Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Apple Businesses

PPC Linux Distro Comparisons 168

Posted by timothy from the but-it's-a-*friendly*-battle-to-the-death dept.
acaben writes: "At MacSlash we've got a story about the differences between the different distros of Linux available for PowerPC architecture. We've invited developers of each version to stop by and respond to comments, and already the debate is raging." Considering the power of Apple's newest hardware, this is an especially interesting topic; readers are weighing in about ease of use, hardware support and other things. I wonder when Web pages devoted to Linux on The G4 Cube will start showing up! :)
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

PPC Linux Distro Comparisons More

PPC Linux Distro Comparisons

Comments Filter:
  • there are a lot of Mac users out there who are very disappointed by Apple's current offerings who are hoping that by hook or by crook MacOS X will work on CHRP PPC machines. there are currently some very interesting PPC motherboard ideas floating around.

    if MacOS X will run on CHRP, I think you're going to see a whole lot of cheap, powerful clones.
  • Mac On Linux is erxtremely stable. I suggest you know what you are talking about before you talk.

    My Mac-On-Linux stays up for days (except when I shut down MOL to log out and log into another user account) no problem with Eudora, iCab, Netscape, or the occasional MS Word 98 use. IE does crash it, but that's cause IE tries to do illegal stuff to give IE more than its share of processor, and that illegal code doesn't get along with MOL.

    Mac On Linux is VERY stable. Even photoshop does dandy.

  • I have to agree. LinuxPPC 1999 was way better than LinuxPPC 2000.

    I installed 2000 Lite on my beige G3, and ended up having to put in my 1999 CD just to get common software like patch and make. Patch- the lite didn't even have patch! What's worse, it needed irt cause it shipped with a broken hwclock, and they distributed the fix as a, um, as a patch ;)

    I ended up putting Linux From Scratch [linuxfromscratch.org] on that G3 instead, and have been delighted with it. Of course, glibc and gcc take a long as time to compile- but it was worth it.

    Just on saturday I aquired a Rev B iMac. Installed LinuxPPC lite on it- and Lite put in a /etc/sysconfig/mouse and /etc/sysconfig/keyboard that do not work with USB and kernels past 2.2.10. Grrr... I had to fix those before it was usable.

    I then installed YD C.S. 1.2 and got a working system from the start. I did build my own RPM for it (their rpm has the macros set to leave man pages gzipped, which causes problems with most spec files which specify man pages in the %files section without the gzip sufix- and a few other things) as well as a few other minor tweaks, but overall it was a much more pleasant install, and worked better w.o needing to edit stuff just cause of lack of QA.

    I still say build your own, or use Debian, though. Red Hat based distros just plain suck.

  • i386. Also (kiddie), it is difficult to run a
    whole computer from an ethernet card. If you don't
    know what I'm on about, ask someone who has
    actually has a clue about computers (i.e. probably
    every /.er except yourself).
  • Actually YDL and LinuxPPC (both based on RedHat) are more secure then x86 for several reasons.

    - inetd.conf services are all commented out on install. The user must uncomment them to use them. That means the user knows he enabling something that could be insecure.

    - PPC Specific Exploits are far and few between. The PowerPC is a more complex processor to write asm for, not to mention less popular. Who is going to write an exploit for PowerPC Linux -- when most people are running i386 linux.

    - Yellow Dog Linux includes yup, which can be configured to run automatically from cron to download and install the latest security updates, similar to Debian.

    - RedHat PowerPC Linux distros come out after the i386 ones, so they have time to spot and fix security problems before shipping.

    - Both YDL and LinuxPPC have a good track record at letting people know about problems quickly. They have security related mailing lists.

    And yes, Debian for the PowerPC certianly exists. I am running it now. :P And SuSE 6.4 also exists. Read some of the problems you might encounter on a below post.
  • FYI, Linux PCC guru Stew Benedict [imaclinux.net] has a great article in this month's Linux Journal [linuxjournal.com], "Yellow Dog Linux on the iMac [linuxjournal.com]." He gives a good overview of the process, the benefits and drawbacks to YDL, etc.

    FWIW, I use Yellowdog (I have for over a year), and I absolutely love it. There's nuthin' prettier than Helix Gnome [helixcode.com] on an iMac. :)

    -Waldo
    -------------------
  • And who do you think creates those special files? Not the devices. They don't know dick about the inner details of the operating system including stuff like file systesm, kernel operating systems or whatever. The thing that creates those special files is the device driver itself. When a user program performs an ioctl on a device driver file the driver catches that and sends it through to the device, generally by writing to an area of memory that is mapped to the devices registers.
  • The two reasons why we did that:
    • Sheer curiosity.
    • Blackdown's JDK 1.2.2 for PowerPC was available before IBM's JDK on AIX.
  • You are completely right. Your comparision makes it all clear: even though pretty women look like they have more love in them than "ugly" women, there are a lot of pretty "bitches" out there.

    Same counts probably for the Mac and Linux: though the Mac gives you more of "that lovin' feelin'", it isn't necessarily made with more spirit and love than Linux.

    That's exactly why I use Linux: I know that the software "cares".

    But that is also exactly why a lot of folks appreciate the Mac: because it at leest *seems* that the software "cares" more, while Linux sometimes seem to behave like your enemy.

    Which it is not, but try to convince them when they don't see a smiley at startup anymore :-)

    It's... It's...
  • Sorry to nit-pick but I get asked about this from time to time. Your right that no *nix will run well, if at all on the LC040 chips but there are other older Mac's that can't run *nix either. Basicly you need a 68020 with a MMU or better. 68000 chips (Mac Plus, Classic, SE) can not run *nix nor can plain 68020's (LC(?), Mac II, etc) with out a MMU.

  • Then when an app crashes every hour, at least your system doesn't ever go down with it.
    You haven't used a Mac since system 7.1 apparently... 8.5 ---> 9.0 have been godsends for stability... even 8.0 and .1 were fantastic. Granted we're not talking month long uptimes, but the days of crashing every hour have long since been gone away. Now it's like every few days, and that's with leaving the machine on all night long running Seti, no less....

    Just thought I'd share.
  • This is a convection cooled device. Unless you're hoping it'll work like a water pipe, covering the intake holes at the bottome might not be such a great move.

    I know; the stand is actually about three inches. I was figuring if you submerged the lower two inches, you'd still have an inch above the water for ventillation. If you used cold water, your results might not suck too badly. Of course, then again, it might.

    --

  • Thanks all. Didn't know that the Mac was supported that well. I'll have to try some of that out.

