Tiger: Performance, Stability, Security

On 1/7/2004 5:43 AM, "dtopcomp" <dtopcompwave.co.nz> spake thus:

> It would be quite nice, for once, if we didn't need to upgrade for
> improvements in P.SS. Or can attendees at WWDC tell us that there really are
> some enhancements in the pipiline for these key areas?

Well, there's definitely some improvements on the security front; they're
adding ACLs. Check about halfway down this page:

<http://www.apple.com/macosx/tiger/unix.html>

--
=Nigel Stanger, Dunedin, NEW ZEALAND.
mailto:nstangerinfoscience.otago.ac.nz

On 6/30/04 10:43 AM, "dtopcomp" <dtopcompwave.co.nz>
wrote:

> It would be quite nice, for once, if we didn't need to upgrade for
> improvements in P.SS. Or can attendees at WWDC tell us that there really are
> some enhancements in the pipiline for these key areas?

Check out the tiger pages. ACLs are a big security
upgrade. As well the core audio / core video concept is a
performance feature. It allows developers to do more
without having to roll as much code. Same thing for
automater. It allows you to do more with what you have.
That's performance too.

Spotlight will allow you to be a lot less forcibly
organized about how you name things, and you can find
stuff more efficiently. Performance

depending on the Sync SDK, having all sorts of programs
sharing data, REGARDLESS of how they store that data
internally. Performance.

If you choose to max out your G5's RAM, being able to
really use it. Performance

Being able to set up and use exa- or petabyte RAIDS, and
not have TB volume limitations. Performance

being able to set up secure, encrypted IM/blogs at a
company...security

synchronized mobile home directories...performance

being able to apply software updates to your network as
YOU decide with a single download...performance and
security

better VPN tools...security

better print server...performance

Ethernet link aggregation...performance

anything else?

john

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

--On Wednesday, June 30, 2004 10:43 AM -0700 dtopcomp <dtopcompwave.co.nz>
wrote:
> It would be quite nice, for once, if we didn't need to upgrade for
> improvements in P.SS. Or can attendees at WWDC tell us that there really
> are some enhancements in the pipiline for these key areas?

Well, the kernel is getting much better SMP locking (better performance for
multi-processor systems). It will add object and filesystem ACL support,
which will provide better security for access to various system resources.
Kernel extensions (kexts) will switch to a binary-stable interface set
that's a good first step towards isolating extensions within the kernel
(stability). The system will get integrated smartcard support. CoreImage
and CoreVideo can speed up complex graphics filtering and processing, and
enable seriously new graphics applications. And a bunch more.

Of course you can decide that you've got no use for any of that. Panther
will still work fine after Tiger ships.

Cheers
  -- perry
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perry The Cynic perrycynic.org
To a blind optimist, an optimistic realist must seem like an Accursed Cynic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

My question is this: is Tiger abandoning the Mach kernel in favor of a BSD kernel?

[And if so, is it because of the reasons in the Subject? -Adam]

On 7/6/04 1:50 PM, "mbizer" <mbizermail.utexas.edu> wrote:

> My question is this: is Tiger abandoning the Mach kernel in favor of a BSD
> kernel?

There is nothing that indicates this at all.

In fact, EVERY version of Mac OS X has ALWAYS had a BSD kernel on top of
Mach. The BSD kernel is what provides all the POSIX services, and userland
Unix features.

It's always looked like this:

Pretty Aqua Stuff
OS X Services
BSD Services
BSD Kernel
Mach/IOKit

Part of the problem is that Apple marketing plays VERY fast and loose with
the word "kernel" using it for any number of things, not just Mach. But the
BSD kernel's always been there. Yes, they will have to do a LOT of work on
Mach for things like ACLs, full 64-bit support, etc.

But I would put the chances of abandoning Mach at nil.

--
John C. Welch Writer/Analyst
Bynkii.com Mac and other opinions
jwelchbynkii.com

--On Wednesday, July 7, 2004 7:44 PM -0700 "John C. Welch"
<jwelchbynkii.com> wrote:

> On 7/6/04 1:50 PM, "mbizer" <mbizermail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>
> > My question is this: is Tiger abandoning the Mach kernel in favor of a
> > BSD kernel?
>
> There is nothing that indicates this at all.
>
> In fact, EVERY version of Mac OS X has ALWAYS had a BSD kernel on top of
> Mach. The BSD kernel is what provides all the POSIX services, and userland
> Unix features.
>
> It's always looked like this:
>
> Pretty Aqua Stuff
> OS X Services
> BSD Services
> BSD Kernel
> Mach/IOKit

Actually, the Mach and BSD kernels are sort of mated (not layered), and
IOKit is sort of stuck on top of it sideways:

         OSX Services
  BSD Services IOKit
  BSD Kernel <=> Mach Kernel

You can't amputate Mach from this system any more than you could yank out
BSD. They are both essential pieces. Many essential servers use Mach IPC
communications, and Mach IPC can do things you simply can't do with BSD
sockets or shared memory.

The "computer science" theory of micro-kernels is that the operating system
should be layered on top of the micro-kernel, so many people assume that's
how it's done in OS X. Well, OS X is not a theoretical teaching project.

(Geek note: The only all-out attempt to put something UNIX-like on top of a
Mach micro-kernel is the GNU Hurd. It still hasn't made it out of beta
after all those years.)

> But I would put the chances of abandoning Mach at nil.

Yup.
  -- perry

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Perry The Cynic perrycynic.org
To a blind optimist, an optimistic realist must seem like an Accursed Cynic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to:

<http://www.geekpatrol.ca/archives/2004/07/09/jaguarpantherand.php>

Tiger (at least the current version) is a bit faster than Panther.

Harro de Jong