"your not in the "in-crowd" of ivory elites."
I have to say that you are completely uninformed about the academic world. Every (research) math department has faculty from the (former) USSR who will be conservative Republicans for life. "Every" political science department had very liberal and very conservative faculty members (who would argue all the time). The only "ivory tower" I can think of is Hoover Tower at Stanford; this is certainly a center for liberal thinking. History (& Math) departments have faculty from China who are sometimes very conservative. Engineering faculty come from many countries and have many opinions. You really have no clue.
"Professors may be smart in their own craft, but that does NOT mean they are current on events."
I doubt this silly comment is accepted by anyone with at least two brain cells. I am the best (i.e. most available) example I know. I have worked in political campaigns (at low levels) for Democrats and for Republicans. I have testified before a state lefgislative committee. I usually (almost always) vote. I may be careless in my slashdot posts but I am very well informed about current events. I believe many/most of my colleagues are also well informed.
"Sorry, man... the only thing you can do in this hellhole of passionately uninformed opinion is waste time."
I think you miss the point. Opinions are very important and can be useful. People have expressed opinions and posted web links on software which has been useful to me in the past. (Sorry, I cannot think of any examples right now.) I want to learn about lots of peoples' opinions. For example, I cannot understand why Bush even has a chance of being reelected; what can "these people" be thinking?
I have asked a different "opinion question" on a few previous slashdot posts without receiving much of a reply. My basic question is:
Why are (many/most) IT people afraid of math?
If you doubt this, put a good/excellent programmer with a MS or PhD in Math into an IT environment and see how the other IT people react. (A common reaction is: if you know math, you must not "know" how to code.)
My experience with CS majors is that their abstract mathematical skills are
(often) weak.
However, I do not want my opinion (since I have it already). What is your opinion? Am I completely wrong? Am I right? People who deal with computer graphics need to know linear algebra (not just matrix operations but real linear algebra (e.g. how do linear transformations behave under change of basis?)) In my experience, sometimes CS majors are good at linear algebra but often they are weak.
Being a little serious, both (political) sides are getting to offer their opinions here. I read at -1 so I can see both sides of the discussion.
How many people read (& post to) slashdot because it is fun? This does not mean that one lies about one's views (except for trolls) but that one can say things here that might not be appreciated elsewhere. For example, I do not hate Republicans and I will vote for one if he/she is the best candidate. However, I believe Bush and his crew really are a danger to our country. If fact, I think the terrorists have already won; we are at war with ourselves. How many of the federal cases brought by the Bush administration have offered serious evidence? Remember that lawyer in Portland, Oregon who was held for 17 (?) days because they decided he was involved in the train bombings in Spain? This was completely unrelated to the fact that he defended some Muslims... . (
His release; also
here,
here.)
"Bush is going to win in November."
You might be right; after all, Hitler originally became the leader of Germany through a "democratic" process.
If you are correct, it will merely show that the American people failed an intelligence test and the US does not deserve to be the world's leading military power. In the long run, the US will lose its position if the people and government keep making stupid decisions. (Remember Spain's position in Europe and how this position was lost?)
"How many stupid democrat geeks there are."
OK, how many?
Let us review the facts. Bush jr. claimed that there were WMDs. There were no WMDs. (Many) Republicians still support Bush jr. It seems to me that there would be very few "stupid democrat geeks" and very many "stupid Republicians".
"no one would be complaining." I would not complain if Bush jr. was going to liberate all of the countries which have evil governments. I would like to see a plan stating the countries we would attack and the means by which we would improve the lives of the people in these countries. I think a list of the worst 20 countries would be a good start.
I like a man (or woman) who bravely states his/her opinion for all to see. We should all proclaim who we are, just as the poster did, and freely state our opinions. Well done, brave soul.
The claim of baby Bush was that there were WMDs in Iraq in 2001. I think most of us understood the discussion in this light. Do you have any credible sources you can cite which support W's claims?
