Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 26th Jan 2006 21:18 UTC, submitted by Macino
Red Hat Imagine a world where you could run both Linux and Apple operating systems on the same high-performance Mac laptop. That day may be coming sooner than Mac fans think. Red Hat has confirmed it is pursuing the development of a Linux distribution for the new Intel-based Macs. Red Hat is no stranger to Macintosh - Fedora and other Linux distributions support the PowerPC architecture once used by Apple - but there are challenges to bringing Linux to the MacBook Pro. It appears the opportunities outweigh the challenges, though, with potential repercussions for Microsoft if the market clamors for Red Hat Linux-enabled MacBook Pros.
Order by: Score:
No need to imagine
by rexbinary on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:12 UTC
rexbinary
Member since:
2006-01-04

"Imagine a world where you could run both Linux and Apple operating systems on the same high-performance Mac laptop."

I'm running Mac OS X and SUSE Linux now on my PowerBook G4. I guess it's not 'high-performance'. Does that mean my PowerBook will start running slower when the MacBook Pro ships? ;p

Reply Score: 4

wtf?
by robojerk on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:27 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

"It appears the opportunities outweigh the challenges, though, with potential repercussions for Microsoft if the market clamors for Red Hat Linux-enabled MacBook Pros."

wtf?

Reply Score: 1

Why??
by cipher on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:30 UTC
cipher
Member since:
2005-12-17

Wouldn't this be a complete waste of money and resources? I just can't see how they would generate very much revenue from this. I would think it would make more sense for them to partner with a low-end provider like Acer or Gateway to produce a Linux/Windows notebook.

Maybe I'm missing something.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why??
by WorknMan on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:42 UTC in reply to "Why??"
WorknMan Member since:
2005-11-13

You're probably right. Given that many Mac users say they love Macs because 'it just works', I'm not sure how many of them would have an interest in Linux.
On the other hand, people looking to jump ship from Windows will probably head for Linux as their first alternative, because that option is cheaper when you can run the OS on hardware you already have.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Why??
by chekr on Thu 26th Jan 2006 23:51 UTC in reply to "RE: Why??"
chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

"You're probably right. Given that many Mac users say they love Macs because 'it just works', I'm not sure how many of them would have an interest in Linux."

I think you are looking at this from the wrong angle, go to just about any linux event and have a look at how many people have a an ibook or powerbook burning up their lap. It is more a case of how many linux users have an interest in a mac than how many mac usrs have an interest in linux.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Why??
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 27th Jan 2006 15:29 UTC in reply to "RE: Why??"
halfmanhalfamazing Member since:
2005-07-23

-------------Given that many Mac users say they love Macs because 'it just works', I'm not sure how many of them would have an interest in Linux.-----------

If that is your lone, and only qualifier I can very much see why they'd want to run linux.

It's only windows that suffers from non-"it just works" depending on how you look at it.

If you *never* connect to the internet then windows is just fine, but if you're internet bound you have to have this, that, and the other thing as protection otherwise "it just works" won't be working very long.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why??
by cilcoder on Fri 27th Jan 2006 04:11 UTC in reply to "Why??"
cilcoder Member since:
2005-07-06

I have bought a new intel iMac(haven't got it yet) and I would be interested in being able to dual boot linux on it. Although, hopefully Ubuntu will have a compatible version, but my point is that there is definately a desire(atleast by me) to be able to boot linux. It would be useful for developing crossplatform-software(without virtualization) and using some linux only software.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why??
by Dark_Knight on Fri 27th Jan 2006 07:01 UTC in reply to "Why??"
Dark_Knight Member since:
2005-07-10

The only reason I can see this being viable is for running Linux applications for x86 that are not yet ported to OS-X. Otherwise one would have to question how much revenue this can actually generate for Red Hat. Especially since Apple is working with third party developers to try and get support for applications ported from OS-X PPC to OS-X x86.

Anyway, if one wants an Intel Duo Core laptop they don't have to buy from Apple. Companies such as Dell and others are starting to offer Intel Duo Core laptops with a 17 inch display. Apple on the other hand locks their OS to EFI and their current laptops are only offered with a 15.4 inch display. Also, since Linux developers such as Red Hat already have an agreement with Dell and others maybe they should focus on companies which won't require additional expenses to the company.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Why??
by ma_d on Fri 27th Jan 2006 07:11 UTC in reply to "Why??"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Nope. Because low-end manufacturers like to swap out parts as much as possible in order to stick with the lowest possible bidders.
Manufacturers like Apple will stick with a configuration for as long as 18 months!

This means port it now, and don't do it again for a good year.

