Clone Wars.

Saturday 26 July, 2008

It was inevitable really — IBM PC clones built to run OS X, such as that built by pystar — and yet there is still a fundamental issue with this solution.

“Another company is preparing to sell Intel-based computers that can run Apple Inc.‘s Mac OS X. But unlike a Florida clone maker that’s been sued by Apple, Open Tech Inc. won’t pre-install the operating system on its machines.”

Yes, they can run OS X Leopard (or Tiger). Yes, it even gives a very similar, almost identical experience. But OS X alone doesn’t make a Mac.

Design Emporium.

It’s the sum of all parts, from large multi-touch track pads on the mac books through the specific selection of base hardware such as motherboard reference design and choice of components. Windows XP (and to a lesser extent) Vista, along with a number of UNIX-ish platforms such as Ubuntu or Fedora have tended to obfuscate compatibility and reliability in component choice over recent years.

Today, it is possible to select almost any type of processor and mate it with a compatible mainboard, some ram, a random graphics card and a hard-drive of some description and you’ll be able to run Windows at the very least, with just about any other Linux derivative also working right-out-of-the-box. But that’s really not how a macbook or mac pro are built.

Components and reference designs are often tuned to suit each other. Something that was done to quite some degree early on in the development of both IBM and HP (Compaq) hardware (as an example) a few years ago. If you supported such hardware seven-or-so years ago, it was not at all uncommon to see very non-standard hardware in use by all the big name brands. Sure, one paid more for it (sometimes a great deal more) but ultimately that resulted in a better, more reliable product.

Clones R Us.

Fast forward back-to-the-future, and most IBM clones are built from off-the-shelf hardware. IBM’s are now in fact built by Chinese giant Lenovo. Customised hardware is still used in the Server realm, but far less often in PC clones. They are no longer built to survive, but rather to suit a market that demands the absolutely-lowest-price. Reliability and compatibility are no longer major watch-words.

Today’s Macs do actually share a lot of similarities with their clone brethren. The same graphics cards, the same hard-drives.. even the same CPUs. The switch to Intel was always going to be a smart one as high levels of component production is assured. It was considered foolish by many so-called Mac experts, surely it would fail. That is obviously not the case, sales are soaring.

This very machine I wrote this article on, can run (and has) run OS X. Indeed a number of clones can. However after observing my partner use her Mac Book, and having the (all too brief) opportunity to use it myself, it’s clear they are not just an ordinary clone. They have been built under an entirely different design philosophy. Macs are built with select components rigorously tested to ensure optimal co-habitation and reliability. Just as brand name PC’s were, years ago.

The Art of War.

Ultimately then, the philosophies can be best expressed as follows: Mac’s empower. Clones duplicate.

And so, the Pystar or Open Tech might well run Mac OS X — and run it just fine — but they are not a Mac. They use non-authorised modified code to bypass operating system constraints that keep OS X Mac only. And that is seldom noted in the push to sell these products. Buying one of those systems means almost no support, on a platform that has an unsupported Operating System (despite what they tell you) that may cease to function at any time.

You are not buying a Mac clone. You are buying a PC clone that just happens to run OS X. It’s not a 1:1 copy, it’s just a cheap, hacked and broken facsimile. Before I used a mac book, I would have suggested that a hacked clone was “almost as good as the real thing”. They are not. There is a difference.

The claims by Pystar and Open Tech that these systems are legally able to run OS X is a joke. They use published hacks to bypass code in the OS X builds. I am no lawyer, but that is still a direct violation of the EULA [section F] which forbids reverse engineering (or tampering with) any code that is not already published under an Open Source licence.

“.. you may not copy,decompile, reverse engineer, disassemble, modify, or create derivative works of the Apple Software or any part thereof.”

That’s a legal view, of course, which is open to interpretation and potential legal challenge. But that really isn’t the point. That which makes a Mac stand out from every other PC clone is the entire package. From OS to hardware to support — a Mac is more than just the operating system it runs. It is the sum of it’s parts.

And that is something these cloners simply do not get. In turn, neither will their duped customers, who will continue to buy these systems under false belief.

Recovery Position.

Wednesday 02 July, 2008

Apple has built in disk duplication and Time Machine. Microsoft has msbackup and absolutely no built in disk duplication.

In Apple’s world, you can use the original OS disc and Time Machine to fully restore a broken situation. Apple have gone to the extreme of producing a one-touch backup solution. Set that bad-boy up, once, then you’re good to go. In Microsoft’s world, you’re on your own skippy. It’s a dog-eat-cat world world out there.. to hell with ensuring the OS can be restored.

At this point you may well be thinking “what about System Restore? fucking noob”. System Restore is a wonderful drain on disk space (with the ever logical usage level set to 10% by default) — it even works, sometimes. It’s also a haven for net-nasties of nearly every flavour.

And it’s always a case of Russian Roulette as to whether it will heal an install. Or deep-six it. That’s assuming you can actually boot into your system to begin with. Logically one has to assume that’s just not possible if the install actually implodes.

Don’t get me wrong, though. I have backups. Mountains of data and cruft and bloat. And stuff that I might actually need at some point too. But the problem frequently comes down to a central location. And what, exactly, do I actually need to make sure I have? Microsoft have taught us that the average user shouldn’t see large portions of the drive and yet will somehow be armed with a keen knowledge of the right things to store in a safe place.

That’s a plan that will always work, right?

Now, having bled in Microsoft’s world for nearly as long as Windows has existed (at all) I’ve got the art of finding hidden-shit-I-really-need down pat. But the average user? Now you know why an entire Microsoft-centric industry of highly-trained individuals exists, to do just one thing. Recover your stuff.

