Slashdot Mirror

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-212942.html

Key quote:

Gates shed some light on his own hard-nosed business philosophy. "Although about 3 million computers get sold every year in China, but people don't pay for the software," he said. "Someday they will, though. As long as they are going to steal it, we want them to steal ours. They'll get sort of addicted, and then we'll somehow figure out how to collect sometime in the next decade."

MS used to recruit all the best talent out of Borland, back when borland had a better compiler.

Borland filed suit to stop them. They weren't successful (obviously), although MS admitting to recruiting 34 employees of Borland.

article about it. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-279561.html?legacy=c net

MS used to recruit all the best talent out of Borland, back when borland had a better compiler.

Borland filed suit to stop them. They weren't successful (obviously), although MS admitting to recruiting 34 employees of Borland.

article about it. http://news.com.com/2100-1023-279561.html?legacy=c net

• Marc Andreessen made 100s of millions of dollars shortly after graduating from UIUC. Today's graduates of the same university face moving back in with their parents. "Fuck that, I got mine!"
• Brian Behlendorf decided he'd rather go to India to recruit software engineers than help out the graduating classes of 2001-2004 here in the US.
• Robert Malda stood idly by and said NOTHING while his company offshored its flagship product.
• Linux Lab set up shop in Bangalore!
• Daniel Robbins decided to sell out his open source compatriots by taking a job with Microsoft in Redmond, Washington!

Miguel de Icaza, Bruce Perens, Eric Raymond, and Linus Torvalds all got rich off the Open Source Movement. What do you have to look forward to?

The following link contains a list of anti-Linux quotations from Microsoft executives. It shows Steve Ballmer said Linux had 'characteristics of communism' on 31 July 2000, and called it 'a cancer' on 1 July 2001. As can be seen, these quotations are the oldest on the site, with the more recent ones sounding much less hysterical, and not mentioning cancer or communism. On 13 July 2004, Ballmer even said 'Linux is a good clone of UNIX'!

If you can point to recent quotes by Steve Ballmer or Bill Gates in which Linux is called ridiculous things like 'a cancer', I'll admit I'm wrong! Until then, however, I think it's you who's wrong.

Bill Gates has recently said those who oppose intellectual property rights are 'new modern-day sort of communists', but this is a valid point: a key part of communism is the elimination of property rights, both intellectual and physical.

The idea of being like communists may get you all worked up, but here in Europe, communism is just another economic theory, and what Gates said sounds reasonable. Eliminating property rights is communistic, but that doesn't mean it isn't valid in some cases! If software patents will stifle software development rather than help it, a communistic approach towards software ideas (not software itself) is a better one than the approach of private ownership of such. At the same time, the examples Gates used: music, films and software, which refer to copyright anyway, probably aren't.

One other thing is you haven't made any argument that hysterical comments about competitors are linked to success. You've simply said: (a) Microsoft executives have called Linux 'a cancer' and 'communism', and (b) Microsoft is successful, therefore (a) caused (b). Steve Ballmer is bald too, but that's not why Microsoft is successful!

If making hysterical comments is the key to success, why has Linux been so much more successful than Hurd? Richard Stallman has been ranting hysterically since the 1980s, where as Linus Torvalds is almost always calm and professional. By your logic, therefore, we should expect Hurd to be much more popular than Linux.

For an example of Stallman's rants, you can see his response to Gates's comments linked above (about intellectual property and communism). One of the first things that stands out is that even though the questioner asked Gates about 'intellectual property, copyrights and patents', Stallman claims Gates was only asked about software patents, and then 'shifted' the subject to intellectual property! This is simply false, as anyone who has read both links can see.

Stallman goes on to rant inanely about how Bill Gates is a communist, and claims Gates said anyone who thinks people should be 'free to program' is a communist! It's just silly, and once again, anyone who reads the other link can see so. In these two articles, Gates comes across as much calmer and more professional than Stallman, and much more so than he himself used to be. Perhaps he's learnt a lesson that Stallman hasn't.

The following link contains a list of anti-Linux quotations from Microsoft executives. It shows Steve Ballmer said Linux had 'characteristics of communism' on 31 July 2000, and called it 'a cancer' on 1 July 2001. As can be seen, these quotations are the oldest on the site, with the more recent ones sounding much less hysterical, and not mentioning cancer or communism. On 13 July 2004, Ballmer even said 'Linux is a good clone of UNIX'!

If you can point to recent quotes by Steve Ballmer or Bill Gates in which Linux is called ridiculous things like 'a cancer', I'll admit I'm wrong! Until then, however, I think it's you who's wrong.

