Running Fedora on a Mac Mini...
May 19, 2005 12:55 PM Subscribe
How to run Fedora Core 4 on a Mac Mini... RedHat's Colin Charles explains how to install the free Fedora next to Mac OS X Tiger on the inexpensive Mac Mini. Linux doesn't get much easier or stylish than this.
Ah the smokey smell of the ancient war...
I have a x86-based desktop and bought a PowerMac G4, anyway. Why? Because the damned thing Just Works.
If you're swinging your computational fortitude, by all means, go x86.
I don't want to spend another minute of my life coaxing "Bob's Awesome NIC" to work in Linux.
posted by elderling at 1:36 PM on May 19, 2005
I have a x86-based desktop and bought a PowerMac G4, anyway. Why? Because the damned thing Just Works.
If you're swinging your computational fortitude, by all means, go x86.
I don't want to spend another minute of my life coaxing "Bob's Awesome NIC" to work in Linux.
posted by elderling at 1:36 PM on May 19, 2005
I scrolled down one pageful on that first link, and as soon as I saw *one* screenshot I knew it was bad. On the installer screen, why is the bit you have to read in a stupidly narrow box requiring scrolling while the rest of the space is taken up with a spiffy logo?
If Linux doesn't get much more stylish than that, I'm glad OS X comes free with the Mac Mini.
posted by bonaldi at 4:40 PM on May 19, 2005
If Linux doesn't get much more stylish than that, I'm glad OS X comes free with the Mac Mini.
posted by bonaldi at 4:40 PM on May 19, 2005
I tried to "throw" Linux onto an old laptop the other day. The other day turned into a weekend. I thought - "I'm familiar with C - I should be able to handle Linux." Oh my.
Problem is - I couldn't get help from any of my friends who are also into computers - if you didn't jump onto the Linux bandwagon when it started, you've been left in the dust. They just made fun of me for not knowin' nothin. Which was frustrating and tends to happen alot with "those types." "Oh - you mean, you've never used Redhat? It's like, way totally intuitive man. Oh, well, jeez, I mean you should know how to ________, it's the same as in Windows. Well, sort of."
I just couldn't figure the damn thing out. The system made it on board - mostly - but installing software was like putting together Lucifer's jigsaw puzzle. Almost comically non-user-friendly.
Long story short - you can't "throw" Linux up on anything. It will eat up your damn life.
posted by Baby_Balrog at 7:16 PM on May 19, 2005
Problem is - I couldn't get help from any of my friends who are also into computers - if you didn't jump onto the Linux bandwagon when it started, you've been left in the dust. They just made fun of me for not knowin' nothin. Which was frustrating and tends to happen alot with "those types." "Oh - you mean, you've never used Redhat? It's like, way totally intuitive man. Oh, well, jeez, I mean you should know how to ________, it's the same as in Windows. Well, sort of."
I just couldn't figure the damn thing out. The system made it on board - mostly - but installing software was like putting together Lucifer's jigsaw puzzle. Almost comically non-user-friendly.
Long story short - you can't "throw" Linux up on anything. It will eat up your damn life.
posted by Baby_Balrog at 7:16 PM on May 19, 2005
Balrog, I'm sorry to hear that your "Alternative" Operating System experience was less than stellar.
Linux can be a challenge to install. You really have to be aware of the components of any given system prior to installing to ascertain wether it is worth your time and effort.
I've got VectorLinux SoHo 5.01 running on an HP Pavillion ze4560. Everything works fairly well, albeit the Radeon driver only provides for 2D acceleration. The Broadcom 802.11b/g wireless chipset plays well with the NDISwrapper.
The only thing that I cannot test is the MODEM as I have DSL through SE and no local phone service (SCREW YOU HELLSOUTH!!!!!!)
....Ahem. Where was I???
Yes.
As to why anyone would want to dual boot Fedora Core 4 and Mac OSX..... because it can be done, and with relatively little pain. Linux is "Just another damn OS". It's a choice. Just like the BSD's, SkyOS, Syllable, BEos, OS/2 Warp4, AmigaOS, TRON, yadda yadda yadda.
Just because they make a choice does not mean that you should do the same.
Kinda like why I got a Sun Blade 100 and installed OpenBSD....and Solaris.
Now THAT was time consuming. = /
Anyway, OSX is nice. Steve Jobs did some good after NeXT. However.....it is a system that I won't run.
