akac
Mar 26, 09:40 PM
Details found here :
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Apple-removes-Samba-from-Mac-OS-X-10-7-Server-1215179.html
Gist of it :
- less features than Samba
- no more Active Directory Services
- Just file sharing now.
Samba developers have also noted that the true motive behind this move might not be the GPLv3 per say, but a more global move away from the GPL. Is Apple moving to close the source on more and more of OS X ?
Anyway, Samba v4 could have given them all the "features" they implemented and much more. Their own in-house version won't necessarily be better just because it's written by Apple. The Samba team does a great job with what Microsoft puts out as documentation (if you can even call it that).
Note that from the article, this change only impacts OS X Server. The client was already an in-house solution.
Although from my understanding from people using this today, the Apple implementation is dramatically faster than the Samba implementation. Just like WebKit started from KHTML and had fewer features than Mozilla, its ended up being the best browser engine out there. Leaner. Meaner. Faster. But it took time. Apple's SMB/CIFS implementation is going the same route. Now I've read elsewhere that it DOES support Active Directory. And elsewhere that it doesn't. The Preview version of Lion was 2 months old by the time devs got it, so its also possible that those reports are all just wrong in as far as what works and what is supposed to work (i.e. it may support AD, but bugs cause it not to work well or at all on some installs).
You will be foolish to wait around unless you want to get buried in the on-slaught of new and improved apps to take advantage of Lion from day one.
Exactly. I know of at least one major app right now that is going to go Lion only...
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
You just gave the perfect answer. Using a VM. Run SL in a VM for Rosetta apps :)
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
Actually its not a small piece. Its a big piece. EVERY OS X Library has to be provided in PowerPC code as well as x86. So Rosetta itself, by itself is tiny. But all the extra libraries that make up OS X is huge. And that's why its cut out.
In SL, it shipped with all the libraries, but not the Rosetta piece. So it was a simple install of just the Rosetta piece.
indisguise
Apr 8, 03:09 AM
Many Best Buys with Apple Shoppes have Apple representatives who work right at the store, I doubt they would let this happen at their store. I wonder how many Best Buys have done this
awesomebase
Mar 31, 07:16 PM
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
From an engineering perspective and from a manufacturer's perspective, you're correct. But from an investment's perspective your argument doesn't work. Investors are concerned about Google's ability to profit from this and they compare "Platforms" to get an idea about where people are trending to. That is why despite BB growing, their stock is actually going to be in the trash in a couple of years if not sooner. Their "OS" is basically worthless... people don't value it as much as Android or iOS and as the phones that run those platforms continue to drop in price and become more capable, BB has no choice but to practically give their phones away to make their numbers (albeit at carrier-subsidized prices, but their prices and margins get severely eroded over time).
Just wanted to point that out... your logic is correct, just not applicable to all scenarios...
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
From an engineering perspective and from a manufacturer's perspective, you're correct. But from an investment's perspective your argument doesn't work. Investors are concerned about Google's ability to profit from this and they compare "Platforms" to get an idea about where people are trending to. That is why despite BB growing, their stock is actually going to be in the trash in a couple of years if not sooner. Their "OS" is basically worthless... people don't value it as much as Android or iOS and as the phones that run those platforms continue to drop in price and become more capable, BB has no choice but to practically give their phones away to make their numbers (albeit at carrier-subsidized prices, but their prices and margins get severely eroded over time).
Just wanted to point that out... your logic is correct, just not applicable to all scenarios...
phairphan
Aug 26, 04:19 PM
Only problem with that is that a 2.33 GHz Merom chip will be fifty percent more expensive than a 2.16 GHz Yonah is today. So do you think Apple will increase prices of the MacBook Pro by $150 to $200 or reduce their profit?
I believe the 2.33 GHz Merom chip debuted at the same price as the 2.16 GHz Yonah when it was released. The prices of MBPs certainly haven't fallen. Apple has just been enjoying the extra profits from Intel's price drops of the past few months.
I believe the 2.33 GHz Merom chip debuted at the same price as the 2.16 GHz Yonah when it was released. The prices of MBPs certainly haven't fallen. Apple has just been enjoying the extra profits from Intel's price drops of the past few months.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 10:08 AM
Really? The posters on here that say there was no issue are correct?
I guess Apple fixing certain bugs related to this is whimtime.
I guess it's all a matter of what part of the issue you deem important. The tracking, the retention or the ability to opt out
Yes, the Apple fans were more correct than the anti-Apple folks. What we heard over the last week is that your personal data was being sent to Apple (it wasn't), that Apple is evil (it isn't), that Steve Jobs is lying (he isn't).
Strip away the hyperbole and you have a bug that is going to be fixed, data that is anonymized and not trackable to you unless you physically possess someone's Mac, and a story that made news last year and should never have gotten so big this time around. So yes, the Apple fans were more correct while the hype machine was wrong (as usual).
I guess Apple fixing certain bugs related to this is whimtime.
