> How many times do people need to have it pointed out to them what financial suicide this would be?
Even if it's true you'll still need to explain it. What good does complaining about that do?
>As soon as they released a version of Mac OS X for stock x86 hardware, they would remove any reason whatsoever for people to buy Apple hardware, since stock x86 hardware is cheaper.
With the G5 Apple has comparable performance and also comparable prices with much of the high end stuff. If someone (unlike myself) didn't have a lot of old hardware that they wanted to use and were looking for a machine with server quality construction then they're looking at a fairly even choice. The deciding factor would become "Which one of these machines was OSX designed for?"
>BTW, Apple only make a profit because they know they can charge a price premium for a complete >solution (hardware and software) that works better than x86 with Windows.
Their premium is evaporating and that is a good thing.
>Even if Apple charged $200 a copy for Mac OS X on x86, they could never make up for the lost profit due to plummeting Apple hardware sales.
With the development costs of OSX86 being a few pennies on the dollar? That, my friend, is called printing money. B^)
>This is precisely why the cloning experiment failed, and why Jobs pulled a fast one on OS version numbers in order to end the clone licenses.
It could work now that Apple can match the midrange and high end cloners in price and performance.
>So, no, Mac OS X for x86 will never happen. Stop waiting for it. You'll see the second coming of Christ, or the appearance of the Jewish Messiah first.
Suicide? Not anymore. Their hardware is comparable in raw speed (I'm not going to argue about which one is a few piddly percentage points faster.)
If Apple can maintain this hardware parity (Or better yet create and maintain a clear and undeniable lead) a x86 version of OSX might serve as a teaser to get people to buy Apple accessories and hardware.
What's required to port software from one BSD platform to another? Some tweaking and a recompile? Once an X86 version of OSX is available Apple's development costs are very low and they might multiply the market for their other products by several orders of magnitude.
I haven't researched laptops much at all. Pretty much everywhere I would want to compute already has a computer that I have access to.
Besides, lugging a laptop (even the small ones) sounds like a very unfun way to spend my time.
Now if Apple came out with a new Newton that was the size of a Palm Vx.....That would be *very* tempting.
I should also disclose that I have not spent any significant amount of time with OSX. My positive opinion of it is based on my use of it over a week on a borrowed Cube. If I purchased the much rumored x86 version of OSX it would be strictly as a trial. But if it did everything I needed and wanted I'd go for it.
It used to be here: http://www-csag.cs.uiuc.edu/individual/pakin/compl aint
But you probably knew that.
I suspect he graduated or something and it was taken down when he left the school.
Running that through a text to speech converter and installing a very special "hold" button would be a good way to irritate telemarketers, wouldn't it?
I want OSX it to support the hardware that I currently have. I enjoy playing mix-and-match with my computers, and other than the processors I can pretty much swap any of the componants I have into any of my boxes.
I'm currently using two 866Mhz HP Kayak XU800 as my main machines. One has Mandrake 8.2 (I paid for mine.) and the other has Win2K. I've got various other boxes lying around, but those are the ones that get daily use.
Needless to say I'm not holding my breath until Apple releases OSX for my PeeCees.
In the absence of patents a competant chemist/physicist/scientist/smart_person could recreate the catalytic converter and sell thier own brand once they knew it was possable.
In fact all they'd have to do to get a real good handle on the mechanical and chemical details would be to pick up a few converters at the local auto parts store.
Could we call Google a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Computers?
What else can it be programmed to do? Could this become the basis for a personal computer where you just add computers seamlessly when you need more power?
>That is just so typical on Slashdot to blame everything on the MCSE's.
Is there anything in the original comment about MCSEs or any other Microsoft bashing?
I'm a desktop Linux user, and I bought a popular boxed distribution and used the GUI setup tools to configure the firewall. I've got to admit that I am a completely incompetant network admin. (My networking knowledge is limited pretty much to knowing what an ethernet jack looks like and how to tell the differance between a crossover cable and the "normal" kind.)
Last year I ran one of the free security scans just to see what would happen and found out that I was running a whole pile of servers. I honestly had no clue that they were even running, and it's quite a miracle that I didn't (as far as I know) get hacked.
Build computers out of the parts and give them to your less technical relatives or friends to use. When you really need that 3.8 gig hard drive or your Number Nine video card back all you do is upgrade thier computer with your current surplus of spare parts.
If it turns out that you never need those parts again you will still have the warm fuzzy feeling from helping someone out. (And you may even be able to get some free meals out of the deal.)
If they insist on using the speakerphone...
on
Cubicle Etiquette?
·
· Score: 2, Interesting
Just download some inappropriate audio file and leave it in thier messages. (Gotta love portable MP3 players aye?)
Make sure you use the boss's (or better yet your boss's boss's) phone after hours so the offender will think it's important.
Slashdot Mirror
> How many times do people need to have it pointed out to them what financial suicide this would be?
Even if it's true you'll still need to explain it. What good does complaining about that do?
>As soon as they released a version of Mac OS X for stock x86 hardware, they would remove any reason whatsoever for people to buy Apple hardware, since stock x86 hardware is cheaper.
With the G5 Apple has comparable performance and also comparable prices with much of the high end stuff. If someone (unlike myself) didn't have a lot of old hardware that they wanted to use and were looking for a machine with server quality construction then they're looking at a fairly even choice. The deciding factor would become "Which one of these machines was OSX designed for?"
>BTW, Apple only make a profit because they know they can charge a price premium for a complete
>solution (hardware and software) that works better than x86 with Windows.
Their premium is evaporating and that is a good thing.
>Even if Apple charged $200 a copy for Mac OS X on x86, they could never make up for the lost profit due to plummeting Apple hardware sales.
