OEMs aren't paying anything like that figure for Offfice pre-installation bundles. Maybe one tenth, if that. Microsoft has deep pockets and they're perfeclty willing to give OEMs Office for practically nothing in order to maintain their position with office.
Heck, we were trained to use the old Wang systems, and that's so far worse than anything available today.
That's totally irrelevant. We used to use a lot of things we wouldn't tolerate now. It has no bearing on anything. Just because we used to use horse and buggy's doesn't mean we're 'ready for' a car that only does 10 mph.
Your comments about MBAs holding back the adoption of Linux are probably true I guess, as long as we are talking about the arena of Fortune 5 (or 100, whatever) companies. But the world is a much larger place than that and it includes consumer markets and education and small business and creatives. I don't think MBAs are a major problem there.
Once the white box boys figure out...Money is money.
I'dl ike to suggest that the "white box boys" know their own business better than anyone. If it were really true that they could make more money by pre-installing RH 7.3 and OpenOffice then you can rest assured that some enterprising company would be doing it and eating everyone elses lunch. The fact that this is not happening leads me to believe that your assessment of the "readiness" of Linux isn't quite where you think it is. You subscribe to the "peole don't yet realize we're ready" theory while I subscribe to the "you're in denial about the fact that you're not ready" theory.
Perhaps it's the edge of consumer-friendliness that Windows has over Linux at present that kills it. I mean how much money are these "white box boys" - or anyone else for that matter! - really making on one unit? $50? $30? Less?? You get two support calls and suddenly you have made $0.
I think there is no reason to claim that Linux will save these guys money until you have an example to point to that's convincing enough to make others follow. When/if that happens you won't have to claim it - we'll all be watching the OEMs trip over themselves to sell Linux-based computers.
Why would you want to emulate a Mac? If you want Unix just get a real Mac.
Seriously, the only reasons to do such a thing would be because a) you just bought a real expensive Dell and can't afford an iBook, or b) political ("free as in speech baby!") reasons.
The only sensible choices would be to either get the Mac or to help the Linux platform grow into something better than it currently is.
And frankly I sort of agree with the assessment of the Rasterman. I don't, however, think Linux on the desktop is dead so much as it hasn't come alive yet. I believe there is a chance it could but there are obstacles. And those obstacles aren't technological primarily.
I think the chief obstacle is that it's made by geeks for geeks. And instead of admitting that the rest of the world doesn't operate like they do and adjusting their distro accordingly, they spew silly rhetoric like "GUIs are like diapers, everyone outgrows them eventually." I do read a lot of comments here suggesting that Linux already is just as usable and friendly and consumer-ready as Windows or Mac OS. This is ridiculous on it's face and if you can't admit it then there is hardly even a starting point for further discussion.
One option is to give up like Rasterman. Another would be to try making that "consumerized" distro that everyone who doesn't know how to "apt-get" would be able to use. I predict, however, that when and if that distro gets made it will be universally hated by the current Linux community.
Let's all admit right off the bat that Linux has very little desktop presence.
Let's further admit right up front that it's slow penetration into this area isn't due to price.
We might discuss reasons like the evil business practices of Microsoft. We all know how they have in the past used every legal and some illigal means of preventing OEMs from bundling competitors software. I think we all understand the implications for Linux in regards to those business practices.
But still. Don't you think there is another reason why Linux has very little presence on the deskop? It's just plain not fit for consumer...well, consumer consumption. It's just not good enough in that regard. At least not yet.
Having arrived at this conclusion, I ask myself "why?" One very important answer comes to mind: Linux developers and users (and there's hardly a difference, really) don't want it to become a consumer-ized product. They want, rather, the consumer to become a Linux-nerd. Think I'm exaggerating? A prime example can be had in a comment just a few inches above this one - "GUIs are like diapers - everyone outgrows them eventually."