I guess it's all a matter of what part of the issue you deem important. The tracking, the retention or the ability to opt out
Yes, the Apple fans were more correct than the anti-Apple folks. What we heard over the last week is that your personal data was being sent to Apple (it wasn't), that Apple is evil (it isn't), that Steve Jobs is lying (he isn't).
Strip away the hyperbole and you have a bug that is going to be fixed, data that is anonymized and not trackable to you unless you physically possess someone's Mac, and a story that made news last year and should never have gotten so big this time around. So yes, the Apple fans were more correct while the hype machine was wrong (as usual).
Super Dave
Aug 5, 06:38 PM
More speculation than rumour, but for Leopard I'd bet on:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
flopticalcube
Apr 27, 09:33 AM
So many critical issues to discuss and serious problems to overcome and people are still talking about ********** birth certificates? :rolleyes:
TheBobcat
Nov 28, 09:24 PM
The record companies know that their business model is archaic and unnecessary. With computers and MP3, and online stores like iTunes, artists no longer need labels. This is their death rattle trying desperately to make themselves more money as it slips through their fingers.
Besides, artists always have made most of their money from merchandise and tours, the labels are just a middle man that got bypassed by technology. Instead of adapting, they're fighting it, and that's why they will cease to exist in the future.
Besides, artists always have made most of their money from merchandise and tours, the labels are just a middle man that got bypassed by technology. Instead of adapting, they're fighting it, and that's why they will cease to exist in the future.
jrb363
Apr 7, 10:39 PM
Quota? Are these guys idiots?
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
jsw
Aug 26, 06:51 PM
Note: I believe I accidentally merged someone's (possibly a couple of people's) posts into BWhaler's post (3 above this post). Sorry. :o
afrowq
Apr 12, 03:08 PM
I'd say 25% of the current user base would be a lot.
I'd say that is a subjective number that you pulled out of thin air. But that's fine, cause it's your opinion. But it is no more valid than my assessment.
I'd say that is a subjective number that you pulled out of thin air. But that's fine, cause it's your opinion. But it is no more valid than my assessment.
clevin
Aug 7, 05:37 PM
can't believe only 8 people voted for 64bit, its the most profound change here.... all others you can achieve with some 3rd party softwares.
Mister Snitch
Mar 31, 02:46 PM
I knew it would happen eventually.
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgN-oQ9SuEXCi3DHYvWZgnnotgQs1uECQkvbSnyAv3v6l6Fwv2DKr8ypQlkZc8Ne8i2Y6plQHcxnvDSqLw9RdQ_DdGyJPstn0ICQhfMdwJm4O4tR9HllURH_l17GmDUqw2Pbz8kdJ__wDBQ/s1600/darth-vader-face.jpg
It was.... their DESTINY!
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgN-oQ9SuEXCi3DHYvWZgnnotgQs1uECQkvbSnyAv3v6l6Fwv2DKr8ypQlkZc8Ne8i2Y6plQHcxnvDSqLw9RdQ_DdGyJPstn0ICQhfMdwJm4O4tR9HllURH_l17GmDUqw2Pbz8kdJ__wDBQ/s1600/darth-vader-face.jpg
It was.... their DESTINY!
janstett
Sep 13, 01:11 PM
Sheesh...just when I'm already high up enough on Apple for innovating, they throw even more leaps and bounds in there to put themselves even further ahead. I can't wait 'til my broke @$$ can finally get the money to buy a Mac and chuck all my Windows machines out the door.
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
blahblah100
Mar 31, 05:03 PM
Ah linux trolls are my favorite :rolleyes: I lost count how many times I've answered a question and/or posted on something to have the random linux guy show up and spout "Or just toss out your mac/pc and install linux on a new machine". Of course no one asked about linux.
What?
What?
skunk
May 1, 04:09 AM
While there are some racists who tried to jump on the birther bandwagon, I did see plenty of non-racists have some concern about where Obama was born, or if in Hawaii, being born there before it was a state and then being a coverup to put his age right after statehood.If those people really were non-racists, they would have ignored such questions entirely, confident in the knowledge that if anything untoward was going on, the World's Greatest Intelligence Agency� would have found it out before he even got his name on the ballot.
Popeye206
Mar 22, 08:01 PM
My take...
Competition is good.
It will be interesting to see if the Playbook sticks. RIM is losing ground in so many areas and from what my daughter says (who works for one of the cell phone companies) that even with all the nice new goodies in BB's, that they are the smart phone that makes them all grimace. She says it's by far the worst phone to activate to trouble shoot. So, will the Playbook be any different?
Samsung... could they have rushed that one out any quicker? They seem desperate to get a tablet to sell. So much for quality control I'm sure.
Is the new Xoom about ready to be run over two minutes out the gate by other Android devices?
From what I can see, the most damage is not going to come in the Apple arena... the iPad is different with iOS, it's proven (15 million sold and growing fast)... it's going to be the other Android devices. Each of them fighting for a small share of customers who don't want Apple.
I honestly believe most consumers care less about the specs. The geeks on this site do.... but the average person does not care. They care about what they hear and see. They see iPads flying out the door. They know the iPad is slick and works.
