Torvalds Switches to a Mac 1162
renai42 writes "Linux creator Linus Torvalds said this afternoon that he's now running an Apple Macintosh as his main desktop, mainly for work reasons, although partly simply because he's a self-described "technology whore" and got the machine for free." And yes, he is running Linux on it ;)
Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Linus has beaten the two biggest drawbacks of macs (Score:5, Insightful)
Hey, I'd take it too, given that kind of deal!
Linux and the Fashion Conscious? (Score:4, Insightful)
Some of my previous employers think of Linux (unfairly) as nothing more than a DOS knock-off. I'd love to see their jaws drop when they read about this. (Perhaps Vogue might do a fashion shoot with Linux on a Mac Mini?)
Yo Torvalds! You rock, dude! (Score:3, Insightful)
I find all those OS and Hardware flamewars silly. Not that I expect them to stop now but that man sure gained some respect in my book.
Re:Wow (Score:3, Insightful)
Nice tidbit and all (Score:5, Insightful)
single-handedly (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, I thought there were several people involved in Linux? Didn't know Linus created it "single-handedly".
Thanks for pointing that out to me, ZDNet!
Why run Linux on a Mac, if you're not Linus? (Score:5, Insightful)
Personally, though, I don't see a lot of point in running Mac hardware and not running Mac OS X. The OS is what makes the system so insanely great.
This answers the question (Score:2, Insightful)
"WHY WOULD ANYONE RUN LINUX ON A MAC?"
There's your answer. Some of the people who do so write operating systems for PPC.
Why dont they (Score:2, Insightful)
Why should it matter? (Score:5, Insightful)
Linux is portable. It shouldn't matter if the main man behind it is running it on a PC, a Mac, an Amiga, a PS2, or a toaster. This should be seen as a good thing.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:4, Insightful)
It's just another linux machine with that horrible X thing on it.
Re:He is using linux on a dual g5 (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Could be worse - it could have been Windows (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:smart people think alike (Score:5, Insightful)
Rather, free hardware is desired over your average hardware you pay for.
endian (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wow (Score:4, Insightful)
Firstly he is only switching hardware to one of these [apple.com] not OS (as is mentioned in the summary now).
Secondly, he is showing how Linux is portable. The PPC versions run just as well as x86. So now people can say "But how do you know it works on Mac platforms?"
Thirdly, there are no tangible reasons to go to Windows, and it's hard to see how he could benefit.
In other news... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:4, Insightful)
Which is a shame. Booting into OSX once in a while might give him an additional perspective.
Re:Why run Linux on a Mac, if you're not Linus? (Score:1, Insightful)
Plus, for someone who's job is linux kernel hacking, a binary kernel which he isn't getting paid to work on isn't so "insanely great". It's best to use the system you are working on.
I am not dissing OSX, I am just saying, for linus' purposes OSX isn't insanely great.
But yeah free 2gighz G5 is not really anything to sniff at is it? And something to remember is that the G5 is as much IBM's baby as it is apple's. He's using an IBM machine with an apple implimentation + case design really.
I have wanted IBM to sell 2 gighz G5 workstations with an open BIOS for ages now.
Imagine a black NExTbox-looking uni proc (or dual core) with water/liquid cooling with an IBM logo stamped on and a slimline DVDR and a gig o' RAM. Would sell like hotcakes I tells ya!
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:4, Insightful)
Perspective on what? He works on the kernel, not the desktop. If he cared about the desktop, we wouldn't be in this mess.
Linux on the desktop is getting real long in the tooth for me. I'm trying real hard not to boot Windows but I keep doing it day after day even though I'm wasting all of my free time trying to assemble some usable "free desktop".
Re:You don't get it (Score:2, Insightful)
Even chefs eat out at restaurants.
Not being able to do something and not wanting to do something are two completely different concepts...
Why? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is coming from someone who owns and uses a Mac laptop (running OSX) and a Linux-based desktop PC.
