Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 56

Thread: Linux On The 2012 MacBook Air, MacBook Pro?

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by drag View Post
    If you are a kernel hacker then mucking around with your system to get it to work isn't going to be a big deal.
    Well, if you want a system to work, then it might be a good idea to buy the same system as Linus Torvalds (or some other kernel developer) who is sure to fix any issues he run into.

    Quote Originally Posted by drag View Post
    If you are going to go out and by a 600 dollar laptop from Dell expect it to actually BE plasticity and whatnot. If you want some brushed aluminium finish then be prepared to pay about the same price as a Apple system.

    Personally I don't want to go and drop 2500 dollars on a fast laptop that is going to cook my crotch or bake my arm just because I want a cool looking system.
    But if you want a pretty, sleek, aluminium laptop and don't mind paying for it. Then Apple is pretty much the only choice.
    Other laptops are plastic and feel like toys and have dozens of stickers on em.[/quote]

    Quote Originally Posted by drag View Post
    postscript-based = yes
    fully scalable = no.
    Isn't PostScript inherently scalable?

    Is Linux desktop more scalable?
    How so?
    Is X.org scalable?
    Is Wayland scalable?
    Is GNOME/GTK+, KDE/Qt scalable?

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    28

    Default applelinux

    if you are buying Apple hardware with the intention of primarily running Linux on it you are making a big mistake.
    The mere intention of running linux on any hw can never be a mistake!!!

    Practically, well my mbp 7.1 runs os x,win7 and archlinux, and by far the worst experience with it has been whilst running windows, in spite of the apple-developed win-drivers. True, I've spent hours and hours on 'getting things to work with linux', but that is part of the fun for me, virtualising it just seems wrong

    Also, was it not linus' daughter's macbook?

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    2,020

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hungerfish View Post
    Practically, well my mbp 7.1 runs os x,win7 and archlinux, and by far the worst experience with it has been whilst running windows, in spite of the apple-developed win-drivers. True, I've spent hours and hours on 'getting things to work with linux', but that is part of the fun for me, virtualising it just seems wrong
    If Apple have Windows developers, then I think they ought to have Linux developers too.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Portugal
    Posts
    945

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by uid313 View Post
    If Apple have Windows developers, then I think they ought to have Linux developers too.
    Here's a simple graphic that demonstrates how it works:

    linux > mac > windows

    How to read the graphic:
    1. stuff to the left is irrelevant
    2. must be compatible with stuff to the right

    Also, haven't you seen the recent wave of "UltraBooks"? Most of them are similar to the Air but slightly higher value.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    258

    Default

    So to sum up this topic, an Evil company produces hardware/software which some people with too much money and too few brain cells are willing to buy. Then, other people, allegedly smarter, come upon the idea to not use that hardware the way its manufacturer (or well, assembler, for all I care) intends to. And when it doesn't work, what do they do then? They don't blame the company or themselves for being so retarded and selling in to (for all I care a beautiful form of) Evil, they blame the software and find excuses to bash it.

    I mean, in AMD's case, where they actually opened up their hardware as far as possible, I would somehow understand criticism. But iEvil doesn't even try to be non-iEvil products/OSs/programs friendly, so why blame Linux/Xorg/GTK/etc. for that?

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,615

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by susikala View Post
    So to sum up this topic, an Evil company produces hardware/software which some people with too much money and too few brain cells are willing to buy. Then, other people, allegedly smarter, come upon the idea to not use that hardware the way its manufacturer (or well, assembler, for all I care) intends to. And when it doesn't work, what do they do then? They don't blame the company or themselves for being so retarded and selling in to (for all I care a beautiful form of) Evil, they blame the software and find excuses to bash it.
    Can you name a company that produces beautiful hi end hardware that is intended to work with Linux.????

    Quote Originally Posted by susikala View Post
    I mean, in AMD's case, where they actually opened up their hardware as far as possible, I would somehow understand criticism. But iEvil doesn't even try to be non-iEvil products/OSs/programs friendly, so why blame Linux/Xorg/GTK/etc. for that?
    People just want FOSS to work anywhere. As simple as that i think.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    136

    Default

    I ran OpenSuSE on a Macbook in 2008/2009, it was a nice combination once I got used to the zero-tactile-feedback keyboard (or maybe I had calluses from Fujitsu keyboards).

    I hope Lenovo and Dell are paying attention to the 2880x1800 screen here. Because I'd love to by a w5x0 with a 2880x1800 screen. That lovely keyboard on the w5x0... yum.

