Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

Freshmeat Launches Mac OS X Section 223

Posted by CmdrTaco from the i-like-my-OS-X dept.
Liedra writes "After announcing Mac OS X software surreptitiously within its main section for the past several months, freshmeat has now launched a section totally devoted to the platform. Read the article by scoop and visit the section directly." Since I switched my primary laptop to OS X, I'm glad to see scoop do this. (Note, Freshmeat & Slashdot are both owned by OSDN.)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Freshmeat Launches Mac OS X Section More

Freshmeat Launches Mac OS X Section

Comments Filter:

  • Wow (Score:1)

    by Exiler ( 589908 )
    That took a while, I don't use OS X but I figured it would have been included on most major software sites by now.

    • Re:Wow (Score:2)

      by Phroggy ( 441 )
      That took a while, I don't use OS X but I figured it would have been included on most major software sites by now.

      Uhhh, it has been, but Freshmeat isn't "most".

  • Where's the software? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I can only find one piece of software listed in the section - HTML Converter 2.0 [freshmeat.net].

  • OSDN ripening for Apple? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Angron ( 127881 ) on Monday December 23, 2002 @12:54PM (#4945478) Journal
    IIRC, someone here on slashdot speculated that OSDN was going to attempt to be bought out by Apple, hence the significant number of Mac-only topic icons here on slashdot, plus the dedicated apple.slashdot.org address.

    Though it makes plenty of sense for freshmeat to have a dedicated Apple section, this certainly provides more fuel for the Sell-to-Apple hypothesis...

    -A

    • Re:OSDN ripening for Apple? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by happystink ( 204158 ) on Monday December 23, 2002 @12:57PM (#4945501)
      That's crazy though, they could try all they want but unless the people in charge at OSDN are brain-dead they know that Apple would never ever buy a content website/business, much less one 90% about open source. People might think /. et. al are kissing up to Apple to be bought, but in truth they're just kissing up to the general Apple fetish around here for hits. Apple doesn't buy companies often (noone does anymore) and when they do it's extremely strategic, not a matter of "aww look, some kids put apple logos all over and list OS X software after a year of ignoring it. Let's snatch them up!".
    • Erm, why would apple buy OSDN?

      Sure, OSDN's interest in Apple is increasing, but that's only because Apple is a Unix vendor now.

      I don't think OSDN is exactly a hot ticket, either.

      • Re:OSDN ripening for Apple? (Score:1, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Apple and Linux rumors are being spread all the time. My Favourites are was the AOL to buy Red hat rumor and the Hurd being ready for production use (they still havent got ps/2 mice working yet, and there is no hope for USB support)


    • If it's anything like the whole .Mac [mac.com] fiasco, it'll be $99.95 to get access.

    • Ummm...one assumes that Apple would want to invest in something that might actually make a long-term profit and build their core business. OSDN doesn't seem to meet those criteria.
      • Increasing the amount of software available for your platform makes your platform more valuable. Apple seems to believe this when it publicly courts the open source community.

        Rather than buying it out, Apple appears have been engaging in "friendship projects" with OSDN to increase its exposure. To name a few: giving Sourceforge OS X Servers for its compile farm, giving the Slashdot crew TiBooks, encouraging Apple sections of Slashdot and now Freshmeat.

    • > plus the dedicated apple.slashdot.org address.

      In contrast to the dedicated yro.slashdot.org, developers.slashdot.org, bsd.slashdot.org... addresses?
      You do know that every section has its own address?

      >this certainly provides more fuel for the Sell-to-Apple hypothesis...

      Certainly. Furthermore, Apple hasn't sued the hell out of OSDN for makeing the Apple section look like Aqua(TM)(C)(R).

      Maybe OSDN should consult NASA on these matters [slashdot.org].

      >someone here on slashdot speculated that OSDN [...]
      This is ground-breaking news. Instead of posting a well-informed comment, purely based on facts, someone speculated.

