-
Hello MLAers! We've re-enabled auto-approval for accounts. If you are still waiting on account approval, please check this thread for more information.
Sun Ultra 10
- Thread starter WorkgroupServer
- Start date
Awesome! It is driving me crazy having this sitting here with no video because of the lack of the kb/mouse!
To everyone else:
Thanks for the replies! I have upgraded the memory on this to 512mb and I noticed it does have the long SUN video card in the first slot! Yay!
If you couldn't easily get Ubuntu working your hardware was either poorly supported or faulty, or you are clueless. DSL is a hacker's Linux distro, made for a specific purpose. It's not easy to install because it's target is hackers and tweakers. Puppy, I'd enever heard of until I read that, but it looks like a Slackware spinoff, again Slackware has always been seen as a distro for people who like tinkering, not just using an OS. Fedora, again is a distro on the same path as Ubuntu (but IMHO a great deal more poorly put together) - if it doesn't work you can assume either hardware problems or user incompetence (apart from Fedora Core 5, which was truly god awful). I stopped using Fedora and switched to Ubuntu 7.04 (and have since moved to 7.10) when the auto-update feature in Fedora 6 decided to eat it's own young and totally screw up my OS. I've never had the same issues with Ubuntu however.
I won't hide the fact that Linux can often be a pain to work out, but if you stick to modern, well known versions (Ubuntu being possibly the best known) then the help is out there on forums and mailing lists. I see the working stuff out part as part of the experience. I enjoy it as much as I dislike it. If that's not your bag then fair enough, but again stop assuming you are everyone and realise your opinion is your own and no more.
OS X is cool, no doubt, and as an every day OS I love it because it's practically transparent to the tasks I carry out. If I do something in OS X I know it'll work and I know it'll be relatively painless, and that's the beauty of the Mac OS environment as it is today. It's so easy it's almost not there.
It seems like an old cliche, but I come back to this every time anyone asks why I do these crazy things. The answer? "Because I can". The sense of achievement and satisfaction you gain from grafting away at something and finally getting it working the way you want is very rewarding for those of us that have the patience. Just because you can't be bothered with all that jazz doesn't mean no-one should.
Besides that, compiling is almost never necessary on major distros anymore, s they all have extensive pre-compiled binary repositories, or in Gentoo's case a system of distributing and compiling source automatically.
If you get so far and get stuck then leave it and go away, at some point you'll have a brainstorm, or think of a new angle to try and get a bit further. Problem solving is a very valuable skill, and this is above all other things the way I learned to do it right.
If you need an OS that 'stays out of your way' then use Mac OS. It's clear that that is the environment you enjoy working in, and that's all to the good. Others here enjoy Mac OS some of the time, but like to get their teeth into something more meaty from time to time. It's a good way of learning that not all computer tasks are done through fancy UIs and preferences dialogs. Some times you have to take the gloves off and get your hands dirty. Apart from anything else you might learn something that you can use in OS X at the terminal...I am just trying to say that the OS should stay out of the users way most of the time, not requiring to be "Fed". I tired, posted on a linux forum about it (Not Here) and they said " We are not here to tell you all the steps of compiling an app, figure it out on your own."
Good way to drive away new users.
To each, is own.
OS X has everything to do with UNIX. It *is* a UNIX. Saying OS X is nothing to do with UNIX is like trying to claim AIX and Solaris are nothing to do with UNIX just because you do everything through CDE. OS X's UI layer is highly advanced but without UNIX it would not have the solid foundations to build upon.
You have singularly failed to understand the very heart of what makes OS X so good. Because the APIs are so good and Apple have done such a good job of Cocoa, every API in OS X handles a large array of UNIX functionality and offers that up to the developer in an easily digestible form that makes development a joy (most of the time). However, a developer still must understand UNIX and how it works to develop for the Mac environment, because to understand UNIX is to understand what makes Mac OS X tick. Far from being nothing to do with each other, Cocoa and UNIX are one and the same, what you see as 'OS X' and 'UNIX' are simply the extreme ends of a linear scale, with cool GUI apps at one and and the nitty gritty low-level functionality at the other. UNIX != Terminal.app. UNIX is an established standard that means an OS has to do 'certain things' the way every other UNIX does, in order to provide an easy interoperability. That *does not* stop at the terminal. That goes to all corners of the OS, the development tools, the file structure, the behaviour of the OS, and how it talks to the outside world. UNIX is not just the 'core' of OS X, it is the foundations and the life blood that flows in the veins of OS X.
Apple are far from a 'bunch of idiots'. In fact they have leveraged UNIX in ways no other OS programmers have ever managed. Producing an OS that is both UNIX through and through, and seamlessly easy to use. The latter does not turn it's back on the former, it embraces it and allows it to empower the OS to be powerful and still usable.
