linux_penguin asks: "Recently I've been interested (as is everyone I suppose) in OS X. My girlfriend is currently studying desktop publishing, and is using Illustrator, PageMaker etc at tech. I'm thinking of buying her a powermac. This will allow her to study at home, and give me a chance to have some fun with OS X when it finally comes out. I've looked at the pricing of these things, and there appears to be large price jumps from one model to another, with only minor changes in spec. Not only that, but their monitors are *so* expensive... and thoughtfully, a large jump in spec. I thought it might be better to buy a mid-range powermac with no monitor or accessories, and upgrade it myself. My question is, is this a feasible thing to do? Do Macs support standard SVGA monitors? I know it supports USB devices, but could I upgrade the H/D, RAM or whatever with off-the-shelf components?"

Mad Browser writes: "Ars Technica has posted a review of the recently released-to-developers MacOS X DP4. Check it out." Rather than concentrating on Aqua, this article is typical Ars -- it gets beneath the surface to consider the mechanisms for printing, screen display and more. As the writer points out, DP4 is not itself OS X, but only a snapshot of OS X as it matures.

P-Rod asks: "With Apple reportedly about to announce multiprocessor G4s, many have been asking why they'd do so before OS X is released, since OS 9 doesn't have the multithreading that OS X has. What about a multithreading extension? Apple has been really good at allowing newer products to work with older ones and vice versa. Apple's ultra-smooth transition to the PowerPC chip back in 1994 is a great example. So is the CarbonLib extension, which lets you run Carbonized OS X programs on OS 8.1 and up. Is a multithreading extension feasible?"

Anonymous Coward writes: "One of the more significant statements of the session [at Apple's WorldWide Developer's Conference] came when Magee told the audience that the Mach kernel and the BSD layer which lays upon it are inseparable. "Every application [that runs in Mac OS X] is a BSD application," said Magee. "You can't keep the system running without the Mach kernel and the BSD layer." This quashes the public rumour that Apple will be able to ship a "lite" version of Mac OS X which will contain only the smallest possible bit of BSD, or another that questions Apple reluctance to move its tools to Linux."

firewort writes: "Someone sure got back from WWDC quick, and posted a review of Aqua, MacOSX DP4. Nice screenshots, too! " Fairly detailed overview of the UI changes. And with the BSD kernel, it looks like I may finally have an OS that my gf and I could agree on.

caligula writes: "Just saw this [macnn.com report]: 'Tuesday, May 17 updated 2:30 pm, top stories. During the hardware keynote of WWDC, which ended just minutes ago, Apple demonstrated a dual-processor G4 Power Mac running Mac OS X. Of note to developers is that Cocoa/Carbon applications do not need to be changed in any way to take advantage of multi-processors. Benchmark demonstrations ran roughly twice as fast on the dual-G4 system compared to the single-G4 Power Mac that was on stage. No mention was given as to when these multiprocessor G4s would ship, although it was stressed that it would not be happening any time soon but that they would definitely be out by next year's WWDC.'" JonahLee pointed out a related link on macosrumors.com, and migooch noted this slightly more informative ZDne t story. Mortals still must wait at least 'til January.

Mneme writes "Looks like Apple finally has the open source core of MacOS X up and running on Intel boxen. We'll have to wait until the WWDC is over before we'll get our hands on it, but it's still a very pleasing development. Check out a story about the demonstration, or click below to read the message from the Darwin Developer's list.

Otter asks: "I've been dabbling in C++ programming with Linux and Qt. I'm interested in trying Darwin or MacOS X development but am not sure where to start. Mac programming books only deal with traditional MacOS. I could use CodeWarrior and Carbon, but if I'm going to start out, I might as well use the NeXT/Cocoa methods that are the way of the future and, I've heard, a lot better. So, how do I get started? Apple's Web site is still oriented towards the traditional API's and the move to Carbon. Are there any books that would give me a good introduction? Any tutorials? Can I continue with C++ or do I need to learn Objective C or Java? Does Code Warrior support Cocoa development (in the IDE and/or in the documentation)? "

Mad Browser writes:"MacNN is reporting that Apple has delayed MacOS X again until January 2001. They are also reporting that a public beta of OS X will be available this summer. Jobs also said that WebObjects deployment licenses would go from $50,000 to $700. " QuickTime 5 is also tentatively going to be out this summer, as well.