      Couldn't it just be that due to MacOs X and iPod and the like, some geeks got hooked up to Apple?

  • Platform favouritism (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
    A Mac section but refusing to list Windows software? Why the bias towards one platform?

    If Freshmeat isn't going to restrict itself to Unix OSes, they ought to allow submitted software for all platforms. Yes, Mac OS X does have a lot of Unix software you can run on it, but the same is true of Windows with or without Cygwin. Both platforms have their own weird microkernel and various layers on top, of which some provide a Unix-like API.

    Allowing Windows software on Freshmeat would be very useful in practice - I don't just advocate it out of some sense of 'fairness'. There must be many Freshmeat users who have to use a Windows PC at work and would like somewhere to look up software. And the increasing number of Windows-based free software projects could do with somewhere to make announcements.
    • Uhhh Ed... Mac OS X is a 'Unix like' Operating System based on BSD, the GUI isn't X but X isn't 'Unix' either.
      • Not for anything, but I run X on top of Aqua for apps like Gimp, abiword, and xmms. I'm trying to d-load KDE3 to help mange my unix-y stuff, but I'm not having a whole ot of success yet.
      • The kernel isn't Unix, the GUI isn't Unix. Okay, maybe it qualifies as 'Unix' by having some FreeBSD-derived code in the middle somewhere. The point of whether Mac OS X is 'Unix' or not isn't really important here... I just wanted to suggest that Freshmeat's traditional policy of listing software only for 'Unix-like operating systems' is a bit fuzzy around the edges.

        Windows with Cygwin is arguably a 'Unix like' OS based on GNU... you can interpret the term as loosely or as strictly as you want.

        • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:5, Informative)

          by Panix ( 2408 ) on Monday December 23, 2002 @02:36PM (#4946253) Homepage
          Sorry man, you are actually wrong again =) The kernel of Mac OS X is something called Darwin, which is heavily based on *BSD, and specifically is highly inspired by FreeBSD. It is 100% UNIX. Not like Windows+cywin, since the kernel of OS X is actually a 100% fully blown UNIX. People are running it on x86 hardware too!

          You also say that "the GUI isn't UNIX." Well, I challenge you to tell me of a GUI that *is* UNIX. UNIX and windowing systems have nothing to do with each other. You need to have a better understanding of the issues before you blast Freshmeat for this.

          Freshmeat's policy of UNIX-like operating systems holds perfectly true here. OS X is as much a UNIX as Linux, FreeBSD, AIX, Solaris, or OpenBSD.

          And, you can't interpret "UNIX-like" loosely enough to call Windows + Cygwin UNIX. I don't even want to have to argue that =)
          • I was using the word Unix (not UNIX) loosely to mean the whole package of tools you normally expect on a Unix box - which includes the X window system, a C compiler and development tools like bison which are associated with Unix systems, perhaps an ssh client and server... it's a fairly loose definition I admit.

            Perhaps the best definition of 'Unix' is that from Debian's definition of an important package - an important package is one where an experienced user sitting down at a box and finding it lacking this package would grumble and ask 'where the heck is foo?'. So you or I might say 'where the heck is awk?' if we found a supposedly Unix-like system which lacked it. Therefore having awk is some part of being a Unix system (though not the most important). X11 is another part, I believe.
            • MY definition of a 'Unix' system is a computer which I can SSH to and install software like this:

              ./configure && make && make install
              And it works.

              OS X qualifies. You don't need X-windows to be a Unix system: many of my Linux boxes have X explicitly removed, to save space and prevent sploits. All the tools are available. Jaguar even includes bash now, my earlier os x needed bash built from ports (yes, you could use FreeBSD ports on OS X, though I think that went away in favor of fink).

              I've worked with AIX, SunOS, Solaris, HP-UX, Digital Unix, IRIX, OpenBSD, Linux, and FreeBSD. IMEAO OSX qualifies as a fully-fledged member of the Unix fraternity. Don't let the fact that it's easy to use and pretty fool you. It's kinda like IRIX without all the security flaws, frankly.
            • Wow. You really proved your ignorance.

