No, I don't want it.

    For intel boxes, I have FreeBSD.

    For PPC boxes, I have OS X.

    This does nothing better than either of the above in either hardware situation. Well, it does add "GNU" to everything. Woo. Be still my beating heart.
    • Well, it does add "GNU" to everything

      Try running "strings -" on the binaries.

      Last time I checked it added "OpenBSD" to a lot of things not "GNU".

  • Hardware support? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by pope nihil ( 85414 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @04:58AM (#4765936) Journal
    Last time I checked, x86 darwin only supported a very limited set of hardware.
    • Exactly my concern... so what happens, you buy this harddrive, plug it in, and find that you don't have one of the handful of x86 configurations supported? The latest Darwin release noted that "IDE drives may not work" [apple.com].

      What the hell is "may not work"? This is 2002, there is no excuse for such shoddy support in a release-quality Operating System. Maybe the x86 port of Darwin should be flagged as Alpha, and stuck with version numbers somewhat less than 6.x... maybe .00601!

  • Hedged Bets? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by USC-MBA ( 629057 )
    Though the company remains profitable, Aapple's recent performance in the market [apple.com] has been marked by a decline in sales, in comparison to both the previous quarter, and the previous year. Per-share revenues have dropped by almost half compared with 3rd quarter 2001, down to $0.09 per share from $0.17

    And now GNU/Darwin developers are marketing their products directly, for use with the considerably less expensive x86 hardware. An attempt to hedge their bets in the face of a sluggish tech market and Apple's precieved weakness? Interesting times....

    • You forgot to mention that OS X runs BSD so it's obviously dying.
    • Apple has always had an x86 version of Darwin [apple.com]. What isn't available is their second-level operating system, Aqua, which is the graphical environment along with extended application support. The top level is actually and evolution of NeXTStep, then OpenStep and then Rhapsody. NeXTStep worked on the 680x0 processor and OpenStep ran on Intel. It is very much processor independant. There is very little assembly (probably none) in the code. This is all to say that anything can happen, but whether it will is a whole different story.

      It is known that Apple does have an in-house version of MacOS X that runs on Intel, but this is more to test that coding approaches are well thought out.

      Heck, Microsoft might even have a PPC version of Windows XP, but does that mean that they will sell it? As I said, anything is possible, but as to it happening ...
    • Though the company remains profitable, Aapple's recent performance in the market [apple.com] has been marked by a decline in sales, in comparison to both the previous quarter, and the previous year. Per-share revenues have dropped by almost half compared with 3rd quarter 2001, down to $0.09 per share from $0.17
      I guess that means it's time to fire Jobs and then, a year later when the company is about to file for Chapter 11, re-hire him so he can save Apple for... what, the fourth time?

  • Another Distro, different kernel (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Coryoth ( 254751 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @05:00AM (#4765944) Homepage Journal
    It seems we have another distro based around GNU tools plus the other usual suspects. The only main difference I can see here is that it is running on Darwin instead of Linux or (Net|Open|Free)BSD.

    It doesn't actually say so on the site, but given the software they do list, it is pretty clearly just running X like everybody else. Not that that is bad thing.

    It would be nice if they could make it very Windowmaker/GNUStep centric for nostalgia sake though.

    Anyway, it is good to see other kernels making it into new Distro's. It bodes well for the future.

    Jedidiah.
    • ``It would be nice if they could make it very Windowmaker/GNUStep centric for nostalgia sake though.''
      I don't think GNUStep is up to it yet. Once they are, it will probably be ported to Darwin, too. At any rate, Apple probably wouldn't push a GNUStep system; it comes too close to being an OS X replacement.
      • At any rate, Apple probably wouldn't push a GNUStep system; it comes too close to being an OS X replacement.

        You are kidding, right? There's a hell of a lot more to OS X than Foundation and Application Kit. It won't be possible to talk about an OS X replacement until somebody comes up with a Quartz/Aqua replacement, and that's not even on the horizon.

  • Should better be done by hardisk manufacturer (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Joseph Lam ( 61951 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @05:14AM (#4765975)
    Instead it will be a good idea if IBM, Maxtor, WD, etc...are distributing their hd with free OS preloaded. The volume will be huge!

    Also, the large capacity of current HD will allow preloading a couple of free OSes together.

