Forum: Ruby on Rails Why Macs instead of AMD or Intel ? Just curious

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Greg (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 00:51
(Received via mailing list)
My first computer was a Mac (SE30) but it was also my last so I am not
without appreciation of  Apples wonderful aptitude for design.  Without
starting a flame-fest why do so many ruby and rails developers use a Mac
?
It seems to be a commonality within the ruby and RoR community.
Especially
laptops.  The first ruby users group meeting I attended was about 50%
Macs
(or so it seemed to me - I didn't do a formal poll or anything).

Just curious,

Greg

--
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.21/236 - Release Date:
1/20/2006
Pat M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 00:54
(Received via mailing list)
Well, first of all you can have the best of both worlds now - mac and
intel.  For me, the main selling point is OS X.  It's BSD with a
beautiful interface.  That's just the most kick ass OS I could think
of, to be honest.

Considering that *nix is just a very common, excellent
development/deployment platform, it makes a lot of sense to code on a
*nix box.  I've noticed that developers tend to prefer laptops, and
there certainly is no better *nix laptop than an Apple.

And come on, we have TextMate :)

Pat
Kyle M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 00:57
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/27/06, Greg <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
>
Macs are the easiest *nix to use, and they can use Adobe/Macromedia/MS
tools.  Plus, they're sexy.

--
Kyle M.
Chief Technologist
E Factor Media // FN Interactive
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
1-866-263-3261
James L. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 01:00
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/27/06, Greg <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> My first computer was a Mac (SE30) but it was also my last so I am not
> without appreciation of  Apples wonderful aptitude for design.  Without
> starting a flame-fest why do so many ruby and rails developers use a Mac ?
> It seems to be a commonality within the ruby and RoR community.  Especially
> laptops.  The first ruby users group meeting I attended was about 50% Macs
> (or so it seemed to me - I didn't do a formal poll or anything).

The short answer is that OS X makes it possible, and Apple makes a
solid product.

I've owned several Macs over the years, although not for a while now.
I'm currently using a Thinkpad with Fedora Linux for my Rails
development.
Sean S. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 01:03
(Received via mailing list)
I bought a new MacBook Pro just so I could use TextMate. :)

<http://www.radrails.org/blog/show/44>

-Sean
Greg (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 01:30
(Received via mailing list)
Well, my work pc is an HP 3.6 GHz with 2 GB of memory and they are
starting
at less than a Mac laptop with more hardware stuff.  While I know that
clock
speed isn't everything, it does matter in many things and can beat a
well
developed and integrated machine (think Sun) and my work laptop is
sometimes
faster than my dual Opteron (2.0 GHz w/ 1 GB ram per processor).  Yeah,
don't think that doesn't stick in my craw ... I don't know about
TextMate
other than what I read on this list but I am kinda fond of the Eclipse
IDE
with RadRails and RDT and the kitchen sink thrown in.  Gotta love those
little green testing bars !  SVN support and the ability to work on any
DB
is a must for, me at any rate, in an IDE.  And while all this is on
Windows,
I don't feel any less a developer than a TextMate using Mac developer.
I
guess all the command line / vi stuff on servers has tempered me to
using
what I want when I want how I want.  To each their own ..

Interesting feedback.

-Greg
Sean S. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 01:37
I think it's really ironic that the guy asking why so many folks prefer
Mac has this as his (auto-appended?) sig:
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.21/236 - Release Date:
1/20/2006

The main reason I use a Mac for development is because when I want to
work, my computer is ready to go about 99.999% of the time.  I can count
the number of crashes (kernel panics) I've encountered on one hand.  I
rarely shut down my machine, just use instant on/off sleep.  And the
insane virus, adware, spyware treadmill that plagues the PC world is
just someone else's problem ;-)

To date, Windows has had tens of thousands of viruses, many of them
extremely severe resulting in tons of downtime and data loss for many
developers.  On Mac OS X, there have been exactly *zero* viruses found
in the wild.  Zero, nada, none.  Not even one.  People can debate why
that is, or how long it can stay that way, and so on.  But one thing is
almost a certainty: Using a Mac for development almost guarantees that
you'll spend less time monkeying with your machine which leaves more
time for developing Rails apps :-D

I think the reason some people get so fanatical about Macs is because
it's just frustrating to see all the suffering people put themselves
through unnecessarily.  It's like watching your friend swim in a muddy
pond complaining about all the algae and litter.  And you're like --
Dude, would you just listen to me?!  I'm telling you there's this
crystal clear swimming hole just over there with water that's always 70
degrees!  But the guy just keeps saying -- naw, I'm all right.  I just
gotta clear some of this litter and algae and then I should be okay for
a while.  And you're like -- dude, are you insane?!  It's crystal clear
over there -- it'd take you like five minutes to walk over there!  For
the love of god -- why do you guys all insist on swimming in this filthy
pond when you don't have to?!  (a mac zealot is born)

Plus there's TextMate :-)
Dylan S. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 01:45
(Received via mailing list)
I hate Apple.  They basically make you buy their products ;)

I'm on a Thinkpad, running OpenBSD.  My friend is on a Powerbook....
running
OpenBSD.
I'm planning on buying a MacBook as well... JUST for graphics programs,
presentation software... etc.

I insist on coding on a "true" BSD OS :)
Greg (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 02:46
(Received via mailing list)
yah, one of my av's is out of date by 7 days (since I only re-boot once
a
month).  It's an AMD (old one) running Windows 2000 Pro.  I use OpenBSD
for
all of my servers, except my RoR server (easier getting RoR on Debian
then
OpenBSD).  I guess I have been lucky + smart as I don't have all of
those
windows problems - despite installing a million programs and abusing my
pc.
I also run 2 av's, never use i.e. (except for security updates), ripped
out
scripting, and use SpamBayes on top of my Outlook.  As for crash
worthiness
I have crashed Macs, OpenBSD, and just about anything else but I guess
OpenBSD is about the most stable here in my house.  As I need machines I
can
stuff a lot of hard drives into I bought a dual Opteron instead of the
dual
Macs a while ago.  The Opteron was cheaper also.  But I am a big fan of
Mac
(and Sun) boxes.  Of course with Apple's

Don't know what's so ironic about it the (is auto-appended) sig - if
more
folks used AV's there would be less of the nasty stuff about.  Of course
a
good beating of miscreants would help too.

