Linux.com

Feature

An early eval of Apple's Mac OS X 10.3

By Chris Gulker on October 30, 2003 (8:00:00 AM)

Share    Print    Comments   

Apple's BSD-based Mac OS X 10.3 Panther offers 64-bit processor support and new features wrapped in the latest version of a GUI that has its roots in the NeXT desktop. While Panther sets a new standard for ease of use and interface look and feel, it still lacks features that Linux users have long enjoyed.

Panther, billed as "the evolution of the species" and built on the open source Darwin project's version of BSD 5, really is an evolutionary step -- not a revolutionary new operating system. Panther does offer admirable user-interface consistency and ease-of-use, but its new Finder is bound to draw complaints from died-in-the-wool Mac users, particularly the large base of users who still cling to Mac OS 9 "Classic."

*NIX users will find this one of the most polished GUIs ever bolted onto a UNIX-like OS and probably won't have issues with the file browser. Mac developers groaned audibly when Steve Jobs presented an OS X Finder based on the NeXT columnar file browser at the ADC conference in 1998, and Mac OS Classic users continue to resist it in favor of traditional Mac windows, icons, and folders. In Panther, columnar view is the default window behavior.

Apple has taken the sleek, brushed chrome interface featured on apps like iTunes and Safari and applied it to the new version of Finder, the always-on application that provides the Mac desktop and handles chores like connecting to servers and other shared resources. Gone are many of the shiny, translucent Aqua interface widgets and light gray pin stripes that debuted barely three years ago.

Finder windows offer a new pane, called a Sidebar, that weds the NeXT-like columnar file hierarchy view with a Windows XP-like list of storage devices and common sub-directories in the user's home folder. Buttons on the customizable window allow users to select iconic, list or column views and turn the Sidebar on and off.

While this will be handy for people who are at home with hierarchical file systems, it has potential to confuse others because it can mask parts of the hierarchy, particularly when the list or icon views are selected. At first glance, files appear to live at the top of whatever directory is selected in the Sidebar -- intervening folders and subfolders are not shown. Sidebar does not have an option for the tree view common to Linux and Windows desktop windows.

expose_small.png
ExposZ allows for one-click tiling of all open windows.
A new feature called ExposŽ allows one-button (or one-click) tiling of all the open windows as thumbnails, and is a very handy way to find a specific window on a crowded desktop with many apps running.

Panther continues Apple's commitment to making it easy to use Macs in heterogenous network environments. Mac OS X 10.3 offers easy one-click access to network servers in the underlying BSD 5 subsystem. A click-to-start list in the Systems Preferences Sharing panel turns on ASIP (AppleShare over IP), SMB, Apache, FTP, and printer sharing via LPD/LPR and CUPS. NFS, surprisingly can only be turned on using the command line or a GUI config app like Marcel Bresink's NFS Manager.

Panther also discovers and connects to virtually any Windows or *NIX server, although, in practice, the process didn't always work smoothly, and occasionally not at all. Panther generated username/password errors and refused to connect to a Red Hat Linux 9 box running NFS on a local subnet. For its part, the Red Hat box could see the Mac in its UNIX network browser, but returned an error when attempting to open a directory. For some reason, SuSE 8.2 worked fine, in both directions, and the Mac happily connected via ASIP to the netatalk server on the RH 9 box.

Panther also features Rendezvous, Apple's version of zeroconf, that does a good job of discovering supported server and printer shares on the subnet. Panther's new Finder doesn't cure one of my pet peeves: Finder still stalls while network processes like trying to connect to servers are in progress. The time-out seems to be shorter than it was in Jaguar, and the dread spinning beach-ball appears more quickly to let the user know the machine hasn't locked up.

And Panther does lock up. While I was investigating the screensavers, I clicked on the .Mac option that downloads and displays a high-key slide show of gleaming Apple products using the features of Apple's Quartz graphics system. Not only did the screensaver not load, but the GUI locked up completely. The mouse cursor would move, but everything else, even the clock, froze.

A quick ssh from my Linux machine revealed that only the GUI had frozen; BSD/Darwin was chugging along fine underneath Panther's hood, and I was able to do a safe restart from the remote terminal. Lacking another machine and a network, I would have had to do a hard reset on the Mac. For $129, you would hope to get a well-debugged product.

finder_small.png
The Mac's distinguishing Finder app may not win many plaudits from longtime Mac users.
A feature I would love to see in Mac OS X is virtual desktops. My Red Hat/Gnome machine has become a productivity workhorse because I can have several projects -- with different apps, docs et al. -- open at the same time and switch between them as needs dictate. I think nothing of leaving apps and files open for days or even weeks on the Linux machine.

Panther's predecessor, Jaguar, was quite stable -- the Finder and apps would sometimes blow up, but they normally exited gracefully. This is a dot-zero rev of Mac OS 10.3, so we'll have to wait and see if Panther really is "Solid as a Rock," as Apple advertising claims.

Panther comes with a ton of Apple "iApps" that handle everything from multimedia chat to photo collections to music downloads to movie making, and Panther integrates them well into the operating system. For example, iPhoto slideshows are listed and available from the screensaver tab of the System Prefs control panel, and the Finder has an iChat menu that lists currently available buddies and user status. Apple's Safari will play back streaming music in iTunes, and QuickTime Player plays video in Finder and Safari browser windows.

Apple's Mail app has been revved to include better topic thread management, including a nifty e-mail summary feature, but its bare bones look and feel have evolved little. Mail's trainable Bayesian spam filters work quite well with a bit of training, and Mail integrates nicely with the Apple Address Book, which now supports syncing with Exchange servers as well as LDAP.