I'll go with the Analysts on this one... by the end of Apple will own 70-80% market share and the rest will be a mixed bag of struggling tablet makers.
Competition is good.
It will be interesting to see if the Playbook sticks. RIM is losing ground in so many areas and from what my daughter says (who works for one of the cell phone companies) that even with all the nice new goodies in BB's, that they are the smart phone that makes them all grimace. She says it's by far the worst phone to activate to trouble shoot. So, will the Playbook be any different?
Samsung... could they have rushed that one out any quicker? They seem desperate to get a tablet to sell. So much for quality control I'm sure.
Is the new Xoom about ready to be run over two minutes out the gate by other Android devices?
From what I can see, the most damage is not going to come in the Apple arena... the iPad is different with iOS, it's proven (15 million sold and growing fast)... it's going to be the other Android devices. Each of them fighting for a small share of customers who don't want Apple.
I honestly believe most consumers care less about the specs. The geeks on this site do.... but the average person does not care. They care about what they hear and see. They see iPads flying out the door. They know the iPad is slick and works.
I'll go with the Analysts on this one... by the end of Apple will own 70-80% market share and the rest will be a mixed bag of struggling tablet makers.
2IS
Apr 8, 08:09 PM
I never said I considered it overpriced.
I was making a point that it's now underpowered for some users and less powerful than the previous model.
And another point... I'm not really blaming Apple. Obviously, it's Intel's fault for forcing the Intel graphics on Apple, among other companies that plan to use the new CPUs and Intel logic boards.
For many people with the current model, the new Macbook Air will be a downgrade unless you really need some of the other new features.
Intel is not forcing anything. You want dedicated graphics get a MBP which has Sandy Bridge + discrete graphics chipset. The MBA is for portability and Apple decided (not forced) to use the Sandy Bridge IGP which makes sense. For the majority of people buying the MBA, SB will offer up better performance than C2D+320M.
Then you always have the option of "waiting" for Ivy Bridge
I was making a point that it's now underpowered for some users and less powerful than the previous model.
And another point... I'm not really blaming Apple. Obviously, it's Intel's fault for forcing the Intel graphics on Apple, among other companies that plan to use the new CPUs and Intel logic boards.
For many people with the current model, the new Macbook Air will be a downgrade unless you really need some of the other new features.
Intel is not forcing anything. You want dedicated graphics get a MBP which has Sandy Bridge + discrete graphics chipset. The MBA is for portability and Apple decided (not forced) to use the Sandy Bridge IGP which makes sense. For the majority of people buying the MBA, SB will offer up better performance than C2D+320M.
Then you always have the option of "waiting" for Ivy Bridge
SRSound
Nov 28, 06:29 PM
here we go again
rdowns
Apr 6, 01:53 PM
Wow. All the hype and pent up anti-Apple demand and all they could muster was 100K units. Very poor. Where are the other Android tablets?
As for the RIM Playbook, that **** is DOA.
WebOS will be way to late to the game but HP has huge retail distribution.
I think Apple has won this one.
As for the RIM Playbook, that **** is DOA.
WebOS will be way to late to the game but HP has huge retail distribution.
I think Apple has won this one.
macwrangler
Apr 27, 08:26 AM
correct. wasn't sure how long it would take for people in general to get up in arms about location privacy on the idevices... what did people think was going to happen??
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
Then, those of you who are in this train-of-thought should stop buying electronics. Did you know that your computer stores data of where you've been on the internet...AND...your location? Your GPS stores data...your...well, you get the point.
such it is, our electronic tethers are really leashes.
Then, those of you who are in this train-of-thought should stop buying electronics. Did you know that your computer stores data of where you've been on the internet...AND...your location? Your GPS stores data...your...well, you get the point.
4God
Jul 14, 10:56 PM
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
You don't.
Ummm..nobody said you had to settle for my preference. :rolleyes: That's exactly it, my preference, get over it.
Last I checked, this is a forum where I could express my opinion, and as stated
in the post you quoted from, I was giving my opinion not saying that everybody should agree with my preference.
You don't.
Ummm..nobody said you had to settle for my preference. :rolleyes: That's exactly it, my preference, get over it.
Last I checked, this is a forum where I could express my opinion, and as stated
in the post you quoted from, I was giving my opinion not saying that everybody should agree with my preference.
akadmon
Sep 19, 11:19 AM
I ordered my 15" MBP yesterday and they are telling me it will ship next Tuesday. I sure hope that when the package arrives the MBP will have no stinking Merom, no more than 512 MB RAM, no better than an 80 Gb/5400 rpm HDD, and -- please God -- no magnetic latch! Oh - and one more thing: Apple better not send me a refund if they lower the price before the package hits my doorstep. :mad:
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 12:17 PM
He hasn't been carrying this around for 50 years. Did you actually read the article?
I read most of it. I haven't been carrying my birth certificate. It spent most of its time im Mom's china closet, where it still faded.
I read most of it. I haven't been carrying my birth certificate. It spent most of its time im Mom's china closet, where it still faded.
No comments:
Post a Comment