Also, I imagine their firmware is vastly superior to the nightmare that is a typical ACPI implementation.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Why??
by vikramsharma on Fri 27th Jan 2006 13:35 UTC in reply to "Why??"
vikramsharma Member since:
2005-07-06

The main reason would be that all the apps on Linux would run native on Intel Macs unlike OS X where most the apps would be running on top of Rosetta (ppc emulation). With X11R7 being released we would have hardware acclerated graphics which isn't all that bad. Enlightenment and xfce4 are pretty good desktops IMHO.

Reply Score: 1

This is stupid
by robojerk on Thu 26th Jan 2006 22:47 UTC
robojerk
Member since:
2006-01-10

So what was stopping frustrated mac users from switching to Linux before?

http://www.yellowdoglinux.com

Reply Score: 1

Barking
by segedunum on Thu 26th Jan 2006 23:08 UTC
segedunum
Member since:
2005-07-06

Red Hat are absolutely barking mad. I still don't think they, or a lot of other people, have groked that there are no opportunities for people clamouring for Macbook Pros. They are still Macs and still sufer from the same limited supply and will still cater to the same limited market. That market will possibly get a bit larger, but it's a drop in the ocean compared to the PC world. Red Hat would also never come pre-installed on a Mac.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Barking
by Get a Life on Fri 27th Jan 2006 04:15 UTC in reply to "Barking"
Get a Life Member since:
2006-01-01

There isn't a single actual comment from Red Hat cited in that article. It's a fluff piece with no content.

Reply Score: 2

Not so stupid
by whitehornmatt on Fri 27th Jan 2006 00:15 UTC
whitehornmatt
Member since:
2005-07-07

Having a dual boot with linux will give intel mac users wine, which will give them a large amount of the windows apps they need, which could be a temporary fix until XP or vista runs on them.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Not so stupid
by robojerk on Fri 27th Jan 2006 00:25 UTC in reply to "Not so stupid"
robojerk Member since:
2006-01-10

Wine for MacTel PC's is in development.
Here's an early build, please read this forum for link to the build and notes about it.
http://forum.osx86project.org/index.php?showtopic=1261

My comments about the article being stupid is because the artical make claims that Rad Hat linux will be a big money maker on the Mactel's like the fact that Apple switched platforms will encourage some type of movement to Linux. I'm all for running Wine on a Mac and all but to dual boot into Linux just to run Wine? Seems like a headache to me.

Edited 2006-01-27 00:26

Reply Score: 1

True LOL
by Tom K on Fri 27th Jan 2006 02:27 UTC
Tom K
Member since:
2005-07-06

Did anyone else truly laugh out loud when they read -- "... potential repercussions for Microsoft if the market clamors for Red Hat Linux-enabled MacBook Pros", or was it just me?

*What* market for Linux-enabled MacBook Pros? *LOL*

I'm sure all of those people who just shelled out $1600 on a sexy new MacBook Pro will clamor to get Linux installed, in all its no-Airport Extreme, no-elegant-wifi, no-3D-acceleration glory.

Edited 2006-01-27 02:46

Reply Score: 2

RE: True LOL
by poofyhairguy on Fri 27th Jan 2006 03:04 UTC in reply to "True LOL"
poofyhairguy Member since:
2005-07-14

*What* market for Linux-enabled MacBook Pros? *LOL*

Developers that need to test code on Red Hat Linux but want an Apple laptop for the style and quaility (and OSX not during work hours).

Its not a large market, but it will exist.

Reply Score: 2

RE: True LOL
by kristoph on Fri 27th Jan 2006 04:09 UTC in reply to "True LOL"
kristoph Member since:
2006-01-01

It might be that RedHat is supporting a relativelly stable apple hardware platform specifically so they can offer wife and 3d support "out of the box".

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: True LOL
by Tom K on Fri 27th Jan 2006 04:29 UTC in reply to "RE: True LOL"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

Where are the Airport Extreme drivers going to come from? Out of thin air?

Broadcom 802.11g driver development is still in its infancy.

Reply Score: 0

RE[3]: True LOL
by ma_d on Fri 27th Jan 2006 07:13 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: True LOL"
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

My understanding is that Broadcom is developing the Linux driver; they just refuse to say how far it's come.
Maybe they're more willing to talk to RedHat (or work with RedHat) about it...

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: True LOL
by chemical_scum on Fri 27th Jan 2006 13:12 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: True LOL"
chemical_scum Member since:
2005-11-02

Where are the Airport Extreme drivers going to come from? Out of thin air?

YDL has promised the rlelease of a bete extreeme driver for YDL 4.1 soon.

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: True LOL
by peejay on Fri 27th Jan 2006 13:07 UTC in reply to "RE: True LOL"
peejay Member since:
2005-06-29

It might be that RedHat is supporting a relativelly stable apple hardware platform specifically so they can offer wife and 3d support "out of the box".