Re:smart people think alike (Score:3, Insightful)
I read it more like apathy as opposed to making a point about PPC or x86 let alone Apple, Dell, or HP.
Hardware doesn't matter. That's the only important point. Hardware provides the ability to run software. That's it. Speed, capacity, and reliability are features. With Linux, compatability is no longer a big deal. While apple makes some very nice systems (I put them in the top tier), they are not the only ones making nice systems.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
If he cares at all, he probably is worried about responsiveness more than eye candy, and OSX can't help you there anyway. The hardware can, however...
Re:The only reason I run Linux on x86 vs. G5 (Score:3, Insightful)
OS X is a true Unix. It's not Linux, and doesn't have all of the feeping creatures that Linux has had added to it - and my fingers still type "ps -ef" - but it's a real Unix, by anyone's definition.
I also appreciate having a GUI that's not bloated in the extreme and doesn't have the gross inefficiencies of X. I can even run X programs should the need arise.
Irony? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Not too happy about this (Score:5, Insightful)
It's funny you should mention this. Have you ever worked on a Chrysler? How about a Mercedes? I've owned both and worked on both and I can tell you that the Mercedes is a better-engineered vehicle in every way. Most Chryslers that are not highly powerful are really fucked over versions of Mitsubishis. In other words, riding to meetings in one of their piece of shit minivans doesn't seem to have helped Chrysler build a decent vehicle. They make a few good cars (more since the merger) and a bunch of crap and it's all driven by economic desire. As usual, automotive metaphors are not applicable to computers.
Given that the majority of Linux developers, maintaners, etc are still using x86, I sincerely doubt that there will be any serious issues with loss of quality. On the other hand, this will probably significantly improve PPC support, and since PPC is going to be in all the game consoles coming out, I want good PPC support in the hopes that someone will hack one or more of them to run Linux. Especially the new Xbox.
You're all missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
It completely prevents the merging of kernel patches that malfunction on non-x86 platforms.
Sure, these would get ironed out eventually, but if someone were to inadvertently do something x86-specific, it would immediately break on Linus's computer. That's a pretty darn good guarantee that the kernel is going to remain architecture-independent all the time, rather than only after cross-platform QA has been recently performed.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:5, Insightful)
See, this is bullcrap. It's always been bullcrap. What people mean is that it's not ready for *them*, which isn't nearly the same thing. The desktop experience on linux is far better than Windows 3.1, for example. It's better than Win95. It's better, for certain values of better, than OS 9. In fact, the Linux desktop has a lot of advantages over WinXP and OS X, although they do have a polish advantage. The Linux desktop is perfectly usable, no matter your level of technical sophistication. People get upset because they're skilled with Windows and can correct problems there, but don't want to learn the same skills under Linux.
Re:I run mysql and tomcat on G3 350 Blue & Whi (Score:1, Insightful)
I wish I could own a Mac, then I could also get excited about UTTERLY TRIVIAL SHIT.
I could run MySQL & Tomcat on a fucking 386 if it had enough memory. Therefore the fact that you can also run it on your 4 year old Mac somehow fails to excite me.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:1, Insightful)
People who are interested in "desktop" use aren't interested in learning skills. On Windows (or OS X) they don't need to know anything. They turn on the machine and they surf the web. There isn't much to learn.
Who gave it to him? (Score:2, Insightful)
1) publicity for MAC
2) pulling other geeks over the edge ('I want to be like Linus...')
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
Not only that, there is a choice of desktops. The two main ones are GNOME and KDE. Then you have things like XFce and GNUstep.
What's more, these desktops are not merely Linux desktops. They're portable desktops for unix-like operating systems. So, you have a choice of desktop, a choice of kernel, a choice of distribution, a choice of hardware architecture and a choice of vendor. Not only that, you can choose to have it at zero cost or pay for support.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:1, Insightful)
Its about choice.. (Score:3, Insightful)
In this instance, it doesn't seem like much more than using the fastest, free system he was given. But isn't that whats cool about Linux and FOSS in general? The fact your ABLE to run a functional system using the OS of your choice on pretty much any hardware available is very cool.