Under other circumstances, Saddam Hussein would be supporting Bush. Remember the US supported Saddam until he invaded Kuwait. This states:
"This document collection focuses on two major issues central to the Iraqgate affair. The first is U.S. policy toward Iraq during the 1980s up to the latter's invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990. The second is the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL) affair, which came to the attention of the authorities and the public during the summer of 1989, following the revelation that the small Atlanta branch office of an Italian bank had provided Iraq with several billion dollars in off-book loans and credits. The majority of the documents in the set, therefore, date from the administrations of Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) and George Bush (1989-1993). During Reagan's tenure in office, the U.S. Intensified efforts to improve U.S.-Iraq relations, in part to ensure against Iraq's defeat in the Iran-Iraq war. This policy was continued after the end of the war, through most of the first year and a half of the Bush administration, until developing events, including the crisis brought about by Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, rendered it untenable.
"Although the set focuses on documents directly concerned with what came to be called the "Iraqgate" scandal, it provides a historic context for them by incorporating materials on related subjects. Among the relevant issues addressed are the decision taken by the Reagan administration to improve political and economic relations with Iraq, and the rationale for pursuing this decision, which became a major tenet of U.S. foreign policy toward the Persian Gulf Region. The U.S. foreign policy toward the Persian Gulf region. The U.S. remained firmly committed to this policy, despite Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iranian forces during the Iran-Iraq war and against it s own Kurdish population, and despite persistent reports of Iraq's efforts to develop nonconventional weapons. Iraq's use of chemical warfare and its weapons programs, pursued with technology form the West, are also among the collection's major subjects."
"And it won't be no $50/barrel."
I agree completely. It will probably be between $100 and $200 per barrel.
(Why? Limited supply, weaker and weaker dollar, greater risk to the oil supply because of the drug trade, terrorists, etc.)
"Yes, but for what school?" A state university with a PhD program in math. One of our PhD graduates is a faculty member at a Pac10 university which is rated in the top 25 in math in the nation. Another of our PhD graduates is a vice president at a company with revenue of about $40,000,000,000 per year.
One of my colleagues has delivered approximately 80 invited talks at international or national conferences and universities in Austria, Canada, China, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Poland, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, South Korea, Tunisia, and United Kingdom over the last ten years.
I am invited to spend three weeks at the Australian National University in the very near future and I was supported by a Max Planck Institute for two months during the summer of 2003. If you know my university, look at the math dept. web pages. Then talk with some faculty at other universities (e.g. Rafe Mazzeo or Bob Finn at Stanford, Gunther Uhlmann at U. Washington, Peter Kuchment at Texas A&M) and ask their opinions. Then feel free to "rest (your) case."
One thing that few people understand is that there are many universities with outstanding researchers in mathematics. Have you heard of the University of North Texas? It has some excellent math faculty. What about the University of Toledo? The University of California at Davis (the "farm school")? The University of Central Florida? Even the University of Western Ontario (in London) has good people in math.
I suspect that you judge universities by their football programs or by other "important" indicators. You are probably much smarter than anyone else on slashdot.
It is late and I am feeding the troll. Sorry; I guess it is just fun to waste time on/. sometimes.
First on your sig (sorry, cannot resist) "If you disagree with something I say, reply and tell me why. Modding down tells me I'm right."
The correct actions are for some people to mod you down and for others to reply and tell you about your errors. This way you will be uncertain of the slashdot opinion - modded down = "I am right" replies = "I am wrong" ???
(By the way, do you doubt yourself if you are modded up?)
"Another question could be--was it in the best interest of the Iraqi people to remove Saddam? We could have just left him there until he died and passed on his leadership to his sons. It would have gone on forever."
So this was an either-or situation. The only options were (1) to invade or (2) let Saddam's heirs rule forever? It is too bad that there is no third alternative.... I guess that Mumar Kadafi must be eliminated or Lybia will develop WMDs (and his sons will rule Lybia forever); these must be the only options.
I hope you get to attend a university someday. You might learn to do some research and have informed opinions. (OK, I think you do not have the ability to think critically; I hope I am wrong.)
We forced the inspectors to leave. We (i.e. Bush) decided that the inspectors' mission had failed and offered as evidence a pack of lies.