It is this sentiment that is preventing Linux from moving into the deskop market. Gates' sly dealings with OEMs notwithstanding...I think it's time to admit some of the problem is Linux itself. And the responsibility for that lies squarely at the feet of it's developers.
I've made this prediction time and time again in these forums and here I go one more time - "One day someone will make a Linux distro that truly is consumer-oriented. That distro will be universally hated by the existing Linux community."
Linux will be forever a server OS and a geek-toy until and unless this changes.
The real truth of the matter is that it's not Apple who gets a free ride here at Slashdot - it's Linux. Usually when a Linux distro is patched/updated the story on the front page ( and it's always on the front page) usually includes the word "drool" and at least one exclamation point. Apple takes their lumps here same as Microsoft. Worse in many ways because more than half the people here are at least dual-booting a MS OS. Almost none are using an Apple one. But when do the Linux guys get criticised here? About anything?
I think you're right. They would be bitching about how slow Microsoft is with the update. But surely you're not suggesting Apple is getting a free ride in the Slashdot forums. Apple takes a hell of a beating here or haven't you noticed that the main discussion here begins with 5 "jokes" at Apple's expense?
The more daring observation would be:
"If this were a Linux distro putting out an update they would be praised for how quickly and efficiently they had handled the situation." Or at least they would be instantly forgiven for having taken 5 days.
The key will be to watch how quckly (or how slowly!) they respond with an appropriate fix. If it takes two weeks, that's bad. -- me, 5 days ago
It's been five days and it seems the fix has been issued. I wonder if there will be a followup story where we can all go "gee, Apple handled that fairly well"?
And maybe you should switch to DECAF. And break the little pills in HALF tomorrow. Learn to RELAX a little.
Seriously, you make it sound like I can't go buy new vid cards, hard drives, fans, IDE controllers, SCSI cards, processors, NICs, CD-RWs, etc. for my 4 year old G3 whenever I want to. I assure you: much to my wife's dismay, I can. It's not nearly as different as you make it out to be. Maybe you should know more about what you're talking about before going off on me.
And maybe I shouldn't even bother responding to posts like this *sigh*
C'mon, you can't keep upgrading your skanky old p133 forever. At some point you'll have to buy new hardware. At that point switching to the Macintosh seems like a pretty reasonable suggestion. People buy new computers all the time in fact for all kinds of reasons. Even new x86 ones! Go figure! Nobody's suggesting gnawing off one's own leg here. It's buying a computer - a concept everyone here should be familiar with.
Please do not trouble x86 users with comments like this
I wasn't aware that this was an x86-only forum. Next you'll be telling us not to bother Linux users with information relating to other platforms.
"News for nerds" doesn't imply x86, nor does it mean others need not apply. It's a big world out there with people in it who aren't exactly like you. Get used to it.
Actually, that's an excellent point. It's almost as disheartening to see a Mac-oriented site analyze Apple products and services only to come up with an overly rosy view of their worth as it is to see a non-Mac-oriented site not analyze the products/services and surmize that the products are worthless.
Are you saying that "intelligent must equal enthusiastic" where Mac announcements are concerned?
Certainly not. But in the case of the iPod I suspect hardly a thought was given to the merits of the product before dismissing it. And many of the subsequent comments to that post were of similar tone. Yet - and this is the important part - the iPod has proven to be a big seller and one of the most relevant and discussed products even here in these forums.
Maybe I'm just feeling the rub more than usual today. The rub one feels when using a platform made by a company whos products and services - no matter how cool - can never rise above the 50% mark on the meritorious-o-meter because they're not open source or because they belong to that mysterious "other" platform which the majority of members here do not use.
No matter what Apple finally announces, at this or any other keynote, about half the comments in these forums will be filled with "no big deal" or "The Man is trying to crush us!" or some other wacky thing. Sometimes intelligent conversation about the Macintosh platform is hard to come by on slashdot. And that's a shame.