OK, I can understand the "hate Windows cause it's so unstable for me"
argument. My day job is a MS shop ... why I like my OpenBSD / Suse /
Debian
/ "my" Windows environment at home.

-Greg
Lance England (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 03:28
(Received via mailing list)
> the love of god -- why do you guys all insist on swimming in this filthy
> pond when you don't have to?!  (a mac zealot is born)
>
> Plus there's TextMate :-)
>

I love this description. I've probably spent about 5 minutes on a Mac
in my entire life. But lately I'm really starting to be tempted to
jump on into the clear water. I don't quite have $2000 laying around,
but the fact that I'm even thinking about it leads me to believe I'm
not the only Windows person thinking of jumping ship.
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 04:22
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 27, 2006, at 5:25 PM, Lance England wrote:

>> gotta clear some of this litter and algae and then I should be
>>
>
> I love this description. I've probably spent about 5 minutes on a Mac
> in my entire life. But lately I'm really starting to be tempted to
> jump on into the clear water. I don't quite have $2000 laying around,
> but the fact that I'm even thinking about it leads me to believe I'm
> not the only Windows person thinking of jumping ship.

Everyone thinking about switching, don't forget about resale values.

Getting in is a bit expensive, but there has *always* been a vibrant
used market for old Macs that doesn't exist for PCs.

So, the first switch is expensive, but the first upgrade you make
you whole again...

--
-- Tom M.
Nshbrown N. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 04:40
(Received via mailing list)
Oh there are tons of us on the edge :) Only bump in the road for me is
coming up with the $2500 for the new Intel Dual Core MacBook Pro (which
is
apparently 4-5x faster than its predecessor, the G4 powerbook).

The tail end of the keynote by Steve at MacWorld is pretty sweet.
Actually
the whole thing is. One thing I didn't like so much was it felt like he
was
showing off a bit with his numbers, then kinda cut off people from
enjoying
them as well (weird I know).

I have tried setting up apache/MySQL/ruby/rails on my Centrino, and
well,
its slow. Really slow.

Watching all the screencasts I have how a Mac simply outperforms the
Intel
is reason enough. But fact is, they were demo'ing on the old G4 machines
(as
the new Intel's ship in February).

If you haven't already checked them out, take a peek at:
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/

Pretty sweet features. Especially the new magnetic power cord
plug/connector.

-Nb

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 Nathaniel S. H. Brown                           http://nshb.net
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bob S. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 05:22
(Received via mailing list)
I would consider it if they bring over the 17" Powerbook model into the
MacBook Pro.
Can't see spending that type of money to downgrade from my 17"
widescreen
Dell, which I'll point out has never crashed on me. That argument is not
as
valid nowadays as a few years ago. The argument that is valid, is that
it's
easier to install a bunch of crap software on a PC that makes it
unstable.

Bob S.
http://www.railtie.net/
Joe (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 08:33
Sean S. wrote:
> I think it's really ironic that the guy asking why so many folks prefer
> Mac has this as his (auto-appended?) sig:
> Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.1.375 / Virus Database: 267.14.21/236 - Release Date:
> 1/20/2006
>
> The main reason I use a Mac for development is because when I want to
> work, my computer is ready to go about 99.999% of the time.  I can count
> the number of crashes (kernel panics) I've encountered on one hand.  I
> rarely shut down my machine, just use instant on/off sleep.  And the
> insane virus, adware, spyware treadmill that plagues the PC world is
> just someone else's problem ;-)
>
> To date, Windows has had tens of thousands of viruses, many of them
> extremely severe resulting in tons of downtime and data loss for many
> developers.  On Mac OS X, there have been exactly *zero* viruses found
> in the wild.  Zero, nada, none.  Not even one.  People can debate why
> that is, or how long it can stay that way, and so on.  But one thing is
> almost a certainty: Using a Mac for development almost guarantees that
> you'll spend less time monkeying with your machine which leaves more
> time for developing Rails apps :-D

Jeez, that's just ridiculous. I've used Windows computers since 3.1,
leave them hooked up to the Internet all the time, and have never gotten
a virus. And since 2000 and XP, crashes are quite rare. In my
experience, the key to not getting viruses is DON'T OPEN EXECUTABLE
EMAIL ATTACHMENTS! Oh, and maybe let Windows update itself once in a
while. And don't use IE on sites you don't trust.

Joe
Craig W. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 08:47
(Received via mailing list)
On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 07:33 +0100, Joe wrote:
> > the number of crashes (kernel panics) I've encountered on one hand.  I
> > you'll spend less time monkeying with your machine which leaves more
> > time for developing Rails apps :-D
>
> Jeez, that's just ridiculous. I've used Windows computers since 3.1,
> leave them hooked up to the Internet all the time, and have never gotten
> a virus. And since 2000 and XP, crashes are quite rare. In my
> experience, the key to not getting viruses is DON'T OPEN EXECUTABLE
> EMAIL ATTACHMENTS! Oh, and maybe let Windows update itself once in a
> while. And don't use IE on sites you don't trust.
----
the whole discussion is absurd. Viruses aren't a problem if you keep AV
software on your machine and don't run as administrator. Macintosh users
futz with their machines as much as Windows users do. They both have
their strengths and weaknesses. There's no doubt that anyone could use
either.

I use both (rarely) - I mostly use Linux. Who cares? Isn't there enough
traffic on this list already that a discussion about OS's that never
leads anywhere and just adds to the noise?

Craig
Rick O. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 09:00
(Received via mailing list)
> I love this description. I've probably spent about 5 minutes on a Mac
> in my entire life. But lately I'm really starting to be tempted to
> jump on into the clear water. I don't quite have $2000 laying around,
> but the fact that I'm even thinking about it leads me to believe I'm
> not the only Windows person thinking of jumping ship.