I'm trying to get away from those two megalomaniacs. We all know who the other one is.
posted by PROD_TPSL at 7:52 PM on May 19, 2005
Linux can be a challenge to install. You really have to be aware of the components of any given system prior to installing to ascertain wether it is worth your time and effort.
I've got VectorLinux SoHo 5.01 running on an HP Pavillion ze4560. Everything works fairly well, albeit the Radeon driver only provides for 2D acceleration. The Broadcom 802.11b/g wireless chipset plays well with the NDISwrapper.
The only thing that I cannot test is the MODEM as I have DSL through SE and no local phone service (SCREW YOU HELLSOUTH!!!!!!)
....Ahem. Where was I???
Yes.
As to why anyone would want to dual boot Fedora Core 4 and Mac OSX..... because it can be done, and with relatively little pain. Linux is "Just another damn OS". It's a choice. Just like the BSD's, SkyOS, Syllable, BEos, OS/2 Warp4, AmigaOS, TRON, yadda yadda yadda.
Just because they make a choice does not mean that you should do the same.
Kinda like why I got a Sun Blade 100 and installed OpenBSD....and Solaris.
Now THAT was time consuming. = /
Anyway, OSX is nice. Steve Jobs did some good after NeXT. However.....it is a system that I won't run.
I'm trying to get away from those two megalomaniacs. We all know who the other one is.
posted by PROD_TPSL at 7:52 PM on May 19, 2005
Baby_Balrog - I'm with you there. I've got Linux running on a couple of servers (Slackware 10 and Red Hat 9), I've done the GUI or the command line only installs, and every time there's some little thing (or some big thing) that makes me grit my teeth and jump into the help files. They really, truly are written on a level that is far beyond a beginning Linux user. Half the help files I could find seemed to assume that I knew how to write a kernel from scratch just in case I needed to.
I do like how stable both systems are now that they are up and running, and I did learn quite a bit in the process of getting them going. I just don't think that Linux is going to be a big hit with a non-technical minded home user until they figure out that command line switches are beyond the understanding of the average person. People designing the Linux GUIs seem to never really try testing them out on a novice user, which is a really important thing to do if you're trying to attract new people to the OS. Basically, if my dad can't install it and use it without calling me every five minutes for help, he is not going to use it.
Windows and OSX, for all the megalomaniac tendencies, flaws, bugs, and sheer cost, have figured these things out.
posted by caution live frogs at 6:21 AM on May 20, 2005
I do like how stable both systems are now that they are up and running, and I did learn quite a bit in the process of getting them going. I just don't think that Linux is going to be a big hit with a non-technical minded home user until they figure out that command line switches are beyond the understanding of the average person. People designing the Linux GUIs seem to never really try testing them out on a novice user, which is a really important thing to do if you're trying to attract new people to the OS. Basically, if my dad can't install it and use it without calling me every five minutes for help, he is not going to use it.
Windows and OSX, for all the megalomaniac tendencies, flaws, bugs, and sheer cost, have figured these things out.
posted by caution live frogs at 6:21 AM on May 20, 2005
Baby_Balrog, I've had that experience as well.
poring through the online 'help' materials for LINUX is like asking for a nuclear wedgie.
I'm still curious, but not willing to sacrifice any of my perfectly functioning hardware to the Linux beast.
posted by Busithoth at 1:34 PM on May 21, 2005
poring through the online 'help' materials for LINUX is like asking for a nuclear wedgie.
I'm still curious, but not willing to sacrifice any of my perfectly functioning hardware to the Linux beast.
posted by Busithoth at 1:34 PM on May 21, 2005
The problem is, novice users would have a hard time installing Windows, too. But since they buy a box with an OS pre-installed, they don't have to. I've done Linux installs that were no harder than Windows installs, but installing OSes isn't something novice users ever do (or should ever need to do). On the other hand, if you hand someone a Linux box running Gnome or KDE and show them where the link is for FireFox and OpenOffice, they'd easily get as much use out of it as they would a typical Windows box. All Linux needs is vendors to provide nice out-of-the-box systems that are all configed up to work with the hardware included. But Microsoft has done a fine job of keeping that from happening, for the most part.
posted by wheat at 1:38 PM on May 21, 2005
posted by wheat at 1:38 PM on May 21, 2005
« Older Generals Offer Sober Outlook on Iraqi War | Only sing about it once in every twenty years... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
I think the words "Fuck WHAT?" leap to mind.
If you really want a linux box, for Ghugle's sake, you can get a lot more hardware for your money if you buy Wintel.
posted by eriko at 1:25 PM on May 19, 2005