Mail integrates only minimally with iCal, Apple's calendar app, though it (or any mail program) is available from other apps to handle chores like emailing photos. Apple's integration is nice, but Ximian's Evolution is a better email/calendar/contact bundle, in my humble opinion, especially when teamed with SpamAssassin.

Notable additions to Panther include Font Book, a new font management app, integrated fax sending and receiving (long a Mac OS X weak spot), FileVault, which offers 128-bit AES home-directory encryption/decryption on the fly, a personal firewall and a XFree86 4.3-based X window system as an option of the installer package. There's also fast user switching, built-in 802.11 and Bluetooth support and revved versions of the DVD player, iSync and more.

Indeed, Panther comes with so much software it's hard to believe there will be much incentive for commercial developers to embrace the platform. Long-time Apple partner Adobe Systems recently dropped the Mac version of its Premiere movie-editing package and has chosen not to develop Photoshop Album and other new applications for the Mac.

Open source developers, on the other hand, will be interested in the tighter integration of X11 with Aqua. Many X11-based apps will just compile and run on Mac OS X, and features such as cut-and-paste between Aqua and X apps are supported. Apple apparently believes that open source, rather than commercial development, represents the future of Mac software.

Performance on my 2000-vintage 500 MHz G4 Power Mac was acceptable, if not snappy. I should note that the upgrade install took more than two hours; my last Red Hat install took 30 minutes. Performance on a single-processor PowerMac G5 was another experience entirely; even 32-bit apps displayed performance I can only describe as immediate -- owing, no doubt, to the G5 board's massive bandwidth and CPU power.

Will Panther tempt Linux users? Sure! But I don't think there will be widespread defections, given the price points of the Apple hardware required to run it. A bigger question for Apple will be whether its own faithful, the millions of users still on Mac OS 9, will find Panther compelling enough to make the jump to the future of Mac OS.

Chris Gulker, a Silicon Valley-based freelance technology writer, has authored more than 130 articles and columns since 1998. He shares an office with 7 computers that mostly work, an Australian Shepherd, and a small gray cat with an attitude.

Share    Print    Comments   

Comments

on An early eval of Apple's Mac OS X 10.3

Note: Comments are owned by the poster. We are not responsible for their content.

Great

Posted by: edgemaker on October 30, 2003 10:09 PM
wow, it's look great. i need to try it!

#

virtual desktops

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 30, 2003 11:21 PM
There are some programs that create virtual desktops for OS X. But I agree that it should come with Panther.

#

Re:virtual desktops

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 07:23 PM
And they all suck. All of them just do appliaction hiding, so that means you cant put differnt windows of the same across desktops. This is really ugly when you want to have a 2 terminal app windows on differnt desktops, cant be done. The pager was tossed for expose, personally I would have prefered a working pager first, and then this expose thing first. Its so apple, building a kickass hubcap, but a crappy used wheel under it.

#

Re:virtual desktops

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 08:22 PM
Not all sucks, <A HREF="http://wsmanager.sourceforge.net/" TITLE="sourceforge.net">DesktopManager</a sourceforge.net> can have different windows of the same app running in each virtual desktop. I don't have Panther yet, but it works great in Jaguar - Try it out<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)



It's still an alpha version, but I haven't seen any troubles with it.

#

Not all suck

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 08:23 PM
Here are two very good ones, both of which integrate seamlessly into the Mac OS X desktop:

  • <A HREF="http://www.codetek.com/php/virtual.php" TITLE="codetek.com">CodeTek Virtual Desktop</a codetek.com> - Payware ($30). Desktops can be arranged in a NxN fashion (including, of course, a single horizontal or vertical line). Use mouse or configurable keyboard shortcuts to switch to a different desktop. Move windows from one desktop to another by dragging them in the (optional, translucent) desktop pager. Desktops can optionally appear in a pull-down menu from the top menu bar.
  • <A HREF="http://wsmanager.sourceforge.net/" TITLE="sourceforge.net">Desktop Manager</a sourceforge.net> (a.k.a. Workspace Manager) - Free (GPL). Very minimal. A desktop pager (w/thumbnails) appear in the top menu bar - you can click on a desktop (or a thumbnail) in this pager, or select your desktop with a keyboard shortcut. However, currently the only way to move windows from one desktop to another is to hide it (Command + H), then switch to the new desktop and unhide it. That said, its compatability with unruly applications (such as individual X11 windows running in Apple's X11 server, or Lotus Notes etc) seems better than CodeTek VirtualDesktop.


Regards,
<A HREF="mailto:tor@slett.net" TITLE="mailto">Tor Slettnes</a mailto>

#

Re:Not all suck

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 06:26 PM
"However, currently the only way to move windows from one desktop to another is to hide it (Command + H), then switch to the new desktop and unhide it"

Or minimise it to the dock, also XShelf is a handy little app to use with desktop manager

#

Re:virtual desktops

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 01:01 AM
Nopes....

Codetek, which I use since Jaguar 10.2.0 works, and let's you do what you are saying.

For those who like it, you can even do Focus Follow Mouse, and AutoRaise... I personaly never used them even in linux, but some people can´t live without them<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

#

Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 12:00 AM
Newsforge claims to be about "Linux and Open Source." Apple operating systems are not Linux, and the fact that some parts of them are open source does not make the operating systems open source, any more than Micro$oft sticking BSD code in their pieces of crap makes said pieces of crap open source (even if they were to release their changes). If a review of the latest $2,500 Macintosh is wanted one would generally go to an Apple fanatic website. Articles like this shouldn't be on a website devoted to "Linux and Open Source." And no, just because some people that come to this site might find it interesting it's no less out of place; articles on absolutely anything will interest some of the people that come to this website, but that doesn't make articles on absolutely anything topical. Newsforge is supposed to be about "Linux and Open Source." Apple's operating systems are neither.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 12:24 AM
I find it interesting to see a Mac review from a Linux user point of view.