  • MS Tax (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mr_Silver ( 213637 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @05:29AM (#4766000)
    This could be an interesting way to avoid Microsoft tax. Provide the computer with a plug in hard drive and then sell them the HD seperately.

    Because the PC has no HD, it has no OS and no tax can be paid. The users then simply purchase the HD (with stuff preloaded) and drop it right in. You could just provided them with the HD to install themselves, but that would require users opening up the computer - which could cause complications and also end up with warranty issues.

    Of course, the far better way would be to get rid of this pointless MS tax in the first place - but until that happens, this is as good a start as any.

    (subnote: Can anyone point me to a resource that describes the history of this MS tax, how it came about and why? I'm not really up on the whole thing)

    • With at least one musical note (presumably it will ship with at least one multimedia file), there won't need to be a payment to Canada's RIAA equivalent.

    • Slide in HD (Score:3, Informative)

      by dmaxwell ( 43234 )
      There are hard drive slots that fit in a 5 1/4" drive bay. The slot has a removable tray that will accept desktop hard drives as well as laptop form factor hard drives. Once the drive is bolted into the tray it just slides into the drive bay.

      Our hypothetical multisystem vendor could just equip their PCs with these bays with various flavors of preloaded hard drives mounted in the pullout trays. It's literally plug-n-play that way.

      The MS Tax was the natural result of Microsofts old OEM agreements. Basically an OEM could not sell the same hardware model numbers or SKUs with both Windows and non-MS OSes. An OEM would have to actually change the hardware config slightly to sell non-Windows versions of it's PCs. Since non-Windows represent small potential sales, this condition sufficed to keep them from bothering. OEMs were probably also reluctant to offend MS since a raise in their privately negotiated price for Windows could be fatal. Microsoft is now legally prohibited from imposing that condition on OEMs but their 90s+ desktop marketshare largely works to accomplish the same thing. Most OEMs still won't offer non-MS or bare PCs, especially laptops. Their are some cracks in this like the Wal-Mart Microtels but their success is not assured.

    • Re:MS Tax (Score:4, Informative)

      by BWJones ( 18351 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @10:03AM (#4767181) Homepage Journal
      This could be an interesting way to avoid Microsoft tax. Provide the computer with a plug in hard drive and then sell them the HD seperately.

      This used to be the case with SGI's and I would love to see this option come back in more mainstream hardware. You could very easily open a panel and slide out the hard drive for reasons of swapping the IRIX distribution or security if you worked in an area where hard drives had to be locked up in safes when not in use.

      Of course with new technologies like Firewire [apple.com], and the ability of Apple Macintosh machines to boot from external Firewire devices as well as CD's etc... this sort of makes this question moot. Plus, with a true plug and play UNIX, I am much happier with OS X than I ever was with IRIX and Mac's are much cheaper than the SGI's.

  • A big yawn (Score:2, Insightful)

    by guacamole ( 24270 )
    This is silly, why don't they package this software on CD instead and let people decide how and where to install it? You know, I could make a copy of my PC hard drive (currently running RedHat Linux) too, image it, and clone it on identicall disks. Not very impressive..

    • Re:A big yawn (Score:3, Informative)

      by h0tblack ( 575548 )
      Erm, they do package it on CD (you also get the 3x CD distrib when you buy the HD) or a free download, this is just an alternative way of distributing the software, source and the entire ports tree. It's an attempt to make things easier...... clever that ;)
  • Would anyone like to tell me what Darwin has that (Free|Net|Open)BSD doesn't... and the BSDs are under an even less restrictive license. Not to mention that they have a serious history behind them, and they (primarily FreeBSD) have been used extensively on the desktop.

    • Not to mention that they have a serious history behind them, and they (primarily FreeBSD) have been used extensively on the desktop.

      More serious than the history of NeXT? On more desktops than Darwin (which is in every OS X desktop on the planet)? Please tell me you're talking about the GNU/ part of the distribution . . .

  • A Slight Discrepancy... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by whiteranger99x ( 235024 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @06:01AM (#4766059) Journal
    It might be my imagination,but doesn't the $250 price tag [sourceforge.net] strike anyone as being ludicrous???

