Slashdot Mirror
Dvorak Avocates Open Sourcing OS X
xzvf writes "Dvorak claims OS X and Apple in trouble. He suggests open sourcing OS X for an epic battle with Linux. In many ways, this is just insane rambling, but it's certainly entertaining on some levels." From the article: "That would make the battle between OS X and Linux the most interesting one on the computer scene. With all attention turned in that direction, there would be nothing Microsoft could do to stem a reversal of its fortunes. Let's start at the beginning. There's been a lot of fuss over Apple's rollout of the unsupported Boot Camp product, which lets Mac users run Microsoft Windows easily on an Intel-based Macintosh. I got into various levels of trouble when I suggested that Apple was going to gravitate towards Windows since it would be easy to do and there was some evidence that the company might want to do it."
There have been several instances where I would have liked to step into a Cocoa API call to see what's going on behind the scenes, but was not able to. The Cocoa API is part of what the Mac experience is built upon, so Apple is not going to open up this library. But from a developer's standpoint, it is frustrating to have it closed.
'nuff said.
If brevity is the soul of wit, then how does one explain Twitter?
Let me share with you friends, the deep, dark, scary secret that Starbucks is keeping. A secret so shocking that when it is released on the world, it will literally change things forever! I've only recently figured this out myself, so pay attention as I walk you through the sordid details.
Like many super-intelligent-people-in-the-computer-industry
But then I got to thinking. What does Starbucks need with drive through windows? I mean, they're in the coffee business, not the fast food industry. People come into Starbucks to enjoy the environment, not grab their cup and run! Then it hit me! Starbucks needs drive-up windows because they are planning to bring that same environment to your vehicle! That's right, Starbucks wants to give you that same coffee-saturated, easy listening, comfortable seating feeling you get in their stores, but in your car. But how will they do it? Will they allow you to place your Venti cup in a cup holder and allow the smell to drift across your Caddilac? No!
There can be only one explanation: Starbucks is going to make cars. Nothing else makes sense! So two years from now when you're driving your Starbucks-mobile, remember this. You heard it here first. --John C. Dvorak
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
Yeah, first Apple is going to switch to Windows, then OS X will be open sourced! Good going Dvorak. I think he's just picking these out of a hat. God knows it'll get 500 posts here.
this sig limit is too small to put anything good h
Dvorak should buy Ubuntu. Or maybe Novell.
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
I frequent a message board frequented by members of the gaming journalism press and developers. Upon the Boot Camp announcement, about ten of them immediately bought new Macs.
All of them, to a man, spend all of their time in OSX. They only boot Windows to play games, but do everything else in OSX.
Dvorak still doesn't get it.
How would open sourcing OS X make an epic battle with Linux? If anything, asuming the license was favourable, it would only benefit Linux and projects like KDE and Gnome, wouldn't it?
I advocate that banks open their vaults to anyone who wants money. I advocate that car dealers leave their keys in the cars for anyone to take them. I advocate that restaurants make their food free. All of these things might kill the businesses involved, but it certainly would be nice for me and for other people who'd rather not pay for things.
David
Dvorak. Much like his keyboard. His ideas will never take off.
I often enjoy reading Dvorak, but this is just nonsense. Apple's usability comes from their software. Nobody buys Mac because of the hardware no matter what they say. They buy it because of the OS. Apple charges a premium for their hardware, but people are willing to pay this premium because of the software. Apple comes closer to "it just works" because of OS X, not because of the nifty design of the boxes or because they supposedly use "high quality" parts.
Switching to Windows would mean two things: 1) The differentiation factor for Apple decreases, meaning that they would have to compete more on price, and 2) Their support costs would go up because of the number of calls they'd get from users with Windows problems. Hello, spyware anyone? Not a problem for Apple now, but would change instantly with a Windows conversion.
I still think that Apple is slowly making the move to put OS X on generic PC boxes (and eventually more OEMs). Only they're doing it slowly and quietly, so as not to awaken the sleeping giant with the massive war chest. Apple could make a move for just desktop share, as they haven't shown any interest in becoming a large-volume server OS company. Let MS and other *nixes fight over the servers, Apple would be happy with selling boxes to just the end users and software licenses to OEMs and third parties.
C'mon, John, the first step is to admit you have a problem.
Crow T. Trollbot
They did. They called it "Darwin". It had everything that Linux has and had; it runs GNU software like everything else and is capable of GNOME or KDE. It hasn't performed very well.
I hope I am not being desnse here, but if OS X was open-sourced, then couldn't enterprising Linux / OSX experts make distros for any pc hardware? (scrap that - ANY micropocessor platform? Sparc? ARM? PS3 ?)
So why buy apple hardware any more?
Dvorak claims OS X and Apple in trouble. He suggests open sourcing OS X for an epic battle with Linux. In many ways, this is just insane rambling, but it's certainly entertaining on some levels.
How about we Open Source Dvorak's articles and let some other insane ramblings ensue, in fact, I have a few of my own.
First, I want a epic battle between humans and robots complete with protests, picketing, egg-throwing, and flaming.
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Apple has no way to make money from such a move.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
... nothing but increasing his ad-hits by continually pumping out provacative, but senseless drivel, with a side of flame-festy goodness.
Nothing to see here... move along.
...Rob
The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
Dvorak is trolling again.
The reason Apple is 'so great' is because they control the whole experience. What you are buying is the hardware + apps +OS.
If you sell the OS on any old PC hardware (as many have asked for) then suddenly Apple loses one of the legs or their product.
If you open the OS then you lose another leg.
The reason everyone wants apple to do these things is because the quality they can get when they control all those things. (no they dont control all the apps, obviously, but they provide the basic user with everything they would need in an easy to use package)
I am so tired of people saying: I love apple OS, but i will never pay for it until they sell it for my shitty dell hardware! Well, then it wouldn't be the Apple that is able to be so high quality, and you wouldn't want it anyway!
So, back to my original point: Dvorak is a tired hack, and he is trolling for pagehits. Please stop putting his crap up here and helping him out!
Instead of fighting eachother, we could take the best from Linux and OS X (and others) and conquer the world!
Swedish plasma phys. PhD student; MSc EE; knows maths, programming, electronics; finance interest; seeks opportunities
No there wasn't.
Getting OS X onto PCs might be even more doable today, since researchers are reporting that as many as half of the business-owned PCs in operation now may not be capable of running Microsoft Vista.
And any random crap hardware that can't run Vista should have no trouble running Mac OS X! Piece of cake.
The Boot Camp product is pure test marketing. It's so obviously test marketing that it's hard to believe that people are foolish enough to get worked up about it.
Yes, Apple announced that this functionality will be built into the next version of Mac OS X, because they want to wait and see how people react before they decide whether it's a good idea. Because if they had already decided it was a good idea, they would have done something differently.
Does Windows works well on Mac hardware, or not? The idea here is to put it into the wild and see what happens in a support-free environment where Apple has no responsibility to help make it work.
Does Windows work well on PC hardware, or not? That's debatable, but obviously Apple thinks they can make it work just as well on Mac hardware. Does it yet? No. That's why Boot Camp is in beta. There are bugs they need to work out. Some of them are documented.
Apple needs to analyze the reaction to Windows on a Mac. This includes seeing whether there is massive rejection of the idea--protests, picketing, egg-throwing, and flaming. In other words, can the community at large live with the idea of Windows running on a Mac? That cannot be known or assumed without this test.
Nope, it can't be known. Absolutely no way to even guess. It's not like you could ask people. You know, take a survey. And I mean a real one, not PC Magazine's equivalent of a Slashdot poll.
Much of the positive reaction, though, seems to stem from the mistaken supposition that having Windows on a Mac will make OS X look better by comparison, so people will flock to OS X.
Really? That's not the reaction I've been hearing. The two reactions I've been hearing are:
I didn't bother continuing to the next page.
$x='S24;r)>63/* h@<5+oZ)32"5cz';$me='phroggy'x$];
$x=~y+ -xz+\0-Tx+;print$_^chop$me for split'',$x;
Let's see: Apple is selling tons of iPods, keeping lots of media and youth attention on Apple. Apple has switched to Intel and now allows you to dual boot Windows, meaning that Apples now look very attractive to businesses, since they can now have the benefit of both Windows and Mac OS X without having to buy seperate computers. I'd say that Apple is poised to do extremely well, and this guy is smoking some seriously gnarly stuff.
In the words of Peter Griffin: "This plan is brilliant it's retarded!"
What's crazy to me is this might be a brilliant marketing strategy to divert some attention away from Microsoft. It's so crazy it just might work...
Developers: We can use your help.
Great, so Apple can give away either its best product (or it's number one hardware advertisement, depending on if you think Apple is a hardware company, or a software company), into a hardware environment it can't control, thereby eroding its famous stability.
Great business plan. Apple would be insane to turn OSX into an open source product. The market has repeatedly shown what happens to high end wintel box manufacturers.
I don't have an anger problem, I have an idiot problem
actually, it's been a rough day, make it a double!
Dvorak claims OS X and Apple in trouble. Me Tarzan, you Boy. Go find Jane. Need firewood.
It is utter bullshit this maniac comes up with each and every single time he wastes words into cyberspace, but nonetheless, I at least spare a glimpse for it by accident whenever this complete dork is featured on /. :-(
As this turns out to be physically painful 100% of the time, I suggest you just drop the crap (that means EVERYTHING published by him!) Mr. Dvorak fantasizes about when obviously being on crack, dope, and at least 3 other illegal drugs (possibly not!) known to the broad masses of mankind, and just leave him and his infantile and uneducated babble be. Please.
:%s/Open Source/Free Software/g
YTARY!
How can I get a job where all I have to do is write an article with no backup or substantiation beyond my own knowledge and speculation about an idea that I shat out this morning on the toliet? Not only that, how can I get a job where I get to keep it after doing this every week for years?