I'm thinking back to when the iPod was branded "lame" on the front page of slashdot within minutes of it being announced. Of course it if had run Linux it would have been heralded as an indredible technological breakthrough and an "industry leading" product and a shining example of why open source software is better than other kinds.
Jesus, switch to decaf or something. Whatever valid points you might be making (and I think there are some in there!) are lost in the sea of bile. May we meet again in...less venomous circumstances.
Apple appears to have blundered, although I am still watching for further news on how bad. The key will be to watch how quckly (or how slowly!) they respond with an appropriate fix. If it takes two weeks, that's bad. If it takes 3 days I'm not going to complain about that. We'll see what happens. Until then, no SW update for me.
Meanwhile I actually sent Apple an email describing the problem and asking for a public advisory and a fix ASAP. Just doing my part.
And turn a multi-billion dollar revenue stream into the equivalent of Red Hat? Let's stay in reality here - that's never going to happen. Why it is that you and others like you seem to believe so blindly in the "open source business model" is beyond me. Linux is free - free for gods sake - and yet it still has virtually no desktop presence to speak of. Fix that before you start telling the maker of the second most popular operating system in the world to open source it's crown jewels. Then maybe you'll have a leg to stand on. Apple could buy every single Linux company in existence with the change under it's breakroom couch cusions and you want it to do what? I would really, really love to see the proposal you would make to Apple management about why they should open source all their software. There's a good summer project for you. Heh.
So, do you have some insider information about how I really think? Do you presume to speak for all of Slashdot? Feh
I have as much right as anyone else to make guesses as to how this community "thinks" based on how long I've been hanging out here. I can't for the life of me see anything overly presumptuous or insulting about my having done so.
Morons shouldn't be allowed to use the Internet until they're able to discuss things without mindless political jabs.
Personal insults don't make you sound any smarter. Save it. And besides I thought my comment was rather clever and not "mindless" at all.
if MacOS X ran on hardware comparable in cost to x86, we'd all be jumping on it. I know I would.
And Linux would virtually dissapear. But in 18 months Apple would have to stop building hardware because they could no longer charge enough to feed the R&D for both hardware engineering and software development. In 18 more months you would be able to detect a serious gap between the "initial quality" and "fit and finish" of a current Mac and one bought back when Apple made the whole thing. In 18 more months Apple would have lost the innovation and tight hardware/software integration that they once had. As just another software maker with nothing to distinguish themselves they seriously would become just a "niche" player instead of the, what, number 6 computer maker in the world and the maker of the second most popular computer operating system on earth? Wanna talk niche? Niche is what happens when Apple allows hardware clones.
When Linux becomes truly usable and desktop-oriented...when that day comes I will buy a new PC. Until then it's new Macs and cast-off PCs from work upon which to run Linux.
Apparently, you haven't used a recent Linux distribution
Actually I have. I'm a far cry from a Linux expert but I have enough familiarity with Linux to warrant the above opinion. I've installed and configured YDL 2.2 and Red Hat 7.2 several times (on the same two boxes). I'm using RH as my web server at the moment, actually, after having initially set it up in Mac OS X. So, no I'm not a Linux expert but I think I know enough to venture an opinion on it's usability.
I do believe Linux users are at the "promised land."
I'm skeptical. Mainly because I've been hearing that for ages and each time I give the new version/distro a try I'm appalled at the...how shall I say this?... rudimentary nature of the whole experience. The entire product is geared towards open source developers and super-geeks! A graphical installer is a step in the right direction, yes, but if you're telling me RH 7.3 is ready for sale on $900 compaqs in CompUSA then I don't think all your dogs are barkin' on this one. The increased support calls alone will erode the ~ $50 profit margin OEMs are getting nowadays. No way. And they all know it, too, else they would be doing it!
I have yet to use OS X; however, I have used Mac OS 7.x and 8.x within the past year and a half and really wanted to believe it was something great.
