[plug] Linux on Laptops

[Craig Ringer]

On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 13:20 +0800, Benjamin Woods wrote:
> Hey guys,
> 
> Starting a new thread for a related topic (old one was "Buying a Laptop").
> 
> My questions:
> 
> Is there anything new I need to consider when using linux on a laptop instead 
> of a desktop?

1. There's the remotest chance you might actually *need* the built-in
modem one day, so try to find one that can be made to work.

2. Look for a well supported video chipset.

3. Test out power management, on a sample model if you can. See if you
can control the fan, adjust CPU speed, suspend/resume, etc.


On Fri, 2005-07-15 at 13:25 +0800, Mark B wrote:
> Hey Ben,
> 
> Get an apple, running latest version of OSX, it literally kicks ass.  you
> get your terminal, it runs unix

Er.... not really. It runs a custom Apple operating system with a
POSIX-compatible subsystem derived from BSD UNIX. I absolutely promise
you that it is not, in fact, UNIX, much as Apple would have you believe
so. By behaviour and compatibility, Linux is much more a UNIX than Mac
OS X.

That said, it is a UNIX-like operating system that can be coaxed to run
most apps written for UNIX. Command line apps that use autotools
(including libtool) to abstract away the OSX-specific weirdness (.dylib,
MACH-O, Frameworks, etc) will often work out of the box.

Many UNIX GUI apps will also compile out of the box, but will require
X11 to run. Apple has not done a good job on their X11 integration -
they didn't even offer X11 as a shipping option *at* *all* until
recently. Window management, in particular, is a screaming nightmare,
since the Mac OS X-suppled X11 WM doesn't put X11 apps in the Dock or
anything. It's painful.

With some amount of porting, ranging from pretty small (simple Qt
applications) to nightmarish (large Gtk applications), it's possible to
make native Aqua builds of apps that show up correctly in the dock, etc.
More work gets you well-behaved copy+paste, Mac file+print dialogs, etc.
It's a pretty large job.

If X11 under Mac OS X wasn't quite so screwed up, it'd be way more
useful for UNIX users. As things stand, expect to feel like the OS is
telling you that you shouldn't be using those "inferior" second-citizen
applications on its shiny new incompatible GUI. You should also expect
to see a system that looks just familiar enough on the surface to
backstab you brutally when you least expect it (tip: don't use `cp', use
`ditto'. Unless they *finally* fixed `cp' to understand resource forks
in 10.4 ...).

If Mac OS X suits what you need, then by all means go for it. Just be
aware that it's not, in fact, UNIX, and may or may not be suitable if
you need UNIX or a UNIX clone OS. Don't expect all UNIX apps to work out
of the box, and be aware that some won't work at all.

> you can't go wrong.  once you go apple
> you'll never go back.

Unless you discover that you need and like UNIX, and that you like
having a little bit of control over your working environment. Preferably
without awful 3rd party reverse engineered hacks that may or may not
break your entire system next time a patch comes out...

> Only issue may be price, but there are a few second
> hand ones floating around, and they tend to hold their value, unlike other
> makes.

The iBooks are on par with x86 laptops in price. If I had to use a mac,
I'd probably go for one of those.

--
Craig Ringer