Date: 21 Aug 2002 19:17:01 +0000 From: Josh Paetzel <friar_josh@webwarrior.net> To: John Bleichert <syborg@stny.rr.com> Cc: David Kelly <dkelly@HiWAAY.net>, freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: FreeBSD on a Mac Message-ID: <1029957422.17756.59.camel@markx.vladsempire.net> In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208212005550.17375-100000@janeway.vonbek.dhs.org> References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0208212005550.17375-100000@janeway.vonbek.dhs.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, 2002-08-22 at 00:11, John Bleichert wrote: > On 21 Aug 2002, Josh Paetzel wrote: > > > Date: 21 Aug 2002 19:01:54 +0000 > > From: Josh Paetzel <friar_josh@webwarrior.net> > <snip> > > On Wed, 2002-08-21 at 23:45, David Kelly wrote: > > > On Wednesday 21 August 2002 04:17 pm, Derrick MacPherson wrote: > > > > > If there is any feature I'd like for FreeBSD to have is Apple's > > > > > Aqua. > > > > > > > > Yeah, it's a nice interface, I find it gets more annoying after time > > > > though. To be honest, my fave interface to any unix I have used so > > > > far is 4Dwm from SGI. There was a few attempts at creating Aqua for > > > > Linux, but Apple asked them to stop working on it. Short sighted I > > > > would think, but what else is new? > > > > > > I too miss the simple and clean 4Dwm. > > > > > > But its not just the look of Aqua I desire for FreeBSD, but the whole > > > shooting match behind it. If FreeBSD had that then all MacOS X > > > applications should be as easy or easier to port to FreeBSD than Linux > > > apps are today. > > > > > > And Apple would have a state of the art x86 platform. > > > > > > -- > > > David Kelly N4HHE, dkelly@hiwaay.net > > > > A stste of the art i386 platform would be the death knell of apple. > > They are a hardware company. If suddenly all they had to sell was OSX > > and the other 3 apps they make that no one uses where does that leave > > them? > > > > Apple is a lot like Sun, or SGI, or to stretch the analogy a tad > > Compaq/HP. When you buy their systems you are buying a turn-key > > solution. They (sometimes) designed the hardware, they wrote the OS, > > they wrote the drivers, and there's on number on the back of the > > handbook you call when something gets fux0red. > > > > I'm not claiming to have the end-all authoritative opinion on this, but > > apple WOULD have to do some radical shifting around of their operation > > if they were going to do OSX on i386, and I just don't see that shifting > > around happening. > > > > Josh > > > > The reason we got a PowerMac was for the tightly integrated hardware/opsys > design. It's very cool, and I'm a PPC fan anyway. I like Aqua for it's > polish and visual appeal, but I like XFree86 for it's ridiculous, arcane > configurability and speed. > > I would rather have OSX on PowerPC hardware and nice, clean, quick FreeBSD > on my Athlon. > > But Mr. Kelly's comment about "a state of the art x86 platform" still > stands. > > JB > Right, which goes back to Apple can't control the hardware anymore, and they are forced to compete pricewise with Dastardly Dan's House of Clones. Think IBM, circa 1983. Josh To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1029957422.17756.59.camel>