RE: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
Daniel L. Schwartz(expresso[at]snip.net)
Wed, 14 Apr 1999 14:53:39 -0500
WinMac Digest #284 - Wednesday, April 14, 1999
Re: web contents software for Holly
by "Alex Dearden" <pata@tampabay.rr.com>
Re: DHCP
by "Alex Dearden" <pata@tampabay.rr.com>
Re: [WinMac] Re: DHCP: to be or not to be?
by "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
more on DHCP
by "Marc Bizer" <mlbizer@mail.utexas.edu>
article on DHCP
by "Marc Bizer" <mlbizer@mail.utexas.edu>
Re: [WinMac] more on DHCP
by "bartosh" <bartosh@tamu.edu>
RE: DHCP: to be or not to be?
by "Neil Jedrzejewski" <jed@grafx.co.uk>
Apple to move on Merced
by "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
RE: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
by "Frankenstein, Paul" <Frankens@wnet.org>
Mac FTP clients support for DHCP questions + ftpmail server question.
by "Brian Durant" <pip207@inform.dk>
Re: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
by "Jeff Johnson" <jjohnson@wi.net>
enough on the Apple on Intel rumor
by "Marc Bizer" <mlbizer@mail.utexas.edu>
RE: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
by "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
Subject: Re: web contents software for Holly
From: Alex Dearden <pata@tampabay.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:21:51 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>if someone is on the road at a
>trade show they can log in on a laptop and insert text into pages already
>created, or into templates.
You can also do this with GoLive, it just needs to be installed on that
laptop but it doesn't matter where you are, if you can access the
internet you can modify your pages directly from GoLive, it'll download
the data on the fly (from an ftp site though).
Alex Dearden
pata@doglover.com
Subject: Re: DHCP
From: Alex Dearden <pata@tampabay.rr.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:21:56 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>It says to 'Load TCP/IP when needed' and people have reported that when
>the protocol hasn't been used for a while it drops it, thus leading the
>MS DHCP server to believe it has finished with the lease of the IP. When
>the Mac then tries to reload the protocol and use the last IP, its been
>given to someone else or unavailable.
By default, the NT DHCP server will keep IP leases for 3 days (72 hours)
unless it runs out of addresses to give. So it's strange that it would
give it to another machine that quickly.
Alex Dearden
pata@doglover.com
Subject: Re: [WinMac] Re: DHCP: to be or not to be?
From: "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 19:29:19 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Dear David,
Which platform are you using as the DHCP server?
At 03:17 PM 4/13/99 -0500, David McKnight wrote:
>LESLEY:
>
>We've just implemented within the last couple of months at our
>corporate campus.
>I currently have five Mac users and eight Wintel users in my department (I use
>both, but predominantly Mac), and have had no problems whatsoever --
>before implementing DHCP on the Macs, our IS department tested the
>system. Their plan
>was to maintain static IP addresses on the Macs (in a majority PC
>environment on campus) if DHCP became problematic.
[snip]
Subject: more on DHCP
From: Marc Bizer <mlbizer@mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 00:16:13 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hi everyone,
I thought that the following links about DHCP on the Mac
platform might be helpful:
<http://www1.macintouch.com/imacdhcp.html>
Don't be fooled; it's not just about iMacs. There is one message in
particular which states that Apple correctly implements the
applicable RFC (RFC 2131), but NT servers may not follow it correctly:
>Date: Wed, 10 Feb 1999 18:22:14 -0500 (EST)
>From: Eric C Wagner wagnerer@umich.edu
>To: notes@macintouch.com
>Subject: DHCP problem
>
>If you look at the RFC covering DHCP (RFC 2131) you'll find that
>Apple has implemented the protocol correctly. What is happening here
>is that the RFC says servers SHOULD(1) allow a computer to request
>the same address its received before if its still within the lease
>lifetime. Even if it has previously released the address. Server
>programmers are probably neglecting to support this part of the
>standard because its not absolutely required and it would use up
>memory storage to cache addresses for their entire lifetime.
>The question for Apple is should they strictly adhere to a written
>standard or conform to how the standard has been improperly
>implemented. In this case I think the OT engineers should just grab
>a new address if getting the old one fails rather than returning an
>error code.
>Eric
>From the RFC:
>(1) This word or the adjective "RECOMMENDED" means that there may
>exist valid reasons in particular circumstances to ignore this item,
>but the full implications should be understood and the case
>carefully weighed before choosing a different course.
See also the message from Alan Hart immediately preceding this message.
--Marc
Subject: article on DHCP
From: Marc Bizer <mlbizer@mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 00:17:57 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hi everyone,
Vicomsoft has published an article on DHCP:
<http://www.vicomsoft.com/knowledge/reference/dhcp1.html>
--Marc
Subject: Re: [WinMac] more on DHCP
From: bartosh <bartosh@tamu.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:28:02 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>Hi everyone,
>
> I thought that the following links about DHCP on the Mac
>platform might be helpful:
>
><http://www1.macintouch.com/imacdhcp.html>
>
>Don't be fooled; it's not just about iMacs. There is one message in
>particular which states that Apple correctly implements the
>applicable RFC (RFC 2131), but NT servers may not follow it
>correctly:
Not _may not_; nt does not.