And yet Microsoft, to this very day, still don’t understand they are responsible for enabling us. We can push the fucking button if needs be.. sure, but after decades of building operating systems, you’d think they would — being the pants wearer in the relationship — have got a fucking grip and built an OS that can be successfully recovered from reliable backups.

No. No they have not. Instead, one must frequently erase a system that had a working install — ensuring the pre-requisite multiple-hour forensics mission was successful — re-install the operating system. Find drivers for core hardware — like network cards — potentially without internet connectivity. Then re-install at least one service pack. Then all the security updates. Then the applications.

Only then, once Microsoft feel that the operating system is somehow magically complete again — and one is as certain as one can be that all the applications are back — can one even consider locating the aforementioned forensic data and then return it from whence it came.

In the same period of time it takes me to get back to a running OS, an Apple Mac user has already gotten their life back on track, as though nothing. ever. happened. Who was the ass-hat at Microsoft that allowed this to continue? Windows 7 is around the corner and, yet again, there is absolutely nothing slated to revolutionise data retention.

Do you know what is most damming about the whole situation? It’s such a common issue in the Microsoft world that it doesn’t sound at all odd that folks will re-install their operating system every few months for what appears to be absolutely no functional reason whatsoever. And that should be an entirely ridiculous notion, not the norm.

I’ve spent 2 days attempting to breathe life into the rapidly-decaying corpse that was once my operating system. In the end I have had to — like a great many frustrated users before me — accept defeat, destroy the operating system volume and start all over again.

And again I am reminded of how inadequate and boneheaded the entire situation really is. Nearly every other popular operating system has this nailed down. It’s (very) early on a Thursday morning, do you know where your data is?

Leisure Suit. ∗

Friday 27 June, 2008

Looking for inspiration in all the wrong places. Sometimes it’s easier to point towards others’ content, rather than create my own.

It’s cheating — I have to come clean. I need to:

• write everything for me — not just for you.
• write with genuine passion — not with vague abandon.
• stop accepting close enough — it’s right or not at all.
• hold myself accountable to my content — it needs conviction.
• understand my limitations — then work to move beyond them.

Writing great content isn’t easy. It takes passion, energy and faith. Not in the sense of the Good Lord, Mohammed or Vishnu, rather in that I truly understand the fundamentals of the subject I speak of — and a conviction to see it through, no matter the risk.

I’m a geek. I should write about geeky subjects and how and where geeky things have relevance — I have shied away from that topic for fear it will bore. The challenge is to turn that into something people simply cannot wait to read.

You’re not reading this because I am trying to be someone else. You’re reading it because of me. You wouldn’t be here otherwise. It should inspire, challenge or excite. That commitment demands I respect the reader and deliver content worthy of consideration in return.

Thanks for listening.

Neurotic Design.

Sunday 15 June, 2008

I was recently given a tough challenge. Design a layout — something I am still quite unskilled at — for my partners brand new blog. I was given a rough sketch, a moderately simple brief (two column layout) and a degree of flexibility in how I interpreted it.

First hurdle? Typography. My partner is a budding author and as such I wanted the design to focus attention on the content. San-serifs were out, which meant finding a good serif that was easy on the eye. It eventually came down to a choice between Palatino and Georgia, neither of which are particularly stunning when viewed at 9, 10 or even 12 pixels.

Solution? Make it bigger. Much bigger. Typically that isn’t the first (or best) answer to a styling issue and yet, somehow, it just works. Sizes are defined in EMs, but body text is equivalent to ~14px and post headings a whopping 19px. Both give the body text a clear, carefree feel with a moderate amount of typeface styling actually being visible, making it a bit of a joy to build.

The design is comment free, yet there is easy access to the feedback form — encouraging more thoughtful responses — and, overall, I am pretty happy with the result. It’s also pleasing in that the final result matches the original sketch quite closely. Perhaps I have indeed remained true to my partners simple, yet elegant request. The comments so far is that I have.

Amusingly, my partner is as nervous about her re-invigorated launch into the blogosphere as I am in how well the design will be received in return. Design really isn’t my forte, but I am pleased on how it all turned out (it validated on first pass, no less) and how much I learned in the process.

Bumped. ∗

Friday 13 June, 2008

Media Temple have just incremented some versions on their (dv) product line. Notably PHP5 has been upgraded to 5.2.6 (current stable release) which is a welcome improvement and Plesk has jumped a version to 8.4.0.

Both shipped during May, thus it forms a very proactive and on-the-ball choice — be sure to check out Media Temple’s release above for all the geek-worthy details, there is a lot of improvement (in Plesk particularly) overall and as such it represents a worthy return for the short upgrade period.

I also have the (slightly dubious, yet intensely pleasing) distinction of being the first cab off the rank to have an existing (dv) upgraded — oh yes, here at the The Lab we bravely risk it all¹ so you don’t have to.

The process was slick and entirely painless.

As a result, it would be remiss of me not to thank the wonderful folks at (mt) — for building such great systems — and in particular Daniel Greene who drew the short straw to place their bets on the upgrade-user-plus-all-their-shit-and-pray roulette wheel. Nice work brother.

Since rolling from the grid to dedicated-virtual, I cannot stress strongly enough the level of commitment and professional support Media Temple have brought to the table. Nothing is ever too much trouble, no issue is ever left un-answered. If you are in the market, they are the go-to guys for virtual hosting. If you decide to take the plunge, help a brother out and tell them I sent you.

New orders will see the above improvements from day one, if you’re already a (dv) playa, maximum respect yo — submit a support request — profit.

—

¹ ok, so I do have multiple-redundant stored copies of all SQL databases and full data backups. I’m crazy, not stupid.