              [ibook:~] peter% gcc -v
              Reading specs from /usr/libexec/gcc/darwin/ppc/3.1/specs
              Thread model: posix
              Apple Computer, Inc. GCC version 1161, based on gcc version 3.1 20020420 (prerelease)
              [ibook:~] peter% bison -V
              GNU Bison version 1.28
              [ibook:~] peter% ssh workg4
              Last login: Tue Dec 24 22:57:58 2002 from ****
              Welcome to Darwin!
              [workg4:~] peter%

              I did have XFree86 installed but I realised that I didn't need it and it was just taking up space on my drive. However, if you had the slightest hint of a clue you would know that XFree86 compiles on OS X from the same source tree as Linux. OS X doesn't come bundled with XFree86 but who gives a shit about that? Are you implying that PicoBSD [picobsd.org] isn't Unix?

              BTW, GNU stands for GNU's Not Unix! The presence or absence of GNU tools (such as bison) does not make or break a Unix. Nor does the lack of an XWindow system.

              This same stupid, pedantic, ill-informed point was argued to death on Mac forums a year or more ago. ("A: Is this a Unix application? B: No, idiot, it's a Carbon app. Only Cocoa apps are Unix! C: I'm pretty sure it has to run in the Dos terminal to be Unix").

              The point is: Who really gives a shit? You do realise that technically Linux isn't a unix either? Here's my definition of a Unix: /dev exists. Probably also the idea of mount points instead of drive letters or a 'Desktop'. (Before you use this as proof that Mac OS X isn't unix, please realise that disk mounting on the desktop is GUI only. Disks are mounted under /Volumes, which is practically identical to /mnt except that it is more automatic.)

              Oh yeah, Merry Christmas! :-)

              • Yes, you can compile XFree86 on Mac OS X. But:

                - Mac OS X does not include X11;

                - The Mac OS X GUI is not X11 or even vaguely related to it;

                - Graphical applications written for Mac OS X will not run on other Unixes, even those that have XFree86.

                This last point seems the most important to me - sure you _can_ disregard the native windowing system, compile an X server and libraries and run only X11 applications. You can do that on Windows too. But the Mac's standard user interface, the one that 99% of its users run, is not X11 and not particularly Unix-like.

                Yes, I know that under some definitions Linux is not 'Unix' either. That is my whole point, that trying to include or exclude operating systems based on whether they are 'Unix' or not is silly. Almost any system can be classified as 'Unix' by some criterion or another - even MS-DOS with DJGPP has a fairly complete Unix environment. Freshmeat should just accept software for all platforms.
          • The kernel is Mach [cmu.edu].
            Not Unix.

            Darwin refers to the userland stuff, and it seems a bit odd to equate "heavily based" with "100%".

            Quartz clearly isn't unix, but that doesn't necessarily mean that X isn't either.
            Historically, X is the unix GUI, and has as much justification for being considered part of a full-fledged unix system as say, 'tar'.

            As for freshmeat deciding this warrants its own section, I could care less. Just another category for me to filter out. I would not consider this newsworthy by any means, though. Maybe if they were specifically excluding OS X packages, or excluding everything else except OS X, but not this. This lands in importance just above "Freshmeat fixed a typo" and just below "Freshmeat redesigned the look of the site again"

            -transiit
            • FreeBSD does not come with X as part of its base system, it is a port you have to add. FreeBSD is a Unix. MacOS X does not come with X as part of its base system, you have to apt-get, make install, or drag from a disk image later to add it. According to you MacOS X is not a Unix. I don't understand your logic.
    • Are you trying to say that you don't feel there are enough sites where one could find information on Windows software? There's tucows.com, download.com, and a half a dozen more. These are only the ones I can recall off the top of my head, and keep in mind, I haven't even had use for them in quite a while.

      I don't think you should be overly concerned that Windows users are being left out in the the cold. I think you're argument for fairness would have been a stronger one.

      • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:2, Insightful)

        by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
        I mean to say there aren't enough *good* sites where you can find out about Windows software. Both Tucows and download.com are useless compared to Freshmeat - they don't seem to carry fields like project licence or release history, don't have good project summaries or comments, and the site layout isn't nearly as crisp.

        I'm more interested in free software for Windows than the latest shareware. Those two sites are more oriented towards binary-only software and towards users rather than developers. Freshmeat is pretty much perfect, at least it is better than any other site I've found, except for the small detail that it won't carry Windows software.

        If anyone knows of a comparable site to Freshmeat but dealing with the Windows platform, please do post details.

    • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:2, Informative)

      by nmg ( 614483 )
      You mean like this [freshmeat.net]?

      • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:2, Informative)

        by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
        Freshmeat lists projects which run on Unix and also happen to run on Windows... but they won't allow Windows applications, even those that are free software. Maybe nowadays you could sneak some in by compiling them against winelib and calling it a Unix port (as happened for PuTTY).

        Indeed, the site doesn't even allow a link to download the Windows version or to give more information about a Windows port. In the release information the field for entering a zipfile URL says 'It is not intended for any Win32 version of the software'. Yet there is a separate field for a Mac OS X package. One platform is encouraged, another is explicitly forbidden. I don't pretend to understand why.

    • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:5, Insightful)

      by TellarHK ( 159748 ) <tellarhk@hQUOTEotmail.com minus punct> on Monday December 23, 2002 @01:11PM (#4945611) Homepage Journal
      All OSX really is involves an updating of NextStep (for good or ill), and a replacement of X11 with something more bulletproof using interface guidelines. Was NextStep *nix? Nobody I know disputes it. Why're you disputing OSX? Because it's proprietary? That horse has been beaten to death, and nobody hammers on SGI or Sun for proprietary OS'es. Is it because of Aqua being closed source? Okay, so compile (or download the binary for) Xdarwin and use regular X apps. Of course there you have to worry about dependencies, and libraries for GTK, window managers...

      I hope more people re-engineer X11 apps with a Cocoa frontend. Or, perhaps someone ought to start a project similar to WINE, but for the Cocoa API? Just don't put the look and feel in exact, and do it for interoperability... who knows, maybe you can slip under Apple's legal radar.

      Or not. Bleah.

      • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:5, Informative)

        by entrox ( 266621 ) <slashdot AT entrox DOT org> on Monday December 23, 2002 @01:32PM (#4945753) Homepage
        Or, perhaps someone ought to start a project similar to WINE, but for the Cocoa API?

        I really don't know why, but GNUStep [gnustep.org] doesn't seem to be very popular. GNUStep is an implementation of the OpenStep specification and they even track changes from Apple! It's what you are looking for - with a little effort, applications can be made to compile under both GNUStep and Cocoa (completely legal too, since OpenStep is open(duh)). Foundation seems to be pretty much complete and AppKit lacks just a few Apple-specific things like Drawers and Sheets (which will be added at some point in the future).

        Really, GNUStep needs a little more exposure - I switched to a Mac, but I still think GNUStep is great and could be something better than GNOME/KDE.

    • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:5, Funny)

      by WPIDalamar ( 122110 ) on Monday December 23, 2002 @01:27PM (#4945718) Homepage
      What makes a unix-like os unix-like?

      Bash/tcsh/sh/*sh ? OSX Has it
      X11? OSX has it
      Unix kernel? Got that too
      ssh? Yup
      Stability? Yup
      Bad UI that's hard to use and not fully intergrated? Hmm... maybe OSX has a ways to go.

      Hell... it *should* be possible to port any unix app to darwin and run it in an xserver on OSX.

      • Bash / tcsh: not shipped with Windows but you can get them from Cygwin or DJGPP.

        X11: not included with Windows - but IIRC an X server is not included with Mac OS X either. Has this changed? You can certainly get X servers for Windows.