I have several colleagues which prefer Mac, therefore as a linux user it is helpful to have such reviews at hand without having to install/buy/use Mac myself.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Joe Barr on October 31, 2003 12:25 AM
Thanks for your input.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 12:29 AM
stop whining...

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 12:32 AM
I'm not sure the Linux/Open Source movement can pretend Mac OS X doesn't exist. It represents an interesting middle ground between the completely closed/proprietary Windows/Intel duopoly and the open, but admittedly loosely organized, Linux/Unix world.

Apple has actually been instrumental in bringing the Konqueror browser along, and if open-standard video streaming succeeds, it will be because of Apple.

It might make sense to think of Apple as value-added open source. They may not be fully open; where's the iMovie binary on SourceForge, f'rinstance, but they are polishing some open source into an OS that grandma could love.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 04:48 AM
> I'm not sure the Linux/Open Source movement can pretend Mac OS X doesn't exist.

We can't pretend air doesn't exist either, yet that does not make articles on air topical around these parts.

> Apple has actually been instrumental in bringing the Konqueror browser along

The only thing I remember them doing is some work with KHTML for Safari recently, and giving the contributions back (something they may or may not have had a choice about, since my understanding of the LGPL isn't quite as good as that of the GPL). If that's all they've done, that's not instrumental, although you could say KHTML was instrumental to them in making their own Macintosh-only browser. In any case, there's nothing wrong with articles on their work with KHTML, but this wasn't one of them.

> if open-standard video streaming succeeds, it will be because of Apple.

Surely you jest. Their own video format, Quicktime, is proprietary, and, what is more, they refuse to make a player, even a crappy closed source one, for actual open source operating systems. Further, I've heard that they're trying to go to MPEG4 (in some way or another), which is another proprietary 'standard' that requires royalties. I'll pretend you were starved for oxygen when you said that.

> It might make sense to think of Apple as value-added open source.

Considering that they would have to be open source for that, it would make no sense.

> they are polishing some open source into an OS that grandma could love.

Uh, what part of that polish is open source again? It sure ain't Aqua or, actually, just about anything else they release without first taking a project that others have created and making their own changes to suit their own purposes. Everything they have that Granny might use (Aqua, their various programs, etc.) is Macintosh-only closed source.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 05:51 PM
Mac OS X is built on open-source BSD only the GUI and Apps are closed how bout that?

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 06:16 PM
The QuickTime file format is not proprietary. It is an open, and documented container format.

Some of the codecs used with QuickTime (such as Sorenson's codecs) are proprietary, it's true, but this issue arises

The MPEG4 container format is extremely close to that of QuickTime -- do you not remember the news some time ago that MPEG4 was going to be based on QuickTime?

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 07:35 PM
I really shouldn't be wasting my time writing this...

I'm a BSD fan, and I've tried to consider OS X in a positive light. Some issues trip me up, and I'm sad to say nobody's understanding the "problem" quite right.

First of all, props to Apple for the work fed back to KHTML... and for keeping guys like Jordan Hubbard employed. Code does flow out of Apple and into open-source land, even if sometimes in roundabout ways, and that's always a good thing; every little bit helps.

Similarly, while I'm no particular fan of Aqua (as I understand it, the catchphrase for the top-level UI - Finder, widget look/skins), Quartz is a reasonable idea in theory, and if they want to keep it proprietary... Hey, they wrote it, more power to 'em. (I'd like to see a vectorized display layer a bit more lightweight than PDF, but at least they're trying to tackle a problem I'd like to see solved.)

The problem, I'm sad to say, is Darwin. They took Mach. They strapped large chunks of FreeBSD to it. I hate to say it, but "BSD 5" isn't a technology; it's a distribution of FreeBSD. The BSDs in general have been poster children for monolithic OS design; they're stable in spite of having a lot of interdependencies, because they benefit from a lot of real-world testing, and a lot of trained eyes, just like Linux.

Now, I don't want to knock BSD, but to explain why this is so bizarre... Historically, BSDs have tended to need their 'world' (the basic userland tools - ls, rm, dd and so on) kept "in sync" with the kernel. In other words, kernel APIs and ABIs tended to change a lot, and you wanted to be running versions of the userland written and tested against your kernel version. This is why BSDs are released as whole distributions, not kernel projects, in the first place, and at times, it made Linux look positively 'modular' in comparison. (In the past few years, things have settled and improved greatly. You're now equally likely to get bitten on Linux as you are to have a smooth ride keeping binaries around between releases on any given BSD.)

So to make a dumb analogy, think of FreeBSD as a house... a house that happens to be of 'classical' design, that was built well enough to survive storms and earthquakes, that's since been remodeled beautifully, made even more bulletproof, and kept that way by regular inspection and preventive maintenance by a crew of skilled architects, admirers, and volunteers, resting atop of a foundation of solid granite...

Okay, now send in a bunch of guys with chainsaws, cut it in half, move it onto a set of rafts tied together loosely with string (floating houses are hip this year), strap it together with duct tape, and as a token gesture, call up the original architect and tell him to keep an eye on it... Of course, he's welcome to invite his buddies, if they're willing to work for free, know anything about working on rafts, and don't mind the swim.

