Timeline for How Unix'y is Mac OS X?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Apr 25, 2011 at 0:35 | history | edited | Telemachus | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
This is absurd. OSX is a perfectly common shorthand for Mac OS X and repeating "Mac OS X" over and over and over is tedious.
|
| Apr 15, 2011 at 10:43 | history | edited | Peter Mortensen | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 86 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2009 at 22:36 | history | edited | Telemachus | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
Grammar nerd
|
| Oct 1, 2009 at 22:11 | comment | added | mouviciel | @Telemachus: I understand your point and considering the edit of the OP, this is the kind of argument he wants to get. From a user point of view, there is no hint that Unix runs under the hood. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 19:52 | comment | added | David Thornley | @Telemachus: There wasn't one installed on my first Ubuntu box. I had to go to the work of typing "sudo apt-get install development-essentials", and then entering my password. It did surprise me. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 17:44 | history | edited | Telemachus | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
deleted 136 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2009 at 17:40 | comment | added | Telemachus | @David: Fine, I edited my answer to avoid the phrase "out of the box." There is no compiler installed on OSX by default. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 17:39 | history | edited | Telemachus | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 162 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2009 at 17:34 | comment | added | David Thornley | There is a compiler in the box. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 17:21 | comment | added | Telemachus | @Mouvicel: To clarify the key thing, in Gnome what you see in a terminal (using `ls -l) and what you see in the filemanager (Nautilus) is identical. For various reasons, Apple does some voodoo magic to make the GUI show fewer items than the terminal (and not just hidden dotfiles). I find that telling. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 17:11 | comment | added | user4358 | @Telemachus +1 for duck-typing. It expresses the spirit of the change from Mac OS to OS X succintly. In my opinion, Apple wanted to improve the guts of the Mac while keeping the user experience unchanged, and succeeded quite beautifully. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 16:58 | comment | added | Telemachus | @Sal: well and good, but there's a reason that Apple hides that stuff. That reason, which I may not be able to express clearly, is what makes me say that Apple has deliberately hidden the Unix in their operating system. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 16:57 | history | edited | Telemachus | CC BY-SA 2.5 |
added 506 characters in body; added 5 characters in body
|
| Oct 1, 2009 at 16:54 | comment | added | sal | @Telemachus, You can have the Finder display everything osxfaq.com/DailyTips/02-2005/02-01.ws | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 16:35 | comment | added | Telemachus |
@Mouvicel: My point is that quite a lot of the items visible with ls -l are made invisible in the GUI. You don't see /bin, /etc and so on. To clarify this: I find it bizzare (and telling) that Apple goes out of its way to hide these items.
|
|
| Oct 1, 2009 at 16:21 | comment | added | Richard Hoskins | What Unix are you using that the development system is part of the default install? | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 15:49 | comment | added | mouviciel | You can get the output of ls / with Terminal.app. Both worlds coexist in Mac OS X. This is not a compromise. The GUI works on top of Unix, just like Gnome works on top of Linux. | |
| Oct 1, 2009 at 15:17 | history | answered | Telemachus | CC BY-SA 2.5 |