I see a lot of comments about what seems to be only a hypothetical question at this point.
What school did this occur at? Why don't I see any references on the web that don't link back to this slashdot story?
Were the pundits right?
For my money I don't think it's a bluff. Apple has already switched to other industry standard technologies (USB, PCI) and harmonizing it's CPU technology is another logical step.
What makes apple special at this point is a user-friendly OS more than a unique harware design.
Cringly's second theory, that Intel is shopping for a company to write Operating Systems that do the best job of showcasing their hardware, seems to fit this.
I don't understand what some folks have against Cringly and Dvorak. Are their predictions accurate or not?
new PHd level course: Privatization in Government - it's pitfalls and promise.
Is the Diebold issue an example of privatization? No. And that's the scary part.
Privatization would mean outsourcing the work of tabulation and/or polling. Instead, the government purchased equipment which it ran with it's own staff.
Everything involved with the Diebold machines was considered to be proprietary, from the training manuals to the software itself (there is a slashdot story about hackers who got hold of the software and exposed serious bugs in it.)
It is possible that Diebold allowed a few government officials to inspect all or part of the software (as Microsoft has done with windows to allay fears in some governments), but why the need for secrecy, when the output is supposed to be in the public domain?
Is it:
Security by Obscurity?
Profit(eering) motive?
Incredibly stupid corporate culture?
or some severe conflict of interest?
Slashdot Mirror
I see a lot of comments about what seems to be only a hypothetical question at this point. What school did this occur at? Why don't I see any references on the web that don't link back to this slashdot story?
Were the pundits right? For my money I don't think it's a bluff. Apple has already switched to other industry standard technologies (USB, PCI) and harmonizing it's CPU technology is another logical step. What makes apple special at this point is a user-friendly OS more than a unique harware design. Cringly's second theory, that Intel is shopping for a company to write Operating Systems that do the best job of showcasing their hardware, seems to fit this. I don't understand what some folks have against Cringly and Dvorak. Are their predictions accurate or not?
new PHd level course: Privatization in Government - it's pitfalls and promise. Is the Diebold issue an example of privatization? No. And that's the scary part. Privatization would mean outsourcing the work of tabulation and/or polling. Instead, the government purchased equipment which it ran with it's own staff. Everything involved with the Diebold machines was considered to be proprietary, from the training manuals to the software itself (there is a slashdot story about hackers who got hold of the software and exposed serious bugs in it.) It is possible that Diebold allowed a few government officials to inspect all or part of the software (as Microsoft has done with windows to allay fears in some governments), but why the need for secrecy, when the output is supposed to be in the public domain? Is it: Security by Obscurity? Profit(eering) motive? Incredibly stupid corporate culture? or some severe conflict of interest?