I rest my case.
Sweet, it'll make a nice first Sun UltraSPARC box then. You could always download the Solaris 10 ISOs from Sun while you are waiting. I would consider finding a DVD-ROM (most standard ATAPI units will work) nigh-on essential. Installing Solaris 10 from 6 CDs is highly laborious!
Linux has become as eye candy friendly and bloated as any other newer OS. While most sane distros included an installer app that works with specific packages, some pride themselves on having you do all the work to earn your geek credability.
Funny I had a working Fedora Core machine a while back that self destructed when it did an auto update as well (FC 3 or 4). I don't use linux because there are no compelling apps I need that are linux only.
I wonder how many of the OSX users on this forum even pay for their apps instead of pirating them.
Funny I had a working Fedora Core machine a while back that self destructed when it did an auto update as well (FC 3 or 4). I don't use linux because there are no compelling apps I need that are linux only.
I wonder how many of the OSX users on this forum even pay for their apps instead of pirating them.
I've paid for a lot of the apps I use on my Mac, and almost all of the apps I use on my Windows PC. (I use fewer apps, but I seem to use the PC apps more often, since they're things like Microsoft Word.)
As far as Linux goes, it seems pretty easy, even straightforward at times to me, but I'll admit to thinking that it has its place, and that place isn't on any computer that I expect to be able to play MP3 files. I'd use it on a hobbybox and on a server, but not much else, unfortunately.
A Solaris (or IRIX, as I have more SGI than Sun in my house) box, I would consider using as my main computer in the situation that every one of my Macs and Windows computers died, but luckily that's unlikely. They make great hobbyboxes though, I recently got a new hard disc for my SGI workstation, and I'm thinking about getting a Sun box to play with.
As far as Linux goes, it seems pretty easy, even straightforward at times to me, but I'll admit to thinking that it has its place, and that place isn't on any computer that I expect to be able to play MP3 files. I'd use it on a hobbybox and on a server, but not much else, unfortunately.
A Solaris (or IRIX, as I have more SGI than Sun in my house) box, I would consider using as my main computer in the situation that every one of my Macs and Windows computers died, but luckily that's unlikely. They make great hobbyboxes though, I recently got a new hard disc for my SGI workstation, and I'm thinking about getting a Sun box to play with.
They did, iBook Clamshell Indigo [
] ]'>
Like I said, some people might not want that, geek credibility means jack **** to some people after all, no matter how much geeks think it rocks bells. Some people have better things to do with their time, and that's fine by me. FWIW Another reason I use ubuntu is because all it's major branches come on a single 650MB CD, which contains enough t o get most users going pretty well, and a good software manger to add more if it's needed. While I know even compressed onto 1 CD it's still bloated, at least it gives you half a chance of downloading it in a reasonable time frame and it's a lighter install than something like Fedora or SuSE.
I'm pretty much the same, I use OS X 60% and XP 40% (for games), but I do maintain and use Ubuntu just to keep my nails sharp-ish and so that I can understand it when someone asks for help, so, unlike Windows users I can at least offer them a clue, not just say 'sorry I don't help with Windows problems anymore'. I like to stay in touch with technology too, and I realised a couple of years ago I knew jack about Linux as it stood at the time so I have made a point to keep half an interest in it since to see where it's going.
I don't know whether to take offense at that remark, or not , so I won't, but sweeping statements like that do annoy me, no matter how true they might be. You sound like a record exec on one of those 'You're a young person so you don't buy any for your music you download it all off BitTorrent' rants.
FWIW I pay for anything I think justifies its price tag in quality, usability and actual use in my everyday routine. That covers 95% of what's installed on my Mac Pro. I am BIG supporter of small software companies and have over 20 registered Mac OS X shareware apps on my drive ATM that I use regularly and enjoy immensely. I also notably have a copy of OS X for every OS X capable Mac I own, including the 8500. I've long since given up ripping everything. If I can't afford something I'll find a cheaper or free (as in beer) alternative.
One reason I love Sun is they made their entire OS Open Source and free to license
Not only that but they roll the best developments on the Open Source side into their mainline enterprise OS.
I personally like the new and upcoming Fluxbuntu because it combines the nice, easy Ubuntu and the lightness of Fluxbox.
Xubuntu's cool too.
On the topic of paying for software:
I have payed for:
100% of the software currently on my Windows gaming box
0% of the software that's currently on my Linux boxen
and 10% of the software that's on my Mac OSX boxen.
And yet I haven't pirated one piece.
FOSS, ain't it grand?
I have made donations to several notable OSS projects that I like though.
