Why do you assume I'm doing something wrong? How much RAM do you have? The only person who has told me that has a new Mac Pro with 3 GB of RAM. Even he tells me that he needs more for parallels.
As for speed, my wife uses a Mac Pro to play WoW. She got 60FPS with 10.4.9. She gets 20-30fps with Leopard 10.5.1. That is one application and is caused mostly by all the swapping it has to do now. I can't generalize, but it is the same hardware and your claim was that it's faster which it's clearly not in this instance.
As for the betas, I was testing Leopard server on a PowerMac G5 at work since August. Big deal. I administer labs full of Macs, 2 xserves and an xserve raid at work. 10.2 -> 10.4 shows a speed increase with each release. It's very obvious outside of slightly higher RAM requirements. This time you had a huge decrease in the number of Macs that can run it and it requires a lot of RAM. The minimum RAM doubled between 10.4 and 10.5. I sold my iBook on ebay because i had an 800mhz G4 which is too slow. If Leopard is so much faster, why can't all those G4 Macs run it? Next you'll tell me Vista is faster than XP.
You haven't used Leopard then. Leopard = Vista. Both require at least 1.5GB of RAM to run with useful applications. Both require fairly fast hardware. Vista and Leopard don't run on 5 year old laptops at all. Apple's tradition of making it faster isn't true here. There are countless bugs in Leopard. The firewall is actually worse than Microsoft's now. Software applications were broken on both platforms. I actually prefer vista to leopard. I've used Leopard on a 3 month old iMac, a Mac Pro bought in February, and iBook and a PowerMac G4. It's slow on all of these. The Mac Pro shipped with 1GB of RAM which is the problem on that unit.
Apple and Microsoft think a lot alike these days. My pre-order Leopard disk was damaged and after an hour on the phone with Apple, I was sent to the nearest Apple store who bitched me out for not having a receipt. Now consider that they only give you a packing slip with the shipment and my Mac would not boot to print it! I didn't notice it right away and skipped the disc check the first time. I realize that part is my fault but I didn't appreciate the terrible customer service from the Briarwood Apple store (Ann Arbor, MI).
At work we've decided not to upgrade to Leopard until Parallels actually works with it and we can buy more RAM. We have labs full of iMacs bought over the summer!
Lastly, the advantage with OS X in the past was the control over hardware. Do you really think OS X would run well on a beater Dell? I don't.
The failure with vista was the marketing. Microsoft can't come up with one reason to get people to upgrade. Perhaps if they only shipped x64 vista it might have been an incentive for some. It worked with Windows 95. Most people are running 32bit vista. I've been using it since January and it's not too bad for a new Windows release. You must feed it RAM, but that's true of Macs or some of the bigger Linux distros too.
Most of the places that take old computers require them to be 3-5 years old (or newer) with valid Windows licenses. That precludes Macs and systems that don't have a valid windows license. For instance, I had a Dell PowerEdge server I bought used for $50. I couldn't recycle it even though it was a 550 mhz xeon with 512MB RAM, 40 GB of storage (2 scsi disks), a cdrom and ati rage card. Granted by today's standards it was slow, but BSD and Linux ran great on it. It could have worked as a surfing machine for someone. Likewise, I have my mothers old Celeron 700mhz HP that I fixed up. It can run XP, but she doesn't have the restore CD for Windows ME. It can run Linux or BSD fine. The unit doesn't have enough RAM for me to use it for testing software so it just sits there.
I haven't been able to give machines away and most places charge to recycle. I don't want to pay $20 to get rid of my junk. It didn't sell on ebay either.
There was also the availability of the Saturn. I tried to buy one the first Christmas. Only Toys R Us carried them and they were sold out so quickly that I didn't even make it near the counter. After that I didn't see units. I've thought about buying one on Ebay just to see what it was like at this point. I've got a working genesis + cd + 32x, a second genesis (gen1) + cd (gen 2) + 32x that sometimes overheats, and a Dreamcast. To this day, I haven't found a console I like better. I'm sure part of it is memories, but I also loved the game library. The Wii comes close, it just needs a game library.
I hope to buy a PS3 if I can ever afford one. I ebay'd my xbox and I won't buy a 360 as they will just drop it like a rock again. (if it lasts that long) Microsoft has some nice titles for the 360, but I can't buy a new console every year. It's not how things work. I've got a working NES, SNES, N64, gba, the segas, and a wii here. If Nintendo and Sega could do it... I've always blamed sony for killing sega so I haven't bought any playstation to date.
There's an interesting point. Instead of giving every kid a laptop, why not setup a library for whole communities including laptops in these poor areas? Then everyone including children would benefit. It would be possible for older people to learn about the modern world too.
The other advantage is that you might be able to help more communities with it.
Even though I feel this way, I'd consider buying one of these if I had the money. I wish it was buy one get half. At $300, it's doable for me.
A really great phone that never comes out of beta. Google has to finish this product and I don't know if they have it in them. Then again, I'd argue the iPhone isn't done either. Safari certainly isn't.
