[geeks] Google announces Google Chrome OS

[Michael Parson]

On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> On Jul 8, 2009, at 12:16 , gsm at mendelson.com wrote:
>> On Wed, Jul 08, 2009 at 11:28:10AM -0400, nate at portents.com wrote:
>>>> http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/07/introducing-google-chrome-os.html
>>> 
>>> Interesting analysis here:
>>> 
>>> http://www.47hats.com/?p=1303
>> 
>
>> I think it will be "the end" of Linux. In a few years Linux will be
>> a component of Google/OS not something that people think of on its
>> own.  Look at MacOS, BSD is a component of it (I don't want to start
>> a debate of how much of a part, thank you), but people don't think of
>> MacOS as being either UNIX or BSD.
>
> Actually, I hear people all the time, even fairly green newbs, talk
> about Mac OS being UNIX and how that's a benefit.  I've also heard
> Apple Store personnel talking it up to customers quite a bit.
>
> But otherwise, yes, I see what you mean here.  Apple is classic for
> claiming things it didn't really do, or exaggerating what it did, and
> quietly removing "bad" information from the public mindset.

I don't mean to get off on a rant here, but...

I don't understand this argument against MacOS X being UNIX.  It is,
it's been certified as such by those that do that sort of thing.  It
compiles and runs most of the open-source stuff out there about as
easily as it will on any other unix-like OS that was the goofy-patched
Linux system of the pimply faced geek that wrote it in the first place.

No, it's not AT&T SYS V R4, but I don't think that beast exists in the
while any more.  The userland commands that I get are ripped right out
of Net & FreeBSD, the kernel is custom, but so is every other commercial
unix out there.  From a user point of view, it looks and smells a lot
like the other Unix variants I've been using over the past 20 years.

>From a sysadmin point-of-view, it's not Linux, it's not NetBSD, etc.
It uses 'launchd' instead of init/sys-v-init/(x)inetd, but that's just
another super-server manager, with it's own quirks, just like any other,
it's got what seperates it out from the others.  It uses some directory
server rather than plain-text /etc/passwd entries, but hey, if you're in
an LDAP/NIS/NIS+/something else shop, you're used to that already.  But
things like 'ps', 'top', 'kill', 'mknod', etc, they all work like I've
used them for years on end.  They even let me easily map the ctrl-key
where it's supposed to be rather easily.

No, the default GUI isn't X11, but the X server you do get is x.org, and
it's been doing a decent enough job for my needs.  I get a real xterm,
X11 forwarding, can run all the X apps I need, etc.  In fact, some bits
of software are only available as X11 version for the Mac (The GIMP, for
instance).  Until 3.0, If you wanted OpenOffice on the Mac, you had to
either use the X11 version, or the over-javafied NeoOffice.

What part of your understanding of 'UNIX' is missing from OS X?

-- 
Michael Parson
mparson at bl.org