The reason is that the vast majority of existing commercial software is running on Windows and people have gotten used to it. Microsoft has a captive market for Windows, the same way Columbian drug dealers have a captive market for cocaine. Microsoft has other things to worry about, not the least of which is that a third party may come into the ring out of nowhere and offer a solution to the biggest problem facing the computer industry today: software unreliability and our inability to manage and create highly complex and safe systems. This is the reason that none of us are riding in self-driving vehicles today among other things. Clearly, something needs to be done and quick. Microsoft (Bill Gates) has no idea what this something is. That's where the fear comes in. Some other company may come in and take everybody by surprise. Microsoft and the other big players would then be left in the dust holding on to yesterday's obsolete technology. Unless, of course, they see the light and take quick action. But I'm not hoilding my breath.
All of these ideas have the following in common with Dvorak's "advocating" opensourcing all of OS X:
Crow T. Trollbot
I swear to God, what is wrong with him? Is he stupid or what? OSing OS X? This is exactly why he writes a few paragraphs once in a while instead of being entrusted with running an actual company. What a twit.
OS X (open or not) for PC timeline:
1. Apple releases OS X for PCs.
2. Dell begins to sell desktops preloaded with OS X.
3. Phone call to Dell from Redmond about the new per unit cost to "nonexclusive" vendors of preloaded Windows: $500.
4. Dell announces that OS X shipments being discontinued due lack of demand.
5. Apple shipments of computers decline, revenue from OS X makes up only a fraction of shortfall.
6. Apple stock falls.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
I've been forced to notice John Dvorak for far, far too long.
Please, everyone do everyone else a big favor and ignore him.
The authors of this Dvorak bot should really get their act together and fix it they want it to last more than 5 minutes during the next Turing Test challenge.
Since no company, including massive IBM, has been able to compete with or unseat Microsoft from the desktop, Microsoft's stance alone may prevent any universal acceptance of OS X on the desktop from ever happening. In fact, I assume that as this is being written, Microsoft has coders in its skunk works tearing into OS X looking for deep flaws that it can exploit and publicize. Don't think otherwise. It only makes sense that they'd do this.
Right. This would be because they have no problems of their own to fix? There may be folks at Msft disassembling code, but with a goal of "publicizing flaws"? There are enough people doing that for free on both sides of the fence.
Thus a cloud is rising over OS X and its future unless Apple makes its boldest move ever: turning OS X into an open-source project. That would make OS X versus Linux become the most interesting battle within the computer scene. With all the attention turned in that direction, there would be nothing Microsoft could do to stem a reversal of its fortunes.
So.
Because Microsoft will automagically discover their flaws due to their crack team of exploit finders (who have been able to find all of Window's flaws previous to this, and because Microsoft is positioning themselves to squeeze everyone out of the market, Apple should make their OS free and compete with Linux in order to draw attention away from Microsoft? Because making their OS free would help their bottom line.... or.....?
1. Make OS free 2. Start OS war with Linux 3. **?** 4. Profit?
Am I the only one thinking WTF? Insane ramblings indeed.
eof
If the /. staff is going to continue posting Dvorak articles regarding Apple as if they have any value, can my Batboy links please be accepted for the science category?
I mean if you're going to post bullocks like this in one category it's only fair to accept them in all categories!
Hey Slashdot editors! Stop feeding the fucking trolls!
Linux will always have its supporters - you can't shut it down.
... if it were free for their hardware you'd see converts in drones. Linux wouldn'd die, but the Jedi sure would be feeling it.
Yeah, but how many times have you heard OSS guys saying "yeah, but MacOS sure is pretty" or "yeah, I wouldn't mind trying that out on a Mac"
Pick one.
"We reject as false the choice between our safety and our ideals." --The American President (20.1.2009)
The only people who are installing Windows on their Intel based Macs are Mac users who already had a PC, most of which are gamers. The day after Apple announced Boot Camp, I had two PC users tell me they were going to buy a Mac for their next computer, and they would partition the drive so they could use some software they needed to have. Nobody's going to start buying Apple products to run Windows on John, please refrain from smoking crack before writing your articles.
Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
The reason this idiot keeps on rambling is because we're giving him an audience. Why are all his articles on Slashdot?
...oh, wait, that was just the good dream I had last night.
Many Bothans died to bring you this sig.
"That would make the battle between OS X and Linux the most interesting one on the computer scene. With all attention turned in that direction, there would be nothing Microsoft could do to stem a reversal of its fortunes."
Now it all makes sense. I've been labouring under the misapprehension that the main goal of large software/hardware companies like Apple and Microsoft was to make money. It's taken the observations of a true genius to make me realise that the true objective of any such company should be to do 'interesting battles' with Linux. Maybe with light sabres.
'cos like, I need it; and stuff. So, c'mon guys...
[+] dvorak, troll, moron, osx, stupid (tagging beta)
"Dvorak ... is just insane rambling"
-1 redundant.
- Adam L. Beberg - The Cosm Project - http://www.mithral.com/
Can we have this guys fingers cut off so he can't write this crap?
I think the best question to ask all these writers/posters of "Apple should do this..." articles is, why? Or to be more specific. Why DO YOU want Apple to do these things? What's in it for Apple? What's in it for you? How come the status quo isn't good enough for you...or Apple?
Dvorak wants Apple to open source the OS so that Microsoft's developers can steal some code for Windows.
Specifically, they can steal the code that gets rid of the "System Idle Process" that hogs the CPU on Windows.
His opening and closing statement about "turning OS X into an open-source project" and the sudden ability it would have to "make the battle between OS X and Linux the most interesting one on the computer scene" are not actually discussed anywhere in the article. Perhaps if he would have stayed on topic there would have been something to discuss...doubtful...but perhaps. The meat of the article is simply a rehash of former speculation he's had and deviates so far from the subject as to be worthless. Nothing to see here...please move along.
What can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence.
I did my part by not actually clicking on the link and giving it one more page hit.
Stay tuned for new sig...
This notion is unmitigated nonsense.
Apple is not looking to unseat Windows as the OS king or are they trying to become ubiquitous. Apple is cultivating a boutique culture with their products and they are being very successful. Starbucks charges an unreasoble amout for coffee but people pay because they like to be associated with the Starbuck images. Apple is similar but not the same. They actually produce superior products (OS X, iPod) but they want to maitain the hip and cool vibe that is associated with them. The company is doing very well at the moment. I don't understand the "death knell" attitudes of some comentators. Why on earth would they alter OS X? They are making a fortune with it.
I think Boot Camp was introduced to shut people up. To end the Will-Windows-Run-on-Macs speculation. I firly believe that virtualization is in the card in the near future. Boot Camp is a temporary release to bridge the gap.
If you set up the site, I will happily contribute idiocy worthy of The Man Himself.
Here are the titles of some of my brilliant future submissions:
"Microsoft Should Buy IBM"
"Apple Should Buy Apple"
"SCO Should Buy Enron"
"IBM Should Buy All Copies Of Mariah Carey's 'Glitter'"
"The Dvorak Keyboard Layout Should Buy Me"
Rich And Stupid is not so bad as Working For Rich And Stupid.
Why is this batshitinsane Dvorak asshat being given any media space here on Slashdot? I mean, sure, Dvorak is a famous retard... but what on earth makes Taco and crew think anyone gives a good goddamn about what some retard has to say about Apple, regardless his fame?
--
Don't like it? Respond with words, not karma.
Apple's great advantage is the fusion of excellent hardware and software. They will never be sold independently of each other.
I must admit, I still haven't figured out how Boot Camp and Windows will fit into this picture, but I'm working on it. Maybe it's the new Classic, I don't know. Dvorak obviously thinks he's got it figured out.
Beauty is in the beholder of the eye.
Anyone else get the feeling that Dvorak's articles are written by manatee's in a large tank filled with idea balls...?
Apple + Open source + War
"Oh, the makings of another great Dvorak article, I can see it now..."
Be better in bed. Wikiafterdark!
The more I read the chorus of disapproval and dismissal with which his thoughts have been greeted, the more I realised that as usual the conventional wisdom misses the point. I know he is usually fairly silly, but that is when he writes about things he knows too little about. His point in this case does not depend on understanding technology, but on knowledge of human nature, big companies, and markets.
/. will instantly dismiss that, which is exactly why it is worth thinking about. Because it is not you guys who would buy them if they came without OSX. No, but maybe there is a really important numerous market segment that would. It could be. Now, suppose they did find that out, what would they do?
His main point is, if you are a company the size and nature of Apple, you do not simply launch BootCamp on a whim. It is a major decision, internally. So they will have scenarios and objectives. What could they be? His answer is, to find things out. Then he speculates on what they could want to find out, and what they may actually be finding out.
They will also have a followup plan. What could that be?
One of the things they may find out is that people would buy more Macs if they did not come with OSX on them. I realise that everyone on
His answer is, if they thought they could contain the damage, they would take the money and run. His answer to whether the damage seems containable is that so far it does seem likely. There would be some, but the current base would probably shout and scream and stamp their feet and then settle down to their dinners again. They have swallowed Intel, and now they have swallowed BootCamp. They will probably swallow the next one too, if its pitched right.
You all have to realise, this has nothing to do with whether you all like XP or OSX. It has nothing to do with the 'integrated experience' and what you all think makes Apple great. It has to do with some very cold blooded guys sitting in quiet rooms who do not give a damn about your feelings or what you think is great, but who are trying to figure their way through the future. The only thing they worry about is whether enough of you will walk. Dvorak is saying, the evidence they are getting is no.
Never mind who said it, or what silliness he has said in the past. This is really an interesting and penetrating set of thoughts. Yes, I agree, from an unlikely source.