Bill Gates has recently said those who oppose intellectual property rights are 'new modern-day sort of communists', but this is a valid point: a key part of communism is the elimination of property rights, both intellectual and physical.

The idea of being like communists may get you all worked up, but here in Europe, communism is just another economic theory, and what Gates said sounds reasonable. Eliminating property rights is communistic, but that doesn't mean it isn't valid in some cases! If software patents will stifle software development rather than help it, a communistic approach towards software ideas (not software itself) is a better one than the approach of private ownership of such. At the same time, the examples Gates used: music, films and software, which refer to copyright anyway, probably aren't.

One other thing is you haven't made any argument that hysterical comments about competitors are linked to success. You've simply said: (a) Microsoft executives have called Linux 'a cancer' and 'communism', and (b) Microsoft is successful, therefore (a) caused (b). Steve Ballmer is bald too, but that's not why Microsoft is successful!

If making hysterical comments is the key to success, why has Linux been so much more successful than Hurd? Richard Stallman has been ranting hysterically since the 1980s, where as Linus Torvalds is almost always calm and professional. By your logic, therefore, we should expect Hurd to be much more popular than Linux.

For an example of Stallman's rants, you can see his response to Gates's comments linked above (about intellectual property and communism). One of the first things that stands out is that even though the questioner asked Gates about 'intellectual property, copyrights and patents', Stallman claims Gates was only asked about software patents, and then 'shifted' the subject to intellectual property! This is simply false, as anyone who has read both links can see.

Stallman goes on to rant inanely about how Bill Gates is a communist, and claims Gates said anyone who thinks people should be 'free to program' is a communist! It's just silly, and once again, anyone who reads the other link can see so. In these two articles, Gates comes across as much calmer and more professional than Stallman, and much more so than he himself used to be. Perhaps he's learnt a lesson that Stallman hasn't.

If you have no idea what's installed in the computer you are using, everything you do with it may no longer be exclusively your's. I am not just talking about software, hardware is also included (think the Key Katcher Thinkgeek sells). If I wanted security, I would bring my own computer, use SSL on all communication channels, and even that may not be completely safe in a public location (hidden cameras, etc...). I guess hiding in the basement and keep the windows shut, because who knows if they (http://news.com.com/2100-1001-912785.html) can actually see what you do.

Oh, travelling? I guess the short answer is mostly no if public terminals are used.

Nokia also said it will be working with Apple on open source in the future and will be actively involved in the open-source community.

"Open-source software and Linux is an interesting phenomenon--it is not new for Nokia," said Tero Ojanpera, Nokia's chief strategy officer. "We are more and more using open source in our developments."

Apple and Intel Sitting on a Tree...

By Charles Jo
Senior Appleologist, CharlesJo.com
Rev. June 12, 2005 05:54PM PST

Forget Tom Cruz and his new and barely legal girlfriend. Or Brad Pitt and Lara Croft. The hottest couple of this summer is Apple and Intel. After years of bad-mouthing the Santa Clara-based Nelson of the chip sector, Jobs announced last week that Apple and Intel had been secretly dating for 5 years and now are comfortable enough about their relationship to announce to the world their commitment to each other. When asked about the future of the Cupertino-based computer company, Jobs said,"People want better user experience. So, with the hardware giant working on the [air quotes] exciting stuff, I would like to focus Apple's resources to the really really important stuff."
"The logo is our first priority. People love our Apple logo but I've got some neat ideas to take this to a new level that'll really make people go, 'Wow! Now that is a symbol that rappers would be proud to wear.' Watch out Mercedes. And come on, do you really want to be seen wearing a Dell logo? It's like you're advertising to the entire world that you eat at McDonalds and shop at Walmart." He then took a sip of bottled water, adjusted his Freudian spectacles, and continued,"Next on our list is the screensaver. Apple is at the top of the screensaver technology with the fades and zooms so why improve, you ask?" Before I could respond, he answered his own question with another question,"Why not? It's only a matter of time before the Windows folks and Linux folks copy me but by then, I'll have the next screensaver technology ready and BAM! I am on top again. Seriously, this is really important stuff to people. When you walk away from your workstation and your screensaver starts, you want your cubicle neighbors to turn green with envy and our R&D shows that Apple screensavers are excellent ways to increase social ranking in any corporation. Lastly, our commercials are going to so rock you. We are neck to neck with Sony and Budweiser right now and our future commercials will alter the way you view the universe." Jobs then leaned back and pushed a button on a remote control whereupon a giant white screen descended from the ceiling and in parallel, a podium rose from the floor. He insisted that this one-on-one interview continue with him standing at the podium.

