Hey, if you want to talk about eliminating the FCC and simply auctioning off all available bandwidth as if it was real estate, I'm totally on board.
But as long as we're going to use a heavy-handed bureaucracy to manipulate the market "for the public good", having to buy new equipment to keep up with their decisions once every 50 years or so seems far less burdensome than certain other federal departments I can think of.
Also, can somebody please tell me why the government owes anybody a free converter box? If such a thing is too great of an expense for you, maybe you should turn off the TV and take a second job or something.
Those VHF/UHF hybrid ones are good enough (in most places) to tune in the analog signals, while many people (including me) find that you need a big YAGI-style UHF-only antenna to get all your local digital channels on a consistent basis.
(Kudos for knowing it's only "antennae" when speaking of biological ones, btw.)
K-9 has been "getting his own show" for about 20 years now.
What nobody seems to be able to get past is the fact that it's a really, really stupid idea. You might as well give Eddie his own spin-off from Frasier.
Tennant was a villain in a Harry Potter film, so some Americans knew him from that.
But Blackpool and Casanova had not been broadcast in the US (and, as far as I know, still haven't). Can't really blame American audiences for not seeing stuff that hasn't shown up on their TV's.
It's understood that time lords only expected to live a long time when they had dull monastic lives on their home planet. The Doctor grew to an age of just over 900 before he stole a time machine and went off saving planets, and he's been burning through his multiple lives at a shocking pace ever since.
Then again, all the other time lords got themselves killed in a war with the Daleks, so who's the reckless fool now?
She'd make good fodder for a mini-series spin-off, or perhaps even a feature film.
I don't know how well it would work as a series. She's not quite a time lord, and doesn't have a time machine.
One of the bits of cannon which makes the Doctor Who series work is that reliable time-travel is something incredibly rare and mostly unique to the time lords, who use it sparingly and judiciously.
RTD killed off the time lords, but then introduced other organizations (the Time Agents, the Shadow Proclamation, etc.) to sort-of take their place in the narrative. But still, it's extremely rare to encounter somebody other than the Doctor who travels through time, because that's part of what makes him interesting.
There had been some suggestions in the U.K. that maybe they should have a female Dr. Who this time around. That could have been interesting.
The names floating around included Helen Mirren and Judi Dench. Imposing, powerful women. Just the way it should be.
...laura
People throw that around EVERY time there's buzz about a regeneration. It used to be that everybody wanted Joanna Lumley to do it.
In the charity-broadcast parody "Curse of the Fatal Death", they threw in a lot of the "popular" choices for the role in rapid succession, including Lumley, Hugh Grant, James Broadbent, etc.
Worth a download, if you can find it.
By a funny coincidence, that parody was written by Peter Moffat, the guy who is taking over the helm of Dr. Who in 2010.
The thing is, gender is such a huge part of a person's identity that I don't know how well it would work to have him change into a woman. The Doctor is not human, but he is clearly a male of his species.
Would audiences perceive a "female" Doctor as simply a new aspect of the same person? Would regenerating into a feminine form re-define the Doctor as a transsexual? Are the writers even remotely interested in dealing with such questions, or would it get in the way of the real mission of telling thrilling time-travel stories?
My two personal favorite picks for the last ten years has remained unchanged: Either Stephen Fry or Lenny Henry. Neither seems likely at this point to ever get to do it, but you won't hear me complaining. Doctors 9 and 10 have been nothing short of sensational, in my opinion, and I have high hopes for 11.
It's just the language you have learned and political correctness.
You see, I have friend called Jamesi who I have no problem calling ass (as in bum, not as in four legged beast). Then there is American fashion dude called James Perse, who you probably have no problem calling that, but for me calling him is somewhat problematic in English, 'cause perse is ass in Finnish...
It's not her name, but her chosen nick-name. She knows it's a racial slur. She's "taking it back."
I'm not on board. If a Jewish friend wanted me to call him "Heimie", I probably wouldn't do that either.
Can we wait until after somebody claiming to be a religious person actually takes a shot at the president-elect before we condemn an entire ethnic group (rednecks) for cultivating an environment which produces our fictional assassin?
Judging by what a more-or-less sensible non-partisan Obama sounds like, and what an incredibly goofy left-wing tool Biden has shown himself to be, I'd say conservative nut-jobs would not only be among the last to shoot at Obama, they'd probably be among the first to take a bullet for him.