Why? It wasn't. Exept in some hippy / bauhaus UI sense, maybe. But otherwise Mac OS 8 and even 9 really isn't anything anyone would switch platforms over. You probably realize, however, that Mac OS X bears very little relation to Mac OS 9 and lower. It's a little like buying "Windows 2003" only to realize it's actually Linux with a few Microsoft branded widgets on it. It's that different. Give it a try.
What's in it for you? I'll tell you. Apple having tight control over the hardware and OS of the platform allows them to do things no other company can. In the words of the Big Steve, Apple "makes the whole widget." Something no other company - not one - does anymore. This allows apple to do several things that set them appart in the market. They can turn the platform on a decisive dime as in the hardcore switch to (the previously foundering) USB. They can bring things like consumer desktop video editing through inventing Firewire (hardware) and developing iMovie and Final Cut Pro (software) that work flawlessly together. They can take much greater responsibility for the user experience, having made much more of the final product (a PC brought home from the store) than Dell or Microsoft...combined! These innovations fuel the rest of the computer industry. Thus, even if you don't use Apple products it indirectly benefits you and everyone else who uses a computer.
There are tons of reasons not to use a Macintosh. Just pick one, I don't care. There are plenty of less-than-ideal things about Apple and their position in the market today. But tight control over their hardware and software is what makes them what they are. If they gave it up they'd become Gateway or Dell or more likely, Microsoft in terms of quality and innovation. And they would surely be swallowed up in a sea of commodity competitors never to be missed. For who would miss Dell if they dissapeared? Someone else would just offer the same comodity box to you the very next day. Apple, as they are today, would be missed by everyone, customers and non-customers and competitors alike.
Geez, I need to switch to decaf. Pardon the rant:)
Slashdot Mirror
Thus making the unit $300-$400 less.
OEMs aren't paying anything like that figure for Offfice pre-installation bundles. Maybe one tenth, if that. Microsoft has deep pockets and they're perfeclty willing to give OEMs Office for practically nothing in order to maintain their position with office.
+1 informative. thanks.
Heck, we were trained to use the old Wang systems, and that's so far worse than anything available today.
That's totally irrelevant. We used to use a lot of things we wouldn't tolerate now. It has no bearing on anything. Just because we used to use horse and buggy's doesn't mean we're 'ready for' a car that only does 10 mph.
Your comments about MBAs holding back the adoption of Linux are probably true I guess, as long as we are talking about the arena of Fortune 5 (or 100, whatever) companies. But the world is a much larger place than that and it includes consumer markets and education and small business and creatives. I don't think MBAs are a major problem there.
Once the white box boys figure out...Money is money.
I'dl ike to suggest that the "white box boys" know their own business better than anyone. If it were really true that they could make more money by pre-installing RH 7.3 and OpenOffice then you can rest assured that some enterprising company would be doing it and eating everyone elses lunch. The fact that this is not happening leads me to believe that your assessment of the "readiness" of Linux isn't quite where you think it is. You subscribe to the "peole don't yet realize we're ready" theory while I subscribe to the "you're in denial about the fact that you're not ready" theory.
Perhaps it's the edge of consumer-friendliness that Windows has over Linux at present that kills it. I mean how much money are these "white box boys" - or anyone else for that matter! - really making on one unit? $50? $30? Less?? You get two support calls and suddenly you have made $0.
I think there is no reason to claim that Linux will save these guys money until you have an example to point to that's convincing enough to make others follow. When/if that happens you won't have to claim it - we'll all be watching the OEMs trip over themselves to sell Linux-based computers.
Why would you want to emulate a Mac? If you want Unix just get a real Mac.
Seriously, the only reasons to do such a thing would be because a) you just bought a real expensive Dell and can't afford an iBook, or b) political ("free as in speech baby!") reasons.
The only sensible choices would be to either get the Mac or to help the Linux platform grow into something better than it currently is.
And frankly I sort of agree with the assessment of the Rasterman. I don't, however, think Linux on the desktop is dead so much as it hasn't come alive yet. I believe there is a chance it could but there are obstacles. And those obstacles aren't technological primarily.