I jumped ship for $600 on a Mac Mini + 1GB RAM (which you can now get
refurbished for much less).  It won't convince you that macs are
faster by any stretch... but it did convince me the a happier
computing experience is possible.  YMMV

--
Rick O.
http://techno-weenie.net
Joe (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 09:11
Craig W. wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-01-28 at 07:33 +0100, Joe wrote:
>> > the number of crashes (kernel panics) I've encountered on one hand.  I
>> > you'll spend less time monkeying with your machine which leaves more
>> > time for developing Rails apps :-D
>>
>> Jeez, that's just ridiculous. I've used Windows computers since 3.1,
>> leave them hooked up to the Internet all the time, and have never gotten
>> a virus. And since 2000 and XP, crashes are quite rare. In my
>> experience, the key to not getting viruses is DON'T OPEN EXECUTABLE
>> EMAIL ATTACHMENTS! Oh, and maybe let Windows update itself once in a
>> while. And don't use IE on sites you don't trust.
> ----
> the whole discussion is absurd. Viruses aren't a problem if you keep AV
> software on your machine and don't run as administrator. Macintosh users
> futz with their machines as much as Windows users do. They both have
> their strengths and weaknesses. There's no doubt that anyone could use
> either.
>
> I use both (rarely) - I mostly use Linux. Who cares? Isn't there enough
> traffic on this list already that a discussion about OS's that never
> leads anywhere and just adds to the noise?
>
> Craig

Not for me - I don't use AV and do run as Admin. Haven't had any virus
problems. As for Linux, I KNOW I've spent far far more time futzing with
it.

Joe
Steve R. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 09:12
I think the virus thing is one of those "I've got a Mac, so there"
things. Avoiding viruses is not why I use a Mac (I use Mac, Windows, and
Linux). The initial observation was that (paraphrasing) a
disproportionate number of Rails developers are using Macs when compared
with Mac penetration into the market. Why would that be?

My reason for getting a Mac in the first place is that I need it for
Photoshop. Well, times have changed, Photoshop has changed, and Windows
have changed. But I still like the Mac. Why I use a Mac for development
is that Windows and *nix are so dissimilar that I always ran into
configuration nightmares when deploying sites. Now most of those are
ironed out on the dev machine.

Why not use Linux and cut to the chase? I prefer to use GUI editors and
have relatively standard document processing tools available.

Hey, and in case nobody else noticed, 37s is predominently a Mac shop.

Craig W. wrote:
> the whole discussion is absurd. Viruses aren't a problem if you keep AV
> software on your machine and don't run as administrator. Macintosh users
> futz with their machines as much as Windows users do. They both have
> their strengths and weaknesses. There's no doubt that anyone could use
> either.
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 09:42
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:12 PM, Steve R. wrote:

> Hey, and in case nobody else noticed, 37s is predominently a Mac shop.

And, would rather hire Macintosh users than Windows users.

http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000433.html
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/...
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/...

--
-- Tom M.
Joe (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 09:59
Steve R. wrote:
> My reason for getting a Mac in the first place is that I need it for
> Photoshop. Well, times have changed, Photoshop has changed, and Windows
> have changed. But I still like the Mac. Why I use a Mac for development
> is that Windows and *nix are so dissimilar that I always ran into
> configuration nightmares when deploying sites. Now most of those are
> ironed out on the dev machine.
>
> Why not use Linux and cut to the chase? I prefer to use GUI editors and
> have relatively standard document processing tools available.
>
> Hey, and in case nobody else noticed, 37s is predominently a Mac shop.

I do dev on Windows and serve on Linux. Haven't had any significant
problems transferring between the two. Sometimes there's the CRLF/LF
thing. I used to set up a web server and database on Windows, but don't
bother anymore. Setting up PostgreSQL pre 8.x under cygwin on Windows
was much more involved. Now I just remote FTP/SVN edit files on the
server, and use a duplicate dev database if desired.

I'm not evangelizing Windows and Linux here, nor looking down on Macs.
What I've heard time and again about Macs is "It Just Works.", while
with Windows and Linux it can take significant time installing and
configuring to get them to where you want. Packages like
gunwin/unixutils make Windows vastly more useful. I may eventually get a
Mac, but at this point I just don't think the bang for the buck is
there, compared to my current setups. I sort of think that good coders
can still be fairly productive and produce good code on dumb terminals
using vi. ;P

BTW, does anybody use Macs as actual production servers? I don't recall
ever hearing of anybody.

Joe
Joe (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 10:12
Tom M. wrote:
> On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:12 PM, Steve R. wrote:
>
>> Hey, and in case nobody else noticed, 37s is predominently a Mac shop.
>
> And, would rather hire Macintosh users than Windows users.
>
> http://www.loudthinking.com/arc/000433.html
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/...
> http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.ruby/msg/...
>
> --
> -- Tom M.

I don't follow this statement:

"On the other hand, if you want to work with open source technologies
like the Rails stack of Apache/lighttpd, MySQL/PostgreSQL, Ruby/Rails,
etc, I find a strong disconnect with doing so from Windows. It's just
not a natural fit neither from a technological, cultural, or political
perspective. Actively pursuing or celebrating this unnatural fit raises
a red flag for me."

Come on, Macs, OSX, and its programs (like TextMate) are CLOSED source.
What connection is there to open source, besides OSX's FreeBSD heritage?

Joe
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 10:45
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:59 PM, Joe wrote:

> BTW, does anybody use Macs as actual production servers? I don't
> recall
> ever hearing of anybody.

I do, but not for a Rails app yet.

I'm currently rewriting an existing Perl website in Rails,
and will deploy on OS X.

Reasons:

   1) Lack of security issues.
   2) Code developed in Objective-C.
   3) Future requirement for QuickTime.

--
-- Tom M.
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 10:48
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 28, 2006, at 12:12 AM, Joe wrote:

> "On the other hand, if you want to work with open source technologies
> like the Rails stack of Apache/lighttpd, MySQL/PostgreSQL, Ruby/Rails,
> etc, I find a strong disconnect with doing so from Windows. It's just
> not a natural fit neither from a technological, cultural, or political
> perspective. Actively pursuing or celebrating this unnatural fit
> raises
> a red flag for me."
>
> Come on, Macs, OSX, and its programs (like TextMate) are CLOSED
> source.