    I mean, looking at pricewatch, a similar 40GB Maxtor HD costs around $70-$80 (give or take, street value)

    And supposedly, the 3 disc set of Darwin costs $15 per disc...how does that equate to $250???
    • OK try this one..

      Sell 40 GB hard drive $70-80
      Include Darwin installed. $45
      Include 5 hours of Consumer service for a few of the Newbies that can't make their modem, printer, scanner, USB camera, and sound card work.
      Ummm. Profit?? Sounds cheap to me.
      MS goes through dealers so they do not have to deal with customer support directly. You don't get to call MS and say, my printer doesn't work.

    • It might be my imagination,but doesn't the $250 price tag [sourceforge.net] strike anyone as being ludicrous???

      I mean, looking at pricewatch, a similar 40GB Maxtor HD costs around $70-$80 (give or take, street value)

      And supposedly, the 3 disc set of Darwin costs $15 per disc...how does that equate to $250???

      no, that's about a typical mark-up from Apple. . .

  • BSD^H^H^HHurd is Dying (Score:5, Interesting)

    by RAMMS+EIN ( 578166 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @06:07AM (#4766067) Homepage Journal
    So let me see what we have here...the GNU system running on Darwin? And Darwin is Mach based? So what's that other GNU/Mach system again? Ehmm...GNU/Hurd, that's it. I love microkernels, and I love Mach, and I would liked to have seen GNU Hurd thrive, but it seems there really isn't much reason for it to survive now. Linux currently works a lot better (and has for a long time), and if you want a Mach based system, you can get Darwin, which is more stable, backed by a computer giant, and runs on more hardware. Or am I wrong here?

    GPL-purists might argue that the APSL is not a Free license. This brings up a very interesting argument. [puts on flame protection suit] Apple's use of Mach illustrates the core of the liberal (BSD, MIT, public domain, etc.) licenses vs. GPL issue. Apple could use Mach as a base for their own non-Free product because it wasn't copylefted. GNU hard-liners will see this as a Bad Thing because the hard work of the Mach-developers is now being used in a non-Free product. On the flip side, this move keeps Mach alive, and will probably benefit Free Mach implementations as well. Increased interest can result in more developers for those implementations, and software developed for Apple's kernel might also be easier to port to other Mach-based systems than, say, software developed for Linux or the NT kernel. Plus the contributors to the Mach kernel Apple used can be proud that their work is featured in a product of a renowed company, and used by millions of people every day.

    • HURD != Darwin (Score:5, Informative)

      by anandsr ( 148302 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @07:23AM (#4766219) Homepage
      If you think that just because Darwin works upon Mach it is somehow equivalent to Hurd, you are sadly mistaken. Hurd is not a Unix clone. It is as far away from Unix as VMS was, or as MacOS is. The reason why you can even talk about them in the same sentence is that Hurd can and does sport a unix personality. But Hurd can sport any personality, a Windows personality, a MacOS personality. Because basically its not Unix. It has a much more general API, over which you can host several OS personalities. A Hurd task can be a Mach task, but you can't do that either on MKLinux (Linux on Mach) or Darwin (Basically FreeBSD on Mach). There may be different reasons why Hurd will not thrive but being run of the mill won't be it. Hurd is and will be different.

      • Re:HURD != Darwin (Score:4, Interesting)

        by RAMMS+EIN ( 578166 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @07:39AM (#4766276) Homepage Journal
        From the acronym expansion, I would think you have it backwards. HURD is short for Hird of Unix Running Daemons, which suggests to me that it is indeed Unix inspired. The part that isn't Unix is _Mach_, the microkernel that Darwin and HURD (and NEXTSTEP and Lites) are based on. As I see it HURD could (theoretically) run concurrently with (for example) a win32-compatible personality, which is _not_ the same as running that personality under HURD; both HURD and the win32 personality run as servers under Mach.

        You are right in saying that HURD and Darwin aren't equivalent. HURD is equivalent to a bare Unix kernel (like Linux without GNU), whereas Darwin is a full operating system distribution (like any BSD flavor, and like GNU/Linux).