I think the chief obstacle is that it's made by geeks for geeks. And instead of admitting that the rest of the world doesn't operate like they do and adjusting their distro accordingly, they spew silly rhetoric like "GUIs are like diapers, everyone outgrows them eventually." I do read a lot of comments here suggesting that Linux already is just as usable and friendly and consumer-ready as Windows or Mac OS. This is ridiculous on it's face and if you can't admit it then there is hardly even a starting point for further discussion.
One option is to give up like Rasterman. Another would be to try making that "consumerized" distro that everyone who doesn't know how to "apt-get" would be able to use. I predict, however, that when and if that distro gets made it will be universally hated by the current Linux community.
Apple has you beat by a mile. It's been dying twice a year since the mid-80's.
Let's all admit right off the bat that Linux has very little desktop presence.
Let's further admit right up front that it's slow penetration into this area isn't due to price.
We might discuss reasons like the evil business practices of Microsoft. We all know how they have in the past used every legal and some illigal means of preventing OEMs from bundling competitors software. I think we all understand the implications for Linux in regards to those business practices.
But still. Don't you think there is another reason why Linux has very little presence on the deskop? It's just plain not fit for consumer...well, consumer consumption. It's just not good enough in that regard. At least not yet.
Having arrived at this conclusion, I ask myself "why?" One very important answer comes to mind: Linux developers and users (and there's hardly a difference, really) don't want it to become a consumer-ized product. They want, rather, the consumer to become a Linux-nerd. Think I'm exaggerating? A prime example can be had in a comment just a few inches above this one - "GUIs are like diapers - everyone outgrows them eventually."
It is this sentiment that is preventing Linux from moving into the deskop market. Gates' sly dealings with OEMs notwithstanding...I think it's time to admit some of the problem is Linux itself. And the responsibility for that lies squarely at the feet of it's developers.
I've made this prediction time and time again in these forums and here I go one more time - "One day someone will make a Linux distro that truly is consumer-oriented. That distro will be universally hated by the existing Linux community."
Linux will be forever a server OS and a geek-toy until and unless this changes.
The real truth of the matter is that it's not Apple who gets a free ride here at Slashdot - it's Linux. Usually when a Linux distro is patched/updated the story on the front page ( and it's always on the front page) usually includes the word "drool" and at least one exclamation point. Apple takes their lumps here same as Microsoft. Worse in many ways because more than half the people here are at least dual-booting a MS OS. Almost none are using an Apple one. But when do the Linux guys get criticised here? About anything?
And just for the record.
I think you're right. They would be bitching about how slow Microsoft is with the update. But surely you're not suggesting Apple is getting a free ride in the Slashdot forums. Apple takes a hell of a beating here or haven't you noticed that the main discussion here begins with 5 "jokes" at Apple's expense?
The more daring observation would be:
"If this were a Linux distro putting out an update they would be praised for how quickly and efficiently they had handled the situation." Or at least they would be instantly forgiven for having taken 5 days.
The key will be to watch how quckly (or how slowly!) they respond with an appropriate fix. If it takes two weeks, that's bad. -- me, 5 days ago
It's been five days and it seems the fix has been issued. I wonder if there will be a followup story where we can all go "gee, Apple handled that fairly well"?
Uh...it isn't Apple who's done this. It's Roxio. Slow down your itchy Apple-bashing trigger finger next time killer.
And rise above your name.
And maybe you should switch to DECAF. And break the little pills in HALF tomorrow. Learn to RELAX a little.
Seriously, you make it sound like I can't go buy new vid cards, hard drives, fans, IDE controllers, SCSI cards, processors, NICs, CD-RWs, etc. for my 4 year old G3 whenever I want to. I assure you: much to my wife's dismay, I can. It's not nearly as different as you make it out to be. Maybe you should know more about what you're talking about before going off on me.