  • I'm not sure that they released register level information on the hardware in the cube. I would be DELIGHTED to be found incorrect on that one.. but just because the code is released doesn't mean that all the drivers are :(. Although it would most certainly be in the community spirit, especially concidering where some of that code came from! :)

    I always wondered why Amiga didn't get together, take some cutting edge hardware like the GeForce or Voodoo5 chips, and release a real Linux box with full sound, 3D, MPEG, TV, blah blah blah support. I think the old amiga in 92 had more third-party hardware manufacturer support than Linux does now - we just happen to have a lot more dedicated people making code happen. It would certainly solve all the qualms about NDAs and the like, and provide demonstrable market share to people who SHOULD be writing drivers. *cough* diamond *cough* handspring *cough* insert-nifty-usb-device here *ahem*.

  • That's crap.

    Yeah maybe it was poorly worded.

    PowerPCs are much faster than Athlons at the same clock speed. The only reason the two can be compared is, Athlons are available at double the clock speed of the fastest PowerPCs available - and it's questionable which is faster.

    Okay; I use linux on a PPC (debain) I love it, It rocks, PPCs are great; RISC makes up for a lot of mHz etc... that's what I was trying to say. Too bad I was trying to be objective in my previous statement.

    However; if we were talking about some purely CPU style comparisons, I'd have a hard time believing that the athalon, at twice the clock of a PPC is difficult to compare or has questionable results. I've never used an athalon though so... I will say that lucky for us CPU performance means almost nothing when comparing a 350 PPC to a 700 Athalon. The bottle neck is undoubtably at how many clock cycles are lost waiting on ram, or even cache... and lets not discuss the Hard Drive. I've heard some very good things about the PPCs family design's approach to handling branches [damn brain forgot what the term is for pipelineing both branch results and then discarding one] and waiting for memory. I assumed that the athalon (at least its core) would not be behind on such developments, but maybe its all patented stuff.

    Linux on PowerPC takes about as much RAM as Linux on x86. If you run a lot of apps at once, yes, 256MB RAM is great, but 128 is fine, and 64MB works. Sure, you may hit swap (just as you would on a PC), but Linux's swap is fast.

    yeah... I run debian linux on a 120Mhz 604 (no e) with 32mb of ram, and I'm happy enough, although the video built into the 8500 (control) could really use some development help, the FB and X both do some weird things with color depth and screen size (X allocates a square for my screen chopping off the bottom, unless I run fbset twice (not once)) My argument here was that, if your not doing CPU tests, you'd be comparing the system's application performance, and since this often can be limited by RAM performance and swap-space performance, it would be really objective of you to set up the systems as similarly as possible excepting for their CPUs.

    GCC has been fully optimized for the G4 with AltiVec, and Yellow Dog has been recompiled with it. Presumably other distributions have as well. From what I've heard, Linux on a G4 absolutely screams. And now you can get dual G4 systems. *drool* Wish I weren't broke.

    Now this I didn't know... hmmm.. I hope debian will be similarly optimized. I do think though that to get any good usage out of the altivec feature the programmer has to make particular C calls that now help support it... for example in incrementing all values in a matrix, you could write a function that does it the way you'd think an 80s computer would, or you could find that altivec fuction call that probably helps you out. [thats speculation though don't quote me... can anyone confirm?]. I don't think a compiler could go through a loop on a block of memory and figure "Hey all this could be done in one altivec instruction" because there's just so many ways a loop could be setup and you wouldn't always get optimization, hence making a specific function for it would make sense.

  • u have worked on an I AM C DV since 1985?

    i don't really believe much of your posting as it seems quite opposite to my experience

  • Just immerse it about two-thirds up the case ...

    Um, there are vent holes and cable connections underneath. The bottom of this thing is not water tight. You could submerge the bottom 2" maybe (the stand), and run your cables underwater, but don't splash it.

    --

  • Actually, OpenBSD has had a functional PowerPC port for quite some time now; longer than than the more-mainstream NetBSD, which has really improved its PPC support in recent months.

    OpenBSD has not borrowed so much from NetBSD/PPC development lately, however, and is rather behind the NetBSD port at this time.

    It's the normal, expected code-sharing lag that happens with BSD ports.

    Agreed, NetBSD is a nice way to go if you want Unix on PPC. SuSE would be the first Linux distro for PPC not to suck out of the box, so there is now a choice for those who want a PPC *nix that actually works.
  • As soon as VMWare is ported to the TRS80, I'll try it :)

    Why not bundle Office SBE with a clone? Surely Microsoft wouldn't be adverse to an OEM like that. However, I would be willing to pay for a no-OS clone that I would still pay $99 for the OS - if it's around $1000 and includes PCI Slots I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

  • LinuxPPC 2000 vs. Yellow Dog CS 1.2 (Score:3)

    by Laplace ( 143876 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @09:04AM (#891535)
    I downloaded the LinuxPPC 2000 free version to try it out (as an upgrade to PPC 99). On the whole: it blew chunks. It didn't come with any useful software, the the installation process left a lot to be desired. It comes with a graphical X installer, and the classic Red Hat installer. Both were buggy and nonintuitive.

    Now compare that to YDL CS 1.2. It also uses the Red Hat installer, but it is much more stable. The installation documentation rocked, and you can download all of their fully working, complete ISO images. It detected my hardware fairly well, and configuration was easy. It also looks like their update program (YUP) is easy to use. I wouldn't know since my employer has a badass firewall set up (no ftp in or out except through special machines). It would be nice if the YDL people made it possible to update through HTTP protocols.

    Really, they are both very similar, but Yellow Dog has definitely put quite a bit of thought into their distribution. It has what you need on the main CD, and what you want on the tasty morsels CD.

    On an important note, configuring X sucked with both distros.

    My test platform was a PPC 8600/200 with 80 mb of RAM and a 2 gig hard drive, dual booting between Linux and OS 9. I'm installing YDL on a blue G3 later on this week.

    flame on

  • Altivec support in GCC on Linux PPC ? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Hi, I was wondering if there is a freely available Linux PPC distro with Altivec support in GCC.
    (where you use the vector datatype from C/C++)

    I heard about Black Lab Linux (I believe it's from the Yellowdog folks)
    but Blacklab is commercial.
    thanks for infos.

  • New cubes a "home" for linux? (Score:3)

    by xtal ( 49134 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @09:04AM (#891537)

    I've always lamented about the lack of a real home architecture for linux. I used to run amigas, and one of the things I liked was that the Operating System was intimately tuned for a specific set of hardware - that's one of the things that made the amiga great. The OS complimented the hardware and orchestrated it like a symphony, not a drill instructor :).