"we tried that for OVER A DECADE and it wasn't working"
Did we find any WMDs? NO! This sounds like success to me. How to justify this comment ("it wasn't working") of yours?
Is there even one honest bone in your body? Are you just a political hack?
"if you asked these people what the were doing 4 years ago,"
I would answer that I was the secretary of the Faculty Senate (later President of the Faculty Senate and chair of the statewide committee of Faculty Senate Presidents), math conference organizer, math researcher, full professor, parent, community volunteer, etc.
What were you four years ago?
It was up to the UN inspectors to say that Saddam was violating the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire. If you want to say we should remove evil rulers because they harm their own people or their neighbors or the world community, I agree;
let us start with North Korea, Egypt, Mexico (PRI+drug lords), and Saudi Arabia.
"Far from "group think," American nuclear and intelligence experts argued bitterly over the tubes. A "holy war" is how one Congressional investigator described it. But if the opinions of the nuclear experts were seemingly disregarded at every turn, an overwhelming momentum gathered behind the C.I.A. assessment. It was a momentum built on a pattern of haste, secrecy, ambiguity, bureaucratic maneuver and a persistent failure in the Bush administration and among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress to ask hard questions."
If this were a surprise, it might matter more. However, I have trouble believing that an intelligent person can believe most of the things the Bush administration says. I do not think this will hurt Bush because his supporters are completely uninterested in knowing the truth.
Do you remember the cost estimates of the Republician Drug Plan?
(e.g.
here,
here).
What about WMD?
Do you believe him when he talks about how much better is the economy?
Did you believe Bush or Greenspan when they talked about the need for tax reductions because the federal government was going to have too large a surplus?
"But continuing to run surpluses beyond the point at which we reach zero or near-zero federal debt brings to center stage the critical longer-term fiscal policy issue of whether the federal government should accumulate large quantities of private (more technically nonfederal) assets. At zero debt, the continuing unified budget surpluses currently projected imply a major accumulation of private assets by the federal government. This development should factor materially into the policies you and the Administration choose to pursue.
"I believe, as I have noted in the past, that the federal government should eschew private asset accumulation because it would be exceptionally difficult to insulate the government's investment decisions from political pressures. Thus, over time, having the federal government hold significant amounts of private assets would risk sub-optimal performance by our capital markets, diminished economic efficiency, and lower overall standards of living than would be achieved otherwise.
"Short of an extraordinarily rapid and highly undesirable short-term dissipation of unified surpluses or a transferring of assets to individual privatized accounts, it appears difficult to avoid at least some accumulation of private assets by the government."
(From
here)
When I hear Bush or his crew talk, I know that the truth is the exact opposite of their opinion.
Iraq was a hotbed of terrorists before we invaded?
NO!
Iraq is now a hotbed for terrorists because Bush invaded? YES!
Did Bush look like a "little boy" who did not really belong in that first debate?
"Given the huge number of Linux drivers, those are the kind of changes that Apple can pull off but a near to impossible to do in the Linux world."
You trade the freedom to use lots of different hardware (Linux) for the convenience of using Apple hardware. Deciding which is better is personal.
"kernel are not that important anymore"
I have difficulty agreeing with this comment. Certainly there may be a great deal of interoperability between Linux and OSX (perhaps ignoring the GPL in some cases) but this is not the same as saying that the particular kernels are not important. If your comment were correct, would we need
Free Darwin?
(Also here
and here.)
As the Linux kernel progresses (adding more improved journaled file systems, better smp support, better use of resources, etc.), I believe the same applications which run under Linux and OSX will run better under Linux. (A related example is Quake3; it runs much faster under Linux than under Windows. Sometime Windows (applications) run faster under wine than under Windows. I do not know how OSX and Linux compare in this regard. However, OSX has an extra layer which probably does not help speed things up.)
"overall up to $200,000 per year"
A really good (PhD in Math) financial mathematician makes up to $500,000/year here (and the cost of living is SO much less) - Black-Scholes type models (of options) (and "math magic") are very valuable.