        Unix kernel: here I have to disagree with you. Mac OS X is based on the Mach microkernel, I think, which is rather different to the classical Unix kernel. It's closer to NextStep or even Minix than it is to traditional Unix.

        ssh: but that's just an application isn't it? Ports of ssh exist for the Mac, for Windows and for a whole bunch of other platforms.
        • Unix kernel: here I have to disagree with you. Mac OS X is based on the Mach microkernel, I think, which is rather different to the classical Unix kernel. It's closer to NextStep or even Minix than it is to traditional Unix.

          And that's where you are off base. You are not totally wrong, but you're not right either. Yes, OS X/Darwin uses Mach, but it' s hardly used as a microkernel. Sure, you can have mach threads, but the BSD subsystem sits next to Mach, on the bare metal. The BSD stuff isn't done like a personality, like you would expect with a Mach MK.

        • Not that this hasn't been hashed around before, but Mac OS X uses XNU, which has elements of the Mach microkernel but is, in effect, more like a typical kernel found in other UNIX-styled operating systems.

          X Window is not included with Mac OS X, but you can install it just by downloading a binary installer from XDarwin or compile it from the main XFree86 distribution, which supports Mac PPC hardware now.

          In fact, if you really want to, why not build your own Darwin kernel? [apple.com]
    • they have listed windows software for a while.. ntrawrite, for example? It may not have its own section, but the database and software allow you to filter by OS..
      • Hey, you're right! NTRawrite [freshmeat.net] is a program which runs only on Windows, and it has a Freshmeat entry. But the Freshmeat FAQ says [freshmeat.net]:
        Many people submit information to freshmeat regarding software that only runs on the Win32 platform. Such people sometimes become confused when we reject such submissions, since they are under the impression that freshmeat will list any Open Source project. It is true that freshmeat is a big supporter of Open Source, but there are a few problems that would result if we did not limit freshmeat to software for the Unix-like platforms.
        Perhaps this one project slipped through the net?
    • Actually, according to the owners of the UNIX name, OS X is a UNIX. It is not "*nix" or "unix-like." OS X is UNIX. Period. I don't recall the link at the moment, but your point has been proven false repeatedly. Search for the link if you like.

      Since OS X is a UNIX, it should be included as a category on Freshmeat. I'm glad it finally is.
    • > If Freshmeat isn't going to restrict itself to Unix OSes,

      % uname -a
      Darwin Johns-Computer.local. 6.2 Darwin Kernel Version 6.2: Tue Nov 5 22:00:03 PST 2002; root:xnu/xnu-344.12.2.obj~1/RELEASE_PPC Power Macintosh powerpc

      http://www.daemonnews.org/200104/bsd_family.html
      indicates that OS X is a kind of UNIX.

      Apple indicates (http://www.apple.com/macosx/jaguar/unix.html):
      " The most widely-distributed UNIX-based operating system, Mac OS X offers a unique combination of technical elements to the discerning geek, such as the fine-grained multithreading of the Mach 3.0 kernel, tight hardware integration and SMP-safe drivers, as well as zero configuration networking. Jaguar integrates features from state-of-the-art FreeBSD 4.4 and GCC 3.1 into Darwin, the Open Source base of Mac OS X, to provide enhanced performance, compatibility and usability. "

      It quacks like a duck, walks like a duck and looks like a duck, I think it's a duck.

    • Re:Platform favouritism (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Ed Avis ( 5917 )
      Replying to my own post, I think a better example than Mac OS X is PalmOS. There's no way that you could reasonably count PalmOS as a Unixlike operating system (or at least, any such definition would be so broad it would have to include almost any modern OS). Yet Freshmeat happily lists [freshmeat.net] PalmOS-only software. Windows software? Oh no, we can't have that, this is a Unix site. Please, Freshmeat, consider ditching the Unix bias (particularly as a large chunk of Mac OS X applications will not run on any other Unix system) and accepting submissions for software running on all operating systems, even that one from Redmond we're not supposed to like.
      • Thanks for reading our FAQ :)

        http://freshmeat.net/faq/view/34/

        Compare our Unix software section and the Palm section. The Palm section is microscopic in comparison; it's dwarfed by the Themes section, which is in turn dwarfed by the Software section.

