Linux Magazine- June 02

Jump to First Reply
dstranathandstranathan
Posted:
in macOS edited January 2014
There is an interesting reveiw of the TiBook (550) in the current issue of Linux magazine (on newstands now). It refers to OS X as...get this:





"Like Linux, but with a facelift and steroids" (paraphrased)



That's an AMAZING comment to make, considering the entire magazine is devoted to Linux! That one single sentence basically knocks the entire Linux OS down a notch compared to OS X in my opinion. The author REALLY likes OS X (and the TiBook)!



Has anyone else read this article?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 6
    brian paulsenbrian paulsen Posts: 79member
    I read it and I think you are extrapolating a bit... I don't think anybody would argue about using Mac OS X as a developer box, but I've seen little that would make me want to use it as a server. The linux mags have said about as much.



    Brian
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 2 of 6
    dstranathandstranathan Posts: 1,717member
    Ive got the article right here. And yes, they really are THAT excited about OS X. I wouldn't belive unless I read with my own 2 eyes...
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 3 of 6
    linuxmanlinuxman Posts: 17member
    Ok well let's not get too excited here about the "power" or "speed" of OSX. OSX is still quite slow and does not handle forking processes very well. It seems to cripple the 1GHz Dual G4 something awful for file serving.



    For example,

    A new Dual 1Ghz G4 running OSX server took almost twice as long to create files, close files, lock/unlock files as a single processor 1Ghz Duron system running Linux. In fact the Dual G4 had almost 1000KB/s LESS throughput than the Duron box. CPU utilization was 4 times higher than the Duron as well.



    Here's some more testing:

    <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:GfKBBQ-wcdoC:www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=3513+apple+file+serving+helios &hl=en" target="_blank">Real World Test</a>



    OSX will improve of course and it has other strengths but for now for file serving the best Apple has to offer is outclassed all the way by a 'value' PC running off-the-shelf Linux at a fraction of the cost.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 4 of 6
    rogue27rogue27 Posts: 607member
    [quote]Originally posted by LinuxMan:

    <strong>Ok well let's not get too excited here about the "power" or "speed" of OSX. OSX is still quite slow and does not handle forking processes very well. It seems to cripple the 1GHz Dual G4 something awful for file serving.



    For example,

    A new Dual 1Ghz G4 running OSX server took almost twice as long to create files, close files, lock/unlock files as a single processor 1Ghz Duron system running Linux. In fact the Dual G4 had almost 1000KB/s LESS throughput than the Duron box. CPU utilization was 4 times higher than the Duron as well.



    Here's some more testing:

    <a href="http://www.google.ca/search?q=cache:GfKBBQ-wcdoC:www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=3513+apple+file+serving+helios &hl=en" target="_blank">Real World Test</a>



    OSX will improve of course and it has other strengths but for now for file serving the best Apple has to offer is outclassed all the way by a 'value' PC running off-the-shelf Linux at a fraction of the cost. </strong><hr></blockquote>





    Well, that article you linked to is from 1999...



    Anyway, I know MySQL is performing queries more than 10 times faster on this 350Mhz G4 with Mac OS 10.1 than it was on a 233Mhz Pentium II with Linux.



    I had nothing to do with the linux box being set up, so I don' t know if there are any inefficiencies somewhere or not, but it was pretty fast on the G4. Of course, OS X still has a lot of optimization and improvements to be done and GCC is still writes pretty inefficient PPC code so I'm sure linux would be more efficient in many ways. However, I don't think sheer performance is what Apple is trying to market primarily. They are trying to market an easy-to-use UNIX first and foremost.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 5 of 6
    linuxmanlinuxman Posts: 17member
    [quote]Originally posted by rogue27:

    <strong>





    Well, that article you linked to is from 1999...



    Anyway, I know MySQL is performing queries more than 10 times faster on this 350Mhz G4 with Mac OS 10.1 than it was on a 233Mhz Pentium II with Linux.



    I had nothing to do with the linux box being set up, so I don' t know if there are any inefficiencies somewhere or not, but it was pretty fast on the G4. Of course, OS X still has a lot of optimization and improvements to be done and GCC is still writes pretty inefficient PPC code so I'm sure linux would be more efficient in many ways. However, I don't think sheer performance is what Apple is trying to market primarily. They are trying to market an easy-to-use UNIX first and foremost.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    We got our results two weeks ago. And in fact what is significant about the old 1999 stats is that even an "old" 1999 PC got just slightly better results than the new gual 1Ghz G4.

    The great news about that is there is no need to buy a really expensive OSX DUal 1GHz G4 box for serving when a simple Linux PC will perform better. This leaves more money for more fun stuff.
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
  • Reply 6 of 6
    dstranathandstranathan Posts: 1,717member
    I didn't mean to start a penis size contest guys, I simply wanted to share with you my suprise of how much Linux mag liked the TiBook and specifically OS X. I figured any *NIX mag would at least give Apple kudos thus far on OS X (considering its a very young OS), but I never fathomed that the writer would consider OS X to be "Linux with a facelift and steroids". Kinda weird that the review is recent, yet the TiBook they review is a 2nd gen (2001) Ti550. The new 800's SMOKE the 550. I have tested them side by side. Its Amazing in the graphics tests I have ran



    Did I start a Linux VS BSD street brawl?
     0Likes 0Dislikes 0Informatives
Sign In or Register to comment.