Our university produces "tons" of BA/BS CS graduates whose only jumior/senior high level OS is Linux (Debian). I believe this is common at many universities. I do not think there is/will be a shortage of people who know Linux. (By the way, who can afford to live on $200,000/year in San Jose or SF or even Oakland? Have you looked at housing costs? In 1959 a very nice house in Palo Alto cost less than $20,000. Check out the prices now. If (new) Stanford faculty cannot afford to buy a house (other than in the faculty ghetto) closer than Santa Rosa, something is wrong.)
I think that development of the *BSD OSs will lag behind Linux. I believe that if Apple wants to maintain a "current" OS it will have to be based on Linux rather than BSD.
One might argue that the Linux kernel + "GNU" applications (+ Apache, sendmail, KDE, etc.) will become too big (e.g. bloated and slow). To the extent that this happens (if it does), I believe that source based distributions which make it easy for users to select the parts of Linux they need (e.g. Gentoo) will become more important and useful. Imagine if Apple let users select the parts of Linux they want/need and added their own "GUI magic" on top. (Of course, Apple would have GPL/LGPL problems - maybe Apple would become open source?)
I have not used OSX to any great extent and cannot offer any useful comments on:
"Linux kernel doesn't have all the stuff the Darwin kernel has."
I believe that the development and improvement of Linux will increase much faster than that of "MacOS" or Windows and that the "4.0 Linux kernel" will be much better and more powerful than "OS12" or "Windows XYZ".
"Yes, but they're owned by German carmaker BMW."
Does this mean you would turn down a free Rolls Royce? Would you see some value in owning one?
(I have never owned a Mac but I would not mind having one. Of course, a dual Opteron running Gentoo Linux would be more fun - my current AMD64 is pretty neat.)
"I think that makes both of them better leaders and very high on this list."
I agree to some extent but I wonder if Apple will remain in business over the long run. Once Linux is popular enough, could MS buy Apple (without concern about federal lawsuits)?
Slashdot Mirror
"your not in the "in-crowd" of ivory elites."
I have to say that you are completely uninformed about the academic world. Every (research) math department has faculty from the (former) USSR who will be conservative Republicans for life. "Every" political science department had very liberal and very conservative faculty members (who would argue all the time). The only "ivory tower" I can think of is Hoover Tower at Stanford; this is certainly a center for liberal thinking. History (& Math) departments have faculty from China who are sometimes very conservative. Engineering faculty come from many countries and have many opinions. You really have no clue.
"Professors may be smart in their own craft, but that does NOT mean they are current on events."
I doubt this silly comment is accepted by anyone with at least two brain cells. I am the best (i.e. most available) example I know. I have worked in political campaigns (at low levels) for Democrats and for Republicans. I have testified before a state lefgislative committee. I usually (almost always) vote. I may be careless in my slashdot posts but I am very well informed about current events. I believe many/most of my colleagues are also well informed.
"Sorry, man... the only thing you can do in this hellhole of passionately uninformed opinion is waste time."
I think you miss the point. Opinions are very important and can be useful. People have expressed opinions and posted web links on software which has been useful to me in the past. (Sorry, I cannot think of any examples right now.) I want to learn about lots of peoples' opinions. For example, I cannot understand why Bush even has a chance of being reelected; what can "these people" be thinking?
I have asked a different "opinion question" on a few previous slashdot posts without receiving much of a reply. My basic question is:
Why are (many/most) IT people afraid of math?
If you doubt this, put a good/excellent programmer with a MS or PhD in Math into an IT environment and see how the other IT people react. (A common reaction is: if you know math, you must not "know" how to code.)
My experience with CS majors is that their abstract mathematical skills are (often) weak.
However, I do not want my opinion (since I have it already). What is your opinion? Am I completely wrong? Am I right? People who deal with computer graphics need to know linear algebra (not just matrix operations but real linear algebra (e.g. how do linear transformations behave under change of basis?)) In my experience, sometimes CS majors are good at linear algebra but often they are weak.
Being a little serious, both (political) sides are getting to offer their opinions here. I read at -1 so I can see both sides of the discussion. ... . (
His release; also
here,
here.)