    I *Drooled* over the NeXT hardware when it came out, but it was too freaking expensive. But hell, I *like* nice looking hardware. :) Clones are ugly. High powered, but inelgant :). I'm not dissing the goals of cross-platform compatibility - that's a great thing - but it would be nice to have a box that does linux best. It would also get rid of the problems people have - especially newbies - getting linux running. "Here, buy this, put this CD in, wait an hour, and then you're running linux. Voila!"

    If you took one of those little cubes, added in one of those beautiful LCDs that apple has - the big ass one - that might be my linux dream machine, and I can give up dual booting and put my Athlon in the closet out of sight.

    You just need a distribution of linux with the appropriate level of support, and you most certainly will need support from apple to get the required information. I don't really see either happening. While I'm not too sure about the cube's preformance, I suspect it will be lackluster in price/preformance to my Athlon with 256 megs.

  • Just design your mobo to Darwin. Since Aqua (if it's well-behaved) will be using ioctl's and stuff to access the hardware, it's immune from having to speak to ROMs. If you design your mobo so that all ioctl's work properly, then you've got a winner.
  • I have a couple of IIsi's lying around, and thought it would be nice to try Linux on them. I couldn't find any reference to anyone ever getting any dist/kernel working on one... there were some references to it working without the keyboard...??? My question was how did they know it was working if they couldn't type a login? It probably suffices to say I never got around to trying it; the IIsi's on the shelf were as good without Linux on them as they would be with keyboardless-Linux on them. :)

    Next attempt was a Centris... I seem to remember I had problems matching a driver for the wierd-ass built-in ethernet.

    Thus ends my exciting tale of putting Linux on old Macs. Perhaps if I had the right old Macs.... :)

  • Re:LinuxPPC and BSD (Score:5)

    by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @09:05AM (#891540) Homepage Journal
    I'll just wait for OpenBSD PPC

    you shouldn't. Apparently the obsd guys can't get the apple firmware to run elf executables. That means lots o stuff will have to be a.out and that's no fun.

    On the other hand, if you still have that Quadra, you can run obsd on that. Any m68k mac will run it except for those based on the 68LC040 processor. And don't ask theo if a port for that is forthcoming or you'll be subjected to his 20 minute tirade about how to do a chip transplant with a soldering gun a can of air and a roll of masking tape. I kid you not.

  • OT, but what's with your URL? Do you work for Metrowerks? AFAICT, the only thing interesting on that page is the part at the botton where it says that Metrowerks is part of Motorola.
  • the cube doesn't have gigabit Ethernet

    dammit, yer right. Sorry.

  • However; if we were talking about some purely CPU style comparisons, I'd have a hard time believing that the athalon, at twice the clock of a PPC is difficult to compare or has questionable results. I've never used an athalon though so... I will say that lucky for us CPU performance means almost nothing when comparing a 350 PPC to a 700 Athalon. The bottle neck is undoubtably at how many clock cycles are lost waiting on ram, or even cache... and lets not discuss the Hard Drive. I've heard some very good things about the PPCs family design's approach to handling branches [damn brain forgot what the term is for pipelineing both branch results and then discarding one] and waiting for memory. I assumed that the athalon (at least its core) would not be behind on such developments, but maybe its all patented stuff.

    Actually the Athlon and G4 are VERY similar architecturally, but the Athlon has an x86 translator stuck on the front end of it that the G4 doesn't, so the Athlon can emulate a clunky old CISC Pentium. That translation slows it way down - otherwise the Athlons would indeed be much faster than G4s.

    Now this I didn't know... hmmm.. I hope debian will be similarly optimized. I do think though that to get any good usage out of the altivec feature the programmer has to make particular C calls that now help support it... for example in incrementing all values in a matrix, you could write a function that does it the way you'd think an 80s computer would, or you could find that altivec fuction call that probably helps you out. [thats speculation though don't quote me... can anyone confirm?]. I don't think a compiler could go through a loop on a block of memory and figure "Hey all this could be done in one altivec instruction" because there's just so many ways a loop could be setup and you wouldn't always get optimization, hence making a specific function for it would make sense.

    Remember that when you're programming in a high-level language (such as C), each instruction translates to several machine-code instructions. If you simply substitute a big list of AltiVec instructions for that big list of PowerPC instructions, it will be faster. Granted, you're not taking full advantage of AltiVec - but you still get a huge speed improvement. Of course, if you write everything in assembly, it will scream - but then, that's always been the case on other architectures as well.

    --

  • Well, I have always used Macs because I think Windows is a terrible kludge, but I hate the short uptimes of the major desktop operating systems.

    I would leave Mac OS for Linux, but:
    - Mac OS is still the best for ease of use if your main focus is not the computer, and
    - I would sorely miss CommuniGate (integrated email and fax) and FileMaker, as well as the occasional graphics application.

    Currently I'm running SuSE Linux PPC on an iMac with Mac-On-Linux, as a test platform. When things mature a bit more, I hope to move my main G4 machine to Linux/MOL, but I'm still waiting for some of the wrinkles to be smoothed out of MOL (still a damn fine piece of work!), and I'm a bit scared of trying to get my dual-head setup (ATI RAGE/128 and Voodoo3) running with XFree and MOL.

  • Has anyone out there with a Beige G3 AV gotten sound to work under /any/ linux distribution. I've played with LinuxPPC and YellowDog and enjoyed them both, but couldn't get the sound to work at all, and most people I talked to with my setup couldn't either. I loved the linux experience, but I need my mp3s or I'm forced to use MacOS.

  • what's the future for third-party high-end PPC RISC workstations? If IBM could be convinced to make a lower-end variant of their 64-bit workstation/supercomputer processor line, rather than a high-end variant of their 32-bit embedded processor line as they do now, PPC would have a much easier time competing on the desktop market.

    I believe you just described the G5 (no, I didn't just make that up).

    - Scott

    ------
    Scott Stevenson
  • I'm in agreement. I've tried LinuxPPC, and never even got it to install properly! Yellow Dog has been great... easy install, mailing list support, good stuff - even for a Linux newbie. I just wish my hardware wouldn't keep giving out on me :(
  • That's absolutely correct. I've successfully swapped RAM between a Compaq Pentium 3 Presario and a Blue and White G3 (which is RAM compatible with Apple's G4. with the exception that the G3 will not support the 512 meg modules.)

  • Yes.. I tried yaboot and BootX with ppclinux.. And Debian (if I remember correctly) asked something like if I wanted to boot linux and I said yes, but at rebooting... nothing...