I think he means that those technologies emanated from Unix systems, are
developed first and foremost on and for Unix systems, and that Mac OS
X is
first and foremost a Unix system.

> What connection is there to open source, besides OSX's FreeBSD
> heritage?

1) Macintosh OS X ships with Apache/Ruby preinstalled (and MySQL on
Server)
2) That's a *lot* of heritage. :-)

Your point is well taken, but seriously, Mac OS X ships with a *lot*
more
open software and tools than Windows does...

--
-- Tom M.
Dean M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 11:36
(Received via mailing list)
> Come on, Macs, OSX, and its programs (like TextMate) are CLOSED source. What connection 
is there to open source, besides OSX's FreeBSD heritage?

There's quite a few OSS projects developed by Apple... here's a complete
list:
developer.apple.com/darwin/projects
Bruce B. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 18:02
(Received via mailing list)
I use macs for production servers running rails apps.  Why not?  Not
that I am famous or anything, does my answer still count?

bruce
Greg (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 19:12
(Received via mailing list)
Bingo.  That's *all* I was asking.  Just curious.  I already knew some
reasons for those to choose Macs and in this thread learned some other
reasons as well as some things about the RoR community (good and bad).

Greg
Craig W. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 20:17
(Received via mailing list)
Your answer counts but Macintosh is known to perform terribly as a db
server.

http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436&p=6

there are many other similar comparisons/discussions on the net.

don't use a Macintosh OSX server if performance counts.

Craig
Ezra Z. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 21:45
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 27, 2006, at 11:59 PM, Joe wrote:

>> Why not use Linux and cut to the chase? I prefer to use GUI
> bother anymore. Setting up PostgreSQL pre 8.x under cygwin on Windows
> there, compared to my current setups. I sort of think that good coders
> can still be fairly productive and produce good code on dumb terminals
> using vi. ;P
>
> BTW, does anybody use Macs as actual production servers? I don't
> recall
> ever hearing of anybody.
>
> Joe
>

Joe-

	My biggest rails project to date runs on a dual g5 apple xserve with
Tiger server. It runs great and serves 70,000+ dynamic page views/day
without breaking a sweat. http://yakimaherald.com. I also run
numerous debian servers with rails apps on them and it is a great
platform for rails as well. Just the fact that OSX has unix at its
heart but has the commercial apps I need like photoshop, flash et all
is a good reason to use macs. The bang for the buck of raw power
might not be there compared to normal whitebox x86 hardware but the
productivity I get on my osx dev and production machines is very
nice. It really isn't that different running a rails app under lighty
on OSX or debian , I do most of the stuff from the cli anyways. But I
do all my dev on OSX not because of viruses or anything like that,
just because it is a very nice gui environment with textmate and
other nice commercial apps and it has unix at its core. I spend a ton
of my time in the cli and have many linux boxes around as well but
the mac is a great combination of things for me that adds up to a
great experience where I can be more productive then with any other
environment I have tried. And I have tried them all.

	Windows has gotten much better but it is undeniably bloated and
doesn't offer me any advantages over linux or osx so I dont use it at
all except to test my apps in windows browsers.

	YMMV

Cheers-

-Ezra Z.
WebMaster
Yakima Herald-Republic Newspaper
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
509-577-7732
Joe (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 22:05
Tom M. wrote:
>> What connection is there to open source, besides OSX's FreeBSD
>> heritage?
>
> 1) Macintosh OS X ships with Apache/Ruby preinstalled (and MySQL on
> Server)
> 2) That's a *lot* of heritage. :-)
>
> Your point is well taken, but seriously, Mac OS X ships with a *lot*
> more
> open software and tools than Windows does...
>
> --
> -- Tom M.

That certainly seems to be true, and it seems to have all the latest and
greatest, all ready to go, with a highly-polished window environment on
top. Windows straight out of the box is next to useless. And Linux can
take a great deal of configuring; drivers and supported hardware still
seem to be quite a problem; its dearth of commercial apps; and its
desktop is a far cry from OSX (and even Windows IMO).

What's a good used Mac notebook to buy for those of us who have other
things to spend $2000-$2500 (for the latest and greatest) on? Something
with at least 13-14 inches of screen.

Joe
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 22:18
(Received via mailing list)
1) That article speaks to MySQL performance, and I don't use MySQL.

2) The issue has to do with how OS X syncs data to disk, and there
    has been quite a bit of discussion, mostly fruitless and over
    heated, about who does it "right" and such. That article, in
    particular, took quite a lot of heat for misidentifying the cause
    of the performance problem was being slow thread creation. Notice
    that I have not suggested that OS X is a leading performer.

3) Choosing a platform based solely on performance could easily be
    considered a premature optimization. When the site threatens to
    go under due to DB performance, it will be very easy to move it
    to another system, or upgrade the Macintosh.

4) As I mentioned, the site contains elements written in Objective-C.
    Performance comparisons are pointless when your software must be
    served from a particular OS for non-performance reasons.

5) As Ezra pointed out specifically, the performance "issue" is a
    purely relative issue, and few sites will *ever* reach traffic
    levels that will saturate a modern Macintosh running OS X. See
    point #3 above.

6) A site that is remotely rooted on any platform performs far
    below OS X during the time it takes to reconstitute the site
    in a secure fashion. I don't care if it's obscurity, technical
    majesty, or an act of God, but OS X has never been remotely
    rooted (unless perhaps through a security issue in the
    application it's serving, but that wouldn't count, would it?).

P.S. I *absolutely* adore FreeBSD (and friends) and Linux and on
      Intel boxes.

--
-- Tom M.
Craig W. (Guest)
on 2006-01-28 23:09
(Received via mailing list)
There really isn't much purpose to an extended platform debate on this
list and I hate to prolong it. This wasn't my testing and I only linked
it to point out that their are some respected opinions that have
performed tests and made conclusions that are worthy of consideration.