Step 6: Watch as the "faceless, evil" corporations (that are so easy to rip off with a free conscience) lays off a lot of your friends, as those of us in Minnesota are doing right now, as Best Buy is finding themselves forced to drastically down-size.
[rant] A lot of Slashbots love to hate on corporate America, but for most of us, big corporations are the source of our mortgage payments. Even if you're an "independent contractor", think about who buys your contracts.
Then consider the fact that a lot of your retirement hopes and dreams are probably pinned on the success of Big Evil Corporations, too.
You're not just part of the machine. You're a part-owner of the machine. Keep that in mind before you start smashing the machine up. [/rant]
Mine has about a hundred. It's called a keyboard with a trackpad.
Why would I want to drag a bunch of buttons all over the table when all I need for my well-designed GUI (OS X) is some kind of simple pointer device to interact with my keyboard?
Kinda how 'yankee' or 'redneck' is an insult, unless you are one, in which case it's a badge of pride.
Pretty much true of all racial/regional/religious identity slurs, isn't it?
I have a Korean friend who insists that her preferred nickname for herself is "gook". No matter what she says, I just can't bring myself to call her that. If I was also Korean, it would be one thing, but for a white person to call an East Asian by that word... It's simply not how I've been brought up.
That's right. None. Running an AV program on a Mac makes about as much sense as using a rope to tie down your car every time you park it in your garage.
I don't think that is what you mean. If you tie your car down with a rope, a car thief can still get in do his stuff and drive away breaking the rope.
No, that's pretty much what I mean. AV on the Mac is currently both redundant and ineffective.
I know that this is mostly US-centric, where sadly, Linux doesn't rule the desktop. However, there are many countries in the world (a growing number) where Linux *does rule* the desktop. Linux may not be on your desktop, but it is on mine, and there are more per day on my side than there are per day on your side. One day Linux will be on your desktop too, its just that right now you (sadly) have not come to that realization yet.
You assume way too much, AC.
Within the next year, I won't even have a desktop.
I have a media center, a headless rack-mounted music-studio computer, and a phone, all three of which run OS X and have no need of Linux, thanks.
Currently, I still use a laptop (again, running OS X) to remotely control my music studio system, but I'm in the process of configuring my phone to take over that job, and soon will not need the MacBook for that job either.
Assuming Linux EVER gains a toe-hold of the US "desktop" market, desktop PC's will be an obsolete concept by then anyway.
I'm the one you were replying to, and I was talking about desktop share, because that's what the article was about.
And, again, I don't see evidence that Linux is "carving into Microsoft's market share" in the server arena, because it never was Microsoft's market to steal in the first place. If anything, Microsoft is the relatively new usurper in that arena. When I entered IT, the very idea of using a Microsoft OS to run your server was considered laughable. That obviously has changed in Microsoft's favor over the years.
>I find it hard to believe that people actually pay $13/mo for radio:)
10: It's not just a radio. It's entertainment without commercials and it's the only (legal) place to listen to Howard Stern each day. You can't get that on radio (anymore, and in the case of the former; ever), and I have to do some early morning mp3 work to attach Howard to my iPod for the day's show. iPod is a helper here, not a competitor. I'd pay double for this service, it's that much better than any alternative. Never heard of FStream, does this somehow work on my in-car radio, over many miles of roads? I doubt it. What I don't doubt is that this item smells of NAB sour grapes for spending $400M+ on lobbyists to try and keep the XM/Sirius merger from even happening in the first place. While HUGE oil and wireless companies merged in a fraction of the time. This is just another example of our misguided government and their weakness for some cash for influence. Over a year it took before the merger was approved, that hurts the two companies by not allowing them to shift to a better business strategy, or offer other combined services, during a critical time in their development, nor does it help me as a subscriber. It's not a free market when your competitors have to bribe officials to help protect their ailing, old-fashioned business. Radio stations are worthless to me and most investor and station owners too. Face it, XM/Sirius has a great product, they have over 18 million subscribers combined, and they aren't going anywhere except in my new car next year.
If I had to pay $13 a month to NOT hear Howard Stern, I'd probably do so.
