Time to fork the FSF • Hacker News Board

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#331

Post by nknight » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 1:18 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #329

nknight wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://support.apple.com/kb/ht1948 Where's the problem?

Did you read the page you posted? The external USB device:- >Contains an installation of Mac OS X 10.4.5 or later, or Mac OS X 10.5 or later, which is compatible with (or shipped with) the Mac that the USB device is connected to. That's not Linux. Linux will not work with that method. Don't take my word for it; try it yourself, or ask Apple, or have a quick search of the "support" communities. See, for an example, th…

#1: You've moved the goalpost. You "asked" how to boot a Mac from a USB stick, not for instructions on creating a bootable USB stick to boot an operating system not specifically intended to boot on a Mac.

#2: That a particular kind of computer has certain requirements for booting that are not, by default, met by certain operating systems, has nothing to do with freedoms. The requirements aren't hidden, they're publicly documented, and can be easily accommodated by those operating systems if their developers desire.

From my perspective, it seems like you're arguing that Apple restricts freedom because it doesn't follow 80s-era "standards" for partitioning and booting, but instead follows the newer EFI/GUID schemes. I find such a stance more amusing and ironic than credible, particularly considering Intel is largely responsible for both.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#332

Post by astrodust » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 1:25 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #316

astrodust wrote: post #288

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try and explain how to restore a MacBook from back-ups over the phone to a frantic parent who's just lost their hard drive. I did that. It took two minutes. It worked flawlessly. Sometimes to gain more command over your technology you have to give up some theoretical freedom, but that's freedom you'd never have been able to exercise. An F-16 pilot would find the controls in a typical car so disappointing. Where's the…

Sure, there are a lot of important benefits to having firm design choices made by someone, rather than just not ever making the decision and cramming a million options into a multi-tab options dialog (or a config file). I own (and use every day) a mac. I've recommend mac to everyone I know, fo rthe reasons you mention. But you can't have it both ways - not having those options available means you're not as free to us…

Maximizing windows a certain way and tiling windows is something only very few people need. You're presuming they're problems because you have expectations that the software behaves in ways that it does not.

People without any expectations do not have the same problems.

So many technical people see the "App Store" as something that limits choice. Consumers see it as freedom, since they are free to install anything they find without fear that it will wreck their system or actually be a trojan.

Just as you'd see using a wheel-chair as something that's severely limiting, the same thing for someone with no legs it's freedom to get around independently.

What Apple's products tend to do is trade one kind of freedom for another. They don't eliminate or reduce freedom, they transform the essential nature of it.

Some people might be justified in complaining about how it limits the freedom they need, but they're probably trying to use a product for a purpose it was not intended for.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#333

Post by prodigal_erik » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 1:44 AM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #332

DanBC wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, there are a lot of important benefits to having firm design choices made by someone, rather than just not ever making the decision and cramming a million options into a multi-tab options dialog (or a config file). I own (and use every day) a mac. I've recommend mac to everyone I know, fo rthe reasons you mention. But you can't have it both ways - not having those options available means you're not as free to us…

Maximizing windows a certain way and tiling windows is something only very few people need. You're presuming they're problems because you have expectations that the software behaves in ways that it does not. People without any expectations do not have the same problems. So many technical people see the "App Store" as something that limits choice. Consumers see it as freedom, since they are free to install anything th…

> trying to use a product for a purpose it was not intended for

Good for them. Using things in novel unanticipated ways is toolmaking, quite literally what makes us human. I suspect people who surround themselves with appliances which resist tinkering are harming themselves through learned helplessness.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#334

Post by DanBC » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 7:17 AM UTC

astrodust wrote: post #332

DanBC wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, there are a lot of important benefits to having firm design choices made by someone, rather than just not ever making the decision and cramming a million options into a multi-tab options dialog (or a config file). I own (and use every day) a mac. I've recommend mac to everyone I know, fo rthe reasons you mention. But you can't have it both ways - not having those options available means you're not as free to us…

Maximizing windows a certain way and tiling windows is something only very few people need. You're presuming they're problems because you have expectations that the software behaves in ways that it does not. People without any expectations do not have the same problems. So many technical people see the "App Store" as something that limits choice. Consumers see it as freedom, since they are free to install anything th…

>What Apple's products tend to do is trade one kind of freedom for another. They don't eliminate or reduce freedom, they transform the essential nature of it.

No. Apple's design choices remove freedom. It would be easy for Apple keep their software as it is, but also include text config files. I agree with you that "sane defaults" are something that Apple does really well, and I agree with you that it's great for many users.

But not having the option to change some behaviours; having that option locked out, has removed some freedom from some users.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#335

Post by DanBC » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 11:23 AM UTC

nknight wrote: post #331

DanBC wrote: post #329

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the page you posted? The external USB device:- >Contains an installation of Mac OS X 10.4.5 or later, or Mac OS X 10.5 or later, which is compatible with (or shipped with) the Mac that the USB device is connected to. That's not Linux. Linux will not work with that method. Don't take my word for it; try it yourself, or ask Apple, or have a quick search of the "support" communities. See, for an example, th…

#1: You've moved the goalpost. You "asked" how to boot a Mac from a USB stick, not for instructions on creating a bootable USB stick to boot an operating system not specifically intended to boot on a Mac. #2: That a particular kind of computer has certain requirements for booting that are not, by default, met by certain operating systems, has nothing to do with freedoms. The requirements aren't hidden, they're public…

You're right! I missed out 'linux' from "boot from USB". Sorry, I should have included that. Still, the point stands; booting Linux from USB is hard and not clearly documented anywhere and is tricky to explain to people. Maybe that's as designed, but there are so many of these design decisions that lock down the system to whatever Apple wants. And that jars with the "Think Different" sloganeering.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#336

Post by stonemetal » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 4:02 PM UTC

0x12 wrote: post #215

stonemetal wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I bought a new box last year I couldn't get wireless to work. Until I went in to some random config file and forced it to load an older version of the driver because the new fancy version that is shipped doesn't actually work. But thanks for proving his point by calling him a liar.