How many people read (& post to) slashdot because it is fun? This does not mean that one lies about one's views (except for trolls) but that one can say things here that might not be appreciated elsewhere. For example, I do not hate Republicans and I will vote for one if he/she is the best candidate. However, I believe Bush and his crew really are a danger to our country. If fact, I think the terrorists have already won; we are at war with ourselves. How many of the federal cases brought by the Bush administration have offered serious evidence? Remember that lawyer in Portland, Oregon who was held for 17 (?) days because they decided he was involved in the train bombings in Spain? This was completely unrelated to the fact that he defended some Muslims
How much is a subscription? I think I want one.
"Bush is going to win in November."
You might be right; after all, Hitler originally became the leader of Germany through a "democratic" process.
If you are correct, it will merely show that the American people failed an intelligence test and the US does not deserve to be the world's leading military power. In the long run, the US will lose its position if the people and government keep making stupid decisions. (Remember Spain's position in Europe and how this position was lost?)
"How many stupid democrat geeks there are."
OK, how many?
Let us review the facts. Bush jr. claimed that there were WMDs. There were no WMDs. (Many) Republicians still support Bush jr. It seems to me that there would be very few "stupid democrat geeks" and very many "stupid Republicians".
"no one would be complaining." I would not complain if Bush jr. was going to liberate all of the countries which have evil governments. I would like to see a plan stating the countries we would attack and the means by which we would improve the lives of the people in these countries. I think a list of the worst 20 countries would be a good start.
I like a man (or woman) who bravely states his/her opinion for all to see. We should all proclaim who we are, just as the poster did, and freely state our opinions. Well done, brave soul.
The claim of baby Bush was that there were WMDs in Iraq in 2001. I think most of us understood the discussion in this light. Do you have any credible sources you can cite which support W's claims?
Under other circumstances, Saddam Hussein would be supporting Bush. Remember the US supported Saddam until he invaded Kuwait.
This states:
"This document collection focuses on two major issues central to the Iraqgate affair. The first is U.S. policy toward Iraq during the 1980s up to the latter's invasion of Kuwait on August 2, 1990. The second is the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL) affair, which came to the attention of the authorities and the public during the summer of 1989, following the revelation that the small Atlanta branch office of an Italian bank had provided Iraq with several billion dollars in off-book loans and credits. The majority of the documents in the set, therefore, date from the administrations of Ronald Reagan (1981-1989) and George Bush (1989-1993). During Reagan's tenure in office, the U.S. Intensified efforts to improve U.S.-Iraq relations, in part to ensure against Iraq's defeat in the Iran-Iraq war. This policy was continued after the end of the war, through most of the first year and a half of the Bush administration, until developing events, including the crisis brought about by Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, rendered it untenable.
"Although the set focuses on documents directly concerned with what came to be called the "Iraqgate" scandal, it provides a historic context for them by incorporating materials on related subjects. Among the relevant issues addressed are the decision taken by the Reagan administration to improve political and economic relations with Iraq, and the rationale for pursuing this decision, which became a major tenet of U.S. foreign policy toward the Persian Gulf Region. The U.S. foreign policy toward the Persian Gulf region. The U.S. remained firmly committed to this policy, despite Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iranian forces during the Iran-Iraq war and against it s own Kurdish population, and despite persistent reports of Iraq's efforts to develop nonconventional weapons. Iraq's use of chemical warfare and its weapons programs, pursued with technology form the West, are also among the collection's major subjects."
"And it won't be no $50/barrel."
I agree completely. It will probably be between $100 and $200 per barrel.
(Why? Limited supply, weaker and weaker dollar, greater risk to the oil supply because of the drug trade, terrorists, etc.)
"Yes, but for what school?" A state university with a PhD program in math.
/. sometimes.
One of our PhD graduates is a faculty member at a Pac10 university which is rated in the top 25 in math in the nation. Another of our PhD graduates is a vice president at a company with revenue of about $40,000,000,000 per year. One of my colleagues has delivered approximately 80 invited talks at international or national conferences and universities in Austria, Canada, China, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Poland, Russia, Sweden, Switzerland, South Korea, Tunisia, and United Kingdom over the last ten years. I am invited to spend three weeks at the Australian National University in the very near future and I was supported by a Max Planck Institute for two months during the summer of 2003. If you know my university, look at the math dept. web pages. Then talk with some faculty at other universities (e.g. Rafe Mazzeo or Bob Finn at Stanford, Gunther Uhlmann at U. Washington, Peter Kuchment at Texas A&M) and ask their opinions. Then feel free to "rest (your) case."