____________________________
Related links:
http://stream.apple.akadns.net/
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2005/jun/06intel.h tml
http://ptech.wsj.com/archive/ptech-20050609.html
http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit20050609. html
http://news.com.com/The+brains+behind+Apples+Roset ta+Transitive/2100-1016_3-5736190.html?tag=nefd.le de
http://www.slashnot.com/article.php3?story_id=532
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/12/ 1450217&tid=118&tid=3
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/06/ 1752234&tid=118&tid=179&tid=3
http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/06/12/ 130234&tid=179&tid=1

here

What? Not all of them silly.


Apparently, all except direct copies of intel chips and the cpu-bus, at least until 2011. They first cross-licensed across the board (except for the pentium design) in 1995 over anti-trust concerns.

Why has no one posted this story yet ?

http://news.com.com/Whats+really+behind+Apple-Inte l+alliance/2100-1047_3-5742034.html?tag=macintouch

Jobs throws some light on move to Intel, rejects Cell etc....

There have been some critics of the term AJAX, claiming that the Adaptive Path consultancy who created it are using it as a marketing vehicle (and as a meme) for previously used techniques

It has been pointed out that the AJAX technologies did not have a common name before, and that some welcome a unifying term for the process. However it is also reported that the Google engineers who have created the most prominent applications using this technique consider their technologies as 'Javascript'

AJAX is not a new approach of building software. From a higher perspective the presentation layer is like a form and a programming layer behind handling the events, commonly known in programming terms as MVC. This kind of programming is very well known in older programming environments like Delphi, MFC, Visual Basic, Oracle ADF, and Windows Forms, just to name a few. Applications using this model of programming have been around for years: Microsoft Outlook Web Access using WebDAV and the Web based ERP system P2plus using web services directly from the browser. However, because there are no standards available for the communication model behind previous implementations, all use proprietary extensions.

A new aspect to AJAX is that there are now multiple browsers that can be used to realize this type of application, as opposed to earlier technologies which were frequently limited only to Microsoft's Internet Explorer.

But of course no mass media corporation is going to use an event like this to evaluate our disporportionate value of property over human life.

"We do question the rationale of a transaction which reduces Sun's cash hoard by 40 percent and does nothing to reignite revenue growth or profitability," Prudential analyst Steve Fortuna said in a report Thursday. "We would rather have seen the company buy back a billion shares and fire 10,000 people."

GDI: http://www.crime-research.org/news/28.09.2004/666/

For the record, the company was formed to defend the patents. Several posts seems to suggest that NTP is a company that patents vague ideas and waits for a successful company to pounce on.

From http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,116441,0 0.asp/
Tom Campana developed a wireless communications system for his pager company that he later patented, and the BlackBerry infringes upon that patent, said James Wallace, an attorney with Wiley Rein & Fielding LLP in Washington, D.C., representing NTP. NTP was incorporated to hold Campana's patents, and does not make any products or provide any services, he said.

Oh, and BTW, in case you're thinking Tom is one greedy SOB, he's dead. http://news.com.com/Key+figure+in+BlackBerry+case+ dies/2100-1041_3-5238198.html/

Don't think I'm defending NTP. I just want everyone to get the facts straight.

Actually, Apple Senior Vice President, Phil Schiller said Macs would be able to run Windows, as quoted here. At least that is my interpretation of what he said.
Anyway way, it would be trivial for MS to make it happen if they chose to.

http://news.com.com/2100-1023-963937.html?tag=lh

I've wondered how that turned out. I didn't read any disaster stories... did I miss them?

Oracle Released thier Oracle File System at least a couple of years ago. Same thing
http://news.com.com/2100-1001-239522.html

Just like a Jedi openly going over to the Dark Side turns in his old lightsaber for a red one, now that M$ has openly declared itself evil, the blue screen of death has turned red!!!

And just like in Star Wars, the only folks in the whole damn universe who couldn't tell who the evil person manipulating events was were the idiots running the government....

and surprisingly - for once - I agree with ballmer: http://news.com.com/Quote+of+the+day+What+changed/ 2110-1006_3-5735703.html?part=rss&tag=5735703&subj =news

This was revealed in a news.com story.

The quote was on the second page of that link:

>>
After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

The news is actually better than dual boot though. With Virtual PC, you will be able to run XP in an application window on Mac OS. You won't need to reboot. And, because it's running on an X86 chip already, the performance should be as good as Windows running on a dedicated PC.

Here are just a few references pointing out the real percentage of computers infected with spyware:
80%
8 out of 10
88%
Or, just search it.
So, 5 years to admit to the problem as it was 3-ish years ago.

...but their VAIO notebooks have done exceptionally well for them at least for a period; they were no.1 by revenue in 2001 (no.2 by shipments) with consistently higher pricing than the competition.