And maybe I shouldn't even bother responding to posts like this *sigh*
Why go throught that step?
C'mon, you can't keep upgrading your skanky old p133 forever. At some point you'll have to buy new hardware. At that point switching to the Macintosh seems like a pretty reasonable suggestion. People buy new computers all the time in fact for all kinds of reasons. Even new x86 ones! Go figure! Nobody's suggesting gnawing off one's own leg here. It's buying a computer - a concept everyone here should be familiar with.
Please do not trouble x86 users with comments like this
I wasn't aware that this was an x86-only forum. Next you'll be telling us not to bother Linux users with information relating to other platforms.
"News for nerds" doesn't imply x86, nor does it mean others need not apply. It's a big world out there with people in it who aren't exactly like you. Get used to it.
Actually, that's an excellent point. It's almost as disheartening to see a Mac-oriented site analyze Apple products and services only to come up with an overly rosy view of their worth as it is to see a non-Mac-oriented site not analyze the products/services and surmize that the products are worthless.
Are you saying that "intelligent must equal enthusiastic" where Mac announcements are concerned?
Certainly not. But in the case of the iPod I suspect hardly a thought was given to the merits of the product before dismissing it. And many of the subsequent comments to that post were of similar tone. Yet - and this is the important part - the iPod has proven to be a big seller and one of the most relevant and discussed products even here in these forums.
Maybe I'm just feeling the rub more than usual today. The rub one feels when using a platform made by a company whos products and services - no matter how cool - can never rise above the 50% mark on the meritorious-o-meter because they're not open source or because they belong to that mysterious "other" platform which the majority of members here do not use.
getting another stevejob
Or maybe I can just let that comment say it all.
No matter what Apple finally announces, at this or any other keynote, about half the comments in these forums will be filled with "no big deal" or "The Man is trying to crush us!" or some other wacky thing. Sometimes intelligent conversation about the Macintosh platform is hard to come by on slashdot. And that's a shame.
I'm thinking back to when the iPod was branded "lame" on the front page of slashdot within minutes of it being announced. Of course it if had run Linux it would have been heralded as an indredible technological breakthrough and an "industry leading" product and a shining example of why open source software is better than other kinds.
Actually, I think Apple could use some sort of authentication or digitally sign their updates. That seems to be the general consensus.
Jesus, switch to decaf or something. Whatever valid points you might be making (and I think there are some in there!) are lost in the sea of bile. May we meet again in ...less venomous circumstances.
Apple appears to have blundered, although I am still watching for further news on how bad. The key will be to watch how quckly (or how slowly!) they respond with an appropriate fix. If it takes two weeks, that's bad. If it takes 3 days I'm not going to complain about that. We'll see what happens. Until then, no SW update for me.
Meanwhile I actually sent Apple an email describing the problem and asking for a public advisory and a fix ASAP. Just doing my part.
If Apple ever open-sourced everything
And turn a multi-billion dollar revenue stream into the equivalent of Red Hat? Let's stay in reality here - that's never going to happen. Why it is that you and others like you seem to believe so blindly in the "open source business model" is beyond me. Linux is free - free for gods sake - and yet it still has virtually no desktop presence to speak of. Fix that before you start telling the maker of the second most popular operating system in the world to open source it's crown jewels. Then maybe you'll have a leg to stand on. Apple could buy every single Linux company in existence with the change under it's breakroom couch cusions and you want it to do what? I would really, really love to see the proposal you would make to Apple management about why they should open source all their software. There's a good summer project for you. Heh.
So, do you have some insider information about how I really think? Do you presume to speak for all of Slashdot? Feh
I have as much right as anyone else to make guesses as to how this community "thinks" based on how long I've been hanging out here. I can't for the life of me see anything overly presumptuous or insulting about my having done so.
Morons shouldn't be allowed to use the Internet until they're able to discuss things without mindless political jabs.