The rafts are an analogy for Mach (specifically, the "xnu" flavor), here, and I'm unfairly teasing Hubbard, but the 'swimming' is the added confusion around the APSL and contributing to Darwin in general. The core of FreeBSD, the thing that makes it as stable as it is, is the kernel. But Apple didn't port FreeBSD to PowerPC; they took Mach and started tacking chunks of FreeBSD code onto it to make up for the fact that Mach doesn't do much on its own. What they ended up with is an untested entity that very few people (other than Mac purchasers themselves, who deserve a tested product for the price and marketing claims) want to jump through the hoops to test, let alone figure out how to patch...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and when problems do show up, they're inevitably weird, masked by the attempt to insulate the user with a nice UI (which, again, would be great, if the underlying platform were actually time-tested or proven in any way... building an OS X type entity on Linux or a plain FreeBSD kernel would be a better idea, because both of those are getting real-world testing by real-world nerds), confused further by Apple being their own hardware supplier.

The end result is that, while X has been a good bit of fun when it wants to cooperate, it's an utter dog when something that Shouldn't Happen does. Unfortunately, on my cousin's iBook, the impossible happened repeatedly; every Nth wake from sleep mode would corrupt something somewhere, locking the system and producing an endless "spinning beachball of death" on reboot; the kernel, Quartz, and early logon screen were fine, but the Finder wouldn't load for any user. Poking around at the console revealed that much of the high-level configuration is stored in XML files... full of hashed binary data. Looking for support from Apple, Apple users, Apple fans, Darwin fans, and anyone else who'd listen resulted in three answers - "That shouldn't happen," "I have no idea," and "Reinstall." Is it fixed in Jaguar? "I have no idea."

At $100+ to find out, I've waited for Panther... but I still can't know for sure. Between that and the recent 10.2 patch of death, I can't say they've changed my opinion of their development model. I know I wouldn't want to foist this on my grandma... which is why she's still using an iOpener with the original QNX install; it sure isn't perfect, I'd love to find something better, but it's been running three years without a single complaint. (If I ever build my own replacement, chances are it'll run a cut-down BSD... To take advantage of a stable, time-tested kernel.)

This isn't to cut off all hope for Apple. They've made their architectural bed, but they can improve their mistakes in a number of ways. One is to attract more testers/developers/patchers to Darwin, and they've just <A HREF="http://www.opensource.apple.com/apsl/" TITLE="apple.com">relaxed the APSL</a apple.com> to try to help. (Honestly, I think they'd still have to fight for attention if they went 100% GPL or BSD... Darwin-the-distribution just isn't very compelling compared to any of the 'actual' BSDs or Linux distros, and as a product that *needs* testing, it's not only less convenient, it's also not something you can expect to be stable. So for all I know, they might've exhausted the pool of Apple loyalists with the time/knowledge/desire-to-work-for-free already.) They can figure out how to fix the pricing model, or at least pull an IBM and be open about what issues are/aren't resolved in new releases. (Anyone remember OS/2 FixPaks, and the lists of APARs - problem reports, to the uninitiated - handled?) They can make better use of the customer feedback they do receive, and give the in-house developers the resources to make good on it. (Obviously, a perma-locked machine with a trashed Finder is unlikely to be able to submit a crash dump automatically, yet that's the sort of destructive bug that most deserves quashing.) But I think they feel these'd be dangerous breaches to the Reality Distortion Field.

I should also warn that making OS X a platform for X11 apps makes it little better than any other (pardon the pun) X terminal on the planet - especially when the lawsuit-happiness around Aqua prevents the Open Source guys from skinning their way into the Design Guidelines' good graces. That's another nut they'll have to crack.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 11:30 PM
"Unfortunately, on my cousin's iBook, the impossible happened repeatedly; every Nth wake from sleep mode would corrupt something somewhere, locking the system and producing an endless "spinning beachball of death" on reboot; the kernel, Quartz, and early logon screen were fine, but the Finder wouldn't load for any user. Poking around at the console revealed that much of the high-level configuration is stored in XML files... full of hashed binary data."

Problems due to wake from sleep and corrupted data after cold booting are two different issues.

1. Cold booting OS X without Journaling is going to screw things up considerably. Try running Repair Permissions, and Disk Warrior on the iBook. Or just turn Journaling on or upgrade to Panther which now provides a GUI for journaling and is now the default HFS+ w/Journaling file system. If the system does actually lock up see if you can ssh into a remote console and shutdown the system safely.

2. Wake from sleep problems are almost always caused by bad RAM. Don't even bother testing the RAM. Just replace it with Crucial.com's RAM! I had similar wake from sleep problems that were alleviated by simply putting quality RAM in the computer. Mac's are very very very picky about RAM. Much more so then x86 hardware. It may be the Open Firmware, etc. Cheap RAM is not recommended!

3. Once you do have scrambled XML<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.plist files, you will need to delete them (or back them up somewhere) and allow the system to recreate default ones. You can also dump system cache files while you are at it. Journaling will prevent this sort of file corruption in the future. In fact, it hasn't happened to me since I turned journaling on! Disk Warrior may actually be able to repair it.

I don't know what BSD uses for a file system (UFS?) but the ext2 file system on Linux does not recover well if you just shut the system off without shutting down. HFS+ is probably worse then ext2 which explains the need for journaling.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 02:48 AM
Thanks for the honest attempt.