That Sony are now ~no.6 (by laptop shipments) is partly due to price, but also because their competitors (HP, Dell, Toshiba, IBM, Fujitsu) now produce nicer notebooks that compete with Sony on weight, ergonomics and aesthetics. There wasn't that same competition in 2001.

Next thing Microsoft will be friendly to other OS'... wait a minute...damn..

The world is ending i tell ya!

Yes, but they were talking about the dual core P4.

according to this artical: http://news.com.com/Intel+spills+beans+on+Yonah,+t he+next+notebook+chip/2100-1006_3-5729925.html?par t=rss&tag=5729925&subj=news
the dual core Pentium M will be different.

"For one thing, it will contain two cores, instead of the single core on current notebook chips. The two separate cores will also share a 2MB cache. Current dual-core desktop chips from Advanced Micro Devices and Intel come with similar sized caches, but each core accesses only 1MB of cache memory dedicated to it. Sharing the cache will significantly boost performance. (The chips communicate with the cache through a single bus embedded in the chip.)"

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

Not that I don't hope I'm wrong, but I suspect this is why Microsoft isn't looking that upset about the switch right now.

If this story about not allowing people to run MacOS on non-Apple hardware is really true, this will mean that, apparently, Apple is chronically disabled in its capabilites for marketing strategies and will never get it right.
Just look at the recent developments: first, they release the MacMini. Now, it'll adopt Intel chips - which translates as - don't buy a MacMini, because Mac OS X will run on Intel. But look closer: no, you won't be able to install it on standard hardware, only Apple hardware.
How fucked-up can your World Dominance strategy get?
Steve Jobs only seems to target the North-American and the European markets. He doesn't really get it that the PC-clone markets are everywhere, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe, and that in all those fringe markets, as well as all the important ones, there's a Windows OS in a PC-clone.
Apple will, once again, miss a window of opportunity. Apple just never learns, it always wants to be the sofisticated desert for the rich people of Suburbia, never the staple item for the masses, sitting on filthy shops in São Paulo or Beijing. Always the dame, never the fun-giving whore. Steve Jobs is clueless...

Wow, you were right. Interesting!

This article from news.com.com details an Amnesty International report about the Western corporations who have been happy to help China set up its massive surveillance system. Those of us responsible for buying networking hardware for our companies may want to consider where we want our money to go. I would suggest supporting businesses who don't so blatantly assist in massively squashing basic human rights.

The underlying CPU means almost nothing to the vast majority of application developers. The endianness might make it easier to port Windows and Linux/x86 applications to the Mac, but I can't see OSS developers moving en masse to OS X for that reason. And if OS X/x86 ran on standard PC hardware, it could easily take a chunk out of open source Windows apps, but that's just not going to happen--See here, the last paragraph: Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

(Incidentally, the use of the word allow indicates to me that perhaps the hardware will be practically identical and artificial restrictions may be put in place to ensure the hardware is a genuine Apple box... then someone will hack OS X to run on generic PCs... and Apple will bludgeon them with the DMCA... I can hardly wait.)

i do...We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac,"

Remember, NeXT went from selling Computers with a BSD-based OS to selling just the OS for x86 computers. Steve Jobs was there, he saw how well that worked.

to run the OS:

http://news.com.com/Apple+throws+the+switch,+align s+with+Intel/2100-7341_3-5733756.html?tag=macintou ch

However, [Apple Senior VP Phil] Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

So Macs are just going to be "less different" than other computers by using the majority processor. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Interesting that Apple's own page on the G5 towers touts how great it is over Intel with all sorts of benchmarks.

It seem incredulous to me that after hearing some of the major breaches or loss of customer data within the past 60 days or so (Wachovia, Bank of America, DSW, Lexis-Nexis) I have the right to be a bit concerned about giving my social security number to any financial institution. If these large financial institutions and data warehouses can't keep my information secure, why should I give it to them?

The lady at the local bank started looking at me funny after I asked her if my SS# was required to open an account, and started giving me some "post 9/11" corporate response. (Meanwhile, I'm thinking 'yeah, exactly. that's why you shouldn't have it.') And who cares about "128-bit SSL/DES encryption/armed-guard data centers" when you ship unencrypted records via public-class shipping services?

Where's that bit of legislation about returning the social security number to an SSA-only internal identifier when you need it... Maybe we can get some support for some of that now..

that if Opera 8 is downloaded a million more times in the next four days that Eskil Sivertsen, his Public Relations Manager, would swim across the Atlantic underwater using the underwater breathing apparatus. Tetzchner says, ' last time I made a promise my body couldn't keep but this time I'll be rowing the boat, so I feel much more confident.'

