http://www.osnews.com/story/945/Book_Review_Mac_OS_X_Unleashed Exploring the Future of Computing en-us Copyright 2001-2009, David Adams adam+nospam@osnews.com Tue, 10 Nov 2009 07:34:16 GMT http://www.osnews.com/images/osnews.gif http://www.osnews.com http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Good review - this sounds like a keeper book, if/when I take the Mac OS X plunge )

Time to go into overdrive on freelance work, so I can not only afford an OS X machine, but also all of the software apps I need ... *sigh* Tue, 16 Apr 2002 19:18:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? maybe those incorrectly placed articles were paid for by Apple? Tue, 16 Apr 2002 21:37:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Incorectly placed? Wed, 17 Apr 2002 00:54:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Eugenia, I'm wondering what info they provide about configuring NetInfo specifically. That seems to be the most arcane bit of X, and you are least likely to find any info in Mac, BSD, or Unix books on that. Is it covered well? Wed, 17 Apr 2002 01:06:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? There are 44 pages devoted to NetInfo. A whole chapter (chapter 23). Also, at the end of the book, you will find the help (man) pages for NetInfo, almost 3 more pages.

Let me know if you want to know what exactly is discussed in that chapter. Wed, 17 Apr 2002 01:31:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Eugenia, I may be terribly wrong but I thought you don't have a Mac but a Dual Celeron only. So I kinda had to smile seeing a Mac OS book review written by you... So, how much have you tempered with OS X so far..? Wed, 17 Apr 2002 05:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Yes, I only have a dual Celeron 533 (along with another dual celeron 466, two notebooks (Vaio/Celeron and CTX/K6), a dual PIII, an AMD K6 and a BeBox but we are thinking with Jbq to buy a new iMac for my birthday in May.

However, since the G4 offerings are extremely expensive and far slower (as the Heise benchmarks revealed) than the latest AMD and Intel offerings, we are thinking of buying a dual Xeon SMT 2 GHz instead (that will be like having *4* Xeon CPUs . Funny, that such a MONSTER machine, is cheaper than the iMac we wanted to buy.

So, we are still thinking about it, even if we had decided to buy an iMac some months ago. BTW, this is not the first MacOSX book I am reviewing. Scroll down here to see the rest 4 books I read and reviewed about MacOSX the last few months:
http://www.osnews.com/resources.php

I still have to review an AppleScript book and I think I am done with the subject. Wed, 17 Apr 2002 05:43:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? I generally don't like apple oses, but yet again I have to exclaim my love for that flat panel on the new imac. I stopped in the local apple store today, and after playing with the imac for a bit I still don't like the os much (no particular reason, just not my cup of tea), but damn if i'm not smitten on that panel. That has got to be the sharpest image I've ever seen on a flat panel (granted most of the other ones I've seen are low to middle market). If only apple would sell a version of that bad boy for x86 I think I'd be forced to break my piggy bunk and dump my crt. Wed, 17 Apr 2002 08:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? What Os's yeah got runnin on all your machines Eugenia?
What u planning on running on the Xeon, i know Linux supports SMT but last i heard none of Micro$hite's Os's did.

Hello from Ireland everyone :-) Wed, 17 Apr 2002 11:19:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? >However, since the G4 offerings are extremely expensive
>and far slower (as the Heise benchmarks revealed) than the
>latest AMD and Intel offerings, we are thinking of buying
>a dual Xeon SMT 2 GHz instead (that will be like having
>*4* Xeon CPUs . Funny, that such a MONSTER machine, is
>cheaper than the iMac we wanted to buy.

Eugenia,

I believe that no publically discussed benchmarks with Xeons with SMT enabled have demonstrated more than a 10-15% performance increase so far ... and that's with code designed to show it off. It's not like the performance increase one gets going from uniprocessor to duel. The user performance difference under Windows or Linux might be even harder to notice.

-- Ed Wed, 17 Apr 2002 12:34:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Nice review! I've been loooking at the book for a while, wondering if i should get it... i guess when i get my mac with osx i will!

Hey Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:32:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? oops, clicked the submit button before i was done... oh well, nothing important. Wed, 17 Apr 2002 14:33:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? >dual Celeron 533 (along with another dual celeron 466, two
>notebooks (Vaio/Celeron and CTX/K6), a dual PIII, an AMD
>K6 and a BeBox

looks like you can make your own startup.com with all those computers Wed, 17 Apr 2002 15:23:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Yes, the MS Windows 2000 and Windows XP both support Intel's whiz-bang new acronym, with one TINY little problem for Windows 2000. Remember that for a long time, Microsoft sells NT derived versions of Windows under a license that extends to a specific number of processors in your machine.

Example: Win 2000/XP Professional for up to 2 CPUs, all the way through Ultra-Mega-Datacenter Supreme with Onions for up to 64 (I have heard after 64, NT and friends lose any real benefit to added CPUs).

Now, the SMT driver for Windows XP and up treats each CPU as 1 REAL CPU and 2 Virtual SMT CPUs. The license only covers real CPUs. This is the Right Thing To Do. The current SMT drivers for Windows 2000, treats the Virtual SMT CPUs as REAL CPUs. Windows 2000 Professional would disable one of the real CPUs on a 2 CPU SMT Xeon box because it thinks there are 4 real CPUs in the machine, even though there are not! This is a shaft for people who don't want to move up to XP yet, and DON'T want to shell out for a Server version of Win2k.

Things may have changed since then, but here's a thingy from Microsoft on the subject:
http://www.microsoft.com/WINDOWS2000/server/evaluation/performance/...

Yes, it's a link to a Word file. This is Microsoft, you think they're NOT going to support their own proprietary format they spent SO much time inventing and reinventing? Wed, 17 Apr 2002 16:10:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? > What Os's yeah got runnin on all your machines Eugenia?

Everything you can think off.

> What u planning on running on the Xeon, i know Linux supports SMT but last i heard none of Micro$hite's Os's did.

Everyone's support them nowdays.

> I believe that no publically discussed benchmarks with Xeons with SMT enabled have demonstrated more than a 10-15% performance increase so far ... and that's with code designed to show it off.

Yes and no. I mean, benchmarks are just benchmarks and not compiled for the specific machine, therefore indeed, the advancements are not showing off. However, in a daily basis use, where more than 2-3 important threads or applications are running at the same time, at least theoretically, a dual Xeon SMT 2x2 Ghz can be up to 3 times faster than its equivelant Pentium 4 at 2 Ghz. And that's fast. Wed, 17 Apr 2002 16:36:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments http://osnews.com/thread? http://osnews.com/thread? Yes, the review should mention that this is the best book on Netinfo and the Next past of OSX. Easier to use this book as a guideline to run a netinfo server,, set up NFS exports, ect... Netinfo has been despised by lack of documentation and knowledge but it is a very neat technology. Wed, 17 Apr 2002 16:48:00 GMT donotreply@osnews.com (Anonymous) Comments