    I needed a server to run linux/apache/php3/mysql. I have set it up on a 486 DX2/66 with 8Mb ram now. it works, but it's _not_ fast. I'll give it a shot again since I have a 7500/100(120) and a 9600/200 at my disposal. Do you know if all of the above mentioned are available for NetBSD for PPC? And a last question: where can I find info about tweaking the Open Firmware?

    Thanks in advance. :-)
    //Frisco
    --
    "No se rinde el gallo rojo, sólo cuando ya está muerto."

  • While the cube is cool... I'm more anxious about Linux on the daul G4!

  • Hear, hear re: LinuxPPC. Those guys are great kernel hackers, but they don't have the big-picture skills to put out a decent distro.

    SuSE is, IMO, the most competent distro on the PPC as of this moment. Debian/PPC has great potential, but it is not for the faint of heart, and you can't just go get CDs, run the install script, and be on your way. Debian/PPC won't be mature until at least Debian 2.4.

    For those who like BSD-style packaging, there is always NetBSD/PPC. :-)
  • I personally bought the LinuxPPC 1999 Distro for my Beige G3/300 tower and had problems installing the thing

    Great, a somewhat normal color. I love the processors... I don't have a problem with colored cases... Why does every damned review of mac hardware have to mention, "Mine is a grape flavored mac, shaped like a cube!"



  • Um, yeah... there's Debian on PPC. A bit premature with this post, wouldn't you say?

    There is also SuSE. There is also NetBSD.

  • Just wondering... (Score:3)

    by ACK!! ( 10229 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:38AM (#891554) Journal
    Are there any numbers on the people using Macintosh systems with Linux? Usually half the Mac mystique is the love most mac folks have for the OS.

    Are there any numbers on performance versus Intel Linux based systems?

  • PPC stuff isn't standard... Intel stuff is... I want some of whatever that was you were smoking, just now. ;-)

    LinuxPPC is pretty much like Intel Linux of two or three years ago. Why not give SuSE or NetBSD a try?
  • I saw a number of links in the Sunday NYTimes, and they weren't all Apple links either.

  • Wouldn't that be illegal product bundling? If you buy Apple hardware they're not allowed to even void the warranty just because you don't buy their ram, for example. Lexmark can't force you to buy their paper, etc.
  • I have a beige g3 all-in-one with working sound.
    I started originally with LinuxPPC 1999 Q3, but it's been upgraded since.

    E-mail if you'd like suggestions.
  • You might as well go to a junkyard and find a 386 you can run Linux on as run it under emulation.

  • My eyes, my eyes! (Score:3)

    by FascDot Killed My Pr ( 24021 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:41AM (#891560)
    Rob: on behalf of anyone who has every said Slashdot was ugly, I apologize profusely.

    Everyone else: I suggest you visit macslash to see what happens when good code goes bad.
    --

  • Hmm.. really?.. I don't trust ya (IDAny NetBSD on PPC users there to confirm this?

    I installed debian and ppclinux2000 on a ppc mac but never got them to boot without a MacOS partition... I have quite a bit of *nix expiriense but only on intel/sparc and I'm not that familiar with mac HW so I ditched the project.. Maybe I should try NetBSD?..

    Thank you.
    //Frisco
    --
    "No se rinde el gallo rojo, sólo cuando ya está muerto."

  • Yes. That is why I run linuxPPC on my Mac. It is beige like an overripe pear. Once OX comes out, I'll upgrade to another fruit flavor.
  • Why not just immerse them in a tub of water - liquid cooled G4 cubes - ice cubes! Think about it ...

    Perhaps because water is electrically conductive. There's noting to stop you from using liquid cooling though, just try not to dump good hardware in a tub of water please... send it to me, it'll cost you the same [I'm not implying that you'd get it back].

  • Do you work for Metrowerks?

    No, I change my homepage to reflect what I'm ranting on at any particular moment. Due to holidays and my absence from this board, the last time I updated it was during some argument on IDEs for linux.

  • You've got a couple of options (that I know about):
    http://www.marathoncomputer.com/pr_fndra.html
    alt ernatively, you could get a shelf and sit them side by side (basically the same amount of rackspace) and you don't have to turn your head sideways to view the logo.
    :>)

    PS...I'm running MkLinux and LinuxPPC 2000 on Mac Workgroup Servers.

    Curious George

  • There are lots of old Macs in closets that can find a new life as a unix box. I've run my server over the past few years with NetBSD on a Mac IIx, Mac IIci, Centris 650 (still in use as a router), StarMax 5000 (Mac clone), and currently a PowerMac 6500. My desktop machine runs Mac OS, but it's nice to be able to recycle the hardware as a server.
  • Well, Apache and php3 should be available on PPC; I don't know about mysql, but I don't see why it wouldn't be.

    For the Open Firmware, grab the System Disk [apple.com] tool (you'll need MacOS 8 or 9). There is a mini-tutorial [netbsd.org] (with pictures :-) which should get you started. If the stuff there doesn't get you going, you can probably find tips in the mailing list archives.

    - Joe

  • Actually I wouldn't bet on it being any faster unless your athalon is at the same Mhz as your G4. Then you'd have to make sure that you have 256 megs of ram on the cube too, just to avoid swapping to the same degree... although PPC RISC code may be larger... and then you'd have to hope the compiler was optimizing for the specifics in the RISC PPC G4 chip. Thats less likely. In fact I've been told that GCC doesn't have any decent optimization for anything beyond a 601. and considering a 604 could conceivably do 4 601 instructions in a cycle, it would have been nice to have optimization for that. -Daniel

    That's crap.

    PowerPCs are much faster than Athlons at the same clock speed. The only reason the two can be compared is, Athlons are available at double the clock speed of the fastest PowerPCs available - and it's questionable which is faster.

    Linux on PowerPC takes about as much RAM as Linux on x86. If you run a lot of apps at once, yes, 256MB RAM is great, but 128 is fine, and 64MB works. Sure, you may hit swap (just as you would on a PC), but Linux's swap is fast.

    GCC has been fully optimized for the G4 with AltiVec, and Yellow Dog has been recompiled with it. Presumably other distributions have as well. From what I've heard, Linux on a G4 absolutely screams. And now you can get dual G4 systems. *drool* Wish I weren't broke.

    --

  • Like this [debian.org] maybe?

    --

  • While you probably could pop a dual G4 daughtercard in the cube, Apple won't sell you one that way, and I suspect you have some rather serious heat issues.

    Mount a fan on top and put the thing in a minifridge and everything should be fine ;-)

    --
  • People want to be noticed as individuals without being noticed for screaming that they need attention. Just like people like to show off their homes, or buy expensive sports cars and drive them slowly through parking lots, people want you to notice their individuality through their computer. For many of us, it's the 3rd most expensive thing we'll buy, after the home, and the car. Apple has just been able to tap into that desire. With several billion people out there, everyone just wants to be special.