Maktoo writes: "Well, this has been a favorite rumour in the Mac world for quite some time, but with the approach of WWDC (next Monday) things are starting to heat up. MacOSRumors, AppleInsider, and Go2Mac are all predicting MP G4s soon ... with Go2Mac actually claiming that CompUSA has SKUs for the systems. The keynote on Monday should be interesting. I don't see why Apple would release MP machines before MacOS X ... but we might get a demo at least. I'm excited enough that I'll be getting a copy of MacOS X Beta when I walk in the door ... but an MP G4 would be nice too."

Graymalkin writes: "Apple has finally released iMovie (the really easy video editor) for the non-iMac DV customers; the best part is that it's free. You can get it over at iMovie's Web site. I've used demos of this package and compared to professional packages like Premiere it really packs a punch. You need OS 9 and at least 64 megs of RAM (unless you want to do Web quality video, then 64 is fine). It's nice to see Apple responding to their customers (like myself) who wanted iMovie but didn't want to go out and buy an iMac to get it. fnord. "

Mr. Groove writes: "Hey foo, think your PIII is killer? Imagine running Photoshop on one of these!" Frugal or insane -- only you can decide.

Cybersonic writes: "Cnet has an interesting story where they are thinking about going after yet another company making a translucent PC. " It's a company from Australia that makes something called "FishPC". It's not a standalone machine like the iMac is, which the company pointed out when interviewed.Update: 04/24 03:54 by H :I've been told that the case is actually AMD's EasyNow! design - thanks to Chris Tom for the head's-up. Wonder why they aren't suing AMD?

Several folks, all anonymous, have been asking about Darwin and Linux drivers, so I figure I should send this out before I'm drowned by more requests: "A discussion has been going on recently on the Darwin Developers mailing list about porting Linux drivers to use the DriverKit on Darwin, due to the wide number of Linux hardware drivers currently available. The problem is that many Linux drivers are under the GPL. My reading of the GPL, especially section 2, is that since the Darwin kernel and the drivers are under separate, incompatible licenses, that they may not be distributed together unless the complete work (the kernel) is licensed under the GPL. Could someone clarify if this is correct, what the options are, and if this applies to distributing a GPL'd dynamically loadable kernel module for the APSL'd kernel (which I read the GPL to say is OK)? "

PirateBek asks: "As Apple OS X is based on the Mach3 BSD kernel, does anyone know if it can natively (or be compiled to include) support Samba services? Nothing seems to be listed on the Apple site." If not, does anyone know if the Samba Team is planning any support?

Quite a number of folks have written in with announcement from Apple saying that Darwin 1.0 is released. It's got the BSD core that's been discussed before, along with Mach 3.0 - and here's to hoping that Apple will open up all OSX, at least in some fashion or another.

newt asks a question that I'm sure a lot of you have been wondering about: "We've just seen news that Apple has Open-Sourced Darwin, which no doubt fills enthusiasts with a warm fuzzy feeling about the future of Open Source and the way that Apple has embraced it. However, there's a piece missing from the picture: QuickTime. How often have you visited a Web page only to find that all the streaming media on it is QuickTime, and you can't view it without the Sorenson CODEC?" There was once a time when Quicktime as well as MPEG were cross platform, now we only have MPEG without the advantages of the advances made in the newer CODECs. Now that Apple has embraced Open Source, could Quicktime be on its way?

The AC crowd were the first to write in with the news. From Wilfredo Sanchez's diary at Advogato, "Today another big milestone has come up. I imported the sources to the kernel into the Darwin CVS repository today, which means that at this point all of the sources needed to build Darwin are available externally for the first time." For those not in the know, Darwin is the foundation on which MacOS X is based. It's a BSD Unix, including significant contributions from the NetBSD and FreeBSD kernel and userland code.

BluesHarp writes, "Apple's lead Darwin engineer Wilfredo Sanchez announced that he successfully built and has made available all of Darwin 1.0 for both PowerPC and Intel. Does this mean that OS X for Intel would be just a recompile away?"

Andrew van der Stock writes "Check out this link and see a rack-mounted iMac. Very Cool." Shades of the 21" Frankenstein iMac covered a few months ago here on Slashdot. This is a cool hardware hack of the "gotta get it done" variety. Talk about faith in a platform! But what is he doing with all the old iMonitors? Perhaps ESR and friends could use some interesting targets ...