        But imagine what would happen if we allowed Windows software. A flood of applications, to say the least. Sometimes it gets a bit hectic keeping up with all the Unix software and themes, and I think we'd be totally swamped if we added Windows software, thus reducing the usefulness of the site.

        Finally, as the FAQ says, there are plenty of software download sites for Windows. We don't need to reinvent that wheel. This is different than PalmOS, because our selection of Palm apps is generally a different sort than the ones at other sites (When we launched the section, Jeff noted that other sites had mainly apps for business users, whereas ours could be more for geeks).

        [Why Palm? Unless I'm mistaken, that's still the PDA of choice for *nix folks, since they can actually sync with it]

        I am not officially representing OSDN, blah, blah...

        • If the Freshmeat admins are too busy to cope with Windows software releases, that's a fairly good reason.

          But how about free software for Windows? There isn't yet a good site for that, not that I know of; the 'software download sites for Windows' are pretty lame and focused on binary-only applications. This is a similar business-vs-geeks distinction as you point out for PalmOS (except here it's more Joe User vs geeks).

          The amount of free software for Windows is growing, but still tiny compared to the amount of stuff you'll find on download.com.

          • Curses; I was about to yell that you still hadn't read the FAQ link I posted, but now I find that gnusoftware.com appears to have vanished. opensource.org has links to some sites, but I'm not sure how good they are. There's also www.ossblacksheep.com, and I believe sourceforge lists any open source project (though they're hardly the same as freshmeat, you can still search for things)

            Davecentral is probably more like what you wanted. Unfortunately, it's gone now, and for similar reasons; OSDN didn't have the resources to continue with it [I think that's what the site said a month ago, so it's not like I'm giving out secret information here]. If freshmeat could have handled absorbing it as we did themes.org, maybe we would have.

            We still do get oodles of Windows-only submissions, both open and closed source. The problem with only accepting open source Windows apps is that we'd _still_ have a double standard, because we accept closed-source *nix apps.

            Finally, I think that part of the reason this new section came into being is because Catie and Patrick use and like OS X. None of us use Windows; Jeff hardly even uses X. I'm not sure we'd be qualified to run a directory of Windows software, and I don't think we're hiring :)

            However, freshmeat isn't hostile to Windows users. We have Trove categories for Windows operating systems, and will happily list software which runs under Windows as long as it also runs under one of our supported operating systems. Browsing by category, you can find lots of software "for Windows", and you can restrict searches too. Keep in mind that we don't directly link to Windows downloadables, and we don't take any action if they disappear from project homepages.

            • Let me respond to your posting and try to work out a list of sites. As you say, gnusoftware.org is down and has been for quite some time. The links on opensource.org [opensource.org] aren't a great deal of use but I did find O'Reilly OSDir's Windows section [osdir.com] with 18 apps listed, and BerliOS's Windows category [berlios.de] with 11 projects. OSSBlacksheep [ossblacksheep.com] is just a CD you can buy with some free software for Windows - similar to some mentioned on Slashdot recently.

              More useful than these is the old favourite Cygwin [cygwin.com], a Unix-on-Win32 layer with gcc and tools, and its offshoot Mingw [mingw.org] (aka Ming, Mingw32, Minimalist GNU-Win32) which is a native gcc and toolchain, without a Unix emulation layer. You can use Cygwin to port lots of Unix apps, and you can use Mingw to build the Win32 ports of things like perl and Mozilla. Actually I don't think you need both since Cygwin's gcc can build native executables too, but Mingw is slightly 'cleaner' if you have no need for emulated symlinks and other cruft.