Just curious, are there non-FOSS operating systems that offer this level of choice? I know Microsoft tried on a few platforms with NT but dropped that relatively quickly. MacOS has always been tied to 68k/PPC, Sun offers what most consider a castrated x86 version of Solaris (with hopes of it turning into a sparc system purchase).
Its great being able to get the best hardware for the job and know that your OS and apps will run on it. Its a beautiful thing. *sniff*
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:5, Insightful)
With all that time invested and the several years more experience I have had with it over Windows and OS X I am going to say again that you are wrong and Linux is NOT ready for the desktop no matter how many times people like you claim it is.
Re:Reading between the lines (Score:3, Insightful)
4: Martians really do exist
5: I like fruit
Point two is somewhat of a stretch when you think the inventor of linux would test linux kernels on PPC running OS X. You could hardly draw any conclusions on mac software from that, what?
Point three is over the top since every day hundreds, nay thousands of people give each-other mac hardware (not always G5's) and Apple won't toast anyone for that, on the contrary.
Just my opinion, nothing earth shattering...
Cheers!
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:1, Insightful)
I'm not quite sure why you think that bringing up old Windows versions will strengthen your position but we'll go with it.
No, Windows was not ready for the desktop until Win9x (and please note the large migration to it) and it really wasn't stable and ready until 2000/XP.
Compare Linux with old Windows versions? Ok, the stability is similar (and in some cases better depending on various issues) to what Windows offers today in 2000/XP (and no my uptime on XP blows my uptime on Linux away so don't even go there). What Linux offers as far as "desktop software" isn't even in the Win 3.1 days though.
Let me know when it is and when there is sufficient general application support that is acceptable for 90%+ of users and I will agree. That will include being able to view web pages that are IE bug dependent, interoperating 100% with other Office users, and being able to play games.
While I'd love to see Linux win (or winning) it isn't and it probably won't... At least not in the next two years.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:2, Insightful)
I myself run both Linux and Windows on different desktops here. I am beginning to find very little difference between the two anymore.
On both machines I use:
1. Mozilla for web browsing and e-mail
2. OO for all them Office things
3. Eagle schematic capture and board layout
Files move between the two machines so seemlessly that I have started keeping all of them on a cetral server so I can more easily use them from either environment.
The biggest reasons I still keep Windows around are:
1. Pagemaker for manual creation. Scribus is an up and comer, but is still not completely there. Last time I tried PM under Wine it had problems.
2. PIC development tools - most notably the MPLAB stuff from Microchip. Last time I tried it under Wine it had problems.
I have to support Windows machines for my clients so I have to have at least one around anyway. I certainly don't "waste all my free time trying to assemble some usable free desktop", but I am moving towards a suite of apps that I CAN use across platforms without relearning all the time.
At the same time (and I think this is the important central fact in the submitted article), I am moving more towards Linux because it is beginning to offer the same independence of the hardware that I am running on, too. The fact that Linus can move from x86 hardware to Mac hardware and still continue to develop in exactly the same way, with the same tools, is real important here.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
I would disagree with that. I think there are so many levels of computer users that there is no statement that covers them all. There is no "average user". I have known many very smart people who don't really get computers. I have known some not so smart people who had no problem with them. Everyone talks about "so easy your mother could use it" - but they have never met my mother. She has now had a computer for 5 years, and still doesn't get some of the basic concepts. My 10 year old niece picks it up really quickly.
Think about 50 years into the future - nearly everyone will not remember when there weren't computers and the internet. Just like my generation, where I don't know what it was like without TV or telephones. Hopefully, the "average user" will move up the curve a bit. But until then, the computer (and thus, the desktop) is a learning ground.