The issue of MySQL was that for testing. If you read through the entire
article, they point out that the problem is endemic to OSX because of
their problems with threading which if true, performance issues would
extend to PostgreSQL etc.

for example...http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436&p=9

"The server performance of the Apple platform is, however,
catastrophic."

You can't sugar coat their conclusion...

I am not technically capable of repeating their testing or evaluating
their methodology or conclusions but it does track with reports that I
have seen from others who have moved off Mac OSX servers that faltered
under load.

Of course Macintosh OSX Server works and is usable and is a viable
option, but considering Anandtech's evaluations that under load from 5
simultaneous clients, it will perform much slower than other servers,
it's probably advisable to use another platform.

Craig
Phillip H. (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 00:39
(Received via mailing list)
On 28/01/2006, at 11:42 AM, Greg wrote:

> My first computer was a Mac (SE30) but it was also my last so I am not
> without appreciation of  Apples wonderful aptitude for design.
> Without
> starting a flame-fest why do so many ruby and rails developers use
> a Mac ?
> It seems to be a commonality within the ruby and RoR community.
> Especially
> laptops.  The first ruby users group meeting I attended was about
> 50% Macs
> (or so it seemed to me - I didn't do a formal poll or anything).

Since this thread seems to be on the verge of degenerating in to a
flame war I'll inject my opinions ;)

Because.
I have to use the machine for 8-12 hours each day, otherwise I won't
get paid. I want a machine that fits me, something that conforms to
what I want, something that Just Works. I've never found this with
Windows, I found it with OS X, and that was that.

I deploy to Linux, but that's because I can get cheap deals. I'd
deploy to OS X just because I like the platform.

--
Phillip H.
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
http://www.sitharus.com/
Sean S. (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 03:56
I read somewhere that *all* of the core Rails team uses TextMate on OS
X.  Not 100% sure if that's true or not but if so I think it makes
sense.  I like Rails because it's very powerful and elegant and doesn't
get in my way.  I like OS X for exactly the same reasons.  I wonder if
the Rails team makes the same comparison?

Here's an interesting snippet from the Rails blog:  First some guy
weighs in on news that a new user manual was released for TextMate.
Look who responded to him.

-----

Louis said 1 day later:
Iâ??m planning on reading this over the holidays to convince me to buy a
Mac â?? just for TextMate. Of course, my life would be so much simpler if
youâ??d just release a Windows version â?? or work with another programmer
to do it, or something. Iâ??m going crazy here without it. _Sigh_s with
longing.

David Heinemeier H. said 1 day later:
Louis, consider TextMate the tip of the iceberg. Once youâ??ve switch
over, itâ??s just one of the many wonderful aspects of OS X. Youâ??ll thank
Allan not so much for TextMate as for making you do the switch ;)

-----
Mark H. (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 06:13
Reasons I use a Mac for RoR development:

1. Security.  ie: no virus's.
2. Less evil than that Redmond company
3. Textmate
4. BSD core
5. Macs are cool, PC are boring little boxes.
Guest (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 06:51
Joe wrote:
> BTW, does anybody use Macs as actual production servers? I don't recall
> ever hearing of anybody.
>
> Joe

For the same reason no one buys a Gucci bag to store old newspapers in.
With a Mac, you're spending a lot of money on the culture and "hip"-ness
of owning a Mac.  If all you really want to do is run a server that no
one will see, there's no reason to spend 2x for the same hardware.

   Jake
Paul R. (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 14:10
(Received via mailing list)
On 29 Jan 2006, at 04:51, Guest wrote:

> For the same reason no one buys a Gucci bag to store old newspapers
> in.
> With a Mac, you're spending a lot of money on the culture and "hip"-
> ness
> of owning a Mac.  If all you really want to do is run a server that no
> one will see, there's no reason to spend 2x for the same hardware.

I infamously (within the FreeBSD community at least) wrote this:

http://tinyurl.com/8mklk

just two months before ordering my iBook which I am writing this on.
If you can't beat them, join them. Bizzarely, because I was working
at UK University at the time, the reason I went with the iBook was
because it was the cheapest 12" laptop I could get with integrate
WiFi, Bluetooth and a decent chunk of RAM and HDD space - with
educational discount it was £400 cheaper than the nearest similar
specification intel based machine.

As laptops go, I miss my ultralight Thinkpad (it was an old 240, one
of the best little laptops I ever owned), but I like the fact that I
have Unix under the hood without Cygwin (uugggghhh!) or being forced
into spending hours configuring X and struggling to work with KDE
instead. OS X has seemed to hit a sweet spot, and I expect once
they've worked out how to get Windows and FreeBSD booting on the
intel Apple kit, all my hardware will move over 100% to Apple
hardware on the desktop side. I'll stick with HP and Dell for servers
though. I probably spend 80% of my time on OS X now.

As for the apps and development environment, I'm finding apps now
that I can only use here that are genuinely useful. I do miss some
Windows apps, but not enough to make me want to switch back - it
would be nice to have them available however. In general, I'm pretty
happy with where I am now.

That said, my install is rather customised and I've had to turn a lot
of stuff off (the dock, bouncing icons, improve the keyboard
shortcuts, etc.) and it is rather slow on my 1.2Ghz G4 which is
annoying. Later today I think I might attempt a reinstall to try and
get some performance back.

Anyway, if you ever want to flame an Apple user, I hope my above
example provides ample inspiration or even a template for how it is
done...

If I were advising somebody thinking about moving to the kit now, I'd
say "Wait for 6 months, pick up what comes next". Hope that helps.

--
Paul R._______________________________________________
Rails mailing list
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
Guest (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 18:10
Paul R. wrote:
> Anyway, if you ever want to flame an Apple user, I hope my above
> example provides ample inspiration or even a template for how it is
> done...
>
> If I were advising somebody thinking about moving to the kit now, I'd
> say "Wait for 6 months, pick up what comes next". Hope that helps.

I think you misunderstood my remark.  I was answering why Apple hardware
isn't so often used as servers.  Servers generally don't need fancy
GUIs.  Servers aren't seen in coffee shops.  Servers don't need fancy
graphics or have to power 30" displays.  Servers need to do their job,
only their job, and do it well.