Hands down, OSX/Apple has a mature desktop. If Apple were to completely open source it's operating system, or those portions that they are able to do so without license encumberance (we also have Darwin), the community could not only learn from Apple, but integrate that knowledge into other projects.
That would almost certainly create more competition for Microsoft. And I think all would agree THAT is a good thing, given the state of affairs these days.
Doing so may also prove dangerous to Apple as, afterall, it's a specialized product for specialized/controlled hardware. Their operating system is at the core of their products; they don't have a hardware market share such as Sun (who open sourced Solaris, OpenSolaris), so the risk is clearly greater. That alone may be too risky for the present time, strictly as a business decision.
Either way, I think it's an interesting idea... at least.
I believe our chances of getting abducted by a UFO are much greater than Apple going completely open source GRIN.
Face it folks, Unless Apple sells an integrated system, they can't compete. If they sell hardware only, they get killed on price. If they sell just the OS, M$ kills them with its market power. Apple can do something M$ can't, they can sell an integrated computing system that basically "just works."
The boot camp strategy seems to be a way to allow someone to own and use an apple while still retaining their legacy M$ software. Eventually the customer will abandon the M$ partition for everything but that application (game) that still doesn't run on apple. Meanwhile, Apple is selling overpriced very reliable computer systems to people who discover that computers don't have to crash on a regular basis.
At some point the developers will notice this fact and provide programs that run on both platforms. When that happens M$ dies (or it adapts).
David,
/. readers who 1) recognize satire and 2)have no mod points at this moment, please accept our apology for the idiots who modded your post "flamebait." They do not speak for us and hopefully they'll get slapped down during meta-moderation.
On behalf of the legions of
Mod points should only be given to those who can demonstrate basic literacy.
Darwin? FreeBSD?
Wtf?
Perhaps, Dvorak is a sleestak, and he must be opened.
A computer once beat me at chess, but it was no match for me at kick boxing. Emo Philips
He just doesn't know what he is talking about.
Dvorak is like Nostrodmos (sp?). He sees a trend, and totally misinterprets it.
I have every belief in the world that Apple will release a Cocoa for Win32. You'll be able to build OS X applications that will run just fine on Win32 using the Cocoa framework.
There'll be some minor niggles that are resolved through an extra compile-time check on Xcode, after which you get an even MORE universal binary. Then, Xcode becomes a painless cross-platform development library, and Apple does its damndest to encourage cross-platform developers like Adobe to move to using only Xcode.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
Dvorak just likes to make inane random predictions that never, and I mean never, come true. His column inches are dedicated to shots in the dark which don't deserve the time of day. He's a troll with a website who claims to be an expert, and loves making wilder and crazier predictions with a distinct Apple fetish
Apple has the best sales they've ever had, they have no reason to open source it, and it's just... nonsense to anyone.
Looking at Slashdot posts he thinks
* Apple is going to move to Windows
* Microsoft should buy Opera
* Apple are promoted by news people more than they are used
* the Creative Commons license is worth trashing
* That Apple's move to Intel will harm Linux
* Google is planning a web browser
* Apple should discontinue the Mac
* TiVo is a way of stealing programming
Make your own opinions. Mine is that he's a poor troll. Okay, so he correctly predicted that Apple would move to Intel. But if you fire enough shots and make enough random predictions, you're eventually going to get one on the bullseye.
He's been wishing for/predicting Apple will die for about 18 years now.
When the Mac was first introduced, he was the guy who stated that the graphical user interface was "stupid" and "toy like".
Every article he writes is basically a suggestion for Apple to commit suicide. He actually wrote an article saying that if you used an iBook you were gay.
Here's my suggestion to Dvorak. If you want to be more competitive as a writer, start taking cyanide pills immediately.
Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
Ok, so my reaction to Dvorak was "yeah, but no, but".
Apple's real gambit in regards to Windows is almost too transparent. Boot Camp is the second step towards a true virtualization layer for OSX that will blend Windows and OSX. The move to Intel was the first.
Given that virtualization is becoming so cruicial in so many areas with VM Ware, Solaris zones, and whatever HP call it, Apple's Boot Camp only makes sense. Multi-core processors make virtualization even more attractive to those craving processore density. With the Intel-Mac's lack of BIOS, Boot Camp provides the bridge between OS X and Windows for now, requiring reboots to toggle between operating system.
The abstraction of the BIOS is a key idea to take away from Boot Camp. The abstraction at least proves that Windows will run at that layer. The next step is likely to be a greater abstraction that will allow a Windows "session" to run inside of OSX without requiring a reboot, possibly similar to Virtual PC but with better performance. At this point, users would be able to access all features of both operating systems, albeit with some difficulty.
Eventually, the logical move would be to a complete virtualization layer in which multiple operating systems can simultaneously share the system and interact with one another. I wouldn't be surprised to see a virtualization system that allows easy "drag and drop" from OS X into Windows and vice versa.
This is probably a more realistic view than Dvorak, as it gets people onto OS X without the worry of not being able to use Windows. Could we see some kind of "WinOS/2"-like bundling in the future? Probably not to that extent, but with similar functionality.
Here is OSX, need to run Windows? Insert CD and click here, now your windows appas run inside what appear to be OSX windows.
As I have said elsewhere, I think that Apple will probably release OSX for non-Apple PCs someday. The conditions for such a release have not yet been met, but could possibly happen before long.
After that, it's possible that Apple could open-source OSX. But they'll do it only if they decide to get out of the PC business entirely. Apple won't go straight to open source OSX without trying a broad commercial release first, and they won't go open-source unless a broad commercial release of OSX utterly fails to be profitable. Open-source OSX is the last fallback position for Apple. It would be both a generous and a vengeful move on Apple's part, and it would probably not enhance shareholder value.
(Or, to quote Open Source: The Wrath of Jobs: "To the last, I grapple with thee... From Hell's heart, I stab at thee... For hate's sake, I spit my last breath at thee.")
Apple isn't ready to blow themselves up just to make a noise. Maybe someday, but not yet.
With reasonable men I will reason; with humane men I will plead; but to tyrants I will give no quarter. -- William Lloyd
Battles for second place are rarely epic.
HTH, HAND!
When the country falls into chaos, politicians talk about 'patriotism'. Lao-Tzu
hahaha
I agree
I thought that by this time, OSX86 would be replacing XP as the client OS of choice, but then Apple shot itself...not in the foot, but in the balls by refusing to allow OSX86 to run on non-Apple-brand hardware.
IDIOTS!!!
I'll pay $200 per license for 500 licenses, but they don't care. So, XP goes and Knoppix stays.
Andy Out!
I love OS X, but I love the hardware more. Have you ever used a Powerbook? Mine is a 4 year old war horse that has been all over the world, been dropped, been sat on, had water spilled into the keyboard, has scratches galore, but keeps on running, and running well.
You pay for their hardware because their hardware is worth it. Everyone has their "dead computer" story, regardless of who made it, but I've seen far fewer dead Macs than Dells or Gateways.
Most psychotropic drugs are illegal even if you take them to clear your head while reading Dvorak.
dvorak is an idiot, but he knows how to get headlines. and here we are discussing his inane ramblings. he got what he wantaed. must be a slow news day.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Certainly the recent rise of OS X on the back of the iPod has hurt desktop Linux, but these two desktop OS's appeal to completely different market segments so they are natural allies, not adversaries.
Linux attack MS from the low-end and is particularly strong in corporate, third world, and limited use, environments. It is flexible and is appealling technically and politically, but is quite rough and not ready for the average consumer.
OS X is the opposite. It is high margin, high sytle, and slick. It is perfect for the brand-concious, reasonably wealthy, consumer who wants everything to work together easily.
I'm not suggesting that Apple would intentionally help Linux, anymore than MS would, but Apple and Linux are not exactly on a collision course!
Honestly, my favorite part of this article is this:
"I got into various levels of trouble when I suggested that Apple was going to gravitate towards Windows since it would be easy to do and there was some evidence that the company might want to do it."
What he actually said was that Apple would ditch OS X for Windows. What Apple actually did was allow people who want to run Windows -as well- to install it on a second partition, obviously with the intention of providing a safety net to would-be switchers.
I like John, but I'd rather he not try to restate what he previously stated to make himself look smarter than he really is.
bash-3.00$ uname -a
SunOS panda 5.10 Generic sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-2
All windows will now be free for people to download with working keygens, Linux will be made into closed source and sold at an rrp of $80 with no tech support. Its rather embarrasing how much of a fanboy this guy is, is he on Jobs payroll surely he is damaging Apple? Linux has more global users than Mac.
Yeah, well, Apple had the same idea several years ago, and that's why OS X is open source.
Perhaps the FSF doesn't consider Apple's source license to be free--I haven't read the latest papal nuncios on that--but it is open.
Dvorak! Pssst! Here it is. Right up to version 10.4.6, fresh, tasty, and just the griddle. Enjoy!
"How to Do Nothing," kids activities, back in print!
At last, someone else who gets it.
People look at Macs and how well they work, and just assume that they could have a similar experience on commodity hardware if Apple would just let them, and that Apple's just being a bunch of meanies by not selling OS X for generic x86 boxes.
Nobody seems to realize that all that el-cheapo commodity hardware and its drivers that would have to play nice together for that to happen, wouldn't. Why do I say that? Because Microsoft has spent 20 years and untold billions trying to get Windows to work as well on the billions of combinations of commodity hardware boxes as OS X works on Macs. They haven't yet, and judging by that track record, they never will. Oh, they've gotten close over the years, but people still have maddening "this worked yesterday but it's not working today" and "this is SUPPOSED to work, but it doesn't!" type problems that leave them angry and befuddled and either spending hours troubleshooting (if they're savvy enough) or calling in the Geek Squad or their buddy who works in IT somewhere.
