Just curious; for Linux users who bought Apple computers why not just use BSD?

[HappinessNow]

Just curious; for Linux users who bought Apple computers why not just use BSD?...just wondering. :p

[handy]

I do use BSD, but not on the Apple.

I use Arch on the 24" iMac, & OS X, as seldom as I can get away with, as I don't like OS X, that much...

[saif_held]

I'm no expert not even mediocre when it comes to BSD, can you please tell me what do you mean?

Because I was thinking/debating whether I should buy a Mac or not..Of course to install Ubuntu on it.

[Nevon]

Because the BSD kernel and the Darwin kernel are not the same? Or perhaps because no one buys a mac for the underlying kernel, but because of the proprietary user-interface?

[earthpigg]

i am not a mac user.

however, the answer is obvious:

they very likely want to use mac-only software.

you know, like the user interface and iTunes. heard of that? :P

[saif_held]

@Nevon
Is that an answer? Or?

[Nevon]

@Nevon
Is that an answer? Or?

Those are rhetorical questions meant to illustrate the fact that the thread starter is comparing apples to oranges.

[saif_held]

Those are rhetorical questions meant to illustrate the fact that the thread starter is comparing apples to oranges.

Glad you made that clear, thanks mate.

[Tibuda]

Because the BSD kernel and the Darwin kernel are not the same? Or perhaps because no one buys a mac for the underlying kernel, but because of the proprietary user-interface?
I think the OP question is for people using Linux on Macs.

[Nevon]

I think the OP question is for people using Linux on Macs.

But then what does BSD have to do with anything? You could use BSD on a regular PC as well, so why would Linux users who specifically own Mac-computers be more inclined to use BSD? I don't understand what the thread starter is getting at.

[3rdalbum]

For the ordinary person, running BSD on their computer is very much like running Linux. Depending on which BSD, your package management could be vastly different... but then it might not (Debian/kFreeBSD). Your device files are different and some of the commands are different, but otherwise you can log into KDE and start Firefox and nothing appears to be different.

[The Toxic Mite]

Those are rhetorical questions meant to illustrate the fact that the thread starter is comparing apples to oranges.

Cool story, bro...

;/

[blueshiftoverwatch]

Your device files are different and some of the commands are different,
I don't know what terminal emulators the various BSD's use. But if you replaced it with BASH wouldn't it be essentially the same as Linux?

[pwnst*r]

You must have been on some meds when you posted this topic.

[sandyd]

You must have been on some meds when you posted this topic.
I think a little EDIT to the thread title is necessary...


Just curious; for Linux users who bought Apple computers why not just use OS X?

[FuturePilot]

I don't know what terminal emulators the various BSD's use. But if you replaced it with BASH wouldn't it be essentially the same as Linux?

Terminal emulator != shell

[Bachstelze]

I don't understand what the thread starter is getting at.

There's nothing to understand in threads posted by that guy.

[pwnst*r]

I think a little EDIT to the thread title is necessary...


Just curious; for Linux users who bought Apple computers why not just use OS X?

hahaha

[Sporkman]

For a really secure Mac, install OpenBSD.

Every line of code in OpenBSD must pass a rigorous inspection, review, psychological examination, and drug test.

[Bachstelze]

For a really secure Mac, install OpenBSD.


s/Mac/OS/

OpenBSD and OS X have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

[schauerlich]

OpenBSD and OS X have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

Or, for the most part, any current BSD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin_(operating_system)

Although OS X does have a fair amount of BSD code in it, nearly everything outside of Darwin is Apple or NeXT code. Even some low level stuff (like launchd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launchd)) is unique to OS X.

[Bachstelze]

Although OS X does have a fair amount of BSD code in it, nearly everything outside of Darwin is Apple or NeXT code. Even some low level stuff (like launchd (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Launchd)) is unique to OS X.

Not really... All the base userland is almost untouched FreeBSD code. Just do man cat, man tee, man sed, etc. It all says *BSD, you cound't even say it's OS X with just the man pages.