    Unless Apple has "patented" 2880x1800 screens.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by hoohoo View Post
    I ran OpenSuSE on a Macbook in 2008/2009, it was a nice combination once I got used to the zero-tactile-feedback keyboard (or maybe I had calluses from Fujitsu keyboards).

    I hope Lenovo and Dell are paying attention to the 2880x1800 screen here. Because I'd love to by a w5x0 with a 2880x1800 screen. That lovely keyboard on the w5x0... yum.

    Unless Apple has "patented" 2880x1800 screens.
    you are aware that many of the so called Apple displays are in fact just re-badged and striped down Dell devices right ? and these original Dell devices with more inputs have existed in retail for quite some time now.

    and you are also aware that as of 2012, QFHD (38402160) is the newest standard from ITU drafts, this resolution is part of the UHDTV standard. It is four times the resolution of the 1080p HDTV video standard, hence the name (Quad meaning 4). HDMI 1.4 supports QFHD and several high grade products already exist today if you have the cash to buy them.

    "Eyevis produces a 56" LCD named EYELCD 56 QHD HD while Toshiba makes the P56QHD and in October 2011 released the REGZA 55x3, which is claimed to be the First QFHD glasses-free 3D TV, Mitsubishi Electric the 56P-QF60LCU, and Sony the SRM-L560, all which can deliver a resolution of 38402160. Landmark has also produced a 56" QFHD monitor, the M5600"

    then OC in the near future (within the next 8 years) there's the UHD (76804320) spec to be ratified and production to make and ship in retail, and far sooner in the high profit industrial grade markets medical/broadcast Etc.

    UHD (Ultra High Definition), also known as 8K or 8K UHDTV, is a proposed display standard of 76804320 pixels (16 times the resolution of FHD) in the same 16:9 aspect ratio. It is advocated by NHK Science & Technology Research Laboratories and worked on by them and the BBC.

    so better start saving now if you want these types of display for both 2D and 3D work and OC you will be needing something like the red-rocket card to run them so another extra $5K to put away
    http://www.red.com/products/red-rocket
    Last edited by popper; 06-13-2012 at 12:18 PM.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by popper View Post
    you are aware that many of the so called Apple displays are in fact just re-badged and striped down Dell devices right ? and these original Dell devices with more inputs have existed in retail for quite some time now.
    You are aware that this is completely and totally imaginary, right? The only thing that is remotely related to what you have stated is the 27" IPS panel, which Apple and Dell source from the same supplier.

    There are numerous flaws with Apple's hardware and business methodology, why would you need to make stuff up?

    Another poster did the same in reverse:

    But if you want a pretty, sleek, aluminium laptop and don't mind paying for it. Then Apple is pretty much the only choice.
    Other laptops are plastic and feel like toys and have dozens of stickers on em.
    There's a diverse PC hardware ecosystem outside of what Apple offers. Both Asus and Sony have nice high-end aluminum laptop offerings. Apple's only trump card is the NG MBP. It has something that nobody else does. If you desire a high PPI display laptop, Apple is the only game in town, for now.

    F

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    459

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by russofris View Post
    You are aware that this is completely and totally imaginary, right? The only thing that is remotely related to what you have stated is the 27" IPS panel, which Apple and Dell source from the same supplier.

    There are numerous flaws with Apple's hardware and business methodology, why would you need to make stuff up?

    Another poster did the same in reverse:



    There's a diverse PC hardware ecosystem outside of what Apple offers. Both Asus and Sony have nice high-end aluminum laptop offerings. Apple's only trump card is the NG MBP. It has something that nobody else does. If you desire a high PPI display laptop, Apple is the only game in town, for now.

    F
    and you make my point perfectly there, as you say and i implied above there is indeed a diverse PC hardware ecosystem and apple source all their kit there in bulk as they have always done (except when they were broke and let 3rd party OEM's produce PPC macs that turned out to be faster machines than the originals and apple Didn't like that so pulled the plug PDQ),then tweak it to lower the BOM casts in their 3rd party factories and sell it on at a premium price point.

    but as to your speculated "iMac retina 20" @ 2*1920x1080 = 3840x2160" that doesnt seem very likely does it as apple going all the way back to the original mac have never kept to the official standards, and so it will more likely be a slightly reduced panel and they will be the first in retail to sell that size screen whatever it finally is, but it wont be a standard 16:9 ratio like the real QFHD (38402160) OC
    Last edited by popper; 06-13-2012 at 01:19 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •