They're certainly "in the game" more than almost any other PC maker. Keep in mind that "any other PC maker" includes companies that have been out of business for years, not just current major players.
Oh really, where can I buy this IBM PC you speak of?
Umm... #9 is accurate, I just wasn't aware of this being a bad thing.
Depends what you mean by incompatible. With Samba I can share files, with Wine I can run some Windows Apps. With OO.o I can access most Office files, and with Mplayer I can play just about any video or audio format used in the Windows world.
Not that I use this functionality often, but OSX on PPC isn't capable of running Windows apps in Wine and the Mac is considered a team player. I would say that Linux is equal to OSX for Windows compatibility.
However, when Google wants to send you a video from the video search, they want really high bandwidth and really good Quality of Service. So they toss Verizon some extra cash to temporarily flip your connection to 45 Mbps and let only the Google traffic cover the extra 30 Mbps you just got.
That's not the plan. The plan is to create a HOV lane on their backbone (at the expense of every other lane) to companies that pay money to the Bells. It has nothing to do with what is in your house.
Remember big isps oversell bandwidth like crazy, so for every X number of 15 mbps customers they have 1 actual 15 mbps pipe allocated to them. What they want to do is get money from partnerships.
What this means is that if you have 10 ppl sharing a real 15 mbps pipe to the net, and 9 of them are going to Yahoo (who did pay) and you are trying to go to Google (who didn't) then your traffic would be priortiized lower than the ones going to Yahoo, instead of using fair share algorithms.
Now in bigger scales with pipes oversold way more than 10ppl this becomes really bad because if most of the customers are going to companies that did pay, my traffic could be seriously degraded even if I am only using 1 of my 15 mbps because the other people going to sites that paid will be allowed to saturate as much of their bandwidth as possible before I am even given a chance to request.
Perens has been somewhat active in the past couple of weeks? Has he changed the street corner he gets his fix from? Seriously, Perens is banded around as being this "Open Source Evangelist" - excuse me while I puke in a bucket. Perens only pops on the scene when there is another fanciful idea to line his pockets with cash.
Oh come on, when Perens puts his mind to it, he can accomplish anything! I mean look at his last project Duke Nukem Forever Linux . . .
Oh let's face it, he'll forget about it in a few weeks and move on to the next big thing. . .
No, because everyone has a certain affinity for the force. Obviously what occurs is person A's affinity cancels out Vader's ability to act on them directly. Only by harnessing the vast and extreme power of the Dark Side is he able to strangle them from a distance, and that's still only from maybe 10 feet.
IIRC, Darth choked a man on a different ship while merely speaking with him on the videophone. That's a lot more than ten feet.
Also it's clear that the schwartz is more powerful, for Lonestar was able to make the Robomaid switch from Suck to Blow!!!!
In terms of quality, so you dropped $1500 on a 300GB drive? OK with me. That's $5/Gb. Pretty cheap. If I want to keep 5 GB of mail, (or anything else) that's only $25 bucks. If you say it needs to be RAID 5 - that's $125 per user for storage. Still pretty cheap. Hardware support/maintenance at 25% is $375/year, and I figure that you can keep almost 50 users on that RAID set (assuming 80% capacity, each user a disk hog like me.)
That's true, but your calculation is missing a few things.
1) If you have 50 users and are already at 80% you didn't plan this upgrade properly, and should be buying a lot more for just the short term. 2) You didn't factor in the cost of adding more servers, a ton of users accessing gigs of data will take forever without more servers unless you are using the maildir format 3) You didn't factor in the cost of purchasing CAL's and licensing server software, as most organizations use Lotus or Exchange. 4) You didn't factor in the cost of increased labor to IT. This stuff doesn't manage itself. 5) The cost of backup (software, tape robots or disks, and backup servers) 6) Extra cost of off-site storage for more tapes or disks
My point is this. It would be a whole lot more expensive to pay me my rate of pay to delete the messages (multiplied by the total number of users) than it would be to upgrade the storage subsystem.
Not necessarily. Read above. There's more to a mail system than just a box with disks.
Disk costs a lot? So what?
This proves that you don't understand IT. As stated multiple above, there is more to a mail system than just the disks. Many companies pay for the mail servers from their overhead budget. And this sinks into the companies profits, guess what? Companies want their profits more than they want you to have e-mail that you will never read from 1992. If you work for a company that can burn crazy cash so that each employee can have a few gigs of mail space, then your IT people are very lucky. In my experience working for 2 different fortune 100's, that's not the case.
They selling off any of the old CPUs? I could really use a pair of 1800s to replace this pair of 1200s...
Unfortunately no. The company I had worked for has a retarded property manager that thinks cpu's could contain proprietary company data. Once we upgraded, the old ones were destroyed . . .
I don't work there anymore, it got very uncomfortable after the old hardware fiasco and I left for another company. Just remember folks, it's not always the IT folks fault!:)
I like anyone to show me a 200gb SCSI drive for any price. The only SCSI drives I have seen recently jumped right from 146GB to 300GB flavors.
I bought 20 of these 300gb scsi monsters. At 1500 bucks a pop!
They wanted to upgrade an aging 20 node Single Athlon MP Cluster. I told em it'd be cheaper to buy new hardware than to upgrade them to 2 cpu's, quadruple the ram and add 300gb scsi hard drives.
Originally = 1xAthlon MP 1800, 1 Gig Ram, 1x76gig HD Upgraded = 2xAthlon MP 2800, 4 Gig Ram, 1x300gig HD & 1x76gig HD
They didn't believe me. . .
When these old, out of warranty machines, started having all failures (mobo/power supply) it was my fault! Try as I could, I couldn't get replacement parts. The legacy parts, ATXGES (Non-Standard) power supply and discontinued mobo were nowhere to be found. . .
The guy who posted this "ask slashdot" probably knows more about his local IT department than I do. All I can say is that I got a reputation very similar to the posters IT dept. Incapable of keeping servers up, yadda yadda yadda, even though I had made it clear that this was NOT the way to go. Just because IT is in charge of it, doesn't mean they created the mess. . .
The problem for the movie industry is that there are a lot more things for people to spend money on to entertain themselves. Look at the phenomonal growth of the video game industry - that money has to come from somewhere. Some of it comes from seeing fewer movies.
Perhaps you're right. However, I have plenty of money to go see movies, and traditionally have! I don't go anymore because the movies don't generate the interest in me that the older movies did. These days I find myself going to foreign films (such as Ong Bak and Kung Fu Hustle) or buying older dvd's.
As a geek, the last movie that interested me was Firewall, and it was only low interest and the movie was only ok.
Ultraviolet looks pretty cool, but after seeing Aeon Flux I feel like I may be looking to get disappointed. I may just have to wait for the dvd.
X-men 3 - I'm there!!! The Shaggy Dog - Uh huh . . . Omen remake - who cares Basic Instinct 2 - Who still wants to look at a Nekkid Old Sharon Stone???? Silent Hill - Maybe . . . V for Vendetta - I thought this was coming out last year???? Final Destination 3 - Airplane first, car crash second and now a carnival ride?? What kinda stupid premise is that for a movie?????
The only movie I am excited about the release is X-men 3. Who knows, maybe I'm just getting old hitting 25 and all....but I'm just not interested in the crap coming out of Hollywood.
Here's a thought Hollywood, stop making movies about gay cowboys and pimps. Get real writers and try making a quality movie or at the very least a movie about topics that people give a shit about.
Please. This sentence is hypocritical and trollish. Brokeback Mountain is a good movie with a good script.
Actually it isn't hypocritical or trollish. It's just worded horribly.
Gay Cowboys and Pimps == Movies about topics that most people don't really give a shit about. Don't believe me, look at the ticket sales. BBM may have had great writing, and even been a great movie (i don't know, haven't seen it) but very few people cared about the topic.
As far as the bad writing, do I really need to throw down examples? There are way too many to name.
My point is clear, if Hollywood wants to make more money they can do one of two things:
1) Make movies about things people care about. Even if it's not the greatest writing/acting/directing, people will see movies about things they are interested in.
or
2) Make movies with good writing. good acting and so on. There is more to movies than special effects
But if they want to maximize their profits, they can combine 1 & 2.
No shit there is a decline in profits, the movies have sucked royally recently. I used to watch a movie once a week and I wasn't even that picky. I've seen my share of shitty movies, but this past year and a half or so I haven't been tempted to go see a movie. I've gone maybe three or four times in the past year and a half because I just wasnt interested in anything. My friends talked me into going . . .
Here's a thought Hollywood, stop making movies about gay cowboys and pimps. Get real writers and try making a quality movie or at the very least a movie about topics that people give a shit about. While you're at it, try removing the commercials in the beginning and lower the price of a movie to under ten dollars. What you lose from price you'll make up for in volume.
OF COURSE THEY WERE ANYTHING BUT STABLE, all cable internet is SHARED BANDWIDTH. Go DSL if you want stable speeds. (3 mbit/384 kbit DSL line, I pull regular 350k+ download speeds, and mantain 40k+ upload speeds) If you're going to complain about your bandwidth not being stable, that's your fault for using a network that shares it's bandwidth with other users, instead of using a dedicated line like DSL.
Sounds reminiscent of the web hog commercials, but alas its untrue. Both are shared mediums, the difference is where the sharing happens
Internet Cloud -> ISP -> Fiber -> Shared Local Distribution -> Cable Modem
In either scenario, the bottleneck is usually from the ISP to the Internet Cloud. Comcast has stated that in many areas it is looking to get more capacity to the Interet, because they have oversold themselves too much.
The same problem could happen with either technology, given enough mismanagement. I have a cable modem from Charter w/ 3mbps/384k up and I've never run into issues w/ bandwidth or latency.
My guess is that the 32bit x86 Apple machines are going to be relatively short lived, thus Apple could of skipped having to support that particular platform just by waiting a little longer. As another bonus, if the only version of OSX-x86 out there was 64bit, they would of effectively locked out many generic PCs from running it just from the simple fact that most generic PCs are still 32bit.
My guess is that they went all 32-bit because Tiger was all 32-bit, with certain parts in 64-bit as well.
It may not have been feasible to transition to Intel, then transition to full 64-bit in time for the change. Besides Intel's 64-bit offerings just aren't up to snuff.
At my job we have two distinct set of systems. The general computing environment, and our clustered computing environment.
I am one of three admins of the clustered computing environment. The general computing admins run the wifi, all desktops and printers. The clustered admins run our high performance computing clusters.
I have root on all machines on my floor, but in general the users go to the general computing admins. So I get to concentrate on my job, the clustered computing environment, and the general computing guys keep everyones machines running.
No, the G4 is a 32-bit processor as well. Remember Apple never released a G5 laptop, and we are talking about laptops here. Had this been about the G5 iMac vs. the Intel iMac, you probably would have had a point though . . .
Why would you have your OS on that drive/partition? You use this on your data partition... You just need to use a special driver that retains where the data is (a file allocation table if you want)... it could fit on a USB key and you're set.
Or you could hide it from the OS similar to the way OEM's hide the restore partition:)
sell a PC version for 50 bucks, no support, download only.
That about wraps it up, don't you think? People who want it will get it, Apple doesn't ahve to pay a penny for support, and 50 bucks a downl;oad should more then cover the bandwidth cost.
And just wait for the law suits of consumers who bought something that doesn't work? Why do that? I mean shit, people are suing Apple over the fact that if they turn their iPod up as high as it goes they start to lose their hearing. . .
This is a horrible strategy that will only get ill-will from anyone who buys it, since they will always be second class citizens. Look I'm no Apple fanboy, I'm just stating the facts. This will not work as you describe it. And selling software for generic pc's is not Apple's market strategy.
Now, when I download it, and I would, it is up to me that it runs. Now I have nifty piece of software that runs OK on my machine. If the software is good, then I have an insentive to buy hardware it was designed around.
Of course, if the software is not good, and is just hyped by apple fanboys and the hate MS crowd, I won't have sunk 2000 dollare into a commentment I don't like.
$2,0000? The Mac Mini is only 500, you can even get it cheaper if you go for a lower end model. It's always something with people. First $2000 is too much for a Mac, I'll buy a Mac when it gets to $1,500. Then it's I'll get a Mac when it's $1,000. Now it's down to I'll buy OSX for $50 bucks! (Mac users pay more than that for OSX) Face it, you're not gonna buy OSX. Apple knows this and they're not going to waste their software developers time debugging obscure problems with the billions of possible combinations of hardware available on the PC. If you want OSX, buy a Mac. If you don't want a Mac, then don't bitch.
Slashdot Mirror
Oh really, where can I buy this IBM PC you speak of?
http://www.lenovo.com/us/en/
Notice how that url doesn't contain ibm.com in it . . .
Also notice how all the products at http://www.lenovo.com/products/us/en/ are labelled Lenovo and not IBM. So where is this IBM PC I can buy?
They're certainly "in the game" more than almost any other PC maker. Keep in mind that "any other PC maker" includes companies that have been out of business for years, not just current major players.
Oh really, where can I buy this IBM PC you speak of?
Umm... #9 is accurate, I just wasn't aware of this being a bad thing.
Depends what you mean by incompatible. With Samba I can share files, with Wine I can run some Windows Apps. With OO.o I can access most Office files, and with Mplayer I can play just about any video or audio format used in the Windows world.
Not that I use this functionality often, but OSX on PPC isn't capable of running Windows apps in Wine and the Mac is considered a team player. I would say that Linux is equal to OSX for Windows compatibility.
However, when Google wants to send you a video from the video search, they want really high bandwidth and really good Quality of Service. So they toss Verizon some extra cash to temporarily flip your connection to 45 Mbps and let only the Google traffic cover the extra 30 Mbps you just got.
That's not the plan. The plan is to create a HOV lane on their backbone (at the expense of every other lane) to companies that pay money to the Bells. It has nothing to do with what is in your house.
Remember big isps oversell bandwidth like crazy, so for every X number of 15 mbps customers they have 1 actual 15 mbps pipe allocated to them. What they want to do is get money from partnerships.
What this means is that if you have 10 ppl sharing a real 15 mbps pipe to the net, and 9 of them are going to Yahoo (who did pay) and you are trying to go to Google (who didn't) then your traffic would be priortiized lower than the ones going to Yahoo, instead of using fair share algorithms.
Now in bigger scales with pipes oversold way more than 10ppl this becomes really bad because if most of the customers are going to companies that did pay, my traffic could be seriously degraded even if I am only using 1 of my 15 mbps because the other people going to sites that paid will be allowed to saturate as much of their bandwidth as possible before I am even given a chance to request.
Well two out of ten isn't bad...
In case anyone is wondering, #5 & #8 are the only ones not full of shit . .
In the tech industry , the market leader can lose ground EXTREMELY rapidly. Anyone seen a Hayes modem recently?
Very good point. For a long time the PC's were synonymous with IBM-Compatible. Now IBM's not even in the PC game.
Yeah, just imagine if Dvorak was right and Apple would start using Intel chips!! When that day will come I will see the pigs fly over!!
That's probably why the parent poster said "almost". . .
Seriously, Linux users are supposed to be smart. ^_^
You know, nowhere in the gp comment did he mention Linux. . .