I think alot of people would switch to Red Hat if they offered out-of-the-box wife support.

I mean, when you're so busy playing with your new Mac laptop, how are you going to have time to support your wife?

Reply Score: 1

RE: True LOL
by halfmanhalfamazing on Fri 27th Jan 2006 15:34 UTC in reply to "True LOL"
halfmanhalfamazing Member since:
2005-07-23

Why do you constantly spout BS?

------------I'm sure all of those people who just shelled out $1600 on a sexy new MacBook Pro will clamor to get Linux installed, in all its no-Airport Extreme------------

Is that Apple's or (linux's) fault?

-------------no-elegant-wifi--------------

Same gripe twice?

"It won't work with my airport, won't work with my wifi, won't work with my linksys, won't work with my 802.11b, won't work with my 802.11g, and won't work with my 802.11n! Look at all these problems I'm having!!!!"

-----------no-3D-acceleration glory. -------------

It's time you tried something newer than red hat 4.0.

Reply Score: 3

RE[2]: True LOL
by Tom K on Fri 27th Jan 2006 22:53 UTC in reply to "RE: True LOL"
Tom K Member since:
2005-07-06

You need to get a clue.

No Airport Extreme == meaning a lack of drivers for the Broadcom chipset. I don't give a f*ck whose fault it is that there is a lack of such drivers, the fact exists that they are not there. A MacBook Pro owner who has listened to Linux zealots and installed Linux on his MacBook also isn't going to care whose fault it is, only that he can't get on his wireless networks.

No elegant Wifi == meaning a lack of management tools for WiFi on Linux in general. In OS X, I click the Airport icon, and I get a drop-down menu of available networks. I click one, I'm connected. If the network is protected, I get a password/key dialog.

What's the Linux solution like right now? Typing a command to get a list of networks, then typing two more commands to GET ON that network? As if. We're in 2006, take your stuff and go home, and don't come back until it's as easy as 1-2-3.

No 3D acceleration == show me stable and high-performance drivers for a Radeon X1600 for whatever the latest incarnation of X is.

Reply Score: 1

Yo! L_I_P!
by glarepate on Fri 27th Jan 2006 20:39 UTC in reply to "True LOL"
glarepate Member since:
2006-01-04

Subclaimer (doesn't rise to the level of an actual disclaimer): While I think it might be better to be on a first name basis and call you Linux I think for now just using your initials will do. ..d^;

I'm sure all of those people who just shelled out $1600 on a sexy new MacBook Pro will clamor to get Linux installed, in all its no-Airport Extreme, no-elegant-wifi, no-3D-acceleration glory.

You have a good point in that owners of new Macs aren't likely to be installing Linux en masse when they have a perfectly usable Unix based OS "in the box".

By the same token Linux exists for and is installed on SGI, SUN and IBM AIX boxes, just to name a few, for various reasons. While I haven't heard many extolling the elegance and usability of AIX the supporters of IRIX and Solaris have noted that putting Linux on those machines is, at the least, a trade-off. But some folks are obviously willing to make the trade-off to the point of having done the work themselves to get it ported.

You may want to consider that they could be laughing out loud that you are unable to conceive of why it would happen on a widely available, relatively inexpensive, when compared to Unix workstations and mid-to-mainframes, hardware like the MacBook Pro.

I agree that there isn't likely to be a flood of switchers and dual booters in the short run. But it's not impossible either. I also think that the new Macs will make wonderful portable workstations in the future when they will no longer be shiny new $1600 items and that the time to start making options available is now rather than later.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Yo! L_I_P!
by cipher on Fri 27th Jan 2006 22:22 UTC in reply to "Yo! L_I_P!"
cipher Member since:
2005-12-17

You make some valid points. However, Redhat is a business. How do they plan on making a return on their investment? How many Mac users will *pay* Redhat for being able to run Linux on their new Mac laptop. Will most of their target market pay for the distro or support? Has any desktop/laptop Linux distro made money from selling the distro or support? I mean actual revenue from sales and not IPO money.

Redhat has always made their money from support contracts. Their focus is the server market. I would think it would make more sense to focus their resources on that market to continue to grow. I just don't see very much revenue here. Then again, I'm not running a large business so maybe I'm missing something.

Reply Score: 1

nice
by sp29 on Fri 27th Jan 2006 02:33 UTC
sp29
Member since:
2006-01-04

I hope this comes true, because it would be a great to have linux and os x run together.

Reply Score: 1

RedHat = Morons?
by bubbayank on Fri 27th Jan 2006 02:39 UTC
bubbayank
Member since:
2005-07-15

I've never really understood the urge that a handful of Mac users have to wipe out a completely usable and workable Unix to put Linux on their machines. Yes, please, give me X11 as my only windowing environment. Barf.