Just last night, I decided to mess with iMovie to try something out. When I plugged in my camera to pull in some footage, it just worked. No fuss, no muss, no 15 "Windows has detected new hardware and is now setting it up for you" balloons popping up. Plug it in and go. I didn't have to spend time trying to figure out how to get the camera talking to the Mac-- I didn't even entertain the thought that the Mac might not see the camera when I connected it. No, I just spent time editing my video. That's the kind of experience that you just can't get on Windows.
~Philly
...maybe it hasn't faired very well because for a long time (not sure if this is still true), major portions of the POSIX base were broken. I love Darwin in theory: POSIX-compliant API built modularly on top of the Mach microkernel. None of the monolithic messiness of Linux. But in the end, it's just had some fatal problems, such as incomplete POSIX compliance.
(The problem I personally ran into was in trying to compile some C code I wrote that made use of POSIX semaphores. The program quietly compiled and pretended everything was fine. All the while it ignored all of my mutual exclusion constraints. I almost tore my hair out trying to figure out what the problem was before I learned POSIX semaphores were broken in Darwin. Thanks, Darwin.)
... of HW and SW that really makes it. I get an iBook for $800 that just works. No parts to stick out and snap, stock ports to support 90% of the work I'll need, a lid and sleep controls that actually listen to each other, instant wake from sleep, foolproof wireless HW and SW... in short, clean and effective HW, clean and effective SW. The two together are bliss.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
lol
Beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his heart he dreams himself your master. -Anonymous
After the past *stuff* this guy has come up with, why is anyone listening, nevermind how this makes it to /.
Why go fast when you can go anywhere? O|||||||O
Wouldn't it be great to have a job where you could write any outrageously mindless article on your laptop, moronic stories concocted during lengthy shit sessions - and get paid for it! Then millions of angry slashdotters will hear about it and maybe click a certain link, and this will generate advertising revenue for PC World. Brilliant! I want to do it, but I would use a pseudonym.
Beauty is in the beholder of the eye.
Can't we just put him out to pasture?
Honestly, he's turning into the Timecube guy.
So back to the hardware. Whatever premium you think exists (I disagree) on Mac Gear is what my good friend and I call "Worth Every Penny." I've seen an iBook that a caring mother drove over with her BMW X5, sure the LCD was cracked but system still booted in FireWire mode and I was able to retrieve all the documents they needed. My own 12" alBook has been used and abused by myself since they were released and through nearly 2 years now (3 years on an iBook) of my sister's college education without a single failure. I'm kind of upset that I even bothered buying AppleCare for it since I've never had to call them once, not once.
My iMac G5 is one of the most brilliant home computers ever created. One power cord runs the whole system. One. The case is practically seamless and is almost as easy to move around my home as my old powerbook was. When I first shipped it to work some antiMac socialist went crazy and asked why I didn't buy some gateway that was "the same case and form factor and is no different" - http://content.gateway.com/www.gateway.com/img/pro d/249x176/prf55c_pd.jpg - ya freaking right.
I will unplug my internet connection and live in a cave before I buy a "Mac" installed on some beige box AlienDellWare piece of shitbox.
Sorry for the rant, I was up for a little karmaburn anyway.
... Dvorak reads speculative drivel written by YOU!
I've been giving a lot of thought to Dvorak's wonderfully creative suggestions to Apple. This one might not be as far off as his, "Let's put XP/Vista on Macs, cuz hey it's not THAT BAD"-nonsense (gasp). Especially since OS X was partly based on it anyway viz BSD. I think Dvorak has a similar system as South Park's depiction of the Family Guy creators. He might have a dartboard or something with different story ideas and he just goes, in willy nilly random fashion to suss out the details of his next great suggestion to Apple or other companies who couldn't care less about what a dinosaur tries to suggest to them. Or to put it more tech-appropriate; maybe he's written the Dvorak-Random-Story-Generator which uses the randomness in the noise of his clock to come up with story ideas. I don't know--anything is possible--like Apple switching to fully OSS software.
Why is it that Dvorak reminds me of R.M. Renfield?
MadOgre.com
Dvorak has Microsoft underware, jammies, and bedsheets. He also has Bill-Gates power neckties that he wears during sex every now and then. He's worried that Microsoft may be in deep trouble and his delusions of grandeur let him believe that his suggestion might actually start a fight that would give Microsoft a little breathing room.
Such paranoia. Doesn't he know that about 90% of computer users are stuck in the same psychological computer ghetto as him and that they are never going to leave.
I heard from a good source that Dvorak stories are put together by the same crew that writes for Family Guy.... mainly a group of Manatees. They choose the idea balls for him, in this case "Open Source" "OSX" and "Microsoft" He then uses a MadLibs for connecting words, in this case "scared" and "crazy"
Hopefully someone can remove an idea ball from the tank of Dvoraks manatees and stop this madness.
Could we please?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
I think the comments below are pointless especially since OS X is open sourced already. http://www.opensource.apple.com/darwinsource/ It is only the gui that is not open sourced (aqua) or wotever you call it. To all of you that have posted about this do some reading about apple before shooting your mouth about it never happening.
where's the battle?
The God damned flashing, blinking, insane ads made reading the article impossible without cutting and pasting to...
OK, lets paste it here. Quote:
A cloud is rising over Mac OS X and its future unless Apple makes its boldest move ever: turning OS X into an open-source project. That would make the battle between OS X and Linux the most interesting one on the computer scene. With all attention turned in that direction, there would be nothing Microsoft could do to stem a reversal of its fortunes.
Let's start at the beginning. There's been a lot of fuss over Apple's rollout of the unsupported Boot Camp product, which lets Mac users run Microsoft Windows easily on an Intel-based Macintosh. I got into various levels of trouble when I suggested that Apple was going to gravitate towards Windows since it would be easy to do and there was some evidence that the company might want to do it.
Some people saw this prediction as somewhat contradictory, because I've also been advocating that Mac OS X be ported to all PCs and become an alternative OS for the rest of us on our standard systems. Getting OS X onto PCs might be even more doable today, since researchers are reporting that as many as half of the business-owned PCs in operation now may not be capable of running Microsoft Vista. It seems like an ideal time to roll OS X over to the PC.
So what's actually happening? Well, here's what I think is going on, and also what I think should be going on. Let's start with what's going on.
The Boot Camp product is pure test marketing. It's so obviously test marketing that it's hard to believe that people are foolish enough to get worked up about it. You watch a test-marketing scheme to see the results. You use the results to make predictions. We do not have enough results yet to determine what's going to happen next. The test-marketing scheme is likely to be carefully orchestrated and segmented as follows:
Step 1: Testing for level of interest. Will this initiative of running Windows on a Mac increase or reduce computer hardware sales in any noticeable way among the hacker nerds who bother to go through the process? Will this translate to a broader acceptance?
Step 2: Determining functionality without risk. Does Windows works well on Mac hardware, or not? The idea here is to put it into the wild and see what happens in a support-free environment where Apple has no responsibility to help make it work.
Step 3: Blowback analysis. Apple needs to analyze the reaction to Windows on a Mac. This includes seeing whether there is massive rejection of the idea--protests, picketing, egg-throwing, and flaming. In other words, can the community at large live with the idea of Windows running on a Mac? That cannot be known or assumed without this test.
So this testing scheme essentially breaks down to practicality, functionality, and political marketability. So far, everything seems to be going well except for the blowback, which seems to be mixed but mostly positive. Much of the positive reaction, though, seems to stem from the mistaken supposition that having Windows on a Mac will make OS X look better by comparison, so people will flock to OS X. This is a dubious and dangerous conclusion for Mac heads to draw.
So what do I think will happen now? And specifically, what is Apple going to do with OS X?--Continue
If the Windows test keeps going the way it's going, the results may indicate that Mac users are more likely to shift to Windows than we used to think. But what will happen to Mac OS X? I suspect that the testing of Windows on a Mac might be duplicated in reverse, with a similar test of the Mac OS X running on a conventional PC. Here again, we'd need to look at the test-marketing results. In this scenario, the idea would again be to determine--by testing--whether or not getting OS X onto PCs would help or hurt Apple as a company. The same three factors would be assessed: practicality (is anyone interested?), functionality (does it work at all?), and political marketab
OK. If Dvorak can pull off getting Jolie and Portman naked and wresting in jello, I'll run Windows. But I'll expect them petrified afterward, with hot grits poured over them to boot.
...he's taking them in the privacy of his own home.
Besides, after being a successful composer and inventor of the eponymous keyboard layout, he can afford to rest on his laurels.
I get your point, but "How often do most people get to change the whole goddamn world? is a little over the top.
Jobs has changed an incredibly tiny piece of the world. He didn't revoke gravity or overthrow Batista or map the genome or teach Indonesian children to hate the USA and embrace terrorism. He browbeat some programmers into making some blinky lights arguably prettier and some interesting noises arguably more commonplace.
I'm betting Nick Negroponte will change the world more than Jobs, and I think that would be so even if computers had never been invented.
If Microsoft opened up windows, we could do some great things.
OSX is built on an open source platform, BSD. Why should it itself be open sourced? Why do I want 20 different distributions of OSX when Apple makes one decent version of it.
Honestly, people say Open Source without thinking. They think that all software should be free or all source code should be made available without even thinking for one instance whether the world needs it. OSX doesn't need to be open sourced, neither does windows, sorry.
For all you hobbyists out their, linux is great, it is an example of good OS design and if your wondering how the pros do it, look at linux source code. But that doesn't mean that every software vendor out their needs to open source their friggin software.
Open source isn't a solution. It's a business concept which really isn't that successful. Its not making anybody rich, it isn't creating products that are truly sweeping proprietary software, and I tire when someone say "Hey, open source your software!" without making one real statement of why it should be so.
F*ck off, write your own software, stop standing on the shoulder's of giants because you feel you can build a better mouse trap then them.