Yes, because we all know that the occasional configuration problem is unique to Linux. Really. Counterpoint to your story: I bought a notebook with a 3G card in it, couldn't for the life of me get the thing to work under windows vista (which it came installed with). It got so bad that I suspected that the hardware must be broken. For kicks I booted the machine using ubuntu NBR, not only did it detect and configure al…

My experience flipping through the bug reports for ubuntu is that hardware isn't 90% solved it is more like 70% solved(the scary part is that each release tends to move that 70% coverage around a bit.) Both windows' and Apple's hardware support is poor as well but they fixed it by non-technical means(control of the hardware distribution channel.) Which is a perfectly viable channel for Linux, and seems to be working well for them(System 76 and Dell's Ubuntu boxes.) However as an OS that is primarily distributed after the fact, it would be nice to see user friendly hardware configuration.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#337

Post by 0x12 » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 8:09 PM UTC

drieddust wrote: post #311

0x12 wrote: post #215

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, because we all know that the occasional configuration problem is unique to Linux. Really. Counterpoint to your story: I bought a notebook with a 3G card in it, couldn't for the life of me get the thing to work under windows vista (which it came installed with). It got so bad that I suspected that the hardware must be broken. For kicks I booted the machine using ubuntu NBR, not only did it detect and configure al…

You must be a very lucky. Reason I am not running Linux is because I was not able to find a decent driver for my latop's Synaptic touchpad. Now please do not say you can write a driver yourself.

I'm not lucky. I read before I buy.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#338

Post by astrodust » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 8:46 PM UTC

prodigal_erik wrote: post #333

astrodust wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maximizing windows a certain way and tiling windows is something only very few people need. You're presuming they're problems because you have expectations that the software behaves in ways that it does not. People without any expectations do not have the same problems. So many technical people see the "App Store" as something that limits choice. Consumers see it as freedom, since they are free to install anything th…

> trying to use a product for a purpose it was not intended for Good for them. Using things in novel unanticipated ways is toolmaking, quite literally what makes us human. I suspect people who surround themselves with appliances which resist tinkering are harming themselves through learned helplessness.

I respect hackers, yet I don't want to have to endure someone whinging about how their washing machine doesn't also do dishes like the 1920 model did.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#339

Post by astrodust » Mon, Oct 10, 2011, 8:47 PM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #334

astrodust wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maximizing windows a certain way and tiling windows is something only very few people need. You're presuming they're problems because you have expectations that the software behaves in ways that it does not. People without any expectations do not have the same problems. So many technical people see the "App Store" as something that limits choice. Consumers see it as freedom, since they are free to install anything th…

>What Apple's products tend to do is trade one kind of freedom for another. They don't eliminate or reduce freedom, they transform the essential nature of it. No. Apple's design choices remove freedom. It would be easy for Apple keep their software as it is, but also include text config files. I agree with you that "sane defaults" are something that Apple does really well, and I agree with you that it's great for man…

You keep missing my point: Freedom from configuration is a form of freedom.

Re: Time to fork the FSF

#340

Post by nknight » Tue, Oct 11, 2011, 2:26 AM UTC

DanBC wrote: post #335

nknight wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

#1: You've moved the goalpost. You "asked" how to boot a Mac from a USB stick, not for instructions on creating a bootable USB stick to boot an operating system not specifically intended to boot on a Mac. #2: That a particular kind of computer has certain requirements for booting that are not, by default, met by certain operating systems, has nothing to do with freedoms. The requirements aren't hidden, they're public…

You're right! I missed out 'linux' from "boot from USB". Sorry, I should have included that. Still, the point stands; booting Linux from USB is hard and not clearly documented anywhere and is tricky to explain to people. Maybe that's as designed, but there are so many of these design decisions that lock down the system to whatever Apple wants. And that jars with the "Think Different" sloganeering.

I truly, honestly feel like you're fundamentally misunderstanding what has happened here. Apple made a technical decision to follow the newer partition table, booting, and "BIOS" (EFI) standards from Intel rather than continue to use the legacy systems from the 80s.

Apple was an early adopter in this regard, but the standard is openly documented, and most recent x86-64 operating systems, including Linux and Windows 7, have support for it, even if it's not always used by default.

The last thing I remember Apple doing that could be remotely construed as "locking down" a Mac was when they still used a proprietary/undocumented memory controller, but that hasn't been an issue in many (10-15?) years. They stopped doing that long before they even moved off of PowerPC chips in 2006.

Thinking there's anything remotely nefarious here is very closely akin to arguing that any breaking of backwards compatibility is evil. This is just a new platform -- albeit one using the same instruction set as an existing one, and extremely easy to port to. It really isn't Apple's responsibility to ensure legacy operating systems they don't control support this new, documented platform.