1. While I don't know what the initial format was, the won't-wake/dead-on-reboot bug hit after I reinstalled 10.1 with HFS+, and applied all patches humanly available as of.. January or so. fsck from the console was surprisingly finding no errors on repeated hard resets (somewhat necessary, when you're stuck at a 'SBBOD'), but then, I gather fsck from the console isn't to be trusted? [FWIW, 'UFS' (Berkeley FFS?) used to have its share of troubles, but "soft updates" have matured over the past three years, and provide an elegant alternative to journaling... though apparently the implementation does add to the 'interdependentness' of the architecture, leading to Dillon's desire to go with a "log-structured" FS in the DragonFly overhaul project... I'm not sure if that boils down to plain journaling or not, it's been a few weeks since I tried to enlighten myself. Anyhow, UFS with softupdates *is* stable enough that you can watch the system get hit by a power outage and come up no-questions-asked, now with background fsck so it's perceptually as fast to recover as with plain journaling... Some final writes may be lost in the process, but let's put it this way... They replaced the telephone pole feeding my house one day, and I only noticed because my system was back to the login: prompt.]

2. If Panther is no cure, I'll keep the RAM thing in mind... but as this is an untampered, Apple-store iBook, it speaks ill of Apple's build quality if they'd ship their own with noncompliant memory.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) While I know the issues that do affect Macs (and there are quite possibly less than you think), and imagine any actual problem would be a bit more interesting than simple detectable bit errors, do you have an equivalent to "memtest86" to suggest? Sadly, the machine only managed to do this once before his warranty ran out, and the college tech who saw it then sent him on his way with a reinstall, not a RMA.

3. Unfortunately, back then, nobody was able to provide a clear answer as to which plist(s) were responsible. Some Googling now offers better hints, but at the time, nobody could even tell me how to get cd0 (or the equivalent device, been a while) to appear in devfs when booted to the console... I think they fixed that in Jaguar, but in lieu of anyone else with a clue, it took me a while to find the right incantation, and by then I'd hooked up a crossover cable and backed up his data with scp, making it easier to obey the mindless reinstall suggestion than to struggle with uncooperative software, surly guru-wannabes, and Apple support forums. [EFNet #Macintosh: This means you.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)]

Oh, and why do they use XML for the plists, yet pack many of the files with the same binary-style data of the Windows Registry? (I see there seem to be APIs for both XML and 100% binary plists... so that style of usage seems to be even more haphazard?)

With the Disk Warrior suggestion, again we hit the problem of "A $70 program, maybe with a $100+ OS update or two, and at least $50 of fresh RAM, just might be prerequisites to keeping your $1500+ computer stable enough to use." I believe you, it just doesn't seem economically feasible, unless you *are* a diehard Mac fan who can see the incentive. (As a diehard Amiga fan, I can understand what that's like, though I see less 'Macintosh' left in X than in any of the screwball Amiga-rebirth efforts... but if it's hard making the sell to me, imagine what it's like when I have to make the sell to a bored fratboy and his ex-fratboy parents... I really *do* want to see Apple become a company I can tolerate, if only in the hopes of filling that 'grandma' niche and keeping Microsoft somewhat in check.)

Again, I'm not trying to be a spoilsport, I'm trying to be honest. These are serious warts, and it looks like Panther's added more eye candy (and a new Firewire disk bug!?) without addressing the underlying problems. Maybe that's business, but if business made for reliable computing, then Windows would be the most stable platform on earth... Now that Apple has what should be a stable run of hardware with the G5, they need to relearn to stabilize their software to match.

---

Oh yeah, for the guy below - sure, maybe CMU set the ball rolling (<A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mach_kernel" TITLE="wikipedia.org">something approximately resembling history here</a wikipedia.org>); the fact is, Apple specifically crows over merging work from FreeBSD's 5-series, so they've put their money on perpetuating the amalgam rather than... I don't want to say "doing something that doesn't suck," but they're neither taking the pure microkernel road (iokit's better than nothing, I guess?), nor applying existing code in a way that guarantees its 'goodness' stays intact. The end result is worst-of-both-worlds in some ways, the complexity of Mach with the monolithicness of a conventional *NIX kernel, but hey, those are buzzwords that sound good in the ad copy.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 02:11 AM
Umm, Apple didn't do all you say with Mach/BSD. Carnegie Mellon did. It's evolved many times since the 80s/90s, but when CMU released Mach oh, a decade+ ago, it was with BSD attached on top wasn't it? I distinctly remember getting a copy back then and installing it and that's how CMU was showing off Mach.

#

Not iMovie, but iTunes

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 09:10 AM
I'd be happy to see even the closed-source binary of iTunes running on the various flavors of Linux. It may be closed, but at least its free. And having it available would make it easier for me to get a few more friends to dump Windows.
With iTunes and TiVo-like recording from a HDTV card, the gadget-addicted masses would be more attracted. Stability, security, flexibility, low-cost and the essential apps are great, but throwing in something sexier would draw in more consumers.

The innovation and quality of many of Apple's offerings is refreshing. iTunes and the iPod, iChat AV and iView. Hmmm there's another pair to bring to Linux.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: gerardm on October 31, 2003 12:33 AM
That is an easy one:
Panther builds on Open Source in a credible way. With Apple spending effort in both strengthening the underlying operating system and the top up proprietary stuff, integretating them into one credible package they show how a company can adopt to this brave new world.

Another reason:
The Panther is here and now, this in a marked contrast with another company who receives even more media attention.

A third reason:
Apple is renowned for its User Interface. With the merger with NEXT, they got great UNIX strengths and they showcase how great a UNIX-based desktop system can be. For many people it will help make the penny drop that UNIX-based desktopa are viable , beatifull and here today.

A fourth reason:
To make the internet more secure, the environment needs to be less of a monoculture. Panther is a great specimen for an alternative. It is here today.

Thanks,

    Gerard

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 04:54 AM
> The Panther is here and now, this in a marked contrast with another company who receives even more media attention.