I can tell you one thing that will happen if everything is to go Open Source, Software PATENTS. If Microsoft or Apple open sources their OS, then that is going to mean that as much as you can look at their source code, you can't use it or modify it because of both Microsoft and Apple will get so many patents on it that it will stiffle open source development. Apple isn't going to want to give away source code that makes spotlight fast and efficient, especially with companies like Microsoft around. So Apple will patent their software up the wazoo so that even if you see their code, you couldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. Will this be beneficial for Open Source?
Open source is about the free exchange of information and ideas to develop software by community, and while this is a great grassroots idea, the fact is that Apple and Microsoft and others have billions invested in their software, they aren't just going to hand it out so that Linux users can make 100 differet versions of OSX or Windows. What benefit has 100+ versions of Linux offered the world? Only confusion and weakness is what 100 versions of Linux has offered. Without one distro to rule them all, Linux WILL NEVER compete with OSX or Windows. Open source development fragments the linux community into 100 weak products, all with their own subtle strengths, but get the community behind one Linux distro, and you will have a strong competitive product.
But sorry, Apple isn't one of them, neither is Microsoft. I mean, did this guy even realize that Apple is the developer of OSX? A company that surrounds themselves in propietary technology and secrecy to the point that you don't really know something exists until Steve Jobs stands up on a stage and says its so? You really think Apple wan'ts to release their OSX operating system, now the ONLY reason why people should buy a Mac to the masses so that it can be cloned and ripped off at will leaving Apple with no leverage. OSX as open source would simply turn Apple into Dell, an OEM pre-fab PC manufacturer among 100's of equals. This will kill off Apple quickly.
Sure, OSX source code will last for ages, in one form or another, but gone will be the company that made it great.
Open source OSX? Get real. Put down that pipe because you got a hold of some very bad weed.
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
Didn't he just finish predicting that Apple would move to Windows?
s p
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,1927885,00.a
New Rule: If you're batting 0.000173 you can't be a pundit anymore.
Sounds like a great idea. Let's figure out the new "features" that will come out when everyone gets their fingers in the pot!
1. Three penguin menus (at the left, top, and right of the screen) instead of one Apple menu.
2. A control panel that is 10 pages long instead of one page long.
3. Documentation will now consist of a CD-ROM of HOWTOs outdated by exactly one year.
4. Safari will have an email program within it, a calendar program within it, and a wiseacre "kitchen sink" string that someone tossed in for laughs.
5. iTunes will not be supported because it has less than 50 command line options and doesn't support the cheapest, most counterintuitive MP3 player on the market.
6. iCal will not be supported because when you're recompiling your kernel and compiling software from scratch, time has no meaning.
7. Menus will be replaced by clicking the fifth button on a seven-button mouse and navigating through a subsequent hierarchy of submenus.
8. Booting will no longer be a graceful Apple graphic by default. It will be as detailed with as much garbage text as possible, announcing every single contributor to every package on the system.
9. iPhoto will have easily-installable, pornography-specific features.
10. The OS X help menu will have a selection of helpful things completely unrelated to OS X... perhaps a collection of ESR's works, most notably "How To Pick Up Girls".
Oh please nothing... the hardware Apple is selling now is NO different than the hardware Dell is selling now with the exception of the Apple Logo and the RDF that ships with it.
Apple switched over to a chip that Microsoft made famous, not to screw Microsoft, but to seal Linux's fate.
The very nature of Linux will help it survive. But Apple opensourcing OSX to screw Linux is just stupid. Dvorak is an idiot and I've been saying that for 10 years.
Its like he throws darts and they land on words and he gets ideas.
Steve Jobs really does mean to take over the world, but he will wait until Microsoft gets close and then he'll check mate Gates with something so simple it will make us all take a shit upwards.
Think about it, Gates and Jobs know each other since forever, they are intertwined pervasively (hell they might even be free masons or something), why wouldn't they band together (????) to fight the biggest threat they have ever encountered: something they cannot own, ever.
Oh yea, and Dvorak is a freakin eeeeedioot.... screw him.
It's insane rambling and on top of that it doesn't make the slightest bit of business sense for Apple (yeah sometimes insane and business sense do go together). Apple makes money on hardware. If people can get the Apple experience on cheaper hardware like they did in the clone days, then Apple has a serious problem.
For Apple, running Windows on Apple is perfectly okay because it means people are still buying Apple hardware. However, it is not in their interest to be, primarily, a windows computer manufacturer because then they suddenly have to compete with Dell, etc. They derrive value from having a unique experience with the slick hardware and the nicely integrated OS.
It is furthermore not in the immediate interest of Apple to offer OSX on non-apple hardware. The risk they face there is, once again, people defecting to cheaper hardware. This could change in time though. The position they are in now is that people can get an Apple laptop and become familiar with the Apple experience without abandoning Windows completely. It makes it possible for business users to have chic Apple hardware but still run their company's Windows based software.
So open sourcing will not happen. It's too important to Apple to keep a tight control over the experience of using Apple products. Once they set the code free they can't control what happens. Imagine the mistake of clone licensing repeated with no ability to undo the mistake and you see where this goes.
This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
you insensitive clod.
If being a certain way is not the way a person wants to be and fluoxetine or diazepam helps them in this regard, then, by all means they should have it, but to insist that someone that exhibits certain traits that another group doesn't like should take medicine is evil.
For the love of god Slashdot, PLEASE stop liking to Dvorak's column. By Slashdotting him we're only condoning his retarded ramblings and insuring more will come. I refuse to read or follow links to his articles.
If you want to know how the future of technology will play out, take what Dvorak says and evision the exact opposit being successful.
To quote Billy Madison:
"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Woe is me! Microsoft, that bastion of buglessness, that utopia of user-friendliness, that sanctum of security, is going to bring utter disgrace and ruin on Apple by finding bugs in OS X! Surely they will reveal deep flaws that will finally make me realize how horrible my experience on Mac OS X has been! When I realize how Apple has deceived me into thinking I enjoyed using a Mac OS X more than I would have enjoyed using Windows, when they tell me that a mere blow from a sledgehammer is enough to make all the pretty icons in this entire, fragile, hopeless excuse for an operating system disappear, I'll pick up the sledgehammer and do the deed myself. Only then can I be truly free!
Uh, yeah, right. Sure, if MS wants to find bugs in OS X, they will. If they want to publicize them, they will. Some people hearing about them will turn away from OS X. Somehow, I think more will just be glad that there aren't as many deep flaws in OS X as there are in Windows. "Oh crap! There's a bug in OS X.! Maybe I'd better start using... oh, wait. What the hell was I thinking!"
And where does the conclusion come from that only open sourcing OS X can save it from the cloud that hangs over it? The cloud? Why does that make me think of the assertion used to justify rounding up all the Japanese Americans during WWII--that the fact that there had been no acts of sabotage committed by Japanese Americans yet was PROOF that they would occur. Yeah, there's a horrible cloud hanging over Mac OS X. The fact that no horrible, deep flaws have been revealed yet is PROOF that Microsoft is going to find some, and then it's going to be doom, Doom, DOOM! for Apple.
But if they will give Mac OS X away, they'll do just fine. Uh. What was it they were going to use to replace their OS X and hardware revenue? Oh, the iPod. Uh. They're already selling plenty of iPods without open sourcing OS X.
Apple's goal isn't to destroy Microsoft by destroying the market for commercial OSs. ...It's to make Apple rich and powerful (yeah, they want it all too). Throwing away profits without compensation isn't the path to riches and power.
Convert RSS to HTML - integrate webfeeds into your website
Please stop.
And why are they open-sourcing OS X?
I don't have time to RFA, just give me the big picture.
Is a Dvorak advocate anything like a Devil's advocate?
-- Boycott Shell
No.
well done. If I had the mod point, it would be yours.
bah.
Please. For the love of all that is sane and relevant, please stop posting Dvorak articles. He isn't a journalist; he isn't an expert; even calling him a pundit probably makes other pundits roll their eyes.
So please, just let him go the way of Jon Katz -- into Slashdot Lore, where everyone vaguely remembers that they existed, but no one ever bothers to discuss their views.
Note that I actually liked Katz though....
The whole brilliance behind Boot Camp comes down to this:
The reason Apple didn't become yet another Beige-Box Windows PC manufacturer was because then they'd have the same margins and Windows OEM hassles of everyone else.
Boot Camp allows them to have their cake and eat it, too. You can run Windows, and you can run OSX, and you'll soon have the full support of Apple while doing so. There are ways to run OSX on beige box PCs and there are ways to run Windows without using Boot Camp on a Mac, but the fact that Boot Camp and the Windows drivers are sanctioned changes the landscape completely.
Why would anyone bother buying a Dell now?
This realization is going to hit people eventually. It may take months or years, but the ball is rolling and it won't stop.
OSX is Apple's competitive advantage, and what's more, no one wants to run Windows. They only have to run Windows. The people buying Macs and dual booting are going to spend as much time in OSX as they can get away with.
Dvorak doesn't get it. Cringely sure as hell doesn't get it. And judging from the stock's performance, no one else seems to, either.
Apple has positioned themselves to become the #1 PC manufacturer in the world, and at this point it's just a matter of time. OSX will become more popular, not less, which will actually increase the desirability of Macs (and their market advantage).
I mean, holy shit folks, they just triggered an avalanche that's going to bury the rest of the PC industry and no one else seems to realize it!
Right now Microsoft is more than happy to work with Apple to get XP and Vista working on Apple's hardware, because Microsoft sees a whole new market segment opening up on the short term.
My God, they don't have a clue what's about to hit them, and seeing articles like this just makes me want to scream: "It's about the hardware sales, stupid!"
Instead of mirroring Windows so people can "work" and "game" in Windows, doesn't Apple work towards improving/adding the software selection. While the office application front has seen this already for years, what about games? If Apple, with its infinite wisdom and funding would give an incentive for software developers to create Mac versions of their applications and games, wouldn't that be a better solution? This would be a direct competition with Microsoft et al, not a mirroring/merging.