Xubuntu's cool too.
On the topic of paying for software:
I have payed for:
100% of the software currently on my Windows gaming box
0% of the software that's currently on my Linux boxen
and 10% of the software that's on my Mac OSX boxen.
And yet I haven't pirated one piece.
FOSS, ain't it grand?
I have made donations to several notable OSS projects that I like though.
Silicon Valley Pirate -
You are right, of course. OS X is UNIX and both Cocoa, Carbon and everything else on OS X relies on UNIX through-and-through. I know this. I was just being difficult because I'm not really a fan of OS X.
My point was basically that all the cool stuff about UNIX, the pipes and the networkering and the lightweightness, the building-bigger-stuff-from-smaller-components, plain text configuration files, bash scripting and standard interfaces, seem to have been replaced in OS X by behemoth GUI apps, AppleScript, XML and other nasty things.
An example: a proper graphical UNIX would in my mind have no need for an app like iTunes, or iPhoto or similar. It would have a modular file manager that would make organising, finding and previewing of ALL files easy, and use scripting of external, non-interactive applications to perform functions like converting between audio file formats etc., and only resort to interactive apps to view or create files.
It most certainly would not use a 113 MB app* to move MP3 files to an external hard drive - or that same Music File Organiser Application to move dates and notes into your PDA.
That is what I mean by OS X not being UNIX. I know that [NSFileWrapper openWithPath:] is open() underneath. That's trivial, from my point of view.
*with localisations, yes. The binary is 28MB. I don't think I have a 28MB binary on any of my non-OS X computers.
You are right, of course. OS X is UNIX and both Cocoa, Carbon and everything else on OS X relies on UNIX through-and-through. I know this. I was just being difficult because I'm not really a fan of OS X.
My point was basically that all the cool stuff about UNIX, the pipes and the networkering and the lightweightness, the building-bigger-stuff-from-smaller-components, plain text configuration files, bash scripting and standard interfaces, seem to have been replaced in OS X by behemoth GUI apps, AppleScript, XML and other nasty things.
An example: a proper graphical UNIX would in my mind have no need for an app like iTunes, or iPhoto or similar. It would have a modular file manager that would make organising, finding and previewing of ALL files easy, and use scripting of external, non-interactive applications to perform functions like converting between audio file formats etc., and only resort to interactive apps to view or create files.
It most certainly would not use a 113 MB app* to move MP3 files to an external hard drive - or that same Music File Organiser Application to move dates and notes into your PDA.
That is what I mean by OS X not being UNIX. I know that [NSFileWrapper openWithPath:] is open() underneath. That's trivial, from my point of view.
*with localisations, yes. The binary is 28MB. I don't think I have a 28MB binary on any of my non-OS X computers.
Mac OS X would not be here without NeXT
NeXTStep is a mix of BSD UNIXsoftware and the Mach kernel. It's not pure BSD UNIX, but from the end user point of view, that distinction is academic.
Call me crazy, but I don't consider middleware like iTunes to be a part of an operating system. I'll give you Cocoa and Carbon and all the frameworks that Apple bundles (really, does anyone consider WebKit to be a part of the OS?!), and I'll agree that Aqua is not CDE (ick, though the simplicity does have its charm at times) or even X based, but the GUI system is not what defines UNIX.
Did you know that you can run KDE on your OS X box? ssh into it and start KDE remotely. (Of course, you have to install it first.)
Check this out: http://finkcommander.sourceforge.net/ FinkCommander should scratch that free open source software itch...
Maybe this is also an academic question, but would you not consider Darwin to be a BSD-like UNIX?
Peace,
Drew
Call me crazy, but I don't consider middleware like iTunes to be a part of an operating system. I'll give you Cocoa and Carbon and all the frameworks that Apple bundles (really, does anyone consider WebKit to be a part of the OS?!), and I'll agree that Aqua is not CDE (ick, though the simplicity does have its charm at times) or even X based, but the GUI system is not what defines UNIX.
Did you know that you can run KDE on your OS X box? ssh into it and start KDE remotely. (Of course, you have to install it first.)
Check this out: http://finkcommander.sourceforge.net/ FinkCommander should scratch that free open source software itch...
Maybe this is also an academic question, but would you not consider Darwin to be a BSD-like UNIX?
Peace,
Drew
The comment on pirating was not directed at anyone in particular, just a general question since plenty of people who might have swung with Linux seem to just get OSX and pirate Apps instead. I have seen people who hang out on IRC spend mad money on hardware and not a cent on software.I don't know whether to take offense at that remark, or not , so I won't, but sweeping statements like that do annoy me, no matter how true they might be. You sound like a record exec on one of those 'You're a young person so you don't buy any for your music you download it all off BitTorrent' rants.