Something that bears no relevance to anything (important and topical).

> To make the internet more secure, the environment needs to be less of a monoculture. Panther is a great specimen for an alternative. It is here today.

Besides the fact that that also has nothing to do with anything, that's why we have a plethora of actual open source operating systems.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 02:21 AM
Stop crying Linux Boy. "this is supposed to be linux and open source...oooh look at me, i don't use a mac or windows, i use a real computer. Bluecurve looks just as good as Panther anyway"

If you don't want to read the article, don't! Besides, you pay how much to get into this site? Exactly, now shut your pie hole!

ssh

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 04:57 AM
> Stop crying Linux Boy.

I'll ignore the kindergarten-esque insult, and inform you that 'Linux boys' are known to hang around "Linux and Open Source" websites, except for preteen trolls like you. After about four words of your post it's not worth reading, let alone wasting time responding to, so I won't.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 06:47 PM

After about four words of your post it's not worth reading, let alone wasting time responding to, so I won't.

Actually, you did...

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 10:55 PM
Uh, not beyond the first four words I didn't respond. And of the first four, only words three and four were responded to.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 08:23 AM
Hee hee... "Linux Boy" Funny. Sounds like a Homer Simpson quote. Most of your tirade shows some humor. Next time drop the harsh "piehole" ending and it'll be perfect.

Signed - YALB

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: sethc on November 01, 2003 03:03 AM
It doesnt matter what any of you think say or do, in a few years all you blowhards who got free unix like systems will be wallowing in your own grief. When SCO wins against IBM, FreeBSD and Mac OS X are next. Be sure to save some cash so you can buy the SCO IP license because Darl McBride has sent a message to Steve Jobs, Apple is next on the hot list. So be sure to buy some SCO stock while its cheap because its going to be worth a whole lot more in 2005, the judge will rule the GPL invalid and Linux will die.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 02, 2003 12:36 AM
You are the most misguided person in this board.

#

Agree

Posted by: Void Main on October 31, 2003 03:58 AM
If it makes you feel any better, I am in 100% agreement with you. Between the new site layout, the Microsoft ads, and now all the proprietary Apple stuff there doesn't really seem to be any really good sites devoted to Linux and Open source.

#

Re:Agree

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 05:04 AM
> the Microsoft ads

I see they still have them then. Seeing an ad from Micro$oft anywhere on the Internet at any time causes me to immediately right-click on the image and tell Mozilla to "Block Images from this Server." Hence my lack of advertising banners seen on NewsForge. Well, because of both the taking of Micro$oft money and the fact that they did something else to tick me off a few months ago.

#

Re:Agree

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 11:10 PM
So do you also turn off your TV when a Microsoft ad comes on? Seems a bit over the top, if you ask me.

#

Re:Agree

Posted by: Void Main on November 01, 2003 08:42 AM
Actually, I do turn the channel when Microsoft commercials come on. You may be right, it may be a little over the top, but then again, I believe I am what they call a "Linux zealot" so it is to be expected. I don't actually see the Microsoft ads on this site either, but then I don't see any ads thanks to <A HREF="http://voidmain.is-a-geek.net/redhat/zapping_ads_with_squid_and_adzapper.html" TITLE="is-a-geek.net">Ad Zapper</a is-a-geek.net>. Mozilla cleans up whatever Ad Zapper misses.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 06:18 AM
I suspect that I'm not the only reader that works with more than one operating system so I have no problem with the site taking a slightly wider view.

As far as some of the other comments made by others about MS advertising on the site - well if ole Bill wants to help support Open Source, I say take the money and run.

The Mac workstation, XP laptop, and Linux server at my house get along just fine. But I wish XP would quit trying to phone home.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 10:35 AM
> I suspect that I'm not the only reader that works with more than one operating system so I have no problem with the site taking a slightly wider view.

More than one open source operating system? Sure, post all about them.

> As far as some of the other comments made by others about MS advertising on the site - well if ole Bill wants to help support Open Source, I say take the money and run.

Or, alternatively, if a site wants to help promote crap I hate from a company I hate, I block the promotions.

#

Re:Why's this on this site?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 11:51 PM
me thinks the word you are looking for is "sell-out"

#

Alternative to virtual desktops...

Posted by: manonthemoon on October 31, 2003 12:32 AM
You can also create other users for specific application sets and use fast user switching between them. Nice way to partition tasks and security for different uses.

#

Re:Alternative to virtual desktops...

Posted by: hndrcksn on October 31, 2003 08:53 PM
This is still a kludge though. Sharing files between your various accounts gets to be a pain, because you have to remember to save files in areas that are accessible to all accounts and you have to mess with file/directory permissions. This really doesn't get you close enough to the true freedom of virtual desktops. I'm really surprised that Apple didn't just do this. It is not a new idea, the concept has been around for ages and there are so many implementations on other platforms that they could have easily cherry picked the best features to forge a new cooler virtual desktop. Exposé is not it.

#

Re:Alternative to virtual desktops...

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 08:57 PM
Bad idea.... it's way complicated to do that. iGeek says so:
http://www.igeek.com/articles/Interface/MultiUser<nobr>V<wbr></nobr> irtualDesktop.txt

That being said, I think his review is boneheaded.... he basically says fast user switching sucks because of the inability to hack it easilty to have virtual desktops, which
it wasn't designed to do.

At any rate, it's a sensible idea, but kind of impractical

#

The Metal Finder..

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 04:04 AM
.. can be turned into an exact copy of the OS9 Finder by clicking the upper-right button. Those OS9 diehards will be thrilled with the new finder, that has a spatial mode built in. The new finder is exactly as suggested in the Ars Technica Spatial Finder suggestion, except they put the "browser" and the "spatial finder" into one application.