  • While I don't run LinuxPPC 2000 on a G3 (I run it on an 8500/200, though I plan on upgrading that to a G3 soon enough), XMMS worked fine the one time I tried it. I installed everything but that funky japanese language thing (so the menus would be in english), coded the PPP connection script, connected, ran Netscape, connected to mp3.com, clicked lo-fi play (33.6k modem for now, ugh), and XMMS came up and started playing the stuff. Actually, it was a little disappointing how it just _worked_ ... :-)

    Regards,

    John

  • to be fair, it looks wicked on a macintosh. I am guessing the tables suck when the font size gets too big maybe?

    sig:

  • Perhaps if you tried the right unix :). NetBSD works like a charm on both of those models. The Centris 650 in particular has worked like a dream for me.
  • My problem is a dependance on Openfirmware and 603 or higher processors. Most of my PPC hardware either doesn't have open firmware because it's Nubus(Power Computing Power 120, and two 6100s) or doesn't have a 603 or higher processor (7200/120).

    I'm stuck with MKLinux if I want a Linux distro.

    LK
  • For this I wouldn't suggest linux. Unless you like the kernel or work with it directly, you can easily live with NetBSD [netbsd.org]. NetBSD's strongest support for some time existed for Mac 68k machines. The IIsi is a supported machine with a longer history of support than you'll find with any other unix. While linux is cool, I doubt you'd be able to get it to run well on such a machine, particularly by comparison to NetBSD.
  • There is a problem with your review. You compare a "downloaded" version of LinuxPPC with a CD of YellowDog and then complain that LinuxPPC has no "useful software". I'd suggest getting the LinuxPPC 2000 CD ($20 - actually two CDs, one for source) and then comparing. Nothing against Yellow Dog, which is a fine Distro, just don't trash LinuxPPC on the basis of this guy's review.

    LinuxPPC 2000 installation from the CD couldn't be much easier.

    I _would_ like to know how to do some basic benchmarking to compare performance of OSs & machines running the same. If anyone has any pointers, feel free to pass them along.

    Curious George

  • Re:Best way to run Linux on a Mac... (Score:3)

    by AArthur ( 6230 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @09:24AM (#891578) Homepage
    There are a few problems with that approach:

    - VirtualPC emulates x86 RedHat Linux, at a speed similar to a 66 Mhz 486 on most G3 machines. This means X Windows will be slow, as will many apps (like Netscape). This just doesn't compare to running Linux natively, which is far faster.

    - Your running on top of Mac OS. If Mac OS crashes, you lose your Linux stuff. Debian GNU/Linux on my Mac only has downtime caused by me adding or changing hardware, power outages, and that rare time I have to use Mac OS.

    - VirtualPC means you are sharing your RAM between Mac OS and Linux. This means you need lots of RAM, and you have to share it (Linux won't be able to use all your 512 Megs or whatever, Mac OS needs some of it).

    - VirtualPC is too slow for a server or day to day use.

    Good things about VirtualPC with Linux:

    - Run Mac OS programs side by side with Linux programs. Actually, you can do this now with PowerPC Linux, thanks to Mac-on-Linux.

    - It's preinstalled. No complex installation needed.

    With PowerPC Linux if you mess up your configuration, all you have to do is get out your backup (you backup frequently right?!)
  • I used Suse linux on a 400 mhz G3 with 300 megs of ram..
    Its a good way to experiment, but x is really slow. I went to linuxppc after getting my feet wet with installation and rpms. Its much much faster native.

    /Aram
  • I've been using LinuxPPC2000 on my 7200/120 as the main mac server for our school with no problems. I have over 3000 users on this machine (not logged in at the same time, though). It handles all the installers for the Macs on campus as well as providing storage space to all the Mac lab machines and students using Macs in the dorms. The install took less than an hour.
  • Picking from a set of stock colors doesn't make you very individual. That cow case, and the fishbowl... Those are individual.

  • I've run linux ppC on 3 machines. A tower power pro, motorola starmax and apple 7200. No problems on any. These machines have very similar hardware and therefore need way fewer drivers. I have friends who couldn't get linux "supported" cards working on the pc side. It would seem the less variety of hardware you have the easier it is to get drivers.

    Look at BEOS. They're big problem is lack of driver support on the intel side.

    /aram

  • I have some of the funkiest Macs, don't I? :) Everyone who uses Macs has such a collection of funk, for the most part. I have an SE/30, a Powerbook 100, a Duo 210, a Quadra 610, and a B&W G3. The really sad thing? I have them all on an ethernet network in my house. Why? No reason that I can figure out. Just cause they exist.

  • Maccers know what computing should be...; (Score:3)

    by Pflipp ( 130638 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @12:13PM (#891586)
    ...and that's why they're so negative about their first Linux experience. I know a load of Maccers. They don't care about Free as in Speech as a Linux guru does. They don't care about power as much as we do. What they care about is usability, friendliness, beauty and style.

    These are often small points, that even a Miguel de Icaza should not see (I imagine), just because he is used to Unix, to "RTFM!" and /etc textfiles.

    For instance: when you type in a console, and the program is actually busy and not accepting input, your input will still be repeated on screen. (This is extremely nice when your shell loads in "su" and you already start ticking your password.)

    Also, we are often distracted by the Windows version of usability. Even GNOME, a project that does a lot of things good in my eyes, pops up messages with "Are you sure you want to...?" now and then.

    This is not BAD, but it is one of these small things. I remember my first Windows experience, after having used an Amiga for a time. "Are you sure you want to logout?" No, I'm not, but I still do it.

    "No."

    Damn! Still running! How can I logout, like, "maybe"?

    Sun does this a lot of better: they ask "Please confirm your exit from the desktop session." I click "OK" and I am gone.

    Another small thing: when a Mac hits a serious error (which happens only in emulators, I guess), it *apologizes* in the error message, like:

    "Sorry, but an error has occored." followed by more information.

    Well, see a person who is used to all these nice things get through a Debian install. Or even a graphical install -- for "graphical" doesn't directly mean easy, intuitive and user-friendly. And even though currently user-friendliness focusses on installation, there's a big lack of maintenance-tools user-friendliness. (e.g. try to add a remote Samba printer in Debian.) IMHO a program as Linuxconf only adds to the confusion. It begat buggy beyond repair here, anyway. What's the use of that?