The subject says it all. A big comprehensive site that explains how to do exactly what you wish.
Seriously - is this worth Bruce wasting his time on?
What else is he going to do? He took too long with UserLinux and Ubuntu ate his lunch. At this point the only thing he has is time . . .
Perens has been somewhat active in the past couple of weeks? Has he changed the street corner he gets his fix from? Seriously, Perens is banded around as being this "Open Source Evangelist" - excuse me while I puke in a bucket. Perens only pops on the scene when there is another fanciful idea to line his pockets with cash.
Oh come on, when Perens puts his mind to it, he can accomplish anything! I mean look at his last project Duke Nukem Forever Linux . . .
Oh let's face it, he'll forget about it in a few weeks and move on to the next big thing. . .
No, because everyone has a certain affinity for the force. Obviously what occurs is person A's affinity cancels out Vader's ability to act on them directly. Only by harnessing the vast and extreme power of the Dark Side is he able to strangle them from a distance, and that's still only from maybe 10 feet.
IIRC, Darth choked a man on a different ship while merely speaking with him on the videophone. That's a lot more than ten feet.
Also it's clear that the schwartz is more powerful, for Lonestar was able to make the Robomaid switch from Suck to Blow!!!!
In terms of quality, so you dropped $1500 on a 300GB drive? OK with me. That's $5/Gb. Pretty cheap. If I want to keep 5 GB of mail, (or anything else) that's only $25 bucks. If you say it needs to be RAID 5 - that's $125 per user for storage. Still pretty cheap. Hardware support/maintenance at 25% is $375/year, and I figure that you can keep almost 50 users on that RAID set (assuming 80% capacity, each user a disk hog like me.)
That's true, but your calculation is missing a few things.
1) If you have 50 users and are already at 80% you didn't plan this upgrade properly, and should be buying a lot more for just the short term.
2) You didn't factor in the cost of adding more servers, a ton of users accessing gigs of data will take forever without more servers unless you are using the maildir format
3) You didn't factor in the cost of purchasing CAL's and licensing server software, as most organizations use Lotus or Exchange.
4) You didn't factor in the cost of increased labor to IT. This stuff doesn't manage itself.
5) The cost of backup (software, tape robots or disks, and backup servers)
6) Extra cost of off-site storage for more tapes or disks
My point is this. It would be a whole lot more expensive to pay me my rate of pay to delete the messages (multiplied by the total number of users) than it would be to upgrade the storage subsystem.
Not necessarily. Read above. There's more to a mail system than just a box with disks.
Disk costs a lot? So what?
This proves that you don't understand IT. As stated multiple above, there is more to a mail system than just the disks. Many companies pay for the mail servers from their overhead budget. And this sinks into the companies profits, guess what? Companies want their profits more than they want you to have e-mail that you will never read from 1992. If you work for a company that can burn crazy cash so that each employee can have a few gigs of mail space, then your IT people are very lucky. In my experience working for 2 different fortune 100's, that's not the case.
They selling off any of the old CPUs? I could really use a pair of 1800s to replace this pair of 1200s...
:)
Unfortunately no. The company I had worked for has a retarded property manager that thinks cpu's could contain proprietary company data. Once we upgraded, the old ones were destroyed . . .
I don't work there anymore, it got very uncomfortable after the old hardware fiasco and I left for another company. Just remember folks, it's not always the IT folks fault!
I like anyone to show me a 200gb SCSI drive for any price. The only SCSI drives I have seen recently jumped right from 146GB to 300GB flavors.
I bought 20 of these 300gb scsi monsters. At 1500 bucks a pop!
They wanted to upgrade an aging 20 node Single Athlon MP Cluster. I told em it'd be cheaper to buy new hardware than to upgrade them to 2 cpu's, quadruple the ram and add 300gb scsi hard drives.