One thing that few people understand is that there are many universities with outstanding researchers in mathematics. Have you heard of the University of North Texas? It has some excellent math faculty. What about the University of Toledo? The University of California at Davis (the "farm school")? The University of Central Florida? Even the University of Western Ontario (in London) has good people in math.
I suspect that you judge universities by their football programs or by other "important" indicators. You are probably much smarter than anyone else on slashdot.
It is late and I am feeding the troll. Sorry; I guess it is just fun to waste time on
First on your sig (sorry, cannot resist) "If you disagree with something I say, reply and tell me why. Modding down tells me I'm right."
... I guess that Mumar Kadafi must be eliminated or Lybia will develop WMDs (and his sons will rule Lybia forever); these must be the only options.
The correct actions are for some people to mod you down and for others to reply and tell you about your errors. This way you will be uncertain of the slashdot opinion - modded down = "I am right" replies = "I am wrong" ???
(By the way, do you doubt yourself if you are modded up?)
"Another question could be--was it in the best interest of the Iraqi people to remove Saddam? We could have just left him there until he died and passed on his leadership to his sons. It would have gone on forever."
So this was an either-or situation. The only options were (1) to invade or (2) let Saddam's heirs rule forever? It is too bad that there is no third alternative.
I hope you grow up someday.
I hope you get to attend a university someday. You might learn to do some research and have informed opinions. (OK, I think you do not have the ability to think critically; I hope I am wrong.)
We forced the inspectors to leave. We (i.e. Bush) decided that the inspectors' mission had failed and offered as evidence a pack of lies.
"we tried that for OVER A DECADE and it wasn't working"
Did we find any WMDs? NO! This sounds like success to me. How to justify this comment ("it wasn't working") of yours?
Is there even one honest bone in your body? Are you just a political hack?
"if you asked these people what the were doing 4 years ago,"
I would answer that I was the secretary of the Faculty Senate (later President of the Faculty Senate and chair of the statewide committee of Faculty Senate Presidents), math conference organizer, math researcher, full professor, parent, community volunteer, etc.
What were you four years ago?
It was up to the UN inspectors to say that Saddam was violating the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire. If you want to say we should remove evil rulers because they harm their own people or their neighbors or the world community, I agree; let us start with North Korea, Egypt, Mexico (PRI+drug lords), and Saudi Arabia.
"Far from "group think," American nuclear and intelligence experts argued bitterly over the tubes. A "holy war" is how one Congressional investigator described it. But if the opinions of the nuclear experts were seemingly disregarded at every turn, an overwhelming momentum gathered behind the C.I.A. assessment. It was a momentum built on a pattern of haste, secrecy, ambiguity, bureaucratic maneuver and a persistent failure in the Bush administration and among both Republicans and Democrats in Congress to ask hard questions."
If this were a surprise, it might matter more. However, I have trouble believing that an intelligent person can believe most of the things the Bush administration says. I do not think this will hurt Bush because his supporters are completely uninterested in knowing the truth.
Do you remember the cost estimates of the Republician Drug Plan? (e.g. here, here).
What about WMD?
Do you believe him when he talks about how much better is the economy?
Did you believe Bush or Greenspan when they talked about the need for tax reductions because the federal government was going to have too large a surplus?
"But continuing to run surpluses beyond the point at which we reach zero or near-zero federal debt brings to center stage the critical longer-term fiscal policy issue of whether the federal government should accumulate large quantities of private (more technically nonfederal) assets. At zero debt, the continuing unified budget surpluses currently projected imply a major accumulation of private assets by the federal government. This development should factor materially into the policies you and the Administration choose to pursue.