[schauerlich]

Not really... All the base userland is almost untouched BSD code. Just do man cat, man tee, man sed, etc. It all says *BSD, you cound't even say it's OS X with just the man pages.

That's why I said outside of Darwin.

[Bachstelze]

That's why I said outside of Darwin.

Wait, what? What do cat & friends have to do with Darwin? Darwin AFAIK is just the kernel.

[Sporkman]

s/Mac/OS/

OpenBSD and OS X have absolutely nothing to do with each other.

That's why you'd have to install it. ;)

[Bachstelze]

That's why you'd have to install it. ;)

Oh I see wut u did thar. A Mac as in just the computer. OpenBSD doesn't play extremely well with those, though...

[schauerlich]

Wait, what? What do cat & friends have to do with Darwin? Darwin AFAIK is just the kernel.

The kernel is XNU. Darwin includes most of the Unixy parts of OS X.

See:
http://www.apple.com/opensource/
http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html
http://www.opensource.apple.com/

[Sporkman]

Oh I see wut u did thar. A Mac as in just the computer. OpenBSD doesn't play extremely well with those, though...

I was just making a joke anyways - ragging on OpenBSD & it's assertive claims about its security.

[Bachstelze]

The kernel is XNU. Darwin includes most of the Unixy parts of OS X.

See:
http://www.apple.com/opensource/
http://developer.apple.com/opensource/index.html
http://www.opensource.apple.com/

No need to throw the links at me, I know about them. ;) It was just terminology.

[Bachstelze]

I was just making a joke anyways - ragging on OpenBSD & it's assertive claims about its security.

"assertive claims"? It is a fact that of all the OSes in existence, OpenBSD is the one where the least vulnerabilities have been found.

[schauerlich]

No need to throw the links at me, I know about them. ;) It was just terminology.

You'll take my links and you'll like them!

[Sporkman]

"assertive claims"? It is a fact that of all the OSes in existence, OpenBSD is the one where the least vulnerabilities have been found.

OpenBSD is so secure, hackers can't even find any servers running it!

You can't hack what is not there...

;)

(I'm just teasing - I have no actual expertise, data, nor qualifications to rate the security of OpenBSD or anything else)

[koshatnik]

Just curious; for Linux users who bought Apple computers why not just use BSD?...just wondering. :p

Crazy I know, but I buy an OS for its apps. BSD has nothing of use to me, therefore I use OSX.

[HappinessNow]

I do use BSD, but not on the Apple.

I use Arch on the 24" iMac, & OS X, as seldom as I can get away with, as I don't like OS X, that much...Nice to have the first response be an intellectual post form an Arch, BSD user and Apple owner. :p

Thanks for the post handy.

[Sporkman]

Thanks for the post handy.

He really is. :)

[RiceMonster]

OpenBSD is so secure, hackers can't even find any servers running it!

You can't hack what is not there...

;)

(I'm just teasing - I have no actual expertise, data, nor qualifications to rate the security of OpenBSD or anything else)

I admit, I lol'd.

[LightB]

mac users on bsd? hope you're joking.

[schauerlich]

mac users on bsd? hope you're joking.

Cool stereotype bro.

[Frak]

I don't understand the OP. I got a mac because it's better to design on for me.

[Bachstelze]

I don't understand the OP. I got a mac because it's better to design on for me.

No you're not a Linux user, you can't post ITT. Get out, you don't even have a penguin as avatar. :<

[Frak]

No you're not a Linux user, you can't post ITT. Get out, you don't even have a penguin as avatar. :<
Waddle, waddle, waddle.

[schauerlich]

Waddle, waddle, waddle.

That's offensive to large people in tuxedos.

[jrusso2]

OS X just works easily and also has commercial apps.

I can't say that about BSD.

[HappinessNow]

I don't understand the OP. I got a mac because it's better to design on for me.
nothing to understand, your post and your reasons thus your responses are your own. I use Mac more often then not, especially in my InDesign, Illustrator, Photoshop, and finalcut pro based classes...my next computer purchase will most likely be an Apple computer.