    No, I have seen Mac's and I love them, because you really get the feeling that it is a work of true love to the user, when you sit behind it. But I'd rather not depend on a single company for "love", and that keeps me to Linux :-)

    But if the folks at GNOME really want to make a super-product, they should not only spy on Microsoft and try to improve that. They should also actively spy at Apple. For they have some very unique approaches to software design. (Not that I don't trust the GNOME folks; they have made some very good decisions IMHO!)

    It's... It's...
  • For Nubus Mac users, MkLinux is alive and well: http://www.mklinux.org/

    LinuxPPC (the generic base PowerPC dirtibution, which shares its name with LinuxPPC, the distribution brought to you by LinuxPPC.com) has some experimental support for NuBus based Macs, but MkLinux is more mature in this case


    Lord Pixel - The cat who walks through walls

  • http://www.marathoncomputer.com/pr_fndra.html

    Neat, but... two-hundred-and-twenty-five-goddamn-dollars? Wow. alternatively, you could get a shelf and sit them side by side (basically the same amount of rackspace)

    Not really. We have shelf "racked" and rack racked machines and the shelf is just a huge behemoth of messiness. Also, the rack allows you to just roll yer expensive hardware and data out the door in the event of fire (grin). Oh yeah, macs ship with stickers so you can perform "logo uprighting" procedures independently. :)

  • Re:It ain't easy folks... (Score:3)

    by AArthur ( 6230 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @09:43AM (#891593) Homepage
    Being an anonymous coward, I am sure this is probably a troll, but I'll bite for the hell of it.

    "The root problem I think is so much differing hardware. Intel is usually pretty standard. PPC stuff ain't."

    PowerPC hardware is actually alot more similar in config from model to model then x86 boxes. The difference in PowerPC proccessors is quite small, as is the hardware. There are only about half a dozen different video cards to worry about. SCSI, Floppy, USB, Serial, etc. are the pretty much the same on every Mac (although not all have those ports). The biggest difference now days between models is new world PCI vs. old world PCI vs. Nubus (which is only starting to be supported).

    "There seems to be no central place to report bugs"

    It depends on the software. Just like x86 Linux, there is not an universal place to report bugs. It really doesn't help to send a GNOME bug to the Linux PowerPC Kernel Team. For kernel bugs, try sending to linuxppc-dev@lists.linuxppc.org. For packaging bugs, send mail to the place that makes your distro. Questions and comments on LinuxPPC 2k can be posted to linuxppc-user@lists.linuxppc.org. Yellow Dog Linux, SuSE and Debian also have there own ways to get in contact with the packagers (and others).

    "I've tried but it seems they just want to ship CDs not record problems."

    This would be LinuxPPC, Inc. you are referring to? I have noticed they have a tendency to go with cool, easy to use, over stable and tested, but that's their choice. Other distros (like YDL, Debian and SuSE) are more stable and reliable.

    "I'm quite happy to test stuff and see if I can isolate problems, but not if noone is interested in fixing these problems."

    I highly doubt your comments and suggestions are falling on deaf ears, no matter how it appears. However note that many of the hackers are very busy, and may not have time to fix stuff right way. Of course if you have made up patches or clear fixes I am sure they would be much more likely to fix them.

    "Documentation is worse than non-existent in that it's inaccurate."

    This is certianly a problem, as PowerPC Linux is quickly improving, and the documentation is quickly lagging behind. However, excluding the boot process it's almost the same as x86 Linux. If you need post install help for YDL or LPPC, take a look at the RedHat manual, and on the web. For SuSE look at the SuSE documentation and others. There are also lots of Debian documentation.

    "Getting hold of the latest source for a specific platform is next to impossible."

    Especially nowdays, source tends work between archs without problems. Few Linux programs aren't source compatible with the PowerPC.

    "In short it sounds like the Intel Linux of two or three years ago :-)"

    Good way to end a flame (not, it gives it away :)
  • It's a plastic casing.

    Not electrically conductive.

    Just immerse it about two-thirds up the case ...

    Better yet, use jello!

  • The ROM file is part of MacOS. It replaces the "old" >4Mb ROM that "oldworld" Macs had. It's loaded from disk by the firmware (and in our case, by the emulator which simulates the firmware).

    For example, if you buy a MacOS 9 "box", on the CD, you'll find the ROM file. You just need to copy it over to the linux filesystem, strip it, and then, boot MacOnLinux from the CD in order to do the MacOS install.
  • Part of the problem is Altivec patch for GCC produces binary incompatible binaries (with older non-ativec machines). Also, to get the most out of Altivec, you have to call Altivec instructions, which if you don't #ifdef, you will create source that won't compile on normal GCC (and work on non-G4 machines).

    Altivec.org [altivec.org] has both patches and rpms of patched gcc (and binutils too, I beleive). Also see the Yellow Dog Linux Devel Page [yellowdoglinux.com], it has some altivec info.
  • I have a NetBSD/68k box right next to me. It's an LC III that is running far from factory standards. I replaced that 80 meg harddrive and threw in a ton more RAM. I have 1.4.2 on it right now and am anxious for 1.5 to be released. It runs great as a firewall/NAT box. Haven't had any problems with it. My choice to use NetBSD over Linux were numerous. Greater HW support and the port is much more mature. I wouldn't be able to run Linux on the hardware it currently has. NetBSD easily beats Linux in this area, hate to break it to you.
  • Basicly you need a 68020 with a MMU or better

    true. Okay, I admit I didn't think back to the all-in-wonder 68000-ers. However, I am vaugely sure that you can run obsd on an LC. I have an LC, LCIII and LC630 and had those guys in mind when I picked up obsd. I remember taking solace in the fact that the LC's could run it even if the 630 couldn't... but I didn't install it on any of those machines anyway due to disk limitations....

    (Mac Plus, Classic, SE) can not run *nix

    welll... if you don't mind death-by-slowness you can run the ever-emulated Minix for the Mac [pliner.com]. But, really, you gotta have a lot of patience

  • The only statement I ever got on the issue was:

    The Apple implementation of OpenFirmware does not support loading of ELF executables (like the boot-blocks for this port). This needs a workaround.

    ... and I don't know where I got that from, but it's old judging from the ctime on the doc. I suppose I should have gone and found the quote initially, but if you could see my filing "system"....

  • http://www.risk-wise.com/otech02.html

    Wow, the links alone have made coming here today worth it. I wish my lan-centre looked as cool as theirs though...

    We've been using ANA wich usually works out fine, but we keep monitors and keyboard there for those emergencies (ie, it's frozen) and the resulting jumble has made me want to cry.

  • The Cube looks like a restroom trash can. All it needs is a foot lever and a pop-up lid.
  • I'm more anxious about Linux on the daul G4!