Originally = 1xAthlon MP 1800, 1 Gig Ram, 1x76gig HD
Upgraded = 2xAthlon MP 2800, 4 Gig Ram, 1x300gig HD & 1x76gig HD
They didn't believe me. . .
When these old, out of warranty machines, started having all failures (mobo/power supply) it was my fault! Try as I could, I couldn't get replacement parts. The legacy parts, ATXGES (Non-Standard) power supply and discontinued mobo were nowhere to be found. . .
The guy who posted this "ask slashdot" probably knows more about his local IT department than I do. All I can say is that I got a reputation very similar to the posters IT dept. Incapable of keeping servers up, yadda yadda yadda, even though I had made it clear that this was NOT the way to go. Just because IT is in charge of it, doesn't mean they created the mess. . .
The problem for the movie industry is that there are a lot more things for people to spend money on to entertain themselves. Look at the phenomonal growth of the video game industry - that money has to come from somewhere. Some of it comes from seeing fewer movies.
Perhaps you're right. However, I have plenty of money to go see movies, and traditionally have! I don't go anymore because the movies don't generate the interest in me that the older movies did. These days I find myself going to foreign films (such as Ong Bak and Kung Fu Hustle) or buying older dvd's.
As a geek, the last movie that interested me was Firewall, and it was only low interest and the movie was only ok.
Ultraviolet looks pretty cool, but after seeing Aeon Flux I feel like I may be looking to get disappointed. I may just have to wait for the dvd.
But I mean come on, check out http://www.apple.com/trailers/ and see what's comin out!
X-men 3 - I'm there!!!
The Shaggy Dog - Uh huh . . .
Omen remake - who cares
Basic Instinct 2 - Who still wants to look at a Nekkid Old Sharon Stone????
Silent Hill - Maybe . . .
V for Vendetta - I thought this was coming out last year????
Final Destination 3 - Airplane first, car crash second and now a carnival ride?? What kinda stupid premise is that for a movie?????
The only movie I am excited about the release is X-men 3. Who knows, maybe I'm just getting old hitting 25 and all....but I'm just not interested in the crap coming out of Hollywood.
Here's a thought Hollywood, stop making movies about gay cowboys and pimps. Get real writers and try making a quality movie or at the very least a movie about topics that people give a shit about.
Please. This sentence is hypocritical and trollish. Brokeback Mountain is a good movie with a good script.
Actually it isn't hypocritical or trollish. It's just worded horribly.
Gay Cowboys and Pimps == Movies about topics that most people don't really give a shit about. Don't believe me, look at the ticket sales. BBM may have had great writing, and even been a great movie (i don't know, haven't seen it) but very few people cared about the topic.
As far as the bad writing, do I really need to throw down examples? There are way too many to name.
My point is clear, if Hollywood wants to make more money they can do one of two things:
1) Make movies about things people care about. Even if it's not the greatest writing/acting/directing, people will see movies about things they are interested in.
or
2) Make movies with good writing. good acting and so on. There is more to movies than special effects
But if they want to maximize their profits, they can combine 1 & 2.
No shit there is a decline in profits, the movies have sucked royally recently. I used to watch a movie once a week and I wasn't even that picky. I've seen my share of shitty movies, but this past year and a half or so I haven't been tempted to go see a movie. I've gone maybe three or four times in the past year and a half because I just wasnt interested in anything. My friends talked me into going . . .
Here's a thought Hollywood, stop making movies about gay cowboys and pimps. Get real writers and try making a quality movie or at the very least a movie about topics that people give a shit about. While you're at it, try removing the commercials in the beginning and lower the price of a movie to under ten dollars. What you lose from price you'll make up for in volume.
OF COURSE THEY WERE ANYTHING BUT STABLE, all cable internet is SHARED BANDWIDTH. Go DSL if you want stable speeds. (3 mbit/384 kbit DSL line, I pull regular 350k+ download speeds, and mantain 40k+ upload speeds) If you're going to complain about your bandwidth not being stable, that's your fault for using a network that shares it's bandwidth with other users, instead of using a dedicated line like DSL.
