[samvado]

Hi,

I am creating a CD with HTML / cgi / PHP functions on it.
on Win the functionality (including apache) comes from a consolidated package called "microweb" -
does anyone know if there is something similar for the MAC?
or if not how can I show a CD on a mac that has cgi/php on it?

thanx

-sam

[glasn0st]

The Apache that is installed, but not enabled by default, on Mac OS X, has ~/Shared (the folder "Shared" in the home directory of the user) as a default document folder for the user.

If the user has Apache enabled, you could just make a small script that copies your whole tree into ~/Shared/SamvadoProg/ and then make the default webbrowser surf to http://localhost/~username/SamvadoProg/index.html

Perhaps you can even enable Web sharing by script, I don't know.

CGI support is enabled in Mac OS X's Apache if I remember correctly, mine has PHP as well but I don't know if it's default or that I added it myself. If not, you would have to include the PHP interpreter on your cd as well, and make all your PHP scripts executable and let them start with '#!/Users/username/Shared/SamvadoProg/php"

Pretty far fetched, but I don't think there is a one-click-install web solution at the moment. It all depends on how bad you want to support the Mac... you want to, don't you???

[samvado]

personally I would be happier if Mac died altogether today - its just one more unnecessary proprietary solution where we have better free ones (and another MS cashcow). But thats altogether another discussion. thank you for pointing out where a possible solution lies - so far we have settled for giving the MAC user a simple interface where they can browse the content but not use any cgi functions - more seems a bit far fetched for less than 10% market share :-)

[glasn0st]

I am sure that in the current economical environment an increase of 5-10% is significant for any company. But don't tell your boss or you might have to work on this script all afternoon!!

[samvado]

I would probably care more for 10% than I do now because its an add on for a book. so the customer primarily buys a book with a CD in it.

[bluedog]

Originally posted by samvado:
personally I would be happier if Mac died altogether today - its just one more unnecessary proprietary solution where we have better free ones (and another MS cashcow). But thats altogether another discussion. thank you for pointing out where a possible solution lies - so far we have settled for giving the MAC user a simple interface where they can browse the content but not use any cgi functions - more seems a bit far fetched for less than 10% market share :-)

Wow, harsh words. Its amazing to me how developers, the very people who should care about their products and how it is used on end-user computers have such an attitude. MS is *more* of a proprietary system than the current Mac OS, but that's irrelavent considering that 90% of your market is running this proprietary OS.

As for a custom 'package' of php/apache the solution provided or enabling apache is really for OSX only and won't work in OS9-based Macs which have very scant support for web-server technologies that are non-proprietary.

I understand an MS-based developer SURVIVES because of the monopoly/umbrella provided by that monopoly. Its no wonder developers become irritated when that comfort/protection is threatened. My attitude is know the breadth of what is there so you can move when the tide turns. There is so much animosity for the practices and licensing of Windows I wouldn't be surprised in 5 years if their market share was much less than today. Businesses are putting their forecasts/budgets in place today for the future. I'm sure some of them are not going on the .NET bandwagon.

But I do hear you frustration with trying to support *any* and *all* possibilities, just look at the differences in Windows 95, 98, 98SE, ME, 2000, XP and the soon to be 2003. Sheesh and so many say the MacOS isn't compatible.

[samvado]

I think microsoft is a real plague.
I also think the if steve jobs where in bill gates shoes it would be more of a plague - why? he would also control the hardware, not just the software.
apple lost its appeal with the mac - a closed architecture rigidly controlled by one company.
of course all hopes are on linux.
if adobe ported to linux and mac died tomorrw we would have a better world by far.
nobody needs another opportunistic jerk who sells more MS products to his customers (per computer) than MS sells to the pc market.

and dont take it personally :-))

[Vi0]

Totally disagree with you Samvado. You are making fatal assumptions about apple.

Apple's products are closed simply because they need to make a profit to continue to provide them, not because they are out to control people. But they do rely on standards that are platform independent. That is the key that Microsoft is missing, because they make everything centered on their platform only with only a few exceptions. That is principally why MS is a bad company. People have turned "monopoly" into a slander term, when many good monopolies exist. Just remember that without monopolies there is little or no profit in business. And people don't work for free.

I think that Gates and Jobs differ vastly in their philosophy, with Jobs being essentially a good man who wants people to be happy using Apple computers, whereas Gates is simply someone who aims to make as much money as possible, and then some. If there roles were reversed, I seriously doubt Apple would become MS.

Mac won't ever die, it just keeps getting better and better.

As far as Abobe porting to linux, that will never happen. Why port $700 software to an OS which people expect to be free and which is splintered into a 1000 different distributions?

Linux is a neat concept, but as far as becoming the next big thing for desktop users, it just isn't going to happen. There just isn't enough resources and management to make Linux into Mac OS.
Apple makes it look easy, but making a Mac OS like operating system is more work than any Linux fan can imagine.

[samvado]

you are either very naive or very young - or both.