    Yeah, but I like dual Gauls in my boxen. Asterix et Obelix, the twin processors, both revved to the max - just watch out when you overclock those suckers!

    Has anyone painted their cubes yet? Zebra stripes, polka dots, flowers, and PowerPuff Girl motifs spring to mind ...

    Design Force One - Engage!

  • NewWord ROM's (Score:5)

    by 11223 ( 201561 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:44AM (#891625)
    One hot topic in Linux for PPC today is the Mac on Linux emulator - my question is "What's the license on the NewWorld ROM file you need to download to use the software?" If Apple lets people distribute the NewWorld ROM, wouldn't it be possible to write a Mac emulator simply by booting up a Linux kernel (screw that, boot up a Mach kernel) and then load an emulator? Supposedly this software works on any CHRP/PREP architecture - has anybody had any luck working this thing on a CHRP architecture like the BeBox?

    Secondly, now that MacOSX is almost here, wouldn't it be possible to engineer a peice of PPC hardware so that it boots Darwin, and then shouldn't MacOSX work fine from there? What's to stop a new clone manufacturer?

  • Colors help easily identify the model being used. For example, "Beige G3/300 tower", and you know this machine is 3 years old, have ATI rage II video, no Firewire, etc...
  • Are there any numbers on the people using Macintosh systems with Linux?

    Not now, no. But consider this: The G4 cube comes with gigabit ethernet and if you take the casing off them and lay two down side by side, they fit into a rack with just enough room to spare for some fans. Hm. I could get a set up like that for less than a sparc 220r... hm. But what would I run on it to make it a good server... hm.

    I think a lot of folks will be thinking like that in the next few months.

    hm...

  • Why does every damned review of mac hardware have to mention, "Mine is a grape flavored mac, shaped like a cube!"

    On the PC side, everyone always has to mention the processor speed and video card, "Word sure is slow on my Pentium II 2600/GeForce." :)
  • 1) linux runs perfectly fine on 601s and definetly runs on 7200s

    2) mklinux (the kernel+vmlinux) runs perfectly fine on other dists, except for the fact that it's 2.0.x. only a couple things break. i have personally used debian under mklinux.

    3) http://ppc.linux.or.jp/~toe/kernel
    monolithic linux on nubus pmacs
  • the hardware is different from flavor to flavor, right?

    No.

    When an Apple user says "Beige G3", they mean the pre-Jobs model, which had an older motherboard design and was installed in the same towers as the old 604-PPC Macs. The term is used to differentiate them from the "Blue and White" (or just "B&W") G3 towers, which are the spiffy ones that open like a drawbridge, have a rippin' fast mobo, and use PC100 memory. You can check here [lowendmac.com] for a list of the various models.

    The iMacs that shipped in multiple "flavors" were identical, except for the casing. Every model that came out during that time period was available in all colors, except for the bottom-of-the-line cheapie, which was blue only.

    Being from Minnesota, I kind of would have liked to have had a purple iMac, so I could sitck Vikings horns on the side to make it look like a big football helmet, but I never really had any need for an iMac. I need the PCI slots, so I bought a B&W G3 tower instead.

  • To distinguish which G3 model people have they often state which color case it has - i.e G3 Beige (early) vs. G3 B/W (Blue and White, a later machine).

  • Re:De Colores (Score:4)

    by crayz ( 1056 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:51AM (#891657) Homepage
    he's mentioning that it's a beige G3, because Apple calls all their PowerMac products the same damn thing. in fall '97 they released:

    PowerMac G3 and the
    PowerMac G3

    then in January '99, they released the
    PowerMac G3

    The first "PowerMac G3" was a beige color desktop machine.

    the second was a beige colored minitower machine

    the third was a Blue and white colored minitower

    for that reason, when talking about their G3, they try to specify exactly what system they have(there was also a rev 1 and rev 2 of each, which Mac users sometimes mention).

    the same is true for other product lines too. people who get the new G4s are calling them gigabit G4s, or MP G4s. people with different revisions of PowerBooks refer to their size or weight, or the color of their keyboard. iMac users generally tell you what revision they were, as we had Rev a, b, c, and d, and then iMac DV, etc.

    it might work better if Apple named their machines with numbers like they used to, but for now, just understand that when I say I have a Blue G3/300, I'm not trying to boast about my pretty case

  • NetBSD (Score:3)

    by Joe Groff ( 11149 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:52AM (#891658) Homepage
    NetBSD [netbsd.org] has a much more mature PowerPC port than any of the current Linux PowerPC ports, IMHO. If you want Unix on a Mac, this is probably your best bet. Hell, NetBSD runs on almost any other platform you can dream up.

    Also, for the security-conscious, OpenBSD [openbsd.org] has a PowerPC port in progress as well.

    - Joe

  • No, the internals are identical from flavor to flavor. However, certain flavors were only available at certain times. If you say you have a bondi iMac, that locks it down to the first two revisions. If you have a blueberry, that means it's in a different particular range, and so forth.

  • It ain't easy folks... (Score:2)

    by Anonymous Coward
    I run LinuxPPc on a IAMC DV I've worked as a software engineer since '85. In short Linux on PPC sucks. The root problem I think is so much differing hardware. Intel is usually pretty standard. PPC stuff ain't. There seems to be no central place to report bugs, I've tried but it seems they just want to ship CDs not record problems. I'm quite happy to test stuff and see if I can isolate problems, but not if noone is interested in fixing these problems. Documentation is worse than non-existent in that it's inaccurate. Getting hold of the latest source for a specific platform is next to impossible. In short it sounds like the Intel Linux of two or three years ago :-)
  • no, along the same product line, the hardware generally doesn't change according to flavor.