OS X just works easily and also has commercial apps.

I can't say that about BSD.The strengths and positive reasons to use OS X are numerous, russo2 Thanks for a straight forward and valid response.

many times the simplicity of a thread post is best responded in like by simplicity and honesty ;)

[handy]

...
many times the simplicity of a thread post is best responded in like by simplicity and honesty ;)

Unfortunately the wording of your title for this thread, & the content of your first post, are very ambiguous.

In general, the clearer the question is, the more appropriate the answer(s) you will get.

[HappinessNow]

Unfortunately the wording of your title for this thread, & the content of your first post, are very ambiguous.

In general, the clearer the question is, the more appropriate the answer(s) you will get.
Handy, if you can help me by coming up with a better OP/Title I will gladly edit the OP and request for the title to be edited.

Thanks for the helpful post. :p

[Kenny_Strawn]

Darwin is more on the line of The HURD ('http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Hurd') than of BSD.

Simply put, the Darwin kernel is a hybrid kernel based on the Mach microkernel. BSD Kernel is based on the original UNIX kernel, which was monolithic.

[handy]

Handy, if you can help me by coming up with a better OP/Title I will gladly edit the OP and request for the title to be edited.

Thanks for the helpful post. :p

I can't without knowing more? ;)

The definition of BSD is ambiguous here, (as you would have noticed from the replies) due to the BSD heritage of OS X, we don't know if you are referring to OS X, or the true BSD family?

Because of this, in your title, when you say "why not just use BSD", do you mean:

Why not just use OS X, & forget about Linux?

Why not just use BSD, (where) on the Apple, on another box that they may have Linux on?

Use BSD on the Mac & dump OS X?

Why not just use BSD, instead of Linux & don't buy a Mac?

Then in the content of the first post, you repeated the title & added no hints that would help us to discern what your question actually means.

It is easy to type in an ambiguous fashion, even when we are trying not to, (this I know all too well! ;)) so the more description we give to our thoughts the better chance others have of understanding what we mean.

Forums don't have the many other cues that we get when talking to someone face to face, or even on a phone.

And as far as editing your title, you can do that by going back to the first post & editing it. It won't automatically change the title in all of the other posts though.

Anyway, I hope that helps a bit? :)

[Sporkman]

:lol:

[witeshark17]

I left windows (puke) for OS X Then I wanted a laptop, but the rents wouldn't get me a Macbook. Limiting me to a PC, I agreed on the condition that it be Linux. Got a Dell with Ubuntu; that works! :KS :popcorn: That's my story!

[Frak]

Darwin is more on the line of The HURD ('http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNU_Hurd') than of BSD.

Simply put, the Darwin kernel is a hybrid kernel based on the Mach microkernel. BSD Kernel is based on the original UNIX kernel, which was monolithic.
I wouldn't say BSD is part of the kernel. Without BSD, you lose the functions that the BSD subsystem provides, but the kernel will still function fine without it.

[tubasoldier]

Seems a silly thread to me. And I also agree that it is an ambiguous question.
So I'm taking it as why do I not just use a different BSD derivative.

There are those of us out there that are pragmatic about computer usage. I don't care what RMS thinks, some proprietary software is really good. Why would I choose to remove support for a lot of software not available in Linux/BSD/Solaris? The iLife suite is rather nice. Although iPhoto doesn't hold a candle to Digikam, IMO. Yes there are Open Surce equivalents but not all of them are of equal quality. As soon as an open source video editor that rivals Final Cut, or even iMovie for that matter, I'll consider it as an option. Then I'll most likely install it using fink.

OS X may use a FreeBSD base but the graphical layer is completely different. To lump OS X into another BSD category is rather ignorant. Oh, and flash works quite a bit better in OS X than it does in Linux or BSD.

[schauerlich]

Oh, and flash works quite a bit better in OS X than it does in Linux or BSD.

But it's still pretty bad. Eats loads of CPU and crashes more than anything else.

[Sef]

Locked. OP request.