Tell me this, genius. Do you subscribe to a cable or satellite TV service, or just get your shows over DVD(not free), youtube, bittorrent, appleTV(not free), and the rabbit ears? Thought so. Like I said, this service is worth double to me *because* of the lack of commercials, the permanence of the stations at any location, and the variety. I'm a happy subscriber of two Sirius receivers, and I shut off my DirecTV two years ago, and I don't miss it. Sirius(or XM now), and DVDs, that's all I need. What else do I need? Some shitty commercials on a higher bandwidth, pay for, radio? HD radio is what will fail. That and anything else that does not deliver the goods (no commercials, high quality audio, variety, signal ubiquity). The NAB got their asses handed to them. If radio is so fucking good, go buy a station yourself. You can get one AWFUL cheap now! Wanna know why? goto line 10!
No, I don't subscribe to cable or satellite TV. I get about a dozen channels of HDTV/DTV for free over the air with a simple roof antenna, and can get most other stuff off the Internet. It's awesome and it's free.
Just like commercial radio and internet-based free music services.
The radio in your car is good for one thing; being a host for a satellite radio receiver, iPod or other MP3 player, when there is no AUX jack. HA! Stick THAT in your drive and boot it.
The radio in my car usually stays on 88.5 ("Real Jazz, Real Traffic") or 89.3 ("The Current"), both are commercial-free stations in my town.
Or I listen to Pandora Radio in my car, thanks to my iPhone and the 3G network.
Christmas predates Sol Invictus by almost a century (circa 200 versus 280 A.D.)
Most Roman traditions were borrowed from much older religious traditions. "Embrace and Extend" was Rome's M.O. for most of it's history.
Also, Wiki to the rescue:
The earliest reference to the celebration of the nativity on December 25 is found in the Chronography of 354, an illuminated manuscript compiled in Rome in 354.[5][29] In the East, early Christians celebrated the birth of Christ as part of Epiphany (January 6), although this festival focused on the baptism of Jesus
vs.
Dies Natalis Solis Invicti means "the birthday of the unconquered Sun." The use of the title Sol Invictus allowed several solar deities to be worshipped collectively, including Elah-Gabal, a Syrian sun god; Sol, the god of Emperor Aurelian; and Mithras, a soldiers' god of Persian origin.[21] Emperor Elagabalus (218â"222) introduced the festival, and it reached the height of its popularity under Aurelian, who promoted it as an empire-wide holiday.
This is an article about the desktop market, not the enterprise market. Linux remains a non-factor on the desktop.
As for the enterprise, I admit I haven't been paying very close attention since shifting my career towards more of a programming role, but it seems to me that there were a lot more enterprises running some flavor of Unix or another (including Linux) ten years ago, and a lot fewer Windows Enterprise shops back then. A decade ago, Windows was not taken very seriously as a "big iron" server solution. Now they seem to have bleed into many (if not most) corporate server farms, though still not the overwhelming dominance they have in the desktop market. Am I just horribly misguided on that score?
Each Mac mini needs to be built in a Chinese sweatshop and then shipped to the US.
Each MacBook needs to be built in a Taiwanese sweatshop and then shipped to the US.
Each version of MS-Office needs to be written once and then sold on $0.50 disks to millions of users for hundreds of dollars each. Plus, if the user is "keeping up" with your versions, you'll ding them about 3 times over the useful life of the Mac they're running it on.
Meh. Regardless of its popularity, OS X is still going to be the nicer platform to work with.
Mainstream acceptance does not always invalidate "hip" status. Obama won the election comfortably, but he's still considered the more "cool" candidate to have supported by most trendy urbanites.
I think it's less a "good news for Apple" story as it is a "bad news for MS" story. Apple gained a slight bit of market share. But MS is in a much more vulnerable position. MS's entire business model is pretty much PREDICATED on the proposition that they pretty much own the OS market (and has been for a long time now). Anything that threatens that share, even just a little, threatens the very underpinnings of the company.
God, it was hard getting through that paragraph with no sarcasm.
Okay, let's get a little perspective here. It's a common meme in the business that Microsoft makes more money selling software to Mac users than Apple makes selling Macs to Mac users. I'm not positive whether that's still true, but it would not surprise me in the least if it was. MS-Office for Mac still costs a king's ransom and still sells like hotcakes at Apple Stores everywhere.
Microsoft makes pretty good bank on Windows, but it's far from being their main revenue stream. Productivity software, enterprise solutions, and services are where their big bucks come from.
What I find amusing about the story is this: Apple raises their market share from what was possibly as low as 3 percent a couple years ago to about 9 percent, while Linux remains something that non-nerds are not even sure how to pronounce, and what's the spin on Slashdot? "OS X and Linux are chipping away at Microsoft's market share!"
