New FreeBSD Live CD Distribution

22 June 2005

I have long commented that the problem with FreeBSD was the installation process. Why would anyone but an admin or someone interested in operating systems install FreeBSD? Unlike Linux distributions like SimplyMEPIS, FreeBSD has not concentrated on an automated installation process. However, I received a copy of a new FreeBSD distribution called Freesbie 1.1 with a Linux Magazine purchase.

Like SimplyMEPIS, the Freesbie 1.1 Live CD correctly configured all but one of the OS's components on a PII 450MHZ Dell Dimension Computer. The installation of Freesbie 1.1 did not correctly configure the sound recording ability of the sound card. However, the os will play sounds just fine.

If you have wondered what the FreeBSD fuss is all about and why BIG and professional sites like Yahoo (according to the FreeBSD website) use FreeBSD, download the Freesbie 1.1 live cd iso and burn it to a CD. Boot and have it all configured for you.

Apple to Use Intel CPUs...So what?

8 June 2005

My first computer was an Apple //e (but I admit I really thought I wanted an Apple //+). The Apple, then as now, is much more than the CPU. Apple is an attitude, a beleif, and a mindset. It doesn't matter if it is 5% of the market or 95% of the market.

The PowerPC, however powerful and rebellious, seems destined for arcade-style boxes or boxes not needing to be carried around on someone's lap (can we say no PowerPC in a laptop?). When has a CPU, whatever its ability, made a platform? I remember the 6802, 286, the 68000, a certain Digital chip, and the PowerPC. CPUs generally cause an end of a computer cycle (aforementioned 6802, 68000, PowerPC) even if the general reason is that we request/require more computing power. Maybe we just didn't need cooler running CPUs or didn't get mad because chip delays caused a delay in me getting my next computer.

Let me think back to my computer choices...Apple //e, Amiga 2000, CTX 486SX laptop, Micron P120 desktop (my first comp to run Linux Caldera 1.0 and the new Red Hat), various Dells (including my most recent). I now run Windows XP (love the games), Linux (MEPIS and SUSE), FreeBSD (Freesbie 1.1 and FreeBSD 5.x), and, yes, BEOS. ;)

I admit I have been saving for a shiny G5 PowerPC PowerMac. However, I never thought it would never see the light of day due to power drain, battery life (bateria aziz!) and heat that CPU produces. Now, there is hope for a fast and portable Mac that doesn't suffer from low chip supply.

I admit that at first I was curious about Apple's switch to x86 chips, but I am now embracing it after I had the following thoughts:

• I have moved from an Apple//e to an Amiga to Windows, to Linux, and to FreeBSD--the last few are OSs and not hardware bound;
• All of my choices seem to be an "underdog" class--actually quite funny really;
• Linux, an OS that I really enjoy, is a mindset, an attitude, and not bound by a SINGLE CPU (runs on x86, Digital, 68000, PowerPC, etc.); and
• If Linux is wonderful and thriving without being based on a single CPU, why should Apple's OS/X be any different?

I conclude that I don't buy the OS based on the underlying CPU. Rather, I buy the underlying CPU based on the OS of my choice. I bet most of you do too.

Counsel

For information on environmental consultants, see the SEGi website.