Personal insults don't make you sound any smarter. Save it. And besides I thought my comment was rather clever and not "mindless" at all.
More people tend to favor libertarian viewpoints than "liberal" or "conservative."
ROTFL! And you call Mac users fanatical!
if MacOS X ran on hardware comparable in cost to x86, we'd all be jumping on it. I know I would.
And Linux would virtually dissapear. But in 18 months Apple would have to stop building hardware because they could no longer charge enough to feed the R&D for both hardware engineering and software development. In 18 more months you would be able to detect a serious gap between the "initial quality" and "fit and finish" of a current Mac and one bought back when Apple made the whole thing. In 18 more months Apple would have lost the innovation and tight hardware/software integration that they once had. As just another software maker with nothing to distinguish themselves they seriously would become just a "niche" player instead of the, what, number 6 computer maker in the world and the maker of the second most popular computer operating system on earth? Wanna talk niche? Niche is what happens when Apple allows hardware clones.
When Linux becomes truly usable and desktop-oriented...when that day comes I will buy a new PC. Until then it's new Macs and cast-off PCs from work upon which to run Linux.
Apparently, you haven't used a recent Linux distribution
...how shall I say this?... rudimentary nature of the whole experience. The entire product is geared towards open source developers and super-geeks! A graphical installer is a step in the right direction, yes, but if you're telling me RH 7.3 is ready for sale on $900 compaqs in CompUSA then I don't think all your dogs are barkin' on this one. The increased support calls alone will erode the ~ $50 profit margin OEMs are getting nowadays. No way. And they all know it, too, else they would be doing it!
Actually I have. I'm a far cry from a Linux expert but I have enough familiarity with Linux to warrant the above opinion. I've installed and configured YDL 2.2 and Red Hat 7.2 several times (on the same two boxes). I'm using RH as my web server at the moment, actually, after having initially set it up in Mac OS X. So, no I'm not a Linux expert but I think I know enough to venture an opinion on it's usability.
I do believe Linux users are at the "promised land."
I'm skeptical. Mainly because I've been hearing that for ages and each time I give the new version/distro a try I'm appalled at the
I have yet to use OS X; however, I have used Mac OS 7.x and 8.x within the past year and a half and really wanted to believe it was something great.
Why? It wasn't. Exept in some hippy / bauhaus UI sense, maybe. But otherwise Mac OS 8 and even 9 really isn't anything anyone would switch platforms over. You probably realize, however, that Mac OS X bears very little relation to Mac OS 9 and lower. It's a little like buying "Windows 2003" only to realize it's actually Linux with a few Microsoft branded widgets on it. It's that different. Give it a try.
What's in it for you? I'll tell you. Apple having tight control over the hardware and OS of the platform allows them to do things no other company can. In the words of the Big Steve, Apple "makes the whole widget." Something no other company - not one - does anymore. This allows apple to do several things that set them appart in the market. They can turn the platform on a decisive dime as in the hardcore switch to (the previously foundering) USB. They can bring things like consumer desktop video editing through inventing Firewire (hardware) and developing iMovie and Final Cut Pro (software) that work flawlessly together. They can take much greater responsibility for the user experience, having made much more of the final product (a PC brought home from the store) than Dell or Microsoft...combined! These innovations fuel the rest of the computer industry. Thus, even if you don't use Apple products it indirectly benefits you and everyone else who uses a computer.
:)
There are tons of reasons not to use a Macintosh. Just pick one, I don't care. There are plenty of less-than-ideal things about Apple and their position in the market today. But tight control over their hardware and software is what makes them what they are. If they gave it up they'd become Gateway or Dell or more likely, Microsoft in terms of quality and innovation. And they would surely be swallowed up in a sea of commodity competitors never to be missed. For who would miss Dell if they dissapeared? Someone else would just offer the same comodity box to you the very next day. Apple, as they are today, would be missed by everyone, customers and non-customers and competitors alike.
Geez, I need to switch to decaf. Pardon the rant