I understand why people own Mac hardware (I have a mini).  It's really
nice stuff and I like the OS (except for the fact that the fonts are bad
and need 50% more real estate than my Windows box to be usable).

While the OS is solid enough to run as a server (it's BSD, afterall),
there's just no reason to pay for the OS or pay for the fancy brushed
aluminum cases and glowing Apple logo -- when it is going into a server.

   Jake
Peter De Berdt (Guest)
on 2006-01-29 20:07
(Received via mailing list)
> As laptops go, I miss my ultralight Thinkpad (it was an old 240,
> one of the best little laptops I ever owned), but I like the fact
> that I have Unix under the hood without Cygwin (uugggghhh!) or
> being forced into spending hours configuring X and struggling to
> work with KDE instead. OS X has seemed to hit a sweet spot, and I
> expect once they've worked out how to get Windows and FreeBSD
> booting on the intel Apple kit, all my hardware will move over 100%
> to Apple hardware on the desktop side. I'll stick with HP and Dell
> for servers though. I probably spend 80% of my time on OS X now.

Yeah, well, if you're a whizkid and can get OS X running on a MacTel,
you'll get it for free (and can even buy you another two MacBooks),
the contest is at $8000 for the moment.

http://winxponmac.com/The%20Contest.html

Best regards

Peter De Berdt
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-01-30 09:43
(Received via mailing list)
On Jan 28, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Joe wrote:

> What's a good used Mac notebook to buy for those of us who have other
> things to spend $2000-$2500 (for the latest and greatest) on?
> Something
> with at least 13-14 inches of screen.

iBook G4

--
-- Tom M.
Dylan S. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 20:58
(Received via mailing list)
>
> Louis, consider TextMate the tip of the iceberg. Once you've switch
> over, it's just one of the many wonderful aspects of OS X. You'll thank
> Allan not so much for TextMate as for making you do the switch ;)
>
> -----
>


Soooooo... Apple is eventually going to buy Ruby and Rails, close it's
source, and require it's run on OSX.
I know this would never happen... but c'mon people... do you not see the
eminent world domination of Apple !?

Keep it freeeeeeeeeee !
Bob S. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 21:13
(Received via mailing list)
I just ordered a new MacBook Pro with a 30" monitor. First mac ever for
me.



My logic is this: I first learned of Ruby 2 years ago and ignored it
because
PHP was working just fine for me and now that I've made an effort to
look at
Ruby, I feel like a smuck for not doing it back then.



Same thing applies to this purchase, how will I know if I'm missing out
on
something better, just because my current PC works fine, if I don't
actually
give it a try.



My blog dives a little deeper on the subject but I will have to try real
hard to have an open mind about the Mac since I've "hated" it for so
long.
That and my wife would kill me for spending so much and then not using
it.



Bob

http://www.railtie.net/





PS: Does this mean I can apply for a job at 37signals now?





  _____

From: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
[mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid] On Behalf Of Dylan S.
Sent: Wednesday, February 01, 2006 10:56 AM
To: removed_email_address@domain.invalid
Subject: Re: [Rails] Re: Re: Why Macs instead of AMD or Intel ? Just
curious



I read somewhere that *all* of the core Rails team uses TextMate on OS
X.  Not 100% sure if that's true or not but if so I think it makes
sense.  I like Rails because it's very powerful and elegant and doesn't
get in my way.  I like OS X for exactly the same reasons.  I wonder if
the Rails team makes the same comparison?

Here's an interesting snippet from the Rails blog:  First some guy
weighs in on news that a new user manual was released for TextMate.
Look who responded to him.

-----

Louis said 1 day later:
I'm planning on reading this over the holidays to convince me to buy a
Mac - just for TextMate. Of course, my life would be so much simpler if
you'd just release a Windows version - or work with another programmer
to do it, or something. I'm going crazy here without it. _Sigh_s with
longing.

David Heinemeier H. said 1 day later:
Louis, consider TextMate the tip of the iceberg. Once you've switch
over, it's just one of the many wonderful aspects of OS X. You'll thank
Allan not so much for TextMate as for making you do the switch ;)

-----



Soooooo... Apple is eventually going to buy Ruby and Rails, close it's
source, and require it's run on OSX.
I know this would never happen... but c'mon people... do you not see the
eminent world domination of Apple !?

Keep it freeeeeeeeeee !





On 1/29/06, Peter De Berdt <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:

> As laptops go, I miss my ultralight Thinkpad (it was an old 240,
> one of the best little laptops I ever owned), but I like the fact
> that I have Unix under the hood without Cygwin (uugggghhh!) or
> being forced into spending hours configuring X and struggling to
> work with KDE instead. OS X has seemed to hit a sweet spot, and I
> expect once they've worked out how to get Windows and FreeBSD
> booting on the intel Apple kit, all my hardware will move over 100%
> to Apple hardware on the desktop side. I'll stick with HP and Dell
> for servers though. I probably spend 80% of my time on OS X now.

Yeah, well, if you're a whizkid and can get OS X running on a MacTel,
you'll get it for free (and can even buy you another two MacBooks),
the contest is at $8000 for the moment.

http://winxponmac.com/The%20Contest.html

Best regards

Peter De Berdt

_______________________________________________
Rails mailing list
removed_email_address@domain.invalid
http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
James L. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 21:28
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/1/06, Dylan S. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> > I read somewhere that *all* of the core Rails team uses TextMate on OS
> > X.  Not 100% sure if that's true or not but if so I think it makes
> > sense.  I like Rails because it's very powerful and elegant and doesn't
> > get in my way.  I like OS X for exactly the same reasons.  I wonder if
> > the Rails team makes the same comparison?

OK.  I now officially hate this thread.  I've been looking for a new
laptop and thought that I had made a decision.  Now I have to evaluate
the Apple products more closely.

Being lazy, I'll ask a couple of basic questions.  Here's your chance
to play salesman and swing me back into the Mac world, having left it
years ago for Windows / Linux.

