Note: These statistics are based on vapid
speculation rather than a real survey.
Posted on 01/26/2006 12:20:43 PM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Red Hat representative Gillian Farquhar announced last week that the company plans to add support for Apple's new Intel Macs to its popular distribution. Fedora and several other commonly used Linux distributions support the PowerPC architecture used by Apple in the past, and Red Hat wants to ensure that its software will continue to run on new Apple hardware in the future. The current impediment is the Extensible Firmware Interface, a relatively new BIOS replacement designed by Intel that is not yet commonly used or widely supported.
Linux EFI support already exists in the form of elilo, a special version of the LILO bootloader designed specifically for Intel systems that use EFI and the IA64 architecture. The current elilo code base will have to be ported to Intel's x86 architecture before it can be integrated into Linux distributions capable of running on Apple's new systems. Although such a port is theoretically possible, members of the Ars Technica Linux community have pointed out that bootloaders are generally written with plenty of assembly, and consequently are not easily ported. Elilo is not particularly stable and Red Hat representatives have not discussed the methodology they plan to use, so the solution could end up being something else entirely.
Red Hat has not yet acquired the relevant hardware, so it may be a while before we see any progress. Community members and Linux enthusiasts may beat Red Hat and get there first, but Red Hat's preliminary commitment shows that commercial Linux distributors are interested in getting a piece of the Apple pie. Since Mac OS X operating system is based in part on BSD, and since running Linux on Apple's new hardware will not provide any unique or compelling advantage over running it on commodity x86 hardware from vendors like Dell and HP (Apple's benchmarks aside, pretty cases do not improve the performance of a laptop's software), some users and developers feel that such porting efforts are unnecessary. There are probably more than a few Mac users out there that also like to dabble in Linux, and there are definitely more than a few Linux users out there that are intruiged by the power and grace of OS X. User demand for Linux on Apple's Intel-based hardware does exist within the dual-boot crowd, but I doubt that anybody wants to run Linux exclusively on their shiny new Macbook.
[ Discuss ]
Original Display: IBM 360-40 [CHM]
See #21.
I guess what I was doing was paddling, not dialing.
Nothing, they don't need mac's marketshare.
Set the load source (IPL pack) address with the toggle switches, hit the right buttons in the proper sequence, then you could bring up the rest of the system with that Selectic typewriter/console printer at the CE's right elbow.
Guys in long-sleeved white shirts and ties and suit jackets... it got cooooold on that raised floor at night.
Thanks for the explanation and link!
Linux isn't a bad operating system. It is a great replacement for Windows. It doesn't come near to the ease-of-use of Mac OS X.
Linux-philes will try and argue that Linux is easy to use. For the most part it is. It is about as easy to use as Windows. Installations and uninstallations are a pain. When something breaks there is no easy way to find out what and how to fix it. Linux is an IT person's dream operating system. Free, customizable, powerful, and it comes with a gazillion options. It just isn't everybody's cup of tea, no matter how blue in the face Linux lovers will get trying to argue that it is.
That said, I have a Yellow Dog Linux installation on my Blue & White and it is interesting to play around with. Personally, if I need a robust server I'll go for Mac OS X Server.
I think they've got it backwards. There would be some mac users that would be interested in running the macos, but the majority of this would be linux users who want to have a macbook but have zero interest in the macos.
I'd be in that category. Though I'd probably buy an Alienware or FalconNW first, Apple would be higher than your typical Dell or what not.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
