[LINK] RFI: Cross-Media Publishing under Linux/OO

[Craig Sanders]

On Mon, Aug 08, 2011 at 01:28:27PM +1000, Roger Clarke wrote:
> 3.  I don't want to use OSX as my host-OS, because it will become 
> less like an OS and more like a vehicle for Apple's ownership of 
> everything the device does and stores.  And of course I wouldn't 
> touch Windows.
> 
> 4.  I gather that there are no stripped-down OS designed specifically 
> to operate as the host-OS for existing user-oriented OS (i.e. Win 
> family, OSX family, Linux family).  But I also gather that there are 
> some stripped-down host-OS for servers - which I understand are 
> Linux-based.
> 
> 5.  So there seem to be two possibilities:
> -   run a server host-OS on what is essentially a user device.
>      This would demand expertise and effort, and incur overhead
> -   run Linux, and the best available VM, and OSX and Win under that
> 
> Needless to say, I'd need a fast processor, some solid-state memory 
> for swapping, and a lot of main memory as well.  But I'm not much of 
> a graphics-user so I can economise in that area.  (:-)}

as a transition stage, running linux (or windows or whatever) in a VM
on a Mac isn't a bad first step.

while there have been some very notable improvements in virtualisation
of graphics in recent years, for desktop/workstation stuff you are still
better off having whatever does the most graphically-intensive stuff
being the host OS.  Of course, this only really matters if you're doing
high-end graphics stuff like gaming(*) or 3d rendering etc. for 2d
desktop apps, it doesn't matter much.

There may also be licensing issues with running Mac OS X in a VM on
non-Apple hardware (although it's debatable whether such a restriction
is valid or enforceable if you bought the software. certainly the
people building their own hackintoshes aren't worried - they buy the
software legally, they're entitled to use it).


Overall, though, I still think two machines is your best option.  A new
machine (either brand new or second hand) to run linux, and your old
Mac.  Gradually use the linux box more and more, while still having your
old Mac to fall back on if you're in a hurry or can't find a way to do
something in linux.  Eventually, the linux box will become your primary
machine and the Mac used only for a few special tasks.


(*) i run a lot of Windows games on Linux using wine.  Most games work
well under wine these days, and generally perform as well or better than
on windows. unfortunately, some don't work at all. and some didn't work
when i first bought them (mostly on sale at steam), but work now after a
few updates to wine.  What little graphics editing i need to do can be
done with linux native apps like gimp or inkscape. and blender for 3d
graphics is, of course, native to linux too.


> A 27" iMac with 8GB memory, a 256GB Solid State Drive  and a 1TB 
> Serial ATA Drive would set me back just under $3,000, or $3500 for 
> 16GB memory:
> http://store.apple.com/au/configure/MC813X/A?select=select&product=MC813X%2FA&mco=MjIwNTQzMjY
> 
> Given the kinds of prices I've paid every 2-5 years since 1984, and 
> the (enormous) value I get, I'm not at all traumatised by that.

Given that you don't want to run an Apple operating system, why pay
Apple prices for the hardware?

e.g. $500 just to upgrade from 8GB to 16GB is beyond absurd. i can't
think of any description of it that is fit for polite company, or even
most rough company. it's only about $80 (retail!) worth of parts...and
that's for DDR3-1600 or better RAM. a budget DDR3-1333 8G kit (roughly
the same as apple uses) is about $45. yet they want $500 for it? IMO
that's proof positive that some apple fans would happily pay thousands
for a red hot poker inserted roughly - but oh so stylishly - into their
nether regions if it had an apple logo on it.

An equivalent (or, more likely, better) PC clone would cost about $1100
for everything but the screen, plus another $900 for a good 27" screen
(like the 27" 2560x1440 Dell Ultrasharp, similar specs to Apple's nice
27" screen) or about $300-$400 for a cheaper 1920x1080 27" monitor. and
you get to keep the screen for your next upgrade because it's a separate
component.

i'm personally disgusted by what an appalling waste the all-in-one
computers like iMacs are. they're designed to be discarded and
completely replaced, rather than incrementally upgraded. a good quality
screen should outlast at least two or three computer upgrades before
it's finally too old/obsolete to bother with. and you can't use a KVM to
share them with other machines.


OK, the PC clone machine wouldn't be as sleek looking as the Apple,
and it would take a little more space. but it would cost roughly half
as much, and it would be faster (don't know exactly what CPU apple are
using in that machine you linked to but as an i5 @ 2700Mhz, it's a lot
slower than an i7-2600k @ 3400Mhz).

in rough figures, call it $2000 vs $3500. is Apple's stylishness worth
$1500 more?


> I'll worry later about how I achieve a workable portable solution.  I
> may just have to leak more when I'm on the move.  It would be a pain
> not to be able to prepare and publish documents while I'm travelling.

maybe a lightweight notebook or perhaps a tablet - although your main
choices with tablets are currently ios or android - and android isn't
that much better than ios when it comes to manufacturer-installed
spyware. the main advantage of android is that with most android devices
it is easy to replace the official firmware with the community-built
cyanogenmod[1] or similar.

Most notebooks will run linux just fine, as will most full-size laptops.

Meego[2] (a merger of Intel's moblin and Nokia's Maemo) is a linux-based
notebook OS that may be of interest to you.  will probably also
eventually be worth running on tablets.

[1] http://www.cyanogenmod.com/
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MeeGo


BTW, if much of your work can be done from the command line or with
text-mode apps, then you can use anything with a keyboard and screen
capable or running an ssh client to get your work done.  And you can
keep your data securely on your own computer, rather than on a device
which can be lost or stolen. or seized and analysed by police, spooks,
customs officers, etc.

you don't even need particularly fast net connection to get work done
over an ssh connection.  text is low-bandwidth.


there are also various web-based apps that you can host on your own
server, so you don't have trust google or MS or apple if you want a
thin-client type system (by whatever trendy name they're trying to
re-brand the concept as this time around - like google's chromebook or
"cloud computing" or whatever).


> One remaining possibility is to find a suitable PowerPC emulator, and 
> run that under the host-OS and/or a guest-OS, and thereby sustain my 
> existing, quite satisfactory cross-media publishing environment, 
> 1994-style.

a quick google search reveals this:

http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/

a PPC emulator.  by coincidence it's just had it's first major update in
about 5 years, on July 13 this year.



there's also the really ancient Basilisk for 68K emulation:

http://basilisk.cebix.net/

Open Source 68k Macintosh emulator.  hasn't been updated for years, AFAICT.



craig

-- 
craig sanders <cas at taz.net.au>

BOFH excuse #21:

POSIX compliance problem