1. Just how awesome is TextMate?  I generally use vi, jEdit, or
Eclipse / Radrails.  I really like the perspective-view aspect of
Eclipse, where I can very quickly find and switch between various
files and resources.

2. Are there any problems I should be aware of regarding support for a
standard two-button + wheel mouse?  There's not a chance that I'm
going back to a one-button mouse.

Convince me please.

-- James
Mikkel B. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 21:46
>
> 1. Just how awesome is TextMate?  I generally use vi, jEdit, or
> Eclipse / Radrails.  I really like the perspective-view aspect of
> Eclipse, where I can very quickly find and switch between various
> files and resources.
>
> 2. Are there any problems I should be aware of regarding support for a
> standard two-button + wheel mouse?  There's not a chance that I'm
> going back to a one-button mouse.
>
> Convince me please.
>
> -- James

1. it all depends...i use eclipse as my primary tool at work...doing
projects with probable 1000 classes or so...Eclipse make it very easy to
navigate, search throught the code...
However...textmate just feels so right...Its like writing your code
covering in thick cream and chocolate...

2. no problems...
Brasten S. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 21:50
(Received via mailing list)
James L. wrote:
> 1. Just how awesome is TextMate?  I generally use vi, jEdit, or
> Eclipse / Radrails.  I really like the perspective-view aspect of
> Eclipse, where I can very quickly find and switch between various
> files and resources.
>
>
TextMate is awesome in a minimalist sorta way.  Not that it doesn't have
a ton of features, I just discovered Command-T (file-switching) a couple
days ago.  Worst case scenario, fire up Eclipse on OS X.
> 2. Are there any problems I should be aware of regarding support for a
> standard two-button + wheel mouse?  There's not a chance that I'm
> going back to a one-button mouse.
>
None.  Multi-button mice on OS X gives you a ton of cool features too,
such at dashboard and expose from the mouse.  In fact, Apple now makes a
4-button mouse with a 360-degree scroll ball (Mighty Mouse).  That's
what I'm currently using.

Happy shopping!

-Brasten
David R. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 22:02
(Received via mailing list)
1. TextMate is a nice text editor, probably closest in feel to jEdit
in the list you gave. It's not a full-fledged IDE like Eclipse/
RadRails (nor does it pretend to be). On the other hand, it's not as
bare-metal as vi or emacs. I am functional in any of them -- TextMate
just happens to be the most comfortable for me right now.

I agree with an earlier post on this thread, though -- TextMate is
just the tip of the iceberg. The Mac OS isn't just about eye candy or
style (although it has those in spades) -- it's also an industrial-
strength OS that let's me work in the GUI if that's desirable, but it
also (crucially) lets me drop down to the command line whenever I
want. It has all of the power of a Un*x OS under the hood. Want to
log in to a remote box? Open a Terminal and ssh. Want to copy some
files to that remote box? Same Terminal - use ftp. Or sftp. Or scp.
Or rsync. There's no PuTTY, no dual-booting to Linux, no (shudder)
Cygwin to muck around with. It all just works.

2. I have used all manner of non-Apple mice with all of my Macs. No
problem. Ironically, the only one I refuse to use is Apple's own
Mighty Mouse. My latest is the Logitech V270 Bluetooth. Open the
package, insert the batteries, turn on the mouse, pair with my laptop
-- done. No muss, no fuss, no stretch marks. There's a sizable
instruction sheet and CD that come with the mouse. Both are worthless
(because they're unnecessary) for Mac users. Windows users, on the
other hand, have some serious hoops to jump through.

Wanna know why I bought my Powerbook? When I close the lid -- it
sleeps. When I open the lid -- it wakes up, within a couple seconds.
And when it wakes up -- it resumes whatever it was doing when I put
it to sleep. Downloading a file? Resumed. Building an XCode project?
Resumed. It just works.
John D. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 22:20
(Received via mailing list)
Brasten S. wrote:
> days ago.  Worst case scenario, fire up Eclipse on OS X.

Looks like Intel Macs don't run eclipse yet.  Supposed to be fixed in
Eclipse 3.2.

https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=98889

John
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 22:44
(Received via mailing list)
My Apple is better than your orange!

j/k -- been years since I last saw this debate and I never thought I'd
see it here. but, fwiw, I'm on the edge but massively paranoid. I've
always been a Mac guy, but lately I've been a Mac guy who ran Windows
because Steve Jobs did too many unpleasant things to my hindmost
orifice. I'm waiting to see what he does to you all, and whether
you'll still be able to walk afterwards, before I make any drastic
leaps. that being said I think the current direction of the company is
the coolest yet, and I can't wait until some plucky hacker makes it
possible for me to run OS X on any damn hardware I want.

On 2/1/06, John D. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> Rails mailing list
> removed_email_address@domain.invalid
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Giles Goat Boy

http://gilesmakesmusic.blogspot.com
http://gileswritescode.blogspot.com
Joe (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 22:50
Giles B. wrote:
> Steve Jobs did too many unpleasant things to my hindmost
> orifice.

Like what?

> I can't wait until some plucky hacker makes it
> possible for me to run OS X on any damn hardware I want.

Amen to that!

Joe
Scott (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 23:10
IMOH the OS is just a tool.  Which one you use depends on your mind set,
skill set, how much bit twiddling you really want to do and what's
available.  Personally, I'm agnostic and use what's available.  But when
given a choice I'll usually go with the OS I know better.

In my experience I've found that OS bigots can rarely quantify how
exactly their OS is better than any other.  The argument always boils
down to "It's what I know".

The other thing I've noticed in this business is that if you don't
specialize your chance of becoming extinct is a lot less.  After all,
how many Pascal positions do you see in the classified  adds? (Monster
for you kids)

So the $0.02 worth of advice from the wayback machine is;  The more you
know the more your worth.  That includes how to use multiple OS's.
Tom M. (Guest)
on 2006-02-01 23:21
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 1, 2006, at 11:28 AM, James L. wrote:

> Convince me please.

You're going to be so happy.

As soon as you say what you said above, it's
already over! You know you want it, just go
for it.