To your point about OS X, when it first came out I went into a Mac store to check it out. I hadn't used a Mac for years, and never really liked them all that much. But I was looking forward to seeing OS X because I heard so many good things about it. I didn't get it. I thought it was too simple, and not in a functional way. The simplicity confused me, I couldn't figure out how to do anything. Maybe I am a bit too technical or something, or have been around computers too long. I just didn't care for it. I use WinXP at work, and it is OK (once I have customized the heck out of it) and I mainly run Linux at home. I only boot the Windows box when I need to burn a DVD or play a game.
I don't think that Linux is ready for "the desktop" - nor do I necessarily want it to be! Why is "the desktop" such a holy grail anyway? I would rather that the learning curve with computers goes up instead of the intelligence of the OS goes down.
Re:Obligatory Apples-are-expensive post? (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes. They call them "Opterons" though. Please do your research before accusing others of not doing theirs.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:1, Insightful)
I think Linus needs to progress his operating system kernel experience past his early 1990's university studies. To put it bluntly, the Linux kernel is a severely outdated design and needs to be scrapped and redone from scratch with modern techniques. For one thing, the lack of support for decent binary-only module abstraction layer is a horrendous oversight. A vendor should be able to compile a binary driver for my hardware and I should be able to load it into whatever version of the kernel I'm using without worrying about the compiler and kernel versions matching the build environment.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, Tannenbaum isn't that impressed with the Linux kernel, for that matter.
I personally don't know jack-diddly about kernel design - but I suspect, given what I've seen during years of working with various software companies, and software in general, is that every microkernel, kernel, etc. is a piece of shit.
"Ninety percent of everything is crap." Fred Sturgeon
no longer untouchable (Score:4, Insightful)
i think the biggest thing about this is that it legitimizes
the mac hardware for linux advocates - which have been
traditionally x86 biased. it legitimizes linux as
multi-platform more than anything else could have done.
j.
Re:Not too happy about this (Score:2, Insightful)
I'm not sure that analogy works in this situation. It would be more like if BMW and Mercedes both used the same engine manufacturer (Linux), and 90% of Linux engines went into BMWs but the Linux CEO decided to drive a Mercedes.
I doubt anyone would be too upset about that.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
Proof by analogy is fraud, ok with that said:
Are stick shift cars not ready for the road since a number of people can only drive automatics?
Not that I am missing your perspective nor disagree on its merit. Perhaps I should have used motorcycles instead of stick shifts?
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
Mod parent up (Score:2, Insightful)
There are countless x86 Linux users, with varying degrees of clout, to test drivers and submit bug reports. But Mac Linux users are kind of rare, and as such, their complaints tend to fall by the wayside. And to people complaining that his use of non-commodity hardware will cause it to not work as well on x86 platforms, please understand that a) he is about as likely to switch hardware configurations on his x86 box for testing purposes as he is to switch between x86 and PPC, and b) compared with most x86 hardware peripherals, PPC is about as nonstandard as you can get without going embedded. You have nothing to worry about -- the only conceivable result is a more robust Linux.
no conversion needed (Score:4, Insightful)
They are not cache-friendly, and they are complex.
The hardware does have redeeming features. It runs
cool, allowing for less fan noise. It has AltiVec,
giving it wonderful performance on software RAID,
crypto, and image processing. The FPU is very fast.
Plus, Linus got it for free.
Re:Why run Linux on a Mac, if you're not Linus? (Score:5, Insightful)
The Apple Powerbook is steps ahead of comparable offerings from the PC world, from a purely hardware perspective. We're not comparing GLOPS here. We're talking the light weight, strong brushed anodized aluminum, glowing keyboard, Firewire 800, Bluetooth 2.
I'd run Linux on Powerbook over an Inspiron any day of the week.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
It is precisely because of people like you that have no fucking clue what 99% of the world (some of us geeks included) wants in a desktop that Linux zealots have been fending off this argument for upwards of five years now.