              Hmm, what else can I think of? Well a lot of the big applications like Emacs and Mozilla have native Win32 ports. Don't forget the old DOS stuff, DJGPP [delorie.com] which is a GNU-based development environment for DOS - everything except fork()!. There used to be a rival called EMX but it seems to have faded away.

              You're right that allowing Windows free software on Freshmeat but not Windows proprietary software is something of a double standard; but then so is allowing PalmOS (a wholly proprietary platform and not Unix). I don't think anyone expects Freshmeat to hold to a particular set of principles, it's above all a practical and useful site. So allowing Windows software but only when it is free might be a pragmatic compromise.

              Maybe one day, one of the Freshmeat staff will be forced to use a Windows box for a few months, and then I'd expect a Windows section to appear pretty rapidly :-).

  • One of the things that's kept the Mac software distribution under the radar of most sites like FreshMeat is the fact that for quite some time they've had VersionTracker [versiontracker.com] doing quite well at it. VersionTracker's just starting to get into the PC aspect of things, and remains highly Mac-centric even though PalmOS software is supported as well. VersionTracker may be a pay service, but I discovered a very nice set of features is available with the "Pro" subscription for $50 a year. Not only do you get the daily list of new software updates, but a nifty little application to run on your machine that acts as a new app ticker. Quite nice. But the really nice part is the fact that for your $50, you get 10 licenses and are able to use the Pro software on both PC and Mac platforms.

    Maybe someone ought to look into getting a *nix section started with VersionTracker?

  • X? (Score:5, Funny)

    by xanadu-xtroot.com ( 450073 ) <(moc.tibroni) (ta) (udanax)> on Monday December 23, 2002 @12:59PM (#4945517) Homepage Journal
    Since I switched my primary laptop to OS X, I'm glad to see scoop do this.

    The great Taco isn't using Linux? Oh, what sad times are these when passing ruffians can say "OS-X" at will to old ladies. There is a pestilence upon this land! Nothing is sacred.

    • Re:X? (Score:3, Funny)

      by furballphat ( 514726 )
      Taco: We are now... no longer the Knights Who Say 'Linux'.
      Slashdotters: Linux! Shh!
      Taco: Shh! We are now the Knights Who Say 'OS X'.

  • An apple a day can be good for you. (Score:4, Funny)

    by xmark ( 177899 ) on Monday December 23, 2002 @12:59PM (#4945521)
    Finally. It's nice to have some fresh fruit to go along with the freshmeat. (I don't run OSX but I'm glad to see the invigorating effect it's been having on both /. and the open community.)
    • Freshmeat's servers have a strange fruit
      GUI in the front
      Bash at the root
      Cases and monitors that are sleek and hip
      X servers running on PPC chips
      Open Source scene of the gallant geeks
      The mistrust of anything not free
      The reluctance to part with their cash
      Suprise to find it doesn't crash
      Here is a fruit for the trolls to mock
      for the geek to question
      for the musician to rock
      for the artist to bless
      for the freak to caress
      Here is a strange and fitter OS
  • I don't see the reason why OSX should get its own page on Fm or here on /. either. Do OSX users not want to dirty their field of vision with info about the hoi polloi?

  • This is a godsend. (Score:4, Informative)

    by DwarfGoanna ( 447841 ) on Monday December 23, 2002 @01:07PM (#4945577)
    The Mac software community used to be primarily shareware and commercial-centric (save your quips about proprietary hardware =P). With OSX, I was hoping to make free software (both kinds) a bigger part of my life. This has happened, but hunting and pecking through sites like versiontracker.com has been a pain, and frequently I download somthing listed as freeware that turns out to be nag-ware. This could be a great way to help the community by bug testing, find great Free software, and maybe even get involved in a project I like and use. Apple embracing the open source community was one of the smartest things a computer company has ever done, IMO. I am once again a happy Mac user. Moreso than ever before, in fact.

  • ISO image (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by axxackall ( 579006 )
    Can I download ISO image of Mac OS X from Freshmeat now?