Slashdot Mirror
Hey, if you want to talk about eliminating the FCC and simply auctioning off all available bandwidth as if it was real estate, I'm totally on board.
But as long as we're going to use a heavy-handed bureaucracy to manipulate the market "for the public good", having to buy new equipment to keep up with their decisions once every 50 years or so seems far less burdensome than certain other federal departments I can think of.
Right.
Also, can somebody please tell me why the government owes anybody a free converter box? If such a thing is too great of an expense for you, maybe you should turn off the TV and take a second job or something.
Not everybody owns dedicated UHF roof antennas.
Those VHF/UHF hybrid ones are good enough (in most places) to tune in the analog signals, while many people (including me) find that you need a big YAGI-style UHF-only antenna to get all your local digital channels on a consistent basis.
(Kudos for knowing it's only "antennae" when speaking of biological ones, btw.)
Those jokes pretty much write themselves.
Which is exactly why they should never do it.
I was too young in 1989 to watch it, and the show felt too childish when I watched one in 2005.
I think you need to give it more than one episode to get a sense of how good the show is, kid.
K-9 has been "getting his own show" for about 20 years now.
What nobody seems to be able to get past is the fact that it's a really, really stupid idea. You might as well give Eddie his own spin-off from Frasier.
Tennant was a villain in a Harry Potter film, so some Americans knew him from that.
But Blackpool and Casanova had not been broadcast in the US (and, as far as I know, still haven't). Can't really blame American audiences for not seeing stuff that hasn't shown up on their TV's.
It's understood that time lords only expected to live a long time when they had dull monastic lives on their home planet. The Doctor grew to an age of just over 900 before he stole a time machine and went off saving planets, and he's been burning through his multiple lives at a shocking pace ever since.
Then again, all the other time lords got themselves killed in a war with the Daleks, so who's the reckless fool now?
She'd make good fodder for a mini-series spin-off, or perhaps even a feature film.
I don't know how well it would work as a series. She's not quite a time lord, and doesn't have a time machine.
One of the bits of cannon which makes the Doctor Who series work is that reliable time-travel is something incredibly rare and mostly unique to the time lords, who use it sparingly and judiciously.
RTD killed off the time lords, but then introduced other organizations (the Time Agents, the Shadow Proclamation, etc.) to sort-of take their place in the narrative. But still, it's extremely rare to encounter somebody other than the Doctor who travels through time, because that's part of what makes him interesting.
There had been some suggestions in the U.K. that maybe
they should have a female Dr. Who this time around. That could
have been interesting.
The names floating around included Helen Mirren
and Judi Dench. Imposing, powerful women. Just the
way it should be.
...laura
People throw that around EVERY time there's buzz about a regeneration. It used to be that everybody wanted Joanna Lumley to do it.
In the charity-broadcast parody "Curse of the Fatal Death", they threw in a lot of the "popular" choices for the role in rapid succession, including Lumley, Hugh Grant, James Broadbent, etc.
Worth a download, if you can find it.
By a funny coincidence, that parody was written by Peter Moffat, the guy who is taking over the helm of Dr. Who in 2010.
The thing is, gender is such a huge part of a person's identity that I don't know how well it would work to have him change into a woman. The Doctor is not human, but he is clearly a male of his species.
Would audiences perceive a "female" Doctor as simply a new aspect of the same person? Would regenerating into a feminine form re-define the Doctor as a transsexual? Are the writers even remotely interested in dealing with such questions, or would it get in the way of the real mission of telling thrilling time-travel stories?
My two personal favorite picks for the last ten years has remained unchanged: Either Stephen Fry or Lenny Henry. Neither seems likely at this point to ever get to do it, but you won't hear me complaining. Doctors 9 and 10 have been nothing short of sensational, in my opinion, and I have high hopes for 11.
It's just the language you have learned and political correctness.
You see, I have friend called Jamesi who I have no problem calling ass (as in bum, not as in four legged beast). Then there is American fashion dude called James Perse, who you probably have no problem calling that, but for me calling him is somewhat problematic in English, 'cause perse is ass in Finnish...
It's not her name, but her chosen nick-name. She knows it's a racial slur. She's "taking it back."
I'm not on board. If a Jewish friend wanted me to call him "Heimie", I probably wouldn't do that either.