Sounds reminiscent of the web hog commercials, but alas its untrue. Both are shared mediums, the difference is where the sharing happens
Internet Cloud -> ISP -> Fiber -> Shared Local Distribution -> Cable Modem
vs.
Internet Cloud -> ISP -> Shared DSL Concentrator -> Copper -> DSL Modem
In either scenario, the bottleneck is usually from the ISP to the Internet Cloud. Comcast has stated that in many areas it is looking to get more capacity to the Interet, because they have oversold themselves too much.
The same problem could happen with either technology, given enough mismanagement. I have a cable modem from Charter w/ 3mbps/384k up and I've never run into issues w/ bandwidth or latency.
My guess is that the 32bit x86 Apple machines are going to be relatively short lived, thus Apple could of skipped having to support that particular platform just by waiting a little longer. As another bonus, if the only version of OSX-x86 out there was 64bit, they would of effectively locked out many generic PCs from running it just from the simple fact that most generic PCs are still 32bit.
My guess is that they went all 32-bit because Tiger was all 32-bit, with certain parts in 64-bit as well.
It may not have been feasible to transition to Intel, then transition to full 64-bit in time for the change. Besides Intel's 64-bit offerings just aren't up to snuff.
At my job we have two distinct set of systems. The general computing environment, and our clustered computing environment.
I am one of three admins of the clustered computing environment. The general computing admins run the wifi, all desktops and printers. The clustered admins run our high performance computing clusters.
I have root on all machines on my floor, but in general the users go to the general computing admins. So I get to concentrate on my job, the clustered computing environment, and the general computing guys keep everyones machines running.
All is well!
You mean like missing half their bits?
No, the G4 is a 32-bit processor as well. Remember Apple never released a G5 laptop, and we are talking about laptops here. Had this been about the G5 iMac vs. the Intel iMac, you probably would have had a point though . . .
How else could you explain IE 5.0?
Bad acid trip? Must have came from the FreeLSD group that Microsoft is fond of borrowing from.
Why would you have your OS on that drive/partition? You use this on your data partition... You just need to use a special driver that retains where the data is (a file allocation table if you want)... it could fit on a USB key and you're set.
:)
Or you could hide it from the OS similar to the way OEM's hide the restore partition
sell a PC version for 50 bucks, no support, download only.
That about wraps it up, don't you think? People who want it will get it, Apple doesn't ahve to pay a penny for support, and 50 bucks a downl;oad should more then cover the bandwidth cost.
And just wait for the law suits of consumers who bought something that doesn't work? Why do that? I mean shit, people are suing Apple over the fact that if they turn their iPod up as high as it goes they start to lose their hearing. . .
This is a horrible strategy that will only get ill-will from anyone who buys it, since they will always be second class citizens. Look I'm no Apple fanboy, I'm just stating the facts. This will not work as you describe it. And selling software for generic pc's is not Apple's market strategy.
Now, when I download it, and I would, it is up to me that it runs. Now I have nifty piece of software that runs OK on my machine. If the software is good, then I have an insentive to buy hardware it was designed around.
Of course, if the software is not good, and is just hyped by apple fanboys and the hate MS crowd, I won't have sunk 2000 dollare into a commentment I don't like.
$2,0000? The Mac Mini is only 500, you can even get it cheaper if you go for a lower end model. It's always something with people. First $2000 is too much for a Mac, I'll buy a Mac when it gets to $1,500. Then it's I'll get a Mac when it's $1,000. Now it's down to I'll buy OSX for $50 bucks! (Mac users pay more than that for OSX) Face it, you're not gonna buy OSX. Apple knows this and they're not going to waste their software developers time debugging obscure problems with the billions of possible combinations of hardware available on the PC. If you want OSX, buy a Mac. If you don't want a Mac, then don't bitch.