It's just always struck me as an odd thing to do. But making a "commercial" distro for the same market just seems moronic.

Reply Score: 2

Red Hat Plans Linux Distro for MacBook Pro
by Sphinx on Fri 27th Jan 2006 02:51 UTC
Sphinx
Member since:
2005-07-09

Doesn't everybody?

Reply Score: 0

Why not?
by youknowmewell on Fri 27th Jan 2006 03:26 UTC
youknowmewell
Member since:
2005-07-08

The way I see it, most people these days either:

A. Build their own computer, sans OS. They later install their own.

B. Buy a PC with Windows.

C. Buy a Mac with OSX.

The thing is, many people will tell you that Macs aren't any more expensive than PCs, so the only difference is the OS and the case/accessories. If people want a computer with a nice case and with nice accessories with Linux on the inside, why not support them?

Reply Score: 2

Not thinking far enough ahead...
by bullsbarry on Fri 27th Jan 2006 04:40 UTC
bullsbarry
Member since:
2006-01-27

Eventually RedHat is going to have to support EFI on x86/x86_64 platforms, so why not implement it on a relatively high-profile platform and gain brownie points for being the first ones to do it?

Reply Score: 4

RE: No need to imagine
by Nathan O. on Fri 27th Jan 2006 05:28 UTC
Nathan O.
Member since:
2005-08-11

Yes, it will get slower. Steve's reality distortion field is much more powerful now (being powered by Yonah), and extends in to every PPC Mac owner's legacy hardware, distorting its performance.

Prepare to buy more RAM :-)

On a serious note, what would happen if Apple allowed you to install other OSes under a hypervisor like Xen, including Windows and Linux, all controlled via the OS X style GUI that makes them who they are? The Mac would suddenly become the way to run every major OS.

Reply Score: 1

Fit's my picture
by netpython on Fri 27th Jan 2006 07:04 UTC
netpython
Member since:
2005-07-06

Very nice initiative that fit's my picture very well,(allready).

Furthermore it's a potential investment in future progress based on the hypothesis MS is deteriating.

Reply Score: 1

WTF?
by el3ktro on Fri 27th Jan 2006 08:13 UTC
el3ktro
Member since:
2006-01-10

"Imagine a world where you could run both Linux and Apple operating systems on the same high-performance Mac laptop."

I don't have to imagine such a world, I already do this for over a year now. Where's the news?

Reply Score: 1

riha
Member since:
2006-01-24

If they can release an Linux version that can run on EFI, then i think Redhat will get an headstart compared to microsoft, that can have an big impact on sales and forthcoming linux versions.

I think it sounds good.

Reply Score: 1

perfect sense
by TechGeek on Fri 27th Jan 2006 16:46 UTC
TechGeek
Member since:
2006-01-14

Actually, this makes perfect sense. This gives them the opportunity to support a quality laptop. Apple is much more likely to play nicely with Red Hat since they have a unix based OS. Imagine a linux laptop where every feature is supported. It really requires EFI to get past all the hacks that make up todays BIOS. This isnt about Mac users. They already have OS support on their laptops. But this could be big for linux users.

TG

Reply Score: 1

interesting
by oracle2025 on Fri 27th Jan 2006 17:41 UTC
oracle2025
Member since:
2005-07-11

This sounds very interesting, especially to me, because I am not only a long term linux user, but also ready to spend a bit on a solid machine.

Reply Score: 2

my suggestion
by pjjmartin on Fri 27th Jan 2006 17:53 UTC
pjjmartin
Member since:
2005-07-08

Instead of taking dual booting to have linux, which is time consuming if you want to switch back and forth, by a much cheaper x86 PC laptop and install Linux on that. You could run xvm on the pc and have apple's x client login to it, so you could have linux running in apple's x window under os x. A bit of a klooge perhaps, but I could set this up right now, not wait X number of months or years glued to macrumors.com wondering when RH MAC86 appears at all or comes out in alpha, beta1 beta2....

Yes it costs some money and takes up more but you have to break some eggs to make an omlette.

Reply Score: 1

Shiny
by anda_skoa on Fri 27th Jan 2006 19:47 UTC
anda_skoa
Member since:
2005-07-07

Once you think about it, it becomes a pretty obvious choice.

Supporting all those "normal" x86 laptops from their uncooperative manufacturers is hard and unpleasant work.

Supporting just a couple of hardware combinations should be a lot easier.

While this would also be true for PPC based Mac laptops, it is easier on x86 because all the non-opensource Linuxsoftware will be working as well, e.g. Flash plugin, Sun Java VM, binary codecs, etc.

Reply Score: 1