Re: Apple X11 Beta 3
Re: Apple X11 Beta 3
- Subject: Re: Apple X11 Beta 3
- From: Dave Schroeder <email@hidden>
- Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2003 11:38:16 -0600
On Nov 8, 2003, at 10:52 AM, Jerry Callen wrote:
On Saturday, November 8, 2003, at 08:53 AM, Scott Thompson wrote:
X11 for Mac OS X had a successful beta program. Along the way Apple
learned where the
problems were and made improvements to both the OS and the X11
software to improve both.
When the software was ready they took down the beta software... just
like every other
software beta program in the universe. Why is that so surprising for
everyone?
Several reasons:
- The software in question is open source software. It's not at all
unusual in the
open source world for many, many back versions to be available.
Yes, the software, all based on Xfree86, is open source:
The Apple X11 1.0 source is available, and you can do with it what you
wish (within APSL guidelines):
http://developer.apple.com/darwin/projects/X11/
Xfree86 4.3.x supports Darwin/Mac OS X:
http://www.xfree86.org/
XDarwin supports Darwin/Mac OS X:
http://www.xdarwin.org/
Since it's all based on Xfree86, well, many, many back versions of
Xfree86 continue to be available.
X11.app, however, Apple's custom X server and window manager for Mac OS
X, is NOT open source. Apple never promised to release it for Jaguar,
and was never under any legal/moral/ethical obligation to do so.
- There's no real COST associated with leaving the beta around for
10.2.8 users. It's
just disk space and download bandwidth. No one expects support.
No one expects support? That's a good one! Leaving it around *always*
leaves some people expecting some kind of implicit support, even if it
explicitly states no support is available. And, it guarantees people
with 10.2.x having problems with it down the road (since it won't ever
be updated). Apple could care less about disk space and bandwidth. The
X11 0.3 package, being prerelease, beta software could have significant
defects that could have serious implications in the future, as is the
case with any software defined as "beta". The fact that it *may not*
have said defects - even if it's perfect, or currently serves someone's
purposes 100%, even just as a stopgap until they upgrade to Panther, is
irrelevant.
- That "successful beta program" happened because of feedback from
real-world users.
It's worth something to Apple to maintain good relations with those
users, and
removing the beta cuts against that.
You're essentially saying that beta participants should be "rewarded"
by Apple continuing to make available a beta software download that
will never again be updated, therefore being certain to cause serious
issues for people in the future who continue to use it, when they
should really be using X11 via another method. I repeat: XDarwin, etc.
Apple's trying to have their cake and eat it, too. On the one hand,
they are selling
non-open-source software (Quartz), and they want developers to target
that proprietary environment.
On the other hand, they heavy promote the fact that OS X is UNIX and
"offers a unique
combination of technical elements to the discerning geek" (their
words, not mine), including
"a complete X11R6.6 implementation corresponding to XFree86 4.3, the
same open source
project used for X11 on Linux, BSD,and other UNIX-based systems."
BS. This is EXACTLY what Open Source software is all about. There are
no restrictions for commercializing a product based on OSS in various
OSS licenses precisely because it's not prohibited. And it isn't even
frowned upon by sensible OSS proponents.
And you know what? You can STILL HAVE A "a complete X11R6.6
implementation corresponding to XFree86 4.3, the same open source
project used for X11 on Linux, BSD, and other UNIX-based systems." Just
go to http://www.xdarwin.org/ or roll your own.
For these reasons, this *isn't* just like every other software beta
program in the universe.
Yes it is. Because X11 for Mac OS X 1.0 is completely available, and
even builds on Jaguar, but X11.app is not. X11 for Mac OS X is *just
like* every other software beta program.
To suggest that Apple should have put in more work to support X11.app
on Jaguar is ludicrous.
No one's asking for more work. All they want is for the ALREADY
COMPLETED work to continue
to be made available, with the usual limitation on beta software: you
use it at your own
risk. That's all.
Apple is under no obligation whatsoever to do so. There is no reason to
make beta software continue to be available, especially when there are
several other ways to run X11 on Mac OS X.
Why not suggest that they put in the effort to make the X11 software
work with Mac OS 9.2.2
or System 6 for that matter?
Oh, come now - that's an absurd suggestion, and no one has asked for
that.
Yes, people have. And why not 10.1? The fact that a working beta was
already available for 10.2 is irrelevant. It was a BETA, and Apple was
under no obligation to ever do anything with it in the future, or
continue to make it available for any amount of time. The only
conditions that I would be comfortable with Apple continuing to make
Apple X11 available for Jaguar would be full support for the final
Apple X11 product on Jaguar. Would I love it if they did that? Sure I
would. But testing and qualification for the product on Jaguar would
take valuable, limited resources away from future versions, which I
frankly don't want.
This is a normal software development cycle, not some manipulistic
plot to force people
to upgrade to Panther.
I'm sorry, but that's EXACTLY what it is.
Nope, it's not. And even if it were, it's Apple's right to do so. It
developed a proprietary, non-open-source solution (X11.app) and is
under no obligation to make it available for any particular version of
any OS, or even to release it at all.
Of COURSE Apple wants people to move to Panther.
They wouldn't have released it if they didn't want people to buy it
and use it, and there
are some compelling reasons for users to WANT to upgrade. The argument
being made here is
that the decision to upgrade should be driven by the needs of the
particular user, not
by Apple marketing decisions. That's all.
OS X is a strange and wonderful hybrid of open source and proprietary
software,
and Apple's marketing really plays that up (see the quotes above). To
continue
to appeal to "the discerning geek", they will have to play by the
rules that
geeks expect, and that includes not pulling the rug (of older
versions) out from
under people.
No rug ever existed, and therefore wasn't pulled. If someone has 10.2.x
and wants to run X11, they can (XDarwin). If someone wants Apple to do
it for them for whatever reason, it's available (Panther).
C'mon, Apple - do the right thing here, and put the X11 Beta back for
OS X 10.2.8 users.
That's not the right thing to do, and they won't do it.
With all this talk about "geeks", why is it so hard for these "geeks"
to just get XDarwin, or Xfree86 4.3.x itself?
- Dave
_______________________________________________
x11-users mailing list | email@hidden
Help/Unsubscribe/Archives: http://www.lists.apple.com/mailman/listinfo/x11-users
X11 for Mac OS X FAQ: http://developer.apple.com/qa/qa2001/qa1232.html
Report issues, request features, feedback: http://developer.apple.com/bugreporter
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.