FWIW I pay for anything I think justifies its price tag in quality, usability and actual use in my everyday routine. That covers 95% of what's installed on my Mac Pro. I am BIG supporter of small software companies and have over 20 registered Mac OS X shareware apps on my drive ATM that I use regularly and enjoy immensely. I also notably have a copy of OS X for every OS X capable Mac I own, including the 8500. I've long since given up ripping everything. If I can't afford something I'll find a cheaper or free (as in beer) alternative.
One reason I love Sun is they made their entire OS Open Source and free to license
I can't say I have a legit copy of every app I use, but I try to get a legit copy of anything I use more then a couple times to test. I don't bother getting multiple copies on my OS since I don't generally have more then one machine on at a time anyway and I am the only computer user in this house.
Oddly enough even for my retro collection I try to get every app, game, and utility I use to be legit (my house is overflowing with boxed mac and some old pc software , just added Norton desktop 3 for Win 3.x this week).
Mac OS X would not be here without NeXT
Please don't talk to me like I'm an idiot.
I don't really care for KDE either, mind you. Nor GNOME. IRIX is pretty decent but the file manager, for instance, still feels a little bolted on.
Or install it from MacPorts (Fink is a bit crap, IMO) and edit your .xinitrc to run it automagically, and then run it via X11.app.
You can even log in without the GUI (login as >console) and open -a X11.app as root, although that will log you in as root cos but only root can start the windowing system (and X11.app needs Quartz running)..
Oh FFS. Of course it is.
The point is, the package that gets delivered to end users, the way the Mac OS X operating system works, the philosophy and the metaphors that are built into the programming model, they're not UNIX-like at all. That's why I bring out iTunes as an example: it's a "good OS X app", which it probably is, good integration with the dragging and the dropping, lickable user interface, all that - but to call something that puts all that functionality into a single blob UNIX-like is just insane.
I don't recall any other graphical UINX OS apps being much different. In fact I think OS X is na exception as it is closer to the UNIX ideal than many others, and this is boosted by a lot of developers making great 'one shot' apps anf Utilities.
Look at Apple's OS X Application collection. This *IS* a UNIX way of thinking, and as OS X develops it is becoming more prominent and more useful. Apple believe in an Application for each task, and binding them along a common framework to allow them to interact fully. Applescript and Automator are great for doing 'Mashups' in OS X where you can script applications together to make results. All this is like shell scripting together UNIX tools at the terminal, but on a macro scale, where whole tasks (or workflows if you will) are bound together by a common language and framework, rather than single operations are carried out per program unit. I've not met any other OS yet that makes this so easy or so powerful. For Apple's ideal it's still only just taking shape, but they have the right idea, and thought the scale is different, the concept is the same as UNIX's own 'large operations using small pieces', except here the possibility exists to perform colossal operations using multiple applications.
In OS X it ceased to stop at the 'good integration with drag and drop phase' when iLife came out with a common media library structure. Arguably it ceased to stop there in 1994/5 when Applescript was released in System 7.x, but back then not many apps supported it. TBH they still didn't when OS 9 was ditched in 2003. OS X has almost breathed new life in to it as a language and a structure. It's still a bit of a weird thing, and I personally find it hard to work with, but the results from those who can work with it are great.
What has happened is the scale of computing has grown as the power of computers has grown and the scale of technology has shrunk. Applications have come to express the 'unitary' task of computing, for better or worse, I guess it depends how good the apps are really. Eventually it'll be whole computers.
Currently the technology and usage in OS X is still at an early stage. Automator is a step in the right direction, making scripting Apps together more humanly possible, as good as Applescript is it still doesn't make sense to the average user. Applescript is, though, to Apps what shell scripts are to UNIX tools.
I run Linux on my Ultra 60, no frustration here... Linux is not very complex.
I agree with Phreakinus here, and most everyone else that shares the same sentiment against you, macintoshman. It's not that big a deal. Like SVP said, it's either the hardware that's not supported that's giving you problems, or you need to read up on how to actually install GNU/Linux on said architecture. The same issues with hardware support would arise on any OS if it's not officially suported. This is why MS used to have a hardware compatibility list (I think they still do that IIRC). So long as you stick with hardware that is well supported, there's nary a problem.
Macintoshman, please don't blame your lack of know-how on installing certain operating systems on the OS itself. And don't tell us what it SHOULD be running on. As it stands, we never thought that we would be running OS X on Intel-based innards, and yet here we are running Intel Macs and some are even running Hackintoshes. So let us run GNU/Linux or whatever else we want on our own hardware (not that we REALLY need your permission)...
kthxbai... :
Similar threads