"I believe, as I have noted in the past, that the federal government should eschew private asset accumulation because it would be exceptionally difficult to insulate the government's investment decisions from political pressures. Thus, over time, having the federal government hold significant amounts of private assets would risk sub-optimal performance by our capital markets, diminished economic efficiency, and lower overall standards of living than would be achieved otherwise.
"Short of an extraordinarily rapid and highly undesirable short-term dissipation of unified surpluses or a transferring of assets to individual privatized accounts, it appears difficult to avoid at least some accumulation of private assets by the government." (From here)
When I hear Bush or his crew talk, I know that the truth is the exact opposite of their opinion.
Iraq was a hotbed of terrorists before we invaded? NO!
Iraq is now a hotbed for terrorists because Bush invaded? YES!
Did Bush look like a "little boy" who did not really belong in that first debate?
"Given the huge number of Linux drivers, those are the kind of changes that Apple can pull off but a near to impossible to do in the Linux world."
You trade the freedom to use lots of different hardware (Linux) for the convenience of using Apple hardware. Deciding which is better is personal.
"kernel are not that important anymore"
I have difficulty agreeing with this comment. Certainly there may be a great deal of interoperability between Linux and OSX (perhaps ignoring the GPL in some cases) but this is not the same as saying that the particular kernels are not important. If your comment were correct, would we need Free Darwin? (Also here and here.)
As the Linux kernel progresses (adding more improved journaled file systems, better smp support, better use of resources, etc.), I believe the same applications which run under Linux and OSX will run better under Linux. (A related example is Quake3; it runs much faster under Linux than under Windows. Sometime Windows (applications) run faster under wine than under Windows. I do not know how OSX and Linux compare in this regard. However, OSX has an extra layer which probably does not help speed things up.)
Gentoo will be the real Gem. (Fedora Core 2 and Debian are cool too.)
*BSD? Probably a hobby project (unless MS throws money at it).
"overall up to $200,000 per year"
A really good (PhD in Math) financial mathematician makes up to $500,000/year here (and the cost of living is SO much less) - Black-Scholes type models (of options) (and "math magic") are very valuable.
Our university produces "tons" of BA/BS CS graduates whose only jumior/senior high level OS is Linux (Debian). I believe this is common at many universities. I do not think there is/will be a shortage of people who know Linux. (By the way, who can afford to live on $200,000/year in San Jose or SF or even Oakland? Have you looked at housing costs? In 1959 a very nice house in Palo Alto cost less than $20,000. Check out the prices now. If (new) Stanford faculty cannot afford to buy a house (other than in the faculty ghetto) closer than Santa Rosa, something is wrong.)
I think that development of the *BSD OSs will lag behind Linux. I believe that if Apple wants to maintain a "current" OS it will have to be based on Linux rather than BSD.
One might argue that the Linux kernel + "GNU" applications (+ Apache, sendmail, KDE, etc.) will become too big (e.g. bloated and slow). To the extent that this happens (if it does), I believe that source based distributions which make it easy for users to select the parts of Linux they need (e.g. Gentoo) will become more important and useful. Imagine if Apple let users select the parts of Linux they want/need and added their own "GUI magic" on top. (Of course, Apple would have GPL/LGPL problems - maybe Apple would become open source?)
I have not used OSX to any great extent and cannot offer any useful comments on:
"Linux kernel doesn't have all the stuff the Darwin kernel has."
I believe that the development and improvement of Linux will increase much faster than that of "MacOS" or Windows and that the "4.0 Linux kernel" will be much better and more powerful than "OS12" or "Windows XYZ".
"Yes, but they're owned by German carmaker BMW."
Does this mean you would turn down a free Rolls Royce? Would you see some value in owning one?
(I have never owned a Mac but I would not mind having one. Of course, a dual Opteron running Gentoo Linux would be more fun - my current AMD64 is pretty neat.)
This should be modded "Funny" - or "Insightful", since I will never again trust my C-64 hidden away in the basement with ... Never Mind.
"I think that makes both of them better leaders and very high on this list."
I agree to some extent but I wonder if Apple will remain in business over the long run. Once Linux is popular enough, could MS buy Apple (without concern about federal lawsuits)?