I am 50 and I have had an apple before you knew how to spell computer. we where all very happy in those days - the apple 2 being an open system with a slot even for a cp/m cpu (thats like having an extra slot in the mac for an intel pentium).

then - and that was long before MS even had a share of 10% of the market - came the Lisa for more cash any of us could shell out and briefly after it the mac - as closed as a box. in those days had apple adopted a more user friendly policy it had a chance to outrun the very inferior DOS systems. But mac kept its nose-high attitude, expensive, un-expandable, closed. If it wasn't for the religious mac believers and techno nerds doing graphics (and knowing nothing about computers in technical terms) mac today would have maybe 3% market share and be dead by now. I do extensive graphics, movie cutting and webdesign - all on w2k. Mac has now adopted a FREE OS (freebsd) to their GUI
(or vice versa rather) - not a big deal if you ask me.
and about Linux not going to be on the desktops we will talk in 3-5 years. Now its still to early but "united Linux" shows the way. and there are 12 or so distros but ony 3 that count and of those only 2 have considerable differences in their layout and functionality

If I had to stack all my cash today on either platform it would not be mac - for sure :-)

But this discussion is basically useless - time will show

[[APi]TheMan]

Originally posted by samvado:
I think microsoft is a real plague.
I also think the if steve jobs where in bill gates shoes it would be more of a plague - why? he would also control the hardware, not just the software.
apple lost its appeal with the mac - a closed architecture rigidly controlled by one company.
of course all hopes are on linux.
if adobe ported to linux and mac died tomorrw we would have a better world by far.
nobody needs another opportunistic jerk who sells more MS products to his customers (per computer) than MS sells to the pc market.

and dont take it personally :-))

Eeek! I don't take that personally, but man... It must be hard to carry around opinions like that, who knows what other intense stuff you've got inside that head of yours.

I originally responded to your first post about being happy if Macintoshes died tomorrow, but then deleted it, decided that it wasn't relevant. But your last post was just too good to be true.

"apple lost its appeal with the mac"... Eh. People who think that are few and far between, even Al Gore likes Macs! They can't die tomorrow.

[Vi0]

But if Apple dies, who are MS and Linux going to imitate and rely on for ideas?

Mac OS X is far more than simply FreeBSD with a Mac GUI. In fact FreeBSD is only used for the userland (commands, daemons, etc). The kernel is NetBSD, and the rest of the OS is 4.4BSD-Lite2. However, there are very critical technologies, like Quicktime, Quartz, OpenGL, Cocoa, Carbon, in addition to the Aqua GUI, etc., etc., that set Mac OS apart from an OS like Linux.

The idea that free Linux will be on users desktops in 3-5 years is a neat one. But, the problem is that the Linux model and GNU license will never allow it to be on the cutting edge of technology or to convince software developers to release Linux versions of the programs. In my opinion, the Linux model presents more challenging and costly problems for end users than any other OS.

[utidjian]

Originally posted by Vi0:
But if Apple dies, who are MS and Linux going to imitate and rely on for ideas?

Presumably from the same place they have always gotten it... from their own and other people... including ex-Apple people.(duh)

Mac OS X is far more than simply FreeBSD with a Mac GUI. In fact FreeBSD is only used for the userland (commands, daemons, etc). The kernel is NetBSD, and the rest of the OS is 4.4BSD-Lite2.

Also known as *BSD/Mach + Mac GUI.

However, there are very critical technologies, like Quicktime, Quartz, OpenGL, Cocoa, Carbon, in addition to the Aqua GUI, etc., etc., that set Mac OS apart from an OS like Linux.

Perhaps critical to Apple... but if Apple (and these technologies) cease to exist it is not as if all computers will stop working and people will no longer be able to use them.

The idea that free Linux will be on users desktops in 3-5 years is a neat one. But, the problem is that the Linux model and GNU license will never allow it to be on the cutting edge of technology or to convince software developers to release Linux versions of the programs. In my opinion, the Linux model presents more challenging and costly problems for end users than any other OS.

Linux IS on users desktops right now... more every day. How many desktops, of all possible desktops, have Linux on them in 3-5 years is anybodies guess... but, for certain, there will be more then than there is now.

How do you define "cutting edge"? There are so many edges... Linux is on most of them.

Well it certainly won't cost them much to get the software. Many applications are free and some of them cost money. Currently users have to spend more time learning how to use the OS but as Linux copies or imitates the systems that users already know how to use the transition will be easier. Even at the risk of being criticized for copying other OS ideas... damned if you do and damned if you don't.

[Gene Jockey]

Originally posted by samvado:
you are either very naive or very young - or both.

I am 50 and I have had an apple before you knew how to spell computer. we where all very happy in those days - the apple 2 being an open system with a slot even for a cp/m cpu (thats like having an extra slot in the mac for an intel pentium).<snip more rant...>

I love people with attitudes like yours. Meet someone with an idea that you don't agree with? Accuse them of being young and stupid! I don't care if you're twice my age and were wiring your Apple II to do lower case letters before I could walk, this does not make your opinions better than mine by default.

Macintosh computers were closed and used by people "knowing nothing about computers in technical terms" as you so derisively point out precisely because Macintosh computers were designed as appliances, specifically aimed at people who just wanted to work, and not need specialized computer knowledge. The computer for "the rest of us". If you've been around the computer scene so long, I'd imagine you'd have picked up on that fact. That and the fact that CP/M isn't a CPU, CP/M was an OS that ran on a Microsoft Z80 CPU card for the Apple II.

Thanks for stopping by.

--J