You sound like a impatient young woman urging
her timid young boyfriend along... :-)

--
-- Tom M.
Doug H. (Guest)
on 2006-02-02 05:43
(Received via mailing list)
On 1/28/06, Sean S. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> I read somewhere that *all* of the core Rails team uses TextMate on OS
> X.  Not 100% sure if that's true or not but if so I think it makes
> sense.


It's true. Right from the source: <http://www.rubyonrails.org/down>

See the "Editors" section at the bottom of the page.

The problem I have is that recently, I've been touting "open source" so
much, that I might find it difficult to presuade my boss that it's worth
the
â?¬37. Perhaps proprietary software isn't all bad. (As long as I can save
in
UTF-8.)

;-)

Doug
Doug H. (Guest)
on 2006-02-02 06:08
(Received via mailing list)
On 2/1/06, James L. <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
> 1. Just how awesome is TextMate?  I generally use vi, jEdit, or
> Eclipse / Radrails.  I really like the perspective-view aspect of
> Eclipse, where I can very quickly find and switch between various
> files and resources.


I  first thought, "Hey, I have BBEdit. It can't REALLY be much better
than
that." I'm currently six days into my TextMate 30-day trial, and my
officemate has heard me say "Holy crap!", "Wow, that's cool!" or "YES!
It
CAN do that!" so many times, he's throwing stray office supplies over
the
cubicle wall at me. It's THAT great. BBEdit is second-class next to this
-
for coding/scripting. BBEdit might have a few more features overall, but
none that I've needed for RoR or (r)html. I feel like a kid at Christmas
time.

2. Are there any problems I should be aware of regarding support for a
> standard two-button + wheel mouse?  There's not a chance that I'm
> going back to a one-button mouse.


Nope. No problems. Buy the standard USB mouse of your choice and plug it
in.
If it doesn't work (and I just know it will) buy a utility called "USB
Overdrive" for cheap and forget it. Buy a Mac. You won't regret it.

Doug
matthew clark (Guest)
on 2006-02-02 08:21
(Received via mailing list)
I'll wade in here.  I've been on Ubuntu for 1.5 years, linux for near 5.
On
Monday I had a new job, and a new Intel mac.   After two days, my
feelings
are mixed towards the Mac.  I can clearly see the "wow factor" goodies
that
non-developers point to as reasons that Macs are better, and yes, the
gui is
nice if you like nice fade effects on windows and icons that bounce
around.

But, what really matters?  How easy is it to get Rails up and going on
Tiger
on an Intel Mac?  How easy is it to get sqlite running?  mysql?
lighttpd?

Truth is, not so easy.  To make a long story short, you have to identify
and
install a bunch of dependencies on your own.  Fink and apt are
hopelessly
broken on the Intel machine.  Ports would be better, but it needs rsync,
which doesn't work.  Others may take issue with this, but as a Mac
newbie, I
was lost.

All of those dependencies have their own idea of what is a good bin
directory, so plan on exporting your path a lot. (If you don't know what
that means, good luck)
/sw/bin:/opt/bin::/opt/local/bin:/usr/local/share/bin -- I'm not making
this
stuff up.

Yes, we are developers, and we can figure all of this stuff out, so
maybe it
is worth it because the GUI is so intuitive.  I like the Mac system I
have
now, seeing that it is usable, and you will too.  Although, with a new
job
that has heavy demands, things get fudged and quirks get compensated
for.  I
still don't have sqlite.  Someday I'll get to it and get it working.
Until
then, I'll work around it.  Living like that though, is not living with
an
"easier to use" OS.  So, like I say, my feelings are mixed.  Tiger is
very
user friendly, and for email, IM, office tasks, etc..., it beats any
LInux
,hands down.  But, comming from LInux, wanting to do programmer type
things,
Linux is more predictable, less tweaked, and makes installing things
like
Rails and sqlite much simpler.

matt
Jim F. (Guest)
on 2006-02-02 09:18
(Received via mailing list)
On Feb 2, 2006, at 12:20 AM, matthew clark wrote:
>
> Truth is, not so easy.  To make a long story short, you have to
> identify and install a bunch of dependencies on your own.  Fink and
> apt are hopelessly broken on the Intel machine.  Ports would be
> better, but it needs rsync, which doesn't work.  Others may take
> issue with this, but as a Mac newbie, I was lost.

Well there's your problem. ;)    Just kidding.
Have you tried darwinports. I think you will find it much better. I
left fink years ago, won't go back.

However, you have been given a double whammy. New to Mac and everyone
else is new to Intel on Mac.
It may take some time to work through the transition pains.


Jim F.
Alain R. (Guest)
on 2006-02-02 09:46
(Received via mailing list)
matthew
    > But, what really matters?  How easy is it to get Rails up and
going on
    > Tiger on an Intel Mac?  How easy is it to get sqlite running?
mysql?
    > lighttpd?

As easy as downloading Locomotive:
     locomotive.sourceforge.net/

Alain
Giles B. (Guest)
on 2006-02-07 01:13
(Received via mailing list)
Like discontinuing support for third-party hardware developers like
Power Computing, like the way you had to buy all new apps to move to
Tiger, etc.

Have to echo the sentiment that choosing sides in an OS battle makes
you the weak kind of specialist. (Strong specialist knows the
technology inside out, weak specialist just hides from any other
version than the version they feel safe with, etc.)

I hope Apple has the good sense to realize that adopting the most
hackable OS architecture and the most hackable hardware architecture
equals being hacker-friendly. I'm once bitten twice shy with them, but
I have to admit, I borrowed a new Powerbook from work a while back and
absolutely loved it.

On 2/1/06, Joe <removed_email_address@domain.invalid> wrote:
>
> Joe
>
> --
> Posted via http://www.ruby-forum.com/.
> _______________________________________________
> Rails mailing list
> removed_email_address@domain.invalid
> http://lists.rubyonrails.org/mailman/listinfo/rails
>


--
Giles Goat Boy

http://gilesmakesmusic.blogspot.com
http://gileswritescode.blogspot.com
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.