I'd guess they meant Dvorak Advocates... I'm surprised not to see any other posts on this. I figured on slashdot a spelling mistake wouldn't go unpunished and some bored geek with nothing better to do than harass the mods would put up some sarcastic post.... wait a minute....
Has this man ever been right about anything ?
This guy makes a career of outraging mac users, and little more.
the damn thing wasn't even about making OSX OSS, it just babbled on about how (in Dvorak's psychotic mind, anyway) Apple is really using the Boot Camp thing as a marketing test for deciding if Apple should give Windows just a little bit more favor
just more shit from Dvorak to get hits on his stuff
In other news: Dvorak advocates freezing hell with peltier coolers, and genetic engineering of flying pigs.
... what did you expect, something profound?
I could filter out articles with Dvorak in the article text
Retarded like a fox! (to paraphrase Peter Griffon.) They post his crap for the same reason he writes it, the controversy generates page hits.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I must have missed something.
Look, read Dvorak all you like, but know this: Dvorak defined the term sensationalistic editorial. Do you think he actually believes anything he writes? Instead of a true opinion he just picks a topic that is sure to generate controversy and then fluffs together whatever half-baked argument he can come up with on short notice to impart some sense of cohesion. To write a counterpoint to Dvorak is like being the liberal on The O'Reilly Factor: You can't win because the focus is always on Dvorak, his troll, his hits, his job, you lose just by opening your mouth.
Then I get to re-experience the same reason why I just recently left Linux for OS X.
Stuck inside their bubble, open source zealots think it's ok to have thousands of branches of THE SAME OS, COMPETING, INCOMPATIBLE WINDOWING LIBRARIES that aren't even standardized as part of the OS, and ten thousand window managers to make absolutely certain that your OS has no recognizable "look" or "personality" whatsoever. When they add new features, they add them in the "cleanest possible" manner (ie, make everyone patch and recompile EVERYTHING), rather than the "most usable" manner (add compatibility layers). When they change features, they don't do so gracefully, they break old code and expect everyone to recompile.
Here's just one example of how open source just gets it wrong: a few years ago, I was looking to play some emulators on my Linux box. I figured it would be as easy as emulation on Windows, but boy was I wrong.
See, I wanted to use the same USB gamepad I'd been using for the last few years on Windows. Only problem was, when Linux added support for *USB* gamepads, they used a different interface. Thus, emulators designed for *ANALOG* gamepads could not use my USB gamepad. Unfortunately, most of these emulators had been abandoned, and nobody had bothered to add USB gamepad support, so I was up shit creek unless I wanted to hack it in myself (sound familiar?). This is an example of adding a new feature CLEANLY, but in a manner that is completely UNUSABLE without extensive reworking.
I'm sick of it. It's little things like this that made using my Linux box for anything besides web browsing and basic office tasks a pain.
WINDOWS, by contrast, has supported USB gamepads since Windows 98, and has taken all the guesswork out of the issue. Regardless of whether you use an analog or USB gamepad, an application can use the same hooks to communicate with the pad regardless, and the user can use the same setup widget to configure ALL pads. Now, that's not going to be very CLEAN code, but it is a damn sight more USABLE. I can't speak for OS X on this issue, simply because I've only been using it a few weeks.
This is just one example of why I don't need yet another open-source operating system. Open source applications are just fine - the ones that are mismanaged or get caught up in their own self-image eventually get replaced by better development projects. But operating systems have momentum, and don't just disappear. Open source zealots could do a lot of damage to the USABLILITY of OS X, and it would still take a long tome for it to fade away.
Man is the animal that laughs.
And occasionally whores for Karma.
Should be sufficient argument to anyone against buying Apple for the hardware. AppleCare won't repair. They have no pride whatsoever in making what they sold you work. Far more failures than comparable PC hardware. My down arrow broke. Sorry, the warranty doesn't cover that. Same story that they are reluctant to fix a dead hard drive, bad power supplies, batteries that are clearly defective, and a list of other things. If you buy the hardware because you want to look cool, just don't even waste money on the extended warranty.
The Proper Context for Apple and Open Source
Their hardware is full of defects and they won't stand behind the simple terms of the warranty that they should fix it. I have a case with the BBB against them, and they have yet (after months) to make any attempt at a good excuse why they won't fix the hardware under the terms of the warranty.
I suspect that Apple has some sort of licensing agreement with Adobe regarding PDF in Quartz, though maybe not according to this article:
a cos-x-gui-4.html
"Quartz does not use Postscript as its internal graphics representation language. Instead, it uses Adobe's Portable Document Format (PDF) standard which is a superset of Adobe Postscript. PDF has several advantages over Postscript, including better color management, internal compression, font independence, and interactivity. (Check out the PDF specs for more information.) PDF is also is a free and open standard, which saves Apple from paying Postscript licensing fees."
http://arstechnica.com/reviews/1q00/macos-x-gui/m
Anyone else more in the know care to comment?
This even above and beyond the fact that Apple makes most of it's money from hardware, blah, blah.
Tired of all the isms, don't exploit people as an employer, or a government, mmmmK?
Jobs is an idea man. Gates is a business man. Plain and simple.
$30 Off All Plans: Use code TRIPLESAWBUCK
I absolutely loathe OS X, but if the new Macbook Pro didn't have one mouse button (ghey), I would buy one in a heartbeat (of course, it would run KDE and Linux :P).
Dvorak is still an ass. He's so anti-anything being opened, I wonder where his real agenda is?
I'm not a troll, but I play one on Slashdot.
Why can't we just get a -5 Dvorak option?
- shadowmatter
Two minor niche OSes duking it out for a whopping 6-7% of the desktop market. The only result of this is that Joe Public still wouldn't care and it would make them even MORE likely to go Windows. In other words Microsoft could go back to making more money for even less effort.
Conor "You're not married,you haven't got a girlfriend and you've never seen Star Trek? Good Lord!" - Patrick Stewart
What passes for news these days...
Here's the thing, OSX or Linux someday manage to become the dominant OS, I'll still probably stick with Windows simply because I want to actually be able to DO stuff with my computer without having to tell it how to do every little thing. They're nice enough OSes for non-technical users, but I need more power, sorry.
Which is more painful? Going to work or gouging your eye out with a spoon? Find out!
http://www.workorspoon.com
Many Mac users including myself like the fact that everything works prety well in OS X. We also like the unix underpinning. We like not having to mess with spybot and all that crap. I see little value in mucking up a perfectly good Mac by putting Windows on it. Apple would be crazy to ditch OS X, especially in favor of Windows.
Wansu, th' chinese sailor
If it would get him hits and controversy he will. He does not really care about one thing he write and we should stop giving into him. Every time his story gets more hits his bosses love him for getting more ad revenue. STOP IT DONT LINK TO THIS CRAP. Its like the old saying if you just ignore him he will go away.
OMG Ponies!!! with Glitter!!!! I miss Pink
And I thought Apple switched to Intel because the only way to get their Mach kernel to run faster after exhausting every computer science trick in the book was to throw CPU cycles at it. And we all know that the G5 was not going to be available for laptops anytime soon. Let's face it Apple had to switch processors because the reality distortion field wasn't going to hold much longer. Check Anand Tech for the Linux vs. Mac OS X on PowerPC article. The Mach kernel is slow.
Just by coincidence Apple knew that Intel had some amazing laptop capable processors in the pipe and decided to jump ship, Boot Camp, and the soon to be release virtualization products are just a sales tool to give a push to those people with misgivings about a Mac. "Don't worry you could always run Windows if you don't like OS X." I know I went through it myself when I bought my first PowerBook.
He is a hell of a lot more entertaining than the drivel you basement-dwelling leachers spam slashdot with everyday. I think you are just jealous. True he doesn't say too much, but neither do you. And like it or not he has a bit more credibility. Your credibility = talking with your WOW gang-bang buddies. Now mod me Flamebait and go back to your Cheetos and inflatable doll.
why not pit OS X against MS Vista which is being re-written to be more like OS X? The big picture here is the Mac's are starting to be the de-facto media center in homes, and Gates is very much aware of it.
No kidding, it kills me to see slashdot supporting this guy.
Nice Billy Madison quote BTW!
Never let a lack of data get in the way of a good rant.
And can he at least send me some so his articles start to make sense? ;-)
Two open source software projects aiming at the same market, developing the same product?
I predict that the winner will be the one who goes gold last. All you've got to do is take their version and up the ante! Now, can I run a company or write for a magazine?
Seriously, wouldn't the big winner be the BSD projects?
Get your Unix fortune now!
I've been lured into reading Dvorak's Alzheimer's induced delusions too many times. I won't dignify his latest piece of flamebait with my valuable click. After all, the things he's written lately about Apple are so far from any kind of thoughtful analysis that I must conclude that he's only starting flame wars to get more clicks. Well, I for one won't give him the satisfaction.
Perhaps if we organized a Dvorak boycott until he comes up with some real journalism, he'll either go back to writing real articles or dry up and blow away.
And FWIW, OS X and Linux are already doing battle with Windows for marketshare. Unix (in all it's beautiful flavors-how's that for diversity in action?) is the only true alternative to Windows. And if the latest figures for the increases in Safari and Firefox's browser share (not to mention the increases in OS X penetration) are correct, and if Vista is the disaster that MS's employee blogs make it out to be, we are already looking at the decline of the Gates' Roman Empire.
My prediction is that in years to come, this year will be marked as the year that Microsoft began to lose it's grip on the computer industry.
Nitewing '98
Everything works...in theory.
So Johnny, let me give give you a key insight you'll need to hold onto whenever you write anything about Apple: Jobs doesn't want to win, he wants to be the best.