Linux is absolutely not ready for the desktop. Until the community settles on a consistent interface and set of UI standards, it will never be ready for the desktop. For all the talk about how Microsoft is more committed to shiny new features than stability and consistency, they do a much, much better job than the OSS community in terms of UI. The controls in every window manager I've ever used have felt clunky and awkward. Shortcut keys are different in every application. And you've got 600,000 people each more interested in making their own window managers than in helping to develop a unified standard.
Which is fine. They're hobbyists, after all. But with that kind of attitude, Linux will always remain a hobbyist OS, and will never make it onto the desktop en masse.
Re:Linus is probably biased about Mach though.... (Score:1, Insightful)
No, there's nothing ironic about it. The point of academics is to blaze new ground, not rehash 20 year old operating system design like Linus did. How "useful" or "fast" or "free" Linux is largely irrelvant.
It's astonishing how many people misread this conversation.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I wonder how long it will be... (Score:5, Insightful)
Both x86-64 and PowerPC have pros and cons. Until someone decides to prove conclusively that it's not the OS, or anything else in the system, but only the processor that is the problem, this is mere speculation on the part of fanboys.
You are a troll and nothing more.
Re:Linus is probably biased about Mach though.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:is there an Apple tax ?? (Score:1, Insightful)
The fact is you can't buy a computer from Apple without an Apple OS on it. Therefore there is an "Apple Tax" on all Apple computers.
There, doesn't being honest and straight forward just feel better?
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
"A Mac[intosh]" is a piece of hardware. "Mac OS[X]" is software. If you buy an iMac or Mac mini, and boot to Yellow Dog, you don't have "a Yellow Dog", you have "a Mac running Yellow Dog".
There are several Mac OS emulators (mostly for OS7) I can run on my PC, even full screen, (not to mention the PearPC for OSX). I still have a PC, not a Mac.
Perhaps instead of just stating it as a fact, you could explain why the above is wrong.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you're going to use something as broken as a "desktop", why should you bother switching away from the one you already know.
Speaking of having no fucking clue, you should look in the mirror.
Until the community settles on a consistent interface and set of UI standards, it will never be ready for the desktop.
Have you ever used windows in a business environment? What kind of crack do you have to smoke to see windows applications, hell, even windows components as having a consistent interface.
And you've got 600,000 people each more interested in making their own window managers...
Apparently you've dug up a rotting argument from the mid '90s. Try visiting the present. Find me a desktop environment that supports multiple window managers. Good luck.
If you want people to switch from something they already know, the change will have to be fairly revolutionary. Why don't people come up with a system that overcomes the inherent flaws is the "desktop" model. Things like the difficulty, nay, impossiblity of performing many to many file operations... Hell just come up with an interface that allows you to do all the things you can do in the command line... As it is now you can't even do a fraction of those things. Do that, and you'll have something that is truly better; something that it would be worth considering a switch to. Until you've done something like that, people will stay with windows.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:1, Insightful)
However, most users really couldn't care less about the politics. I'd rather see more crap on the shelves at Best Buy say "Linux 2.X drivers included" than have to spend a weekend thinking of search phrases for mailing list archives to see how to force something to work. Laptop chipsets come to mind--people just want the damn thing to work, and the alternative is to put Windows back on it (is that better for the Linux cause?).
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:1, Insightful)
"People" became skilled with Windows problem solving because they had to, not because they wanted to. Big difference. No, they don't want to have to learn the same "skills" under Linux, those skills were learned under duress, and they don't want to have to slog through that same swamp twice - once was quite enough.
The response to this article amazes me (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the simple matter is that Macs are generally appealing, and that those who like them tend to evangelise a lot and those who don't have some fear that x86 is not good enough, or somethiing to that extent.
Re:oblig Torvalds quote (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Linus is probably biased about Mach though.... (Score:2, Insightful)
in addition i think linux is not completely monolithic anymore and has become a lot more modular to the Mr. Tanenbaum's liking
Well said, but the real point about microkernels is to have distinct kernel subsystems in distinct address spaces, so a pointer gone wild in one subsystem can't corrupt data in other subsystems.
