12 ms·

OS X is a fully POSIX compliant operating system (as opposed to Linux, which is not fully compliant). It is officially branded as Unix. I don't understand what

OS X is a fully POSIX compliant operating system (as opposed to Linux, which is not fully compliant). It is officially branded as Unix. I don't understand what you mean?

whatusername 16y ago
Aside from OSX -- I wonder how many people on HN actually have much dealings with a real UNIX (a Solaris or AIX etc). I would hazard a guess that *nix means Linux to a large % of the population.
rmc 16y ago
POSIX is irrelevant, Linux is POSIX compliant, no-ones bothered to pay the money for the piece of paper the important thing is the tools. The main thing lacking from OSX is a package manager, in Linux its build in. On OSX you have to use 3rd party ones. Just look at mark pilgrims 'how to install mysql on ubuntu' for an example of how It Just Works on Linux and on OSX you have to tweak lots of config files.
- scott_s 16y ago
  Then your complaint is not "It's not Unix." It's really "It's not Linux."
- mapgrep 16y ago
  There is no package manager built into Linux. There are a variety package managers to choose from on Linux (apt, yum, portage) just as on Mac OS X (which has MacPorts, Homebrew, and Fink). Perhaps you are thinking of apt, a popular, slick, "best of breed" package manager that is native on exactly one of the many Linux distributions: Debian. It is technically "third party," though "built in," on other Linux distributions like Ubuntu, which is based on Debian but not the same thing as Debian. Anyway, packaging is a mess on both Linux and OS X. Even on Ubuntu and Debian you have to go outside the built in packager for a truly good experience in certain cases, e.g. Ruby via rvm; Rails and other ruby packages via gem; Perl modules via CPAN, etc. Yes, OS X would be better with a package manager other than the one built into the App Store, but a lack of one does not make it Not Unix.
  - rmc 16y ago
    Balls to semantics! :) If you install Linux on your machine, you get a distro and you get a package manager. It's not third party to your OS it comes with you OS, your OS is installed with it, you OS is upgraded with the package manager. You only need to use the package manager that comes with your OS (i have never had to use yum while on a debian os). None is true on OSX. The OSX package managers are not as good as apt (the one package manager I have a lot of experience), in the same way Nextstep is not as good as OSX. The fact that you need to have more than one installed and use for different software (my experience working with fink afnd macports in OSX tiger days) shows that its not as good as apt
    - blasdel 16y ago
      Fink is apt, and it is by far the worst of the three package managers available for OS X.

OS X is a fully POSIX compliant operating system (as opposed to Linux, which is not fully compliant). It is officially branded as Unix. I don't understand what you mean?

whatusername 16y ago

Aside from OSX -- I wonder how many people on HN actually have much dealings with a real UNIX (a Solaris or AIX etc). I would hazard a guess that *nix means Linux to a large % of the population.

rmc 16y ago

POSIX is irrelevant, Linux is POSIX compliant, no-ones bothered to pay the money for the piece of paper the important thing is the tools. The main thing lacking from OSX is a package manager, in Linux its build in. On OSX you have to use 3rd party ones. Just look at mark pilgrims 'how to install mysql on ubuntu' for an example of how It Just Works on Linux and on OSX you have to tweak lots of config files.

scott_s 16y ago
Then your complaint is not "It's not Unix." It's really "It's not Linux."
mapgrep 16y ago
There is no package manager built into Linux. There are a variety package managers to choose from on Linux (apt, yum, portage) just as on Mac OS X (which has MacPorts, Homebrew, and Fink). Perhaps you are thinking of apt, a popular, slick, "best of breed" package manager that is native on exactly one of the many Linux distributions: Debian. It is technically "third party," though "built in," on other Linux distributions like Ubuntu, which is based on Debian but not the same thing as Debian. Anyway, packaging is a mess on both Linux and OS X. Even on Ubuntu and Debian you have to go outside the built in packager for a truly good experience in certain cases, e.g. Ruby via rvm; Rails and other ruby packages via gem; Perl modules via CPAN, etc. Yes, OS X would be better with a package manager other than the one built into the App Store, but a lack of one does not make it Not Unix.
- rmc 16y ago
  Balls to semantics! :) If you install Linux on your machine, you get a distro and you get a package manager. It's not third party to your OS it comes with you OS, your OS is installed with it, you OS is upgraded with the package manager. You only need to use the package manager that comes with your OS (i have never had to use yum while on a debian os). None is true on OSX. The OSX package managers are not as good as apt (the one package manager I have a lot of experience), in the same way Nextstep is not as good as OSX. The fact that you need to have more than one installed and use for different software (my experience working with fink afnd macports in OSX tiger days) shows that its not as good as apt
  - blasdel 16y ago
    Fink is apt, and it is by far the worst of the three package managers available for OS X.