(PS - I do not and have never owned an Apple computer, so this is not fanboi crap.)
I can understand why people like multibutton mice (I do, too), but what is the appeal of a multibutton trackpad as compared to a single button and modifier keys like on the Macbooks? It's not like you are taking your hand away from the pointing device to reach the keyboard--the pad is right under the keyboard, anyway. And every time I have to twist my hand into that awkward position that lets me reach my thumb under my palm to reach the button I want on a two-button trackpad, I feel like I am risking repetitive motion disorder.
So why to people want multibutton trackpads? Is it just inertia--the resistance of people to changing ingrained habits, even awkward and possibly harmful ones? Is there anybody who started out using a Mac style trackpad (one button with modifier keys) who actually prefers a two-button pad?
Opensourcing Mac OS X is the number one way to make the operating system resemble Linux. Some people don't see this as bad, but let me explain. I love Linux.
Mac OS X is much more than the Kernel and UNIX command-line and X11. It's a substantial part, that already is opensourced as Darwin. The real value in Mac OS for developers is the incredibly elegant framework built on very high-level components.
Core Data, Core Image, Core Video, Applescript, XCode, QuickTime, Speech, Finder, Aqua, Quartz Extreme, Cocoa Bundles & NIBS... There's a lot to this O/S and it's not something you can just "open" at any time.
There are innumerable software license restrictions in the video CODECS for QuickTime alone. Display PDF? Unless Adobe wants to open source PDF, that just won't happen. This is one of the nicest features of Mac OS. Fonts and vectors actually render as they'll print. Mac users take it for granted. Windows gets this feature in 2007, but no one's asking Microsoft to opensource Windows or ship a stripped down "free" version.
MacOS stands apart, in part, due to its bullish resistance to what everyone else is doing. Opening the code invites pressure to conform, the absolute worst thing that can happen to this OS. Apple has always been an innovator and is often ahead of the rest of the industry.
I fear that an open source community would pressure Apple to abandon the very things that make the OS unique and cutting edge. Their proprietary solutions make for great software.
I can tell you:
As an Objective C (Cocoa) developer, the memory management woes of C++ are long gone. Network communications are so simple, I feel dumb for ever using sockets. Message delegation is a feature so powerfully simple, it allows me to write a fraction of code for the same functionality.
To use Mac OS effectively, you really do need to "think different." The Frameworks make extensive use of generics and design patterns... something Microsoft has only started to embrace in their new toolsets.
When I look at Linux, it's not even close. It's not an end-user OS and never will be without the very things that makes Mac OS what it is. Linux lacks a decent GUI and productivity tools... even the support of commercial development as a whole.
I don't dislike Linux at all. I use Linux and/or BSD for almost everything... embedded hardware, servers, and even light day-to-day tasks. It's just very raw and continues to be a tad hardcore.
Linux is largely C-based. The talent, Dvorak suggests should be tapped, is composed of mostly C developers. The OS is built completely different than one that uses C++ or Objective C as its primary language.
What makes Dvoraks' comments silly, is that there simply isn't a community of good object oriented developers in open source that aren't already actively working on very important projects. I would much rather that some of them finish Eclipse, instead of helping Apple. I think Apple has a handle on it already.
Dvorak is a militant Windows user. He pokes and prods the Apple community. His predictions are meant only to antagonize Apple users.
I can point you to the BBB case I filed against them that has been stagnating for months. You were lucky, I was not. This is not the first failure they refused or were reluctant to fix.
jpegs at 11.
J.C. Dvorak is a professional Windows shill who's been claiming that Macs will die out on a regular basis for the last 15 years.
I'm not holding my breath for any of his wild-ass predictions; he's wrong so much more often than he's right, and he's very inflamatory: if he were on Usenet, he'd be a troll.
--
AC
--
Munich for breakfast, Tokyo for lunch, NYC for dinner.
I like a good Tokyo Breakfast myself.
My other first post is car post.
Rather than give it away and compete with Linux, why not do what Jobs would probably prefer, which is take on Windows in their own primary hardware platform? Charge $49 for a boxed OS and offer some support. Maybe bundle it as a $30 addon to iPods.
Excellent post, though I thought this posting also puts a good case. Ultimately, it's hard to see why Apple would open source OS X, whether you feel that it's the feather in their cap, or the doomed OS, to be replaced by Vista at a future date.
If one looks closely the core OS IS already open.. Its the interface that isnt, and dont hold your breath on that ever happening.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Kind of like somebody who works for a right-wing Christian organization and spends all their time raving about homosexuals. After a certain amount of time, you really start to wonder why they're so fixed on that one topic.
In Dvorak's case, I'd say he's writing in order to punish himself for the dreams he has. Dreams filled with smooth, glossy, white cases; windows with the close-widget lustily positioned on the left side; dark twisted dreams, somewhere in the dirtiest corners of his mind, of a mouse without any buttons.
It's really just public self-flagellation, products of someone deeply in denial.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
Linux manages to pull this off just fine. Yes, I compile my own kernel, so what? The stock kernel would work just fine on my hardware -- in fact, it'd work just fine on 98% of the computers in the world. And if it came preinstalled, who cares if they compiled a separate kernel for the remaining 2%?
No, the problem is, Apple is scared shitless of direct competition with MS, so they're easing into it. Notice how Boot Camp is "unsupported", so no one can really complain if they just pull it? Hell, maybe they're planning to do just that -- discontinue Boot Camp in return for a sizable chunk of the ol' MS war chest.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
Can we just ignore this attention whore Dvorak please?
Reminds me of the Buck Henry SNL skit where he ran the radio show. He said sensible shit, no one listened. He had to say ridiculous things to get people to call in. Same thing.
Regardless, I'd still like to see a DV-chip that a) requires Dvorak to pass a breathalyzer before being allowed to write any articles and b) requires readers to pass a breathalyzer before being allowed to view his articles.
Trust me. This is an inactive account. Regardless of what the
"In many ways, this is just insane rambling, but it's certainly entertaining on some levels."
:)
Wait, so you're referring to just this one column, or the entire Dvorak corpus?
I think there is a world market for maybe five personal web logs.
He is a person who has mastered the art of getting people to read what ever gibberish he writes. This is a mark of a true professional writer. There are people to lap up any article he throws at them. And such people are on the rise. :)
Linux Help
for all things on Linux
Pretty comical, that. The guy who overthrew Batista is the last tottering relic of an ideology that now lies on the dung heap of history. The legacy of Steve Jobs is going to last a hell of a lot longer than the legacy of Karl Marx and Fidel Castro, in every metric except dead bodies and human suffering.
woob-woob-woo-woo-woo
where it turned out that they had miss-filed the serial number and so they would not repair it under warranty
I have the extended warranty, which the store clearly verified (they claimed that they would not fix it because a key would only snap off under severe abuse), and now that the BBB complaint went to Apple, they are claiming that my PB was not under warranty at all.
Any Apple hardware advantage is a complete myth, but mine has only spent a few weeks at Apple. Your story is almost making me glad to sacrifice my down-arrow key just to not give them another crack at screwing it up worse.
Does Dvorak just not get the point? People buy Macs to run OS X. Sure, it will be nice to be able to boot into Windows if you have that app or two that you just cannot do without and has no equivalent on the Mac. Does he really think people will start buying Macs, then buying a full copy of XP just to run Windows?
Bootcamp gives the user considering a Mac but holding back because of some app that is only available on Windows the opportunity to still use a Mac. Maybe it's the home user who has his telescope or midi software connected to her PC and doesn't care for the Mac offerings or can't afford to purchase them. Maybe it's the guy or gal who just wants to come home and be able to play all of those PC games they accumulated. Maybe it's the business user or student who has the specialized piece of software that really does require Windows and it isn't an option to use anything else. It really doesn't matter who it is or why. Bootcamp doesn't signify that OS X is in trouble, it recognizes that there are legitimate reasons why some people don't consider a Mac and attempts to rectify it.
If Dvorak were open sourced, maybe he wouldn't be so closed minded about Apple.
Attention Slashdot readers.
You have been trolled (by Dvorak). Have a nice day.
ENDUT! HOCH HECH!
That is some fancy bullshit talk. Let me guess ... second year undergrad? Keep trying -- you'll sound wise when you are so.
Apple doesn't join because they are past caring, so why would they care about a few complaints, and filing is just a way to show how bad they are. Apple has already tried to make it go away without addressing it. But if everyone who experienced their substandard hardware and service filed a complaint, though, it might start making a difference and give a reference point of formally-filed complaints.
Something to stave off the Apple Fanboys with next time they start trying to convince someone that Apple is a good decision from a hardware perspective.
/. maintainers should filter their system for 'dvorak' and send to dev null
I'd use OS X! Fuck Windows and Linux!
to Slashdotters, at least use something we can understand
BEDEMIR: Quiet, quiet. Quiet! There are ways of telling whether
she is a witch.
CROWD: Are there? What are they?
BEDEMIR: Tell me, what do you do with witches?
VILLAGER #2: Burn!
CROWD: Burn, burn them up!
BEDEMIR: And what do you burn apart from witches?
VILLAGER #1: More witches!
VILLAGER #2: Wood!
BEDEMIR: So, why do witches burn?
[pause]
VILLAGER #3: B--... 'cause they're made of wood...?
BEDEMIR: Good!
CROWD: Oh yeah, yeah...
BEDEMIR: So, how do we tell whether she is made of wood?
VILLAGER #1: Build a bridge out of her.
BEDEMIR: Aah, but can you not also build bridges out of stone?
VILLAGER #2: Oh, yeah.
BEDEMIR: Does wood sink in water?
VILLAGER #1: No, no.
VILLAGER #2: It floats! It floats!
VILLAGER #1: Throw her into the pond!
CROWD: The pond!
BEDEMIR: What also floats in water?
VILLAGER #1: Bread!