  • That would be what I most want to see on freshmeat, a Cocoa port of Evolution. Increasingly that looks like OS X's only hope for native Exchange compatibility. MS doesn't seem to be budging on Outlook. If we users ported Evolution, Ximian would surely give us Connector. They can make money selling Exchange connectivity to Mac users.

    I would start the project myself if I were competent.
    • My company would buy licenses for an OSX connector in bulk!
    • Why? If you've got an Exchange server that you need to talk to, Microsoft gives Outlook for Mac away for free. And if you don't have an Exchange server, Mail, Address Book, and iCal make for a better set of personal information tools.

      I don't think the Mac really needs Evolution right now.

      • Why? If you've got an Exchange server that you need to talk to, Microsoft gives Outlook for Mac away for free. And if you don't have an Exchange server, Mail, Address Book, and iCal make for a better set of personal information tools.


        Outlook 2001 is gratis, but it is a MacOS app not an OS X app. As it stands it is the only Classic app we put on our standard OS X hard drive image. This is merely an adequate solution and Mac users are clamoring for a native Exchange client. It is quite possible MS will never provide one. They have shown no indication that they will ever port Outlook. On the contrary, they really push Entourage, which has little Exchange integration.
      • Yes it does. Don't assume that there aren't a few of us in Corporate I.T. land trying to use our Macs full-time instead of the crap Dells we're given. There is no Outlook Exchange Client for OS X. It's not looking too good either: the Mac Exchange Client for the Classic Mac OS, although advertised as feature-compatible isn't entirely: there is some core functionality, like the abiltity to search within Calendar items, that is missing in the Mac version.

        Having said that, there are a number of other options available:
        1. Web access - although you can only view entries you "own"- kills the shared calendar concept.
        2. Virtual PC. Pricey. A bit of a hassle to get set up on an NT domain (our admins don't like adding it...).
        3. Citrix. Works great (I use the Java client instead of the OS X client) if you've got a Citrix install and an admin who's not a dickhead.

        I think a Cocoa Evolution project would be good for OS X and for Evolution: I know it would give OS X considerably more credibility in the workplace.

  • I think that too many people are afraid of the open source movement. And Mac OS X, while partly open source, is a good intro into what Unix/Linux is all about. I have met alot of people, who are afraid of implementing Linux, but have no problem with Mac OS X. While widly different, it is nice to have a stable version of linux on my system that all my *nix commands work with (Unlike windows where i have a hard time remembering a Display Directory is DIR and not LS) I think Mac OS X is going to open the world up to *nix because Apple has done what many people have tried to do, Put a Pretty Face (Aqua) ontop of an Ugly Operating System (BSD). This is going to help out in the long run especially if they release their I-32 version of the OS.

  • RSS? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by endquotedotcom ( 557632 )
    They should really add an RSS feed to that. Just for me. Like a Christmas present, you know? That would be great.

    Same goes for apple.slashdot. That would be like *double* Christmas.

  • (Note, Freshmeat & Slashdot are both owned by OSDN.)

    Does that mean this story will get posted three times instead of two?
  • As a Mac developer for some years and MacHack attendee, where this year CmdrTaco keynoted, mostly about l#sbian sim characters on his ThinkPad, I'd like to be one of the first to welcome you to the world of the MacOS X. Seriously, I hope you enjoy the ride, Rob. Great to have you along.

    VersionTracker could use some competition, so it is great to have the more Unix-focused Freshmeat and MacUpdate on the scene.
  • Granted I don't know much about OSX. However -- with most *nix OS's that are posix complient -- should not only ./configure;make;make install care about what the underlying OS is (as long as all the right libraries installed? (Or is there special reqs. for programs to be ported to OSX?? -- and if there is, then what good is it..)
  • Windows has a much larger userbase than OSX and Linux put together, and there is plenty of Open Source software for Windows.

    Clearly, the issue isn't that the Operating System isn't Open Source, or OSX wouldn't be acceptable either.

Slashdot Top Deals

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Close