OTOH, a single address space means that coders have to triple check their code and pay attention to side effects, which is not a bad idea after all (provided you are not pressed by release dates, as it's the case for the Linux kernel).
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
The only part were I read him criticize PowerPC is MMU's handling which I don't really consider that it is part of the assembly language..
Mods on crack (Score:5, Insightful)
The mods who gave the parent 4, Insightful know nothing about the kernel development process.
For one thing, the lack of support for binary-only modules is not an "oversight". It has been done deliberately, for somewhat political reasons, and is a touchy subject with many kernel developers.
Before giving (or modding up) grandiloquent advice on what the kernel and Linus "need", one should have at least some understanding of how the kernel is developed and what is its current state.
It's not using it- it's installing it. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Linus is probably biased about Mach though.... (Score:4, Insightful)
...except to the people who actually use the software...
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:4, Insightful)
As far as learning new skills to correct problems under linux, that's a bit of a canard. Linux problems tend to be a lot more arcane than problems under other oses. Patch the kernel. Edit
I am not a fucking sysadmin. I do not enjoy fucking sysadmining. Trying to find out out why I have to manually load a module to get USB to work is not my idea of fun. I don't get my rocks off by screwing around with XF86Configs for a week only to get an image that almost fills the screen, and is almost straight across, and just has a little bit of white and black vertical lines in along the top and left edges. When I shove in my USB mouse, I want it to not only be recognized and made usable, but I want all 7 buttons to work damn it. For 10 years I've run linux as my primary OS, and not once in those 10 years has all my hardware worked.
Even if the driver issue is resolved. You then have to deal with the "community". Buggy software that if you ever say anything bad about it, you'll be shouted down as a heratic that should learn some respect for getting something for free. Releasing subpar software doesn't mean you're infallible, it just means you have a hobby. Then if the sofware ever gets to a usable state, the software will be rewritten "the right way" and the bug cycle starts all over again.
I like unix. I'm comfortable in unix. Unix let's me do my work, but these claims of linux apologists saying "Just wait! It will get better! Linux on the desktop is just around the corner! Linux is just a easy as windows! Linux is easy to install, it's windows that's difficult!" (That install line, is my all time favorite.) are getting old. I've heard them all before. Hell, I even used to spout that tripe. Then I grew up.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:2, Insightful)
So all the macs they sold with MacOS 1-9 have turned into pumpkins?
Allow me to reverse troll. The 1984 machines were real macs, crash prone and overpriced. OS X is just another unix machine that favors eye candy over functionality.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
All I have to say is "duck"... few
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:2, Insightful)
Edit: Well, that's how I began this post before the parent got remodded with a bit of, uh... moderation.
IIRC, the ULV Pentium-M consumes 7 Watts and has a higher IPC than the G4. At 1.1 GHz it will outperform the G4 in computation and power consumption. The benchmarks I've seen rank flagship Dothans alongside A64 4000+ with an Achilles Heel only on applications that bottleneck on memory bandwith before anything else. They do this with a TDP of 25 Watts. The PM has already sounded a death knell for Transmeta (if it isn't dead already) and will kill off the P4 once Intel decides it can retire that beast quietly.
Everything I've been able to gather from official specs and anecdotal reports makes the grandparent's claim about battery life shaky at best.
Apple laptops are excellent. I'm posting this from one right now. But let's not kid ourselves into thinking they're hand crafted by geniuses too sublime for pedestrian consumers unworthy of membership in Apple's Magic Circle. They're built by the same ODM that makes lappies for IBM.
Re:Just hardware, no apple OS. (Score:3, Insightful)
Strangely enough most of the OS X converts I know are experienced sysadmins / developers with years of experience on *nix.
Indeed. When I first switched started using a Mac casually, it was still largely "the artists platform". These days, I know more programmers and systems administrators sporting PowerBooks than I do graphic designers.