darwin
 

well darwin is out for x86, im having some trouble with it, as it wont boot so i can even install. does anyone use it on x86 yet? i challenge you all to download it and try it out. plz post results...

i don't want to pick a fight, but why should I download and try it? Will it offer me anything I don't already have?

I looked at the page, it doesn't support AMD and VIA systems, and during install "you are advised to disconnect all drivers but the target one for the risk of losing the data".

Again, why should I install this? Isn't it based off BSD anyway? In hat case FreeBSD/OpenBSD sound much better to me.

Cuz its Apple on a damn PC! Besides the fact that i try different distros just to learn, but then again you use Red Hat so what should i expect. You cant deny the fact that apple makes some cool stuff, and theyre decision to go open-source is a decision to be commended.

Apple went open source because BSD is a top of the line OS, free, and there current MacOS kind of sucked.

Though it is nice that they are giving some fixes to the KHTML team.

Actually, I think you'll find that it isn't Apple on a PC. That would be a monumentously stupid act on the part of Apple (IMHO). It is the same kernel as that used in OSX, obviously tweaked for the x86 processors, and in that respect, it isn't that different, I believe, to the FreeBSD kernel. However, it will certainly lack Aqua - the Apple's GUI (OSX doesn't use XFree86 by default, although you can install it and run XF programs on OSX). So, unless you are into playing with new and interesting things, and learning about the differences between *nix kernels, I would suggest you leave Darwin alone. You will not be able to get Aqua sources, unless you are an Apple insider. If you are into playing with alternative *nices, then you could try out HURD. Debian have HURD stuff.

I once tried it. Installing went fine but I didn't find a way to dual boot it.

well i could still run apple programs from it, and even get aqua. and wtf is hurd?

You my friend are a little ninny...As someone already pointed out - it is most definitely "Apple on a damn PC". Kudos to you for trying different distros "just to learn" - one day you will learn enough to see that there is very little difference between mainstream distros - LFS and Gentoo expcepted, of course.

I don't know what you should expect, or indeed infer, by the fact that I use RH on my systems? Enlighten me, please. Maybe it is not 133t enough for a uber-haX0r like you?

Also, Apple has not gone open-source, only the kernel has. But since the kernel was FreeBSD to begin with, they really didn't outdo themselves there.

Maybe there isnt a big different between RH and Mandrake, but there sure as hell is between the rest of them. Slackware and Debian are nothing short of completely different from the fisher-price linuxes like RH and Mandrake, something like the difference between freeBSD and Solaris if you will. Slackware being most like gentoo except for the fact that it prompts you on what you need to do instead of telling you in a text file. RH's kernel is a freakin mess, but at least Yoper has made it somewhat streamlined and actually pretty fast. Can't knock RH's business plan though, its quite good.

and yes it is not 133t enough lol

does work on AMD
 

It does work on AMD computers coz I have it installed on my AMD machine

Maybe you'd care to enlighten me to the real differences between them (I am not talking about trivialities). RH's stock kernels are actually quite fast, one has to trim down the number of daemons which are started by default but that's not too bad. Fact is, I have used most of the distros out there (I think the only ones I haven't tried are the likes of Lycoris and Xandros) and except for small idiosyncrocies, most of the stuff is similar.

The fact that you used a word 'fisher-price' to describe an OS tells me a lot about your background.

I think what i said about the difference between RH and Mandrake is best summed up by what i said earlier; its kind of like the difference between the BSD's and say Solaris. The kernel is quite big, despite the amount of daemons, i think device support is a little too much, and module support for extraneous devices would have been more appropriate. But then again, RH is trying to please everyone. Packages included with the distro are lacking also, and in that area, i think Slackware is the best because it supports almost any type of system you need. Editors, libraries, i pretty much have something against everything it includes, or is not included. Maybe i got spoiled by starting with Slackware. I think Yoper is what RH should be, a small fast linux distro that has a painless setup. I dont like the fact that you need to buy the enterprise version of RH for things that are free and included with other distros like Debian and Slackware. Like if i wanted to use ModPerl with Apache, for an example. Red Hat includes what they think you need. Basically its a fisher-price linux, and i think thats a great way to describe it.
In reply to the Darwin on Athlon pc, gj, i cant even boot the install cd on three different Athlon-nforce2 systems, each time getting an error early into loading the default kernel. and i wouldnt even know how to configure my own install kernel so i think darwin is out of the picture for now. too bad apples are so expensive. Maybe i can run it on my gamecube, if it accepted normal cds.

Get aqua? Really.... How do you intend to do that? Coz I haven't seen any Cocoa/Aqua sources floating around the net.. And I doubt that you'll run the PPC binaries on x86/Darwin.

I think vlad is right.. It's no big deal.. Apple on a Pc? So what? :) Who cares it's apple, as long as it's just a plain outdated and overmodded bsd?