Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

After Linux-Apple?

Posted by Hemos on from the that's-an...-interesting-idea dept.

Rustless Walter writes "In a series of articles starting here, John Martellaro discusses how Linux represents a threat to Apple's OS market share, but claims that, after Linux has peaked, Apple will be the next wave. Martellaro is a Linux user, and has experienced NT's instability firsthand. Some of his predictions make sense, but he seems to be convinced that people care more about what their computers look like than how well they work. " Hmmm...hasn't Apple been the next big thing for a while? Or was that Java? I always get confused.

1 of 161 comments (clear)

  1. The crux of his argument is VERY weak by Great_Jehovah · · Score: 2
    Since Linux runs primarily on Intel hardware, that means that,
    aside from improvements to KDE and gnome, Linux systems will
    remain generally linked to the tired PC architecture. To be sure,
    you'll be able to run a great Linux system on a 500 MHz Pentium
    III later this year, but it will still require you to remove eight
    stainless steel screws to open it up, you won't have Firewire
    drives, and it will still be a damn beige box. The whole won't be
    greater than the sum of the parts.

    Does "architecture" mean architecture or does it mean the case & power supply? Either way this is obviously false. Linux is less bound to a particular architecture than any OS yet. I can't even see how someone could think that it's bound to a certain style of case.