        • Re:HURD != Darwin (Score:2, Informative)

          by LaminatorX ( 410794 )
          Actually, HURD [gnu.org] stands for Hird of Unix Replacing Daemons. That being the point of the GNU's Not Unix OS. The various processes running on top of MACH simulate (or are meant to simulate) the POSIX/UNIX api we all know and love/hate. The cool thing if (when?) it matures is that it will allow things like mounting file-systems and other kernel-modulesque processes in userspace.
    • And Darwin is Mach based? So what's that other GNU/Mach system again? Ehmm...GNU/Hurd,

      They are very different systems (personally, I think all of the current crop of kernels, including Darwin, have serious design problems).

      GPL-purists might argue that the APSL is not a Free license.

      The phrase "purism" suggests that you think that this is some irrelevant ideological issue. It isn't. Working with software that has the wrong licensing terms can be very harmful. The KDE project found this out the hard way. And it isn't that the GPL is always the right license. But APSL may have serious problems.

      • ``They are very different systems (personally, I think all of the current crop of kernels, including Darwin, have serious design problems).''
        Agreed. I think if I were to hack on an existing microkernel today, I would probably go for VSTa [zendo.com] rather than Mach.

        ``The phrase "purism" suggests that you think that this is some irrelevant ideological issue.''
        Sorry for giving you the wrong impression, then. I don't think the issues are unimportant at all. I just don't agree with those who want everything to be GPLed (those I call GPL-purists). I understand companies' hesitation to release their source code, especially under something as irrevocable as the GPL. If they can't figure out a viable business model with that, they shouldn't do it. Of course it would be nice for us hackers to be able to Use the Source (WOW), and it might be better for the world, but that's not what drives companies in a capitalist environment.
        • I just don't agree with those who want everything to be GPLed (those I call GPL-purists). I understand companies' hesitation to release their source code, especially under something as irrevocable as the GPL.

          When people say "Apple's license is bad", they aren't saying "Apple has an obligation to change their license", they are saying "users shouldn't rely software with that license because it is disadvantageous for them". That has nothing to do with philosophy or purism, it's a simple, legal warning, not much different from a product safety warning someone might release for a stroller or toy.

          but that's not what drives companies in a capitalist environment.

          Who cares? As a consumer, I don't have an obligation to make Apple rich by using their software under unfavorable licensing terms. Free software also is subject to market forces, and if Apple can't create a free software license that is attractive enough, then Apple's free software will not catch on. And that's exactly what's happening.

      • Working with software that has the wrong licensing terms can be very harmful. The KDE project found this out the hard way.

        How so?

  • What's the point? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by tequesta ( 442108 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @06:24AM (#4766088)
    Hi,

    this is a really honest question. Why would anyone want a GNU/Darwin system? OS X is a Unix (arguably the one that is the nicest to use), and the few of tools it lacks can be gotten with Fink. And if you really really don't want anything non-free, get FreeBSD. Where is the need for any effort on Darwin? I'd really like to know.

    And please don't tell me "it's so Apple can port Aqua to x86". You can't honestly believe that's going to happen.

    • Re:What's the point? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by skahshah ( 603640 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @07:38AM (#4766272)
      There is no need for any effort on GNU/Darwin. Somebody has fun doing it, someone has fun using it. Why not have fun?
    • Mac OS X / Darwin has some very nice features not found on other mature (i.e. not Hurd) BSD or GNU OSes. Although most of these are very technical in nature (mostly deriving from its microkernel architecture), I guess having a stripped, portable OS X could be useful for systems programming.

      First, there are places like Audio/Video appliances where an embedded multimedia-friendly (just look at Darwin's IOKit design) kernel would fit very well, without having recourse to more hardcore-barebones realtime OS (i.e. QNX).

      Second, being able to test code for x86 portability (and thus, "future-proofing" it) is a worthy goal, even you dont believe that Apple someday will port OS X to x86. (Maybe x86-64?)

      But, from a user perspective, you are right as there is probably no point is using Darwin over other OSes.

  • Time saver (Score:4, Funny)

    by Woogiemonger ( 628172 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @06:30AM (#4766095)

    You want it.

    I want it? While shipping out hard drives pre installed with Linux is a way of saving a user time, sparing the internet's bandwidth, and making their hard drive a more attractive product, they'd accomplish all these goals twenty-fold if they filled up the rest of that 40GB baby with free pr0n! Then we'd really want it. Can you imagine how much fun the hard drive manufacturing business could be?
  • > A 40 gig Maxtor 3.5 inch, ATA/EIDE hard drive ready to go with GNU-Darwin OS pre-installed, plus GNU-Darwin Office, plus a full ports tree and select distfiles.