Can we wait until after somebody claiming to be a religious person actually takes a shot at the president-elect before we condemn an entire ethnic group (rednecks) for cultivating an environment which produces our fictional assassin?
Judging by what a more-or-less sensible non-partisan Obama sounds like, and what an incredibly goofy left-wing tool Biden has shown himself to be, I'd say conservative nut-jobs would not only be among the last to shoot at Obama, they'd probably be among the first to take a bullet for him.
Step 6: Watch as the "faceless, evil" corporations (that are so easy to rip off with a free conscience) lays off a lot of your friends, as those of us in Minnesota are doing right now, as Best Buy is finding themselves forced to drastically down-size.
[rant]
A lot of Slashbots love to hate on corporate America, but for most of us, big corporations are the source of our mortgage payments. Even if you're an "independent contractor", think about who buys your contracts.
Then consider the fact that a lot of your retirement hopes and dreams are probably pinned on the success of Big Evil Corporations, too.
You're not just part of the machine. You're a part-owner of the machine. Keep that in mind before you start smashing the machine up.
[/rant]
Mine has about a hundred. It's called a keyboard with a trackpad.
Why would I want to drag a bunch of buttons all over the table when all I need for my well-designed GUI (OS X) is some kind of simple pointer device to interact with my keyboard?
Yeah, but you can get what you came for with just a word anyway.
Kinda how 'yankee' or 'redneck' is an insult, unless you are one, in which case it's a badge of pride.
Pretty much true of all racial/regional/religious identity slurs, isn't it?
I have a Korean friend who insists that her preferred nickname for herself is "gook". No matter what she says, I just can't bring myself to call her that. If I was also Korean, it would be one thing, but for a white person to call an East Asian by that word... It's simply not how I've been brought up.
Ah, a car analog on /. I'll bite.
That's right. None. Running an AV program on a Mac makes about as much sense as using a rope to tie down your car every time you park it in your garage.
I don't think that is what you mean. If you tie your car down with a rope, a car thief can still get in do his stuff and drive away breaking the rope.
No, that's pretty much what I mean. AV on the Mac is currently both redundant and ineffective.
I know that this is mostly US-centric, where sadly, Linux doesn't rule the desktop. However, there are many countries in the world (a growing number) where Linux *does rule* the desktop. Linux may not be on your desktop, but it is on mine, and there are more per day on my side than there are per day on your side. One day Linux will be on your desktop too, its just that right now you (sadly) have not come to that realization yet.
You assume way too much, AC.
Within the next year, I won't even have a desktop.
I have a media center, a headless rack-mounted music-studio computer, and a phone, all three of which run OS X and have no need of Linux, thanks.
Currently, I still use a laptop (again, running OS X) to remotely control my music studio system, but I'm in the process of configuring my phone to take over that job, and soon will not need the MacBook for that job either.
Assuming Linux EVER gains a toe-hold of the US "desktop" market, desktop PC's will be an obsolete concept by then anyway.
I'm the one you were replying to, and I was talking about desktop share, because that's what the article was about.
And, again, I don't see evidence that Linux is "carving into Microsoft's market share" in the server arena, because it never was Microsoft's market to steal in the first place. If anything, Microsoft is the relatively new usurper in that arena. When I entered IT, the very idea of using a Microsoft OS to run your server was considered laughable. That obviously has changed in Microsoft's favor over the years.
>I find it hard to believe that people actually pay $13/mo for radio :)
10: It's not just a radio. It's entertainment without commercials and it's the only (legal) place to listen to Howard Stern each day. You can't get that on radio (anymore, and in the case of the former; ever), and I have to do some early morning mp3 work to attach Howard to my iPod for the day's show. iPod is a helper here, not a competitor. I'd pay double for this service, it's that much better than any alternative. Never heard of FStream, does this somehow work on my in-car radio, over many miles of roads? I doubt it. What I don't doubt is that this item smells of NAB sour grapes for spending $400M+ on lobbyists to try and keep the XM/Sirius merger from even happening in the first place. While HUGE oil and wireless companies merged in a fraction of the time. This is just another example of our misguided government and their weakness for some cash for influence. Over a year it took before the merger was approved, that hurts the two companies by not allowing them to shift to a better business strategy, or offer other combined services, during a critical time in their development, nor does it help me as a subscriber. It's not a free market when your competitors have to bribe officials to help protect their ailing, old-fashioned business. Radio stations are worthless to me and most investor and station owners too. Face it, XM/Sirius has a great product, they have over 18 million subscribers combined, and they aren't going anywhere except in my new car next year.