VILLAGER #2: Apples!
VILLAGER #3: Very small rocks!
VILLAGER #1: Cider!
VILLAGER #2: Great gravy!
VILLAGER #1: Cherries!
VILLAGER #2: Mud!
VILLAGER #3: Churches -- churches!
VILLAGER #2: Lead -- lead!
ARTHUR: A duck.
CROWD: Oooh.
BEDEMIR: Exactly! So, logically...,
VILLAGER #1: If... she.. weighs the same as a duck, she's made of wood.
BEDEMIR: And therefore--?
VILLAGER #1: A witch!
"Pretty comical, that. The guy who overthrew Batista is the last tottering relic of an ideology that now lies on the dung heap of history. The legacy of Steve Jobs is going to last a hell of a lot longer than the legacy of Karl Marx and Fidel Castro, in every metric except dead bodies and human suffering."
Now for a reading from the book of of Jobadiah:
Hail Steve Jobs/Full of Darwin/The iPod be with you/Blessed art thou among CEOs/and blessed is the cocoa/of thy womb, Steve Jobs/Holy Jobs/Father of Computing/Pray for us Mac users/now and at the time of our conversion to Windows
This is the word of our Lord
Amen
Just imagine: in the near future, you could buy a Mac, and you'd get the beautiful GUI, the rock-solid stability of Unix, and the ability to run all your old Windows apps.
And Steve Jobs finally defeats Bill Gates for good. Lovely.
We only want a quiet place to finish working while God eats our brains.
--Bruce Sterling
I also manage a campus with 40 macs and 20 windows machines - and after a week of forgotten passwords, blue screens, hunting rogue networks, unpatched xp, 98, me, 95, and requests to reboot the occasional etch-a-sketch, the only words left for the ibook / tiger experience are all in that neighborhood. it's the contrast between using computers to solv what's wring with the computers vs. using them to get my life and work actually done!
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
try { give_technical_help() } catch (exception person_clueless) {...
There really wasn't any need to comment further.
I hereby reiterate my call to fire Zonk. Another Dvorak piece that is completely absurd and absolutely illogical posted by the one and only. I felt my IQ points evaporating away as I read each sentence. Man, I can't even finish this damn post. So, Zonk YOU'RE FIRED
You don't have to be smart to use a Mac, you just have to be smart enough to buy one
Why are we still posting this shite? When are we getting article moderating like Digg and Reddit? Why do I care about tagging and /.'s other recent feature experiments when article moderation is the only one that would make a difference to the content quality here? Why am I wasting my time responding to this?
Flying is easy, just throw yourself at the ground and miss. -Douglas Adams
Tell me who you are who are so wise in the ways of science?
$30 Off All Plans: Use code TRIPLESAWBUCK
Apply for a position as a /. editor.
Huh?
and , * ) Th3Re iS sOmetHinG (& fUny w/ MY KEwBOard%
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Did they run the competitions' OS as well?
Just to clue you in, you can hang just about any USB device off the Macs, intel or otherwise. I'm currently running a USB DVI KVM that hooks to both the MBP and a PC. For my keyboard and mouse, I'm using a Logitech DiNovo Media Desktop which uses a USB Bluetooth hub. The bluetooth keyboard and mouse pair with the hub and then are shared between the PC and MBP.
It was like pulling (blue)teeth to get the PC to function correctly. Both my original Mini and the MBP... just worked. No drivers.
So, no "special hardware" required.
The truth is that SGI software blew. They had the hardware right, just not the software.
I spend so much less time now maintaining the hardware (let alone worrying about maintaing the hardware) it isn't even funny. Do I run Disk Utility after major updates? Absolutely. I still do maintenance, just not as much as before. I am not sure I really need to do it but it's hard to stop cold-turkey.
Don't worry, Mr Anonymous, they can't force your company to honor its
warranties or improve their hardware.
The iPod is in no way a superior product to any of the cheaper, more rugged mp3 units out there. Period. To claim otherwise is irrational.
...that would be the other job where you get paid for starting flamewars with stupid utterances and writings.
Only to idiots, are orders laws.
-- Henning von Tresckow
Dvorak says something stupid, well that's not news, but in saying something stupid about making something open source, garners actual support.
a man, a plan, a canal, panama
Pie in the sky - if not for the culture clash, would it make sense for Google and Apple to merge? I see a chance for Google to grab the rest of the consumer "stack" - e.g., Apple hardware. This could hedge against a decline in ad revenue. Apple would get a real web presence and web application expertise. You could call it Goople. Thoughts?
People buy macs to use OSX, it's just that good. I have a PC to play games, everything else I do on my ibook. Dvorak likes to mention this running windows on a mac is bad thing.. this is stupid. The reason why it's a good idea to let people run windows on a mac is because it will get the fence sitters.. ie "I *would* buy a mac but I need windows for some things" to buy a mac then they'll just use mac OSX all the time because it's just that good. The whole OSX should be open source makes no sense because OSX is far better than any other unix operating system. It's better but you have to pay for it. Duh.
Yeah I'm sure that Microsoft is spending money reverse engineering and pulling apart OSX code for some reason. Double duh.
This guy should not be allowed to write about an operating system he has obviously never used.
Dvorak is a fucking idiot.
bullshit.
"Informative" my ass. I absolutely do not believe any of this. Notice how the posting is AC and no name is given for the board, etc.
The difference being that now Thinkpads are constructed AND designed in China.
Seth
$5 / month hosted VPS on linux = awesome!
Why in god's name would I even bother to consider purchasing an expensive Mac computer in order to run Windows? The whole idea is just plain absurd! The way I see it, Apple will continue to make new and (hopefully) improved versions of OSX and hardware. If Apple does give up on its operating system for Windows, I will never buy anything from that company again -- ever.
Dvorak isn't a shitty writer of technology journalism. He's a brilliant writer of technology fanfic.
Please come home. We miss you.
Doesnt seem like there would be a competition so much as a merger.
(1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
Is this guy just throwing darts at a board with theoretical possibilities to come up with this stuff?
Not to be a spelling Nazi, but I think you misspelled "picking at his crack and pulling shit out of his ass".
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
How many times do you need to repost your tale of woe? I got it the first two times. You had a bad experience, you won't buy Apple products again, and you want to either warn others off or do your little bit to damage Apple's reputation. Well and good, but is it necessary to drive the point into the ground on multiple posts on the same story?
It's not offtopic, dumbass. It's orthogonal.
As long as Microsoft are selling software, they could probably care less where it goes. Sales figures are sales figures.
If there is a virtualization layer in Mac OS that allows seemles integration with Windows, somebody, somewhere is going to need to hand MS some cash for the Windows license.
The reason Apple is 'so great' is because they control the whole experience. What you are buying is the hardware + apps +OS.
Put down the crack pipe.
The reason Apple is great is primarily because they have great software and they control the software environment. Their hardware is and has always been a crapshoot, and they don't even have that good a track record of designing their hardware to best take advantage of their software.
If you get what Dan Knight calls a "Road Apple", Apple's control of the whole experience makes you feel like you're in the hands of a clumsy dominatrix.
They have no credibility when they refuse simple legitimate claims, and it is clear I am not the only one having such problems. The coontinuously-reappearing Apple claims that they have worthwhile hardware needs to be answered whenever it arises.
So you had repairs amounting to over a thousand dollars (assuming the 300+ price tag for a Powerbook extended warranty, which you claim in one of your other posts to this same topic paid for itself three times over at least)? Sounds like a seriously defective machine to me, just like they are selling to others. Yet you have no sympathy for others who have not had the same success getting the defects fixed
Jobs was the one who said he saw absolutely *no* need for ever producing a colour version of the Mac...
Who is this delectable creature with an insatiable love of the dead?
There's now well over 400 posts on this silly topic, started by the deliberate provocateur. Why would Apple want to "compete" with Linux? They're our sister OS! Market share is there for the taking from Windows. Savvy computer geeks will configure their Linux boxes the way they want. Good for 'em. Mom and Pop and the local retail store don't want to do that, even though it's cheaper. You have to know too much! Is Darwin not open source?
[+] troll, stupid, moron, dvorak, idiot (tagging beta)
Looks to me like the tagging is working pretty well these days.
I think one of my previous posts sums up Dvorak pretty well.
The U.S. Constitution needs to be ammended with a "separation of business and state" clause.
I keep seeing this same stupid statement...
"Apple makes money on hardware. If people can get the Apple experience on cheaper hardware like they did in the clone days, then Apple has a serious problem."
This is just assinine. Look at the quarterly 10K filings on Edgar online.
Even though the numbers do not include numbers for new machines that come with MacOS X, the unit sales of the last two releases have paid for all of the software development organization costs, including the software that's not very profitable in itself.
If aApple were to break into a hardware and a software company and bill-back tothe hardware company the per unit costs for MacOS X, and at the same time, license MacOS X on third party hardware with stringent component requirements to keep down unit costs (think "Dell" or "HP" - "HP" already licensed the iPod from Apple), the Software division would likely quickly overshadow the hardware division in profit.
Remember that part of the profit per unit that's currently accounted as hardware would end up moving over to software. Even if this is only $99/unit (a steeply discounted price for a non-upgrade version of MacOS X), you are talking at least 5% per unit of the price of a new MacBoo Pro being software. If you use the standard COGS calculation of 2x COGS = cost to consumer, then you are closer to 10% (and for a PPC Mac Mini, even without COGS, you are talking 1/6th the price of the box).
There's no question in my mind that Apple could sell MacOS X into a controlled component hardware market - even if it was a subset of the total product line of a given vendor to limit the driver/support profile), and the software sales would -VASTLY- ivershadow what Apple currently makes from hardware sales, even if you keep the inflated numbers that don't subtract out the pre-loaded software costs.
-AC
Damn, that was the best non-sequiter thread I've ever started.