In page 2 of the C|Net story; look at the end.

"The company will also soon ship a $999 developers' kit that includes a Mac running a 3.6GHz Pentium processor, the Intel-based version of Mac OS X, XCode 2.1 and Rosetta." a qoute from http://news.com.com/Apple+developers+cautiously+up beat+on+Intel/2100-1016_3-5734020.html

But then people will ask "well then why do I have to buy a new computer to get OSX?" It is official that OSX won't be opened to non Mac harware, so this statement would confuse people and make them mad. Not good marketing on your part..

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said. - source

... according to the developers docs on the apple home-page, Intel-based macs will not use openfirmware, also:

from cnet today:

http://news.com.com/Apple+throws+the+switch%2C+ali gns+with+Intel+-+page+2/2100-7341_3-5733756-2.html ?tag=st.next

--------------

After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

" Or can I homebrew an OSX box?"

from an article on cnet:
"However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said."

According to http://news.com.com/Apple+throws+the+switch%2C+ali gns+with+Intel/2100-7341_3-5733756.html?tag=st.num .

"After Jobs' presentation, Apple Senior Vice President Phil Schiller addressed the issue of running Windows on Macs, saying there are no plans to sell or support Windows on an Intel-based Mac. "That doesn't preclude someone from running it on a Mac. They probably will," he said. "We won't do anything to preclude that."

Looks like I will be getting a Mac to replace my PC. : )

$1000 is exaggerating a little too much. Most of the time its no more than $100-200 difference if you don't factored in software bundles. Apple probably will lower their prices because processors and logic boards can be had for less than the PPC.

This also won't lead to a direct swipe at Microsoft for two reasons. Apple won't disallow Windows to run on the Mac and Apple won't allow OSX to be run on any other commodity PC other than Apple.You can read this hereAnd get it from Schillers mouth. So, Apple users could still install XP or Loghorn if they want aftermarket.

And nothing has been said yet on if you WOULD be able to load it on any Dell or Gateway system. It could very well need some proprietary Mac hardware to run on.

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

This is a huge blow to PowerPC's credibility, though.

Not according to the NYT.

By contrast, the chips I.B.M. makes for Apple represent less than 2 percent of chip production at its largest factory in East Fishkill, N.Y. And while the microelectronics business as a whole is strategically important for I.B.M., it is a small part of the revenue of a company that increasingly focuses on services and software. A. M. Sacconaghi, an analyst for Sanford C. Bernstein & Company, estimates that the company's technology group - mostly microelectronics - will account for less than 3 percent of I.B.M.'s revenues and 2 percent of its pretax income this year.

For years, according to industry analysts, the work for Apple has been barely a break-even business for I.B.M. When the two companies were negotiating a new contract recently, Mr. Jobs pushed for price discounts that I.B.M. refused to offer. For I.B.M., "the economics just didn't work," said one industry executive who was briefed on the negotiations. "And Apple is not so important a customer that you would take the financial hit to hold onto the relationship."

I'm more interested in this quote:

However, [Apple Senior Vice President Phil] Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac."

Too bad. I'd like to run OS X w/out having to pay an Apple hardware premium.

The answer is no, you will not. http://news.com.com/Apple+throws+the+switch,+align s+with+Intel/2100-7341_3-5733756.html?tag=macintou ch A quote from the link.

However, Schiller said the company does not plan to let people run Mac OS X on other computer makers' hardware. "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac," he said.

http://news.com.com/Apple+throws+the+switch,+align s+with+Intel/2100-7341_3-5733756.html

The unofficial position now is (1) you will probably be able to install Windows on an Intel-based Mac, and (2) you will not be able to install OS X on an Intel-based non-Mac.

I'm not sure how Apple will be able to prevent (2) from happening, but I'm sure they've already thought it through and solved the problem before making this decision. The question I have, though, is this: What can Apple do to keep non-Apple hardware from running OS X, and can it be circumvented if you build it yourself?

According to this News.com article, Apple's senior vice president Phil Schiller said, "We will not allow running Mac OS X on anything other than an Apple Mac."

WINE will run on a Mac. This is *HUGE*. Imagine running any Windows software, at native speeds, with OpenGL support, on Mac OS X.


This can't be emphasized enough. This is REALLY HUGE.

In the next couple of years, you'll see PLENTY of open source emulators that will let you run your Windows app on OS X. But you'll NEVER see something that allows you to run your OS X app on a Wintel PC (see Phil Shiller's comments here)

Bottom line: you don't NEED the Microsoft OS -- you NEED the Apple OS.

-ch