With the development costs of OSX86 being a few pennies on the dollar? That, my friend, is called printing money. B^)
>This is precisely why the cloning experiment failed, and why Jobs pulled a fast one on OS version numbers in order to end the clone licenses.
It could work now that Apple can match the midrange and high end cloners in price and performance.
>So, no, Mac OS X for x86 will never happen. Stop waiting for it. You'll see the second coming of Christ, or the appearance of the Jewish Messiah first.
I'm not waiting, I'm hoping.
Suicide? Not anymore. Their hardware is comparable in raw speed (I'm not going to argue about which one is a few piddly percentage points faster.)
If Apple can maintain this hardware parity (Or better yet create and maintain a clear and undeniable lead) a x86 version of OSX might serve as a teaser to get people to buy Apple accessories and hardware.
What's required to port software from one BSD platform to another? Some tweaking and a recompile? Once an X86 version of OSX is available Apple's development costs are very low and they might multiply the market for their other products by several orders of magnitude.
Suicide? Nah, it's a calculated risk.
I haven't researched laptops much at all. Pretty much everywhere I would want to compute already has a computer that I have access to.
Besides, lugging a laptop (even the small ones) sounds like a very unfun way to spend my time.
Now if Apple came out with a new Newton that was the size of a Palm Vx.....That would be *very* tempting.
I should also disclose that I have not spent any significant amount of time with OSX. My positive opinion of it is based on my use of it over a week on a borrowed Cube. If I purchased the much rumored x86 version of OSX it would be strictly as a trial. But if it did everything I needed and wanted I'd go for it.
Was that sentance in English?
>Where is Pankin's complaint generator?
l aint
It used to be here: http://www-csag.cs.uiuc.edu/individual/pakin/comp
But you probably knew that.
I suspect he graduated or something and it was taken down when he left the school.
Running that through a text to speech converter and installing a very special "hold" button would be a good way to irritate telemarketers, wouldn't it?
I'll answer for myself.
I want OSX it to support the hardware that I currently have. I enjoy playing mix-and-match with my computers, and other than the processors I can pretty much swap any of the componants I have into any of my boxes.
I'm currently using two 866Mhz HP Kayak XU800 as my main machines. One has Mandrake 8.2 (I paid for mine.) and the other has Win2K. I've got various other boxes lying around, but those are the ones that get daily use.
Needless to say I'm not holding my breath until Apple releases OSX for my PeeCees.
I think it is alive. It's probably a set of GPL disease building tools.
I'm getting busy signals too. Maybe I'll have better luck at 4:00am Monday.
In the absence of patents a competant chemist/physicist/scientist/smart_person could recreate the catalytic converter and sell thier own brand once they knew it was possable.
In fact all they'd have to do to get a real good handle on the mechanical and chemical details would be to pick up a few converters at the local auto parts store.
Could we call Google a Redundant Array of Inexpensive Computers?
What else can it be programmed to do? Could this become the basis for a personal computer where you just add computers seamlessly when you need more power?
>That is just so typical on Slashdot to blame everything on the MCSE's.
Is there anything in the original comment about MCSEs or any other Microsoft bashing?
I'm a desktop Linux user, and I bought a popular boxed distribution and used the GUI setup tools to configure the firewall. I've got to admit that I am a completely incompetant network admin. (My networking knowledge is limited pretty much to knowing what an ethernet jack looks like and how to tell the differance between a crossover cable and the "normal" kind.)
Last year I ran one of the free security scans just to see what would happen and found out that I was running a whole pile of servers. I honestly had no clue that they were even running, and it's quite a miracle that I didn't (as far as I know) get hacked.
>Only skydivers know why birds sing, only birds know why skydivers smile.
It too bad that the birds don't know why birds sing and that the skydivers don't know why skydivers smile.
>What does that mean? Just because it's radio doesn't mean it's slow.
It means that in the lab radio interferance can be excluded so you get unrealistic results.
In real life most folks can't turn their homes and offices into RFI free zones, so for all practical purposes the maximum specs are unattainable.
> ...which can print onto any thickness material...
How thick is "any thickness"?
Ten meters? More?
This is potentially a very big printer unless the entire printer sits on the top of the material in question.
>If you don't like that... heh, you're probably a GNU/Linux user.
I think you mean SCO/GNU/Linux.
>...if you're NOT a vi user, you are a moron who should just step in front of a speeding bus and remove yourself from the gene pool forthwith.
Wouldn't that be hard for the non-vi-using bus drivers?
So is it SCO/Gnu/Linux or is it Gnu/SCO/Linux?
If there is, why couldn't MD5 shreds be used as a lossy compression scheme for code?
I can finally play Counterstrike on my analytical engine!
Build computers out of the parts and give them to your less technical relatives or friends to use. When you really need that 3.8 gig hard drive or your Number Nine video card back all you do is upgrade thier computer with your current surplus of spare parts.
If it turns out that you never need those parts again you will still have the warm fuzzy feeling from helping someone out. (And you may even be able to get some free meals out of the deal.)
Just download some inappropriate audio file and leave it in thier messages. (Gotta love portable MP3 players aye?)
Make sure you use the boss's (or better yet your boss's boss's) phone after hours so the offender will think it's important.
>The janitors will not dig through your pile of >printouts to find your week-old pesto pieces, but >there are six legged clean-up crews that will.
You have six legged rats?
I think the RULE project might be able to help you.
http://www.rule-project.org/en/
They are creating a installer/distribution for Red Hat that is made for low-end hardware.
And all this time I thought that Plan 9 was from Outer Space.
>Why is it that standard CD-ROM hardware will not allow us to do this?
Somebody thought that no one would possibly want to do such a thing so they never programmed it.