    What about it? Where's the predicate [uottawa.ca]?

  • Insane... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by cenonce ( 597067 ) <anthony_t@nOSPam.mac.com> on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @06:46AM (#4766121)

    Why in the hell would I spend 250 bucks on a 40 gig Maxtor harddrive with free software on it!?!

    I can go to CompUSA, get robbed at 85 bucks for a Maxtor harddrive, order the stinking CD for 15 bucks and save myself 150 bucks!

    If I want to get taken to the cleaners, I'll go buy Windows!

    -A
    • Well, your time is free. If I wanted one of my people to bring up a Gnu-Darwin system for testing and evaluation, I'd consider paying 150 bucks to save the time they would spend nursing the installation along, especially if I just wanted to evaluate it. If I decided later I wanted to go into Gnu/Darwin in a big way, then I'd make them go through the procedure of painstakingly selecting the packages to install, customizing the system startup, decding on the best partitioning scheme etc.

      I always have plenty stuff for my folks to do. We have to even budget our learning time pretty well.

  • I think you mean (Score:3, Funny)

    by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @08:05AM (#4766387) Homepage
    GNU/GNU/Darwin

  • Where is the news here? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by ites ( 600337 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @08:17AM (#4766447) Journal
    Surely /. can do better than this. A new OS is always interesting, but how about a review that clarifies (a) what is special about this OS, (b) why the combination of HD+OS works, assuming it does, (c) how his can be used in combination with existing OSes , (d) etc.
    What I've seen so far is one very thin infomercial followed by an uninformed discussion about useless details. Has anyone actually tried GNU-Darwin?

  • What a rip.... (Score:3, Informative)

    by TrancePhreak ( 576593 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @08:18AM (#4766454)
    $250 for a 40 GB drive, what a rip-off. $122 for 40GB notebook drive on PriceWatch.... I suggest all steer clear of this get rich quick scheme.

  • That's clearly not for me. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by viktor ( 11866 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @08:34AM (#4766553) Homepage

    Interesting idea. A strange one, but interesting.

    But, it isn't for me. What I love about my Mac OS X is that it actually works, and works well. The GUI and applications of Mac OS X are thought through, there are Human Interface Guidlines that people actually follow, and it "just works".

    Gnome has Human Interface Guidlines that either aren't followed or aren't very good. I know I'm picky here, but why is there, for example, no visible difference between a single and double click on a Gnome desktop icon? You have to wait until the application (maybe) starts to determine if your second click went through. That can take a very long time. Surely the Gnome HIG should (maybe does) say that the immediately visible change from a single- and double-click should be different? This is a small picky detail, the kind that IMO Gnome is full of and OS X has just a handful of.

    Really, I'm just trying to illustrate that IMO, Gnome/GNU are miles behind when it comes to GUIs. I don't see who would actually use this. Running Gimp is nice because it doesn't cost anything, but you don't need to buy a second harddisk to do that. People that will benefit from this disk run OS X. What could there possibly be to make them interested in switching to Gnome? "It's free and therefore better, I don't care if the GUI sucks!"?

    Any insights into why people that run OS X would want to switch to Gnome would be appreciated, 'cause I don't get it. ;-)

  • Uh ... I've been over all the arguments regarding why Linux should be GNU/Linux and all that, but I think the GNU folks need to realize that now they are fooling around with the name of something connected to Apple Computer - a company that does not take such matters lightly.

  • Half a Mirror is Better than None (Score:3)

    by kalidasa ( 577403 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @09:18AM (#4766824) Journal
    Great idea mirroring the ordering page. Too bad you didn't mirror the requirements page, too

  • w00t + drivers (Score:3)

    by theolein ( 316044 ) on Wednesday November 27, 2002 @09:32AM (#4766930) Journal
    Another alternative to Windows, Linux, BSD and OSX. Good. The Darwin method of kext's for drivers is much more flexible than the one for Linux in my opinion.

    Wonder how many devices are supported though?

Slashdot Top Deals

In case of injury notify your superior immediately. He'll kiss it and make it better.

Close