#

Re:The Metal Finder..

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 11:30 PM
Well, not exactly. E.g. you can have multiple Windows containing the same folder open, and you cannot make it the default (annoying when you use spring loaded folders).
But it's a progress over the old finder. I Prefer this mode.
They should make the sidebar of the metal finder an extra palette in this mode.

#

Re:The Metal Finder..

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 06:50 PM
I agree, the new Finder is vastly improved. 9ification is complete, you even have the spring-loaded folders (since even before Panther). Personally, I never liked the OS 9 Finder and I'm very happy with column view. It can be configured conveniently. Archiving within the Finder as well as extensive info make it very useful. Not as feature-packed as PathFinder but much better than anything before on the Mac.

#

OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 06:01 AM
OSX looks good, but the performance really doesn't match the look. I purchased a 14" G3 iBook in january 2003. After using MacOSx for a few months, I went to Gentoo Linux and I've never gone back. Jaguar is visually stunning, but I find that when I am busy trying to get something done, I tend not to care about how much eyecandy I can see while doing it.

The hardware is pricey, but rock-solid; it is by far the best laptop I have ever had. Unfortunately, however, the OS is not nearly as worthy as the equipment it runs on.

Buy Mac machines, then throw linux on them. You'll have the best of both worlds -- legendary hardware reliability *and* legendary software reliability.

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 11:39 PM
Admittedly Linux still runs faster on my iBook than Panther does, but Panther has been given a major speed boost over Jaguar (which had a major speed boost over 10.1... yadda yadda).

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 12:28 AM
The performance of the gui in 10.3 is light years beyond 10.2, you just have to have a good video card to take advantage of it. My stupid emac 700 flies on 10.3 while it always felt sluggish on 10.2

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 12:30 AM
try Panther –– the best Mac OS since Mac OS 7

for Jaguar I agree

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 12:30 AM
When did linux become "legendary"? Furthermore, I'd hardly say any distro has been particularly reliable, at least not until the past couple of years.

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 02:38 AM
i've tried linux for a couple of months, its core system is indeed solid but none of the GUIs it has is as solid as the core os.
Actually, it's rather bad at times, but again, what would you expect from an unfinished GUI.
I like OSX, it's improving and it's going to be one of the best OS ever. Time will tell.
Peace
Boeing777

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 04:15 AM
Absolutely agree with the linux-GUI message.
But it's improving at light-speed. (Improvements in just the last 12 months have been biiigger than in the previous three or four years).

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 02, 2003 12:50 AM
I would say the Linux desktop is improving at "light-speed". I started using it nearly 10 years ago and while it is better now, it has been a LONG slow process and there is still a lot to improve on. My biggest concern with Linux is the hardware support. Setting up wireless networking with Linux is a pain in the ass. Scanner support still is seriously lacking for the majority of newer scanners out there. Mine will scan under linux but every picture comes out entirely red. To me it looks like Apple is the one improving at "light-speed" and I'm seriously considering picking one up now.

It looks to me like Apple has come from behind linux (in regards to OS X) and surpassed it now and the margin separating the two is only growing wider daily.

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 11:32 AM
Gentoo? Gag a magot. I love Linux as much as the next geek, but Gentoo suck. There is no comparison between Gentoo and Panther.

#

Re:OSX vs Linux

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 06, 2003 03:56 AM
Dude, let go of the crack pipe, although Linux is great and I personally run it on all servers here (50+ boxes) I can tell you that I would not use it as a desktop system, it doest even come close to OSX.

#

One Virtual Desktop Option

Posted by: Joe Klemmer on October 31, 2003 06:36 AM
CodeTek VirtualDesktop is one of the options available. It's shareware but runs with two desktops unregistered. It's not a bad option but OS X is mature enough now to have this built-in. The info for CodeTek VirtualDesktop can be found at -


<A HREF="http://freshmeat.net/branches/38048" TITLE="freshmeat.net">http://freshmeat.net/branches/38048</a freshmeat.net>


and their home page is -


<A HREF="http://www.codetek.com/php/virtual.php" TITLE="codetek.com">http://www.codetek.com/php/virtual.php</a codetek.com>

#

A OS X review by a Linux user with an axe to grind

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 01:34 PM
No surprises here.

#

Upgrade took 2 hours???

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 07:45 PM
Something must have gone wrong with your G4 500... On my old 300Mhz iBook is took only a coffeebreak to upgrade from 10.2.6 to 10.3.

#

Re:Upgrade took 2 hours???

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 03:31 AM
He likely installed every language under the sun. Something his linux install doesn't have to do. Neither would he, had he deselected additional language support during the install. The additional language files can total as much as 800MB.

#

DVD-burners may be slower??

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 08:13 AM
Perhaps his G4 had a DVD burner or DVD-RAM drive that was being used for the install? I copied a file from a CD in one the other day, and it was much slower than I expected. I haven't seen any specs lately, but I'd wager that a DVD-burner is probably quite a bit slower than recent CD-ROM & CD-RW drives at reading CD data.

#

Re:DVD-burners may be slower??

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 02, 2003 01:16 AM
I have a DVD Burner in my powerbook, and I can say that it probably can only read at a 5th grade level<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P Ripping CDs in iTunes happens at 4.5x maximum, and if I try to read a file from a CD while a Quicktime movie from the same CD is playing, the movie will skip.

It took me about 2.5 hours to upgrade from Jaguar to Panther, including the install of the developers tools.