-mab
From the iMac of...
*******
Michael Bartosh
bartosh@tamu.edu
cell: 409/537.2129
Campus Representative
Apple Computer, Inc.
Texas A&M University
http://jungfrau.tamu.edu/~bartosh
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher
regard those who think alike than those who think differently."
- -- Nietzsche
Think Different.
Apple.
Subject: RE: DHCP: to be or not to be?
From: "Neil Jedrzejewski" <jed@grafx.co.uk> (by way of Marc Bizer)
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 07:31:37 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> Jed,
>
> When you use the Red Hat DHCPD daemon you mention that it
> has problems
> with the PC's. Which PC OS' are having trouble: windoze 3.1, wfw 3.11,
> windoze 95/98, NT/Workstation? More specifically, does this problem occur
> with NT?
I'm told there are problems with ALL MS TCP/IP clients however I'm just
about
to try some files MS sent me and some configurations a user who has got it
working sent to me. I'll give you some info when I'm done.
> Also, when you use NT/Server as a DHCP server, for how long
> did you set
> the lease time... Hours, days?
I'll confess I've never run an NT DHCP server, however my info comes from
friends who have. Lease times that seem to work are in the 4 hour range.
- Jed
Subject: Apple to move on Merced
From: "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 08:49:28 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Good morning, all!
Remember a couple of months ago when I posted about how Apple
was on shaky
ground with the PowerPC processor, with no roadmap past the G4 when the
Somerset design facility was closed last September?
Well, it looks like Apple is covering its bets. Read on...
*****
<http://www.theregister.co.uk/990413-000018.html>
Apple to move on Merced
Analysis: Shift away from PowerPC just Intel spin, but Merced support is
something else...
ARTICLE:
Posted 13/04/99 3:58pm by Tony Smith
Apple to move on Merced
Claims that Apple is to make, or at the very least is considering, a
strategic shift away from the PowerPC platform and over to Intel would be
easy to dismiss if they had appeared on a Usenet newsgroup. But when they
come from a senior figure within Intel's Architecture Group, the team that
guides the evolution of the company's IA-32 and IA-64 processors, you have
to sit up and take notice.
And that's just what The Register heard this week, from just such a source,
one who has, in the past, been pretty damn reliable.
The claim goes something like this: Apple is working closely with Intel on
64-bit versions of MacOS X Server and MacOS X Client for Intel's
forthcoming Merced processor the first to use its IA-64 architecture. The
IA-64 version of Server will ship in 2001, Client will ship in the
2002-2003 timeframe.
The background to this plan, claims the source, is trouble within the
Apple-IBM-Motorola (AIM) PowerPC consortium centering on each partner's
view of where the processor technology should go and the features it needs
to deliver.
Clearly an Intel insider can't be taken at face value where a rival
processor platform is concerned. Intel spokespeople may claim that the only
real competition on the company's radar screen is Advanced Micro Devices,
but PowerPC remains a threat, especially in the areas Intel isn't too hot,
in particular embedded systems -- processors that go into cars, fridges,
mobile phones, not PCs.
The embedded processor market isn't directly relevant to the Mac world, but
it does matter inasmuch as it's the place where Motorola's semiconductor
division makes most of its money. Motorola long realised PowerPC is
probably never going to make it big in the PC arena, so it's been
concentrating on better equipping the chip for embedded roles. That's why
Motorola developed AltiVec, the upcoming G4's instruction set extensions
for handling data streams. AltiVec isn't about competing with the Pentium
III's comparable Streaming SIMD Extensions, it's about competing with
Digital Signal Processors.
*****
MY PERSONAL ANALYSIS:
This is an interesting development if indeed it is true. Personally, I
would prefer to see the MacOS - OS/X ported to the Compaq Alpha for the
much better floating point performance, not to mention the fact that Merced
**hasn't even been taped out yet,** but this shift (if it is true)
represents something good: The divorcing of the Mac hardware from the
software.
Shops that adopt IA64 boxes will now have a choice between
NT, Tru64 unix,
other flavors of *nix, and OS/X. This cuts down on the risk of getting
"stuck" with worthless hardware that runs a discontinued NOS... This will
only be good if OS/X runs on "off-the-shelf" hardware, and does *not*
require special code to be written for proprietary hardware (like the
now-dead and unsupported Apple Network Server 500's and 700's running older
versions of IBM AIX).
Where Apple goes with the MacOS and OS/X *after* the G4 CPU will be
interesting...
-----------------------------------------------------------------
<mailto:expresso@snip.net, Dan@Hemnet.com>
ALTERNATE: <mailto:expresso@workmail.com>
Webmaster for <http://www.Faulknerstudios.com>,
<http://www.BrakeAndGo.com>
**Your Corel Solution Partner**
**Your UltraBac Solution Source**
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
From: "Frankenstein, Paul" <Frankens@wnet.org>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 11:06:49 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Given that
1) Merced has been delayed almost as often as Windows 2000
2) Apple has spent huge amounts of money and mindshare pushing the G3 as
being faster, cycle for cycle, than the PII and PIII
3) The Register has *one* source, not many sources telling them this
4) Switching processors *again* would really piss off their developers
5) Despite their differences, both Motorola and IBM have significant
interest in keeping PPC/AIM alive
6) Apple's a systems company, not just a software company, and the revenue
stream from hardware is substantially greater than the revenue stream from
software
I'd take this rumor with a huge grain of salt (i.e. a couple of barrels).
Is it going to happen? Who knows? Anything's possible. However, I think that
Apple being bought out right now is more likely than a switch from PPC to
Merced.
Subject: Mac FTP clients support for DHCP questions + ftpmail server
question.
From: Brian Durant <pip207@inform.dk>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 11:06:57 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hi,
Most on the list seem to be popping up with DHCP questions, so here is
mine:
I seem to remember a thread about Mac FTP clients support of DHCP. If my
memory doesn't fail me, NetFinder was one of the clients mentioned that
support DHCP. Are there others out there, and how does the support/lack
of support (NT/Linux, et. al.) affect the individual client? Lastly, does
anyone know if the new versions of NetFinder (2.0GM) and VICOM FTP Client
Pro (3.0) support DHCP?
I maybe totally off in left field, as I know very little about DHCP, but
you are of course welcome to enlighten me :-)
PS: Does anyone know of an ftpmail server that handles Mac files without
mangling them, but also handles Win files? What are the necessary
commands to use an ftpmail server?
Cheers,
Brian Durant
---
Human rights and democratization specialist, freelance journalist.
Menneskerettigheds- og demokratiseringsspecialist og freelance journalist.
bdurant@inform.dk
http://www2.inform.dk/durant
---
Subject: Re: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
From: "Jeff Johnson" <jjohnson@wi.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 14:23:39 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
From Apple Insider
======================================
Apple to Transition to Intel by 2001: "Total Fiction"
http://www.appleinsider.com/articles/9904/apple-intel.shtml
April 13, 1999
An article published by a UK technology tabloid on Sunday has
literally left thousands of Apple enthusiasts gasping for air... and
the truth. The story, entitled "Intel works with Apple as PowerPC left
out on limb," makes some wild accusations such as "Apple is expected
to exit the PowerPC model in the next three years."
The Ridiculous
Further along in the article, the author implies that Apple will make
a full transition to Intel based chips by the year 2003, leaving the
PowerPC behind as nothing more than a fond memory. Yeah, and we spill
hot coffee on ourselves because our friends do it and it makes us
cool.
Some Logic
Aside from the obvious, one could always argue the logic, or lack
thereof, backing these outrageous claims. Apple is a hardware company
-- they generate the majority of their revenues based on hardware, not
software sales. If Apple were to make a full transition to Intel based
processors they'd either have to layout the most outrageous
restructuring plan in history and attempt to become a software based
company, or prepare for their ultimate demise.
One of the reasons that Mac OS X Server Intel so quickly faded into
the distance is just that. To add a sudden, but irrelevant twist to
things, it has been rumored that Apple does in fact have a team of
engineers hard at work on further development of Mac OS X for Intel,
but not for the reasons stated in the tabloid.
The Truth
Because of the sensitivity of the issue at hand, we felt the only way
to crush these sudden rumors, and put the Macintosh community at ease,
would be to hear it straight from the horses mouth. And so yesterday
afternoon we contacted Steve Jobs on the issue, who made a prompt
reply that was both sweet and to the point. In short, Jobs deemed the
rumors "Total Fiction," and so our story concludes at that.
So for those who didn't take it so lightly, you can exhale now.
======================================
Subject: enough on the Apple on Intel rumor
From: Marc Bizer <mlbizer@mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 14:54:17 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Hi everyone,
I think that this thread can now end.
--Marc
Subject: RE: [WinMac] Apple to move on Merced
From: "Daniel L. Schwartz" <expresso@snip.net>
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 1999 14:53:39 -0500
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
Dear Paul and everyone else,
I didn't say it was great that Apple was looking at Merced... Just that
they are eyeballing it.
And Yes, Merced is vaporware: It hasn't even been "taped out" yet!
[However, the other half of the IA-64 "evil twins," the H-P incarnation is
moving along.]
As for Apple angering developers, I don't think it would be the case:
This would actually help cut down on the development cycle, because *some*
of the development tools would be in common with IA-64, as opposed to
having to keep a complete separate set for PowerPC.
[The downside is that Intel's x86 compilers suck; and there's
a *lot* of
friction between M$ and Intel on the IA-64 stuff. Personally, for both
intense number crunching as well as 64 bit deployment, I'll stick with the
DIGITAL/Compaq Alpha 21x64 series, for Spec95 FP 50 performance...
<http://www.alpha-processor.com/product/alpha21264.asp>.]
Just my 2 cents...
Cheers!
Dan
* Windows-MacOS Cooperation List *
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b2
on Wed Apr 14 1999 - 17:08:18 PDT
|