If I had to pay $13 a month to NOT hear Howard Stern, I'd probably do so.
Tell me this, genius. Do you subscribe to a cable or satellite TV service, or just get your shows over DVD(not free), youtube, bittorrent, appleTV(not free), and the rabbit ears? Thought so. Like I said, this service is worth double to me *because* of the lack of commercials, the permanence of the stations at any location, and the variety. I'm a happy subscriber of two Sirius receivers, and I shut off my DirecTV two years ago, and I don't miss it. Sirius(or XM now), and DVDs, that's all I need. What else do I need? Some shitty commercials on a higher bandwidth, pay for, radio? HD radio is what will fail. That and anything else that does not deliver the goods (no commercials, high quality audio, variety, signal ubiquity). The NAB got their asses handed to them. If radio is so fucking good, go buy a station yourself. You can get one AWFUL cheap now! Wanna know why? goto line 10!
No, I don't subscribe to cable or satellite TV. I get about a dozen channels of HDTV/DTV for free over the air with a simple roof antenna, and can get most other stuff off the Internet. It's awesome and it's free.
Just like commercial radio and internet-based free music services.
The radio in your car is good for one thing; being a host for a satellite radio receiver, iPod or other MP3 player, when there is no AUX jack. HA! Stick THAT in your drive and boot it.
The radio in my car usually stays on 88.5 ("Real Jazz, Real Traffic") or 89.3 ("The Current"), both are commercial-free stations in my town.
Or I listen to Pandora Radio in my car, thanks to my iPhone and the 3G network.
Or I just chose an album that I own.
Christmas predates Sol Invictus by almost a century (circa 200 versus 280 A.D.)
Most Roman traditions were borrowed from much older religious traditions. "Embrace and Extend" was Rome's M.O. for most of it's history.
Also, Wiki to the rescue:
vs.
This is an article about the desktop market, not the enterprise market. Linux remains a non-factor on the desktop.
As for the enterprise, I admit I haven't been paying very close attention since shifting my career towards more of a programming role, but it seems to me that there were a lot more enterprises running some flavor of Unix or another (including Linux) ten years ago, and a lot fewer Windows Enterprise shops back then. A decade ago, Windows was not taken very seriously as a "big iron" server solution. Now they seem to have bleed into many (if not most) corporate server farms, though still not the overwhelming dominance they have in the desktop market. Am I just horribly misguided on that score?
It's a matter of margins.
Each Mac mini needs to be built in a Chinese sweatshop and then shipped to the US.
Each MacBook needs to be built in a Taiwanese sweatshop and then shipped to the US.
Each version of MS-Office needs to be written once and then sold on $0.50 disks to millions of users for hundreds of dollars each. Plus, if the user is "keeping up" with your versions, you'll ding them about 3 times over the useful life of the Mac they're running it on.
Meh. Regardless of its popularity, OS X is still going to be the nicer platform to work with.
Mainstream acceptance does not always invalidate "hip" status. Obama won the election comfortably, but he's still considered the more "cool" candidate to have supported by most trendy urbanites.
I think it's less a "good news for Apple" story as it is a "bad news for MS" story. Apple gained a slight bit of market share. But MS is in a much more vulnerable position. MS's entire business model is pretty much PREDICATED on the proposition that they pretty much own the OS market (and has been for a long time now). Anything that threatens that share, even just a little, threatens the very underpinnings of the company.
God, it was hard getting through that paragraph with no sarcasm.
Okay, let's get a little perspective here. It's a common meme in the business that Microsoft makes more money selling software to Mac users than Apple makes selling Macs to Mac users. I'm not positive whether that's still true, but it would not surprise me in the least if it was. MS-Office for Mac still costs a king's ransom and still sells like hotcakes at Apple Stores everywhere.
Microsoft makes pretty good bank on Windows, but it's far from being their main revenue stream. Productivity software, enterprise solutions, and services are where their big bucks come from.
What I find amusing about the story is this: Apple raises their market share from what was possibly as low as 3 percent a couple years ago to about 9 percent, while Linux remains something that non-nerds are not even sure how to pronounce, and what's the spin on Slashdot? "OS X and Linux are chipping away at Microsoft's market share!"