    the new iMacs are set so that the low-end($799) machines don't allow users to buy all the flavors, but that's missing the point. if someone with the $799 machine wants features of the "Snow" machine, they have to $1499 because the Snow machine has many more features. it has nothing to do with the color. at any given price point, there is no feature difference between flavors

    although in actuality they probably shouldn't even be called flavors any more, as Sage, Indigo, Ruby, Graphite and Snow aren't generally things consumed by humans
  • The PPC Linux Community is very much alive and kicking. In many senses, it seems to be better off than the i386 community. Say What?! I say that because I use both i386 (at work) and PPC Linux (at home and at work). We don't have to worry about 4 primary partitions- Mac Hardware supports as many primary partitions as you like, which is really nice for multi-boot systems (several different Linux's all living on one big huge drive). You need no planning when initially partitioning- make partitions big enough for what you want, and leave the rest as free space. We also have mol (Mac On Linux) which is free GPL software that allows us to run Mac OS native on the PPC Processor in a Linux X-Window (there also isa a console mode). Sure, PC's have vmware- but that's not free. And there's wine, which is nice and has some advantages over mol- but some software is really hard to get going with wine, and some just flat out doesn't work yet. With MOL you literally boot Mac OS native, installs via RPM with very little setup, and easily tcp/ip masquerades via ethertap. As far as speed goes, my 333MHz G3 is much faster at command line than the 400MHz AMD K6 I use at work (ram being just about equal). seti@home is not only faster under Mac OS than it is under Windows, its faster under Linux on PPC than it is under Linux on x86- signifigantly faster. XWindows is faster on i386 linux than it is on ppc linux, but we'll catch up. Probably the biggest benefit to Linux on PowerPC, though, is that since it is relatively young- it allows almost anybody to contribute to the cause, which is a tremendous learning experience. It really is. Well, I've said enough- there are plenty of reasons to run Linux on PPC. It is a little smoother on initial install on *some* intel machines- but everything is getting smoothed out. The smoothest Linux I've run on PPC is actually Linux From Scratch (probably 'cause it doesn't have all of Red Hat's BS in it, like LinuxPPC and YellowDog does) which I'm using now as I post.

  • Re:Just wait for Debian/PPC! (Score:3)

    by AArthur ( 6230 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @10:30AM (#891668) Homepage
    I am using Debian/PowerPC right now. Yes, I like the package system, it works very good. The FHS is uses works pretty good. Advanced users may want to take a look.

    However, Debian has many problems, (some of which are problems on the x86 too).

    - There are few PowerPC/PowerMac specific stuff in Debian/PPC now. While more and more is being added, it's still not at the level of established PowerPC distros. Stuff like Mac-on-Linux (Run Mac OS on top of Linux), pmud (Powerbook Battery Control), pmacpow (turn your machine on and off a specific times), vmode (change resolution of FrameBuffer, some claim obsolete), Xpmac (an old, simple, few options but fast X Server), Netscape (the version they have is really old) etc.

    - No KDE. I find KDE to be a fast and useful desktop enviroment. Yes, I have heard all of the licensing arguments people make, but most of those arguments are a load of bullcrap. I resent being told what is right and wrong for me. And there are other packages like KDE that won't include for similar reasons. The kde.tdyc.com powerpc.deb's are outdated and limited in what they have.

    - Debian is behind on the PowerPC. All new software on the PowerPC comes out in RedHat-like .ppc.rpm, expecting to be installed on a RedHat-like system, with a FHS similar to RedHat. So you can install them on Debian using Alien, but it will put things in the wrong place, and sometimes mess up the configs.

    - I have had problems with dpkg uninstalling the wrong versions of programs when I have multiple versions. Maybe it's just my luck.

    - The installer is half-baked. Hey, I couldn't even get it to work right. Maybe it was just when I installed it last Spring -- it quite possibly has improved since then.

    - apt-get is very cool stuff. I love that program. However, similar systems are being developed, such as yup. Still yup is very immature compared apt-get, it is rapidly improving.

    For most people I would recommend (at the current time) to stay away from Debian. Unless you are familar with setting up lots of config files, and doing stuff by hand, Debian isn't the anwser. Debian/PPC is a sweet distro, but in it's current state it requires experience, and careful work on the installer to get it working nicely.

    Of course I assume you could apply the same arguments to SuSE, as it has many of the same problems.

    All in all, if you are the typical user, and want an install that works out of the box well, get Yellow Dog Linux.
  • Mac-on-Linux allows one to run Mac OS from within an X session... not run Linux in a Mac window

    No, I know what Mac on Linux is.... I'm saying I preferr the concept behind Connectix product which, in a fit of bon-mot-ism I referred to as Linux on Mac.

    Besides, it's so much slower that it almost isn't worth running.

    yep. It's slow. Running multiple OS's without a reboot is like learning to play all the reed instruments. You'll always be best at tenor sax, but can haul out that clarinet in a pinch if you really need to.

  • No, I have seen Mac's and I love them, because you really get the feeling that it is a work of true love to the user

    Hm. When I use an open source application that one or more people put thousands of hours into and then gave away for the benefit of the world at large, that's love. When I have to pay some smarmy vendor in Cupertino for a pretty-but-vacuous operating system running on overpriced, underpowered, closed-standard hardware, that's soliciting prostitution.

    They'll all say they love you if you pay 'em enough. But it's only the ones that don't require money who mean it.

  • Re:NewWord ROM's (Score:3)

    by Frymaster ( 171343 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:56AM (#891679) Homepage Journal
    What's to stop a new clone manufacturer?

    nothing except money. Clone makers (we call them OEMs sometimes, when we want them to be nice to us) usually get a deal on the OS and associated bundled software. Apple's position is that no such deal will be forthcoming. You can make a clone, but you'll pay the full $99 for the OS. If you want to throw AppleWorks in there just to keep up with cupertino, it's another $169(ish). QuickTime Pro? $40. All of a sudden it ain't such a good deal any more...

    One hot topic in Linux for PPC today is the Mac on Linux emulator

    Actually, I'm a fan of the Linux on Mac emulator [connectix.com] as produced by those wizards of reverse engineering at Connectix (the people who brought you virtual Play Station). With this fine family of products I can run winders, Linux and the macOS on one machine and not have to reboot to switch. Try that on yer TRS80!

  • Re:The G4 cubes have fans (Score:3)

    by Dr.Gonzo ( 124406 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @08:59AM (#891680)
    Actually, the cubes are fanless. At Macworld they compared the sound it makes to a whisper at about 20 paces. They're cooled through an air tunnel through the center of the box.

    From Apple's Website - Amazingly, we figured out how to cool this enormous G4 power without a fan, making this one of the quietest computers ever built. Running in virtual silence, the G4 Cube doesn't distract you from more important things -- like thinking. This also lets you appreciate the pristine audio quality of the pair of Apple-designed Harman Kardon stereo speakers that bring hi-fidelity sound to your movies, music and games.

  • Re:Just wondering... (Score:3)

    by crayz ( 1056 ) on Monday July 31, 2000 @09:00AM (#891682) Homepage
    1) the cube doesn't have gigabit Ethernet. it has 100Mbit ethernet. the new PowerMac G4s are the only Apple products with gigabit ethernet
    2) a lot of what you're paying for with the Cube is the case. also, you're paying for the convection cooled design. if you're just going to stick fans on it, why bother getting a cube?

Slashdot Top Deals

"A car is just a big purse on wheels." -- Johanna Reynolds

Close