I've notice that on friends' PowerBooks without a DVD Burner, reading CDs is much much faster<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

#

Re:Upgrade took 2 hours???

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 03, 2003 10:27 PM
I have a Dual G5 and mine took over 1.5 hours also (stopped before completion), but after watching the installer I saw that it was all the Language files that were the problem. I stopped, restored my Jaguar and ran the upgrade again removing all but my main language. the upgrade took all of 15 minutes...

#

"In Panther, columnar view..."

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on October 31, 2003 11:59 PM
"In Panther, columnar view is the default window behavior."

Ummm, no it's not. You don't get the column view unless you choose using the Finder's preference.

Also, for what it's worth the finder can be made to nearly mimic the finder of old with a simple click on the tic-tac in the window's titlebar. Makes this long time Mac user very happy!

#

not to pick nits

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 12:25 AM
but there is no such thing as "brushed chrome". If you were to "brush finish" a chrome item, the chrome would come off. I think they are going for a "brushed aluminium" look.

#

When the GUI locks up, no problem

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 12:55 AM
When the GUI locks up, ctrl-click on the Finder icon on the dock, and press Force Quit. Its the equivilant of ctrl-alt-deleting Explorer on Windows.

#

Re:When the GUI locks up, no problem

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 02:13 AM
When the GUI locks up, ctrl-click on the Finder icon on the dock, and press Force Quit. Its the equivilant of ctrl-alt-deleting Explorer on Windows.

And how are you going to do this when the GUI has locked?

#

Re:When the GUI locks up, no problem

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 03:03 AM
Or just hit Command+Option+Esc and restart finder.

#

Re:When the GUI locks up, no problem

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 04:52 AM
The Dock is a separate application from the GUI and every time the GUI has locked on em (Hasn't yet in Panther) I could force-quit it either through the Dock icon or by pressing Command-Ctrl-ESC...

#

Performance

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 02:35 AM
Performance on my 2000-vintage 500 MHz G4 Power Mac was acceptable, if not snappy. I should note that the upgrade install took more than two hours; my last Red Hat install took 30 minutes.

If you'd done a clean install, it should have taken about 15 minutes. It did on our aged G4/500. Even less on a new 1.25 GHz Powerbook.

Now that we have established that installation time is the only worthy benchmark, can we see more benchmark stats for other operating systems.

#

It would be nice

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 02:55 AM
It would be nice if you'd get the stupid OSDN Flash ad out of the middle of the article so I can actually read the damn thing.

#

Re:It would be nice

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 02, 2003 07:33 AM
Just click on the 'print' button on the page for a image free version of the article.

BTW, it's not Flash, it's dhtml.

#

FreeBSD vs. BSD

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 03:44 AM
Hi, a small nitpick, but there is no such thing as "BSD 5" - you mean to say FreeBSD 5. This is like saying "Linux 9.0" when you mean "Red Hat Linux 9.0". FreeBSD is a specific BSD-derived OS, just like NetBSD, OpenBSD, etc., and is not the same thing as "BSD itself".

#

Re:FreeBSD vs. BSD. Then there's Darwin.

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 01, 2003 08:19 AM
Darwin made the jump to 7.0. There are good things happening there, out of sight of the Finder. Can we say automatic on the fly file defragmenting? Not all of them mind you, but probably the most severe of the files used most often. Could this OS actually get faster with use? That's a refreshing idea.

#

iApps are necessary

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 02, 2003 05:48 AM
You complain that by including iApps Apple is taking away developer interest in the platform, but you would complain even louder if they had shipped an OS that had no apps and made you download and install them yourself from all corners of the internet. And with MS offering similar apps in Windows. it seems like Apple's stuck between a rock, a hard place, and a brick wall on this issue.

Also, the iApps are hardly the threat to the software industry that you imply either. There's no image editor, page layout program, HTML editor, drawing program, spreadsheet, and the like in 10.3 out of the box. So I don't see how they really encroach on developer incentive that much.

The iApps also serve a seldom-mentioned but essential purpose: they set quality and UI standards for Mac software in general. Apps that don't look and work at least as well as Apple's suite aren't going to make it anyway, so developers are motivated to write software that actually improves on things. They also showcase the "media hub" strategy Apple has repeated mentioned as their goal.

And on a related note, Adobe Premiere was dropped because it sucked compared to Final Cut Pro, not because Apple is shipping iApps/iMovie as part of the operating system (as your article's Adobe reference seems to imply). Just ask anyone who does serious video editing and they'll tell you.

Other than that, a great article, all the other points were well-stated and on target, especially about the UI and the Finder being buggy (and that's a hard thing for a Mac addict like me to admit).

#

Re:iApps are necessary

Posted by: murbanek on November 05, 2003 04:10 AM
I agree whole-heartedly. The inclusion of the iLife applications is only filling a hole left by either developers with inferior products or products that never existed for the platform (I have yet to see a product that comes close to the elegance and simplicity of iTunes).

Apple will most likely never create a vector graphics tool to replace Illustrator, nor should they.

The iLife applications simply illustrate good Macintosh software design, and hopefully is seen as the benchmark for competing development.

#

View Tree

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 03, 2003 11:08 PM
The new finder has a tree view, edit the browser window toolbar, put the view tree button up there and you are set.

That or launch the Terminal and browse directories like a real man.

#

what's better than mail.app?

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on November 06, 2003 04:43 AM
I'm terribly sorry, but as much as the author seems to enjoy restarting, recompiling, and debugging his mail program with core dumps, I'd rather just send and read mail.

UNIX command line tools are great. The large linux "applications" are honking piles of junk.

#

This story has been archived. Comments can no longer be posted.