I wouldn't say superior. Each game had a unique feel to it. Sim City 2000 was fun because it included my home town. Still, I personally like the Super NES version of the original. I spent hours playing that and it was much easier to navigate on. The scroll speed in some of the games varies greatly with the computer you're using. I found that some were too fast.
What if your time machine data is corrupted due to the bug?
I had the external drive used for time machine dive off the network because the port is very sensitive on my new seagate drive. A slight bump will do it. Sure it will recover eventually, but if something happened quickly after time machine would have synced, then poof.
It should be fixed as it's serious. Not every Mac users runs time machine. I'm the only person I know using it right now.
Yeah.. last I checked alaska and russia aren't that far apart... and guess what.. it's not the atlantic between them. Funny thing.. Canada is also right up there too...
I think I'd go through canada and not mexico if i was going to russia.
I don't think I could convict him on the evidence I've heard so far. He might be guilty, but I really don't know.
Right now you can buy a PS3 and an inexpensive HD DVD player for less than the cost of the combo players. (bestbuy pricing)
I've been tempted by the prices of HD DVD players, but then I looked at content. I don't like the movies out on HD DVD for the most part. I don't tend to buy a lot of Universal movies. Some people do, but I'm not one of them. Going through my collection, I have a lot of sony, warner bros. and paramount movies. There are some fox films as well. I mean what geek doesn't have star trek and star wars stuff. Spiderman is a sony film.. I like bond movies which are also MGM aka sony releases. So there are many fronts to this format war. From a technical standpoint, I like that I can actually buy a blue-ray burner. It's not in my price range yet, but at least it's an option. I use my DVD burner for backups of my iTunes library and other things. I could use the additional storage.
So there are many factors keeping me from picking either format.
1. Price.
HD DVD players are cheaper. The movies are about the same in both formats locally. The PS3 is the best value in blue ray and the 5 free movies for blue ray lower the downside on the $400. Of course, i don't like all the movies so at current prices that's worth 50-60 dollars off.
2. Movies
Both formats are missing movies I want to buy. Some things haven't been released on either format. Other things are only available on blue-ray that I like.
3. Who do you hate more?
Microsoft and Univresal/NBC/GE vs Sony and Disney. Wow. I don't know what to think. DRM or DRM.
4. Players
The best blue-ray players are PS3s. Why does sony keep making the PS3 the lowest priced player? It's very rare a player is below the lowest PS3 model. That is stupid. A game console + player should be more than a player.
I'm not a huge toshiba fan. Who else makes HD DVD players? I almost never see other products on shelves.
5. Naming
It's easier to explain that HD DVD is a movie format to friends. Blue-ray sounds like something a space cadet uses in a cheesy movie.
6. HDTV is not in homes
I'm the only one in my family to own an HDTV. It's only a 30 inch so I don't totally benefit and it's a CRT at that. I spent $550 for that and it was an open box item at best buy. My mother can't afford more than $100.
Like others, I've slowed down buying movies. DVD prices have gone up on new releases to force my hand, but I don't feel like adopting anything yet. It's $7 locally between an HD DVD and a DVD new release. Compare hidef prices for spiderman 3, transformers, and fantastic four. You'll see what i mean. I would have bought spider-man 3 the day it came out, except i think I might go blueray and want it then.
Similarly, there are business advantages to the BSD license. Businesses can use the code in their applications without giving back modifications. They can choose to do so if it benefits them or they feel "good" about it. Your advantages were based on companies that want to open source the code to get free development done on their product. With the BSD license, they can use the code in a product, but most likely it won't be their exact product. There is an obvious business advantage to not giving away the keys to the castle.
In reality, the BSDL vs GPL debate will never end. There will always be people who prefer one to the other. We will never have a complete desktop operating system under one license that is open source (under any current definition). X11 isn't GPL. OpenSSH isn't GPL. gcc isn't BSDL. It is best to understand the differences between the licenses and try to adapt to the thinking that both will exist.
The worst thing we can do in the open source community is argue about these licenses. I've done it in the past just like everyone else. It's not helping any of us "convert" users to free software. (either definition)
Isn't there a licensing issue by transplanting to postgres. I was under the impression it was BSDL and MySQL is GPL. Obviously one could use general ideas and implement them again for postgres.
I'm hoping that MySQL 6 is faster on other operating systems than previous versions. The current design makes many assumptions based on Linux. MySQL is running on many operating systems now and shouldn't be so OS centric. You can get binaries for Windows, Mac OS, Solaris, and many of the BSDs. Some of the FreeBSD 7 benchmarks show a serious improvement with postgres, but terrible MySQL performance.
Before anyone is critical of my comments, remember that I use MySQL at work and home.
Consider that Microsoft had to convince people over several versions of windows to use it over DOS applications. At the same time, Apple and many other vendors lost ground. It is possible to have an OS switch, but it has to be fueled by cost and features.
Apple's have features, but also cost more. I've argued they don't in the past, but with the intel hardware it's getting harder to make that claim. I do think apple makes good hardware, but comparing what I can build versus a mini or even looking at macbooks... it's harder to say apple is that much more. Even if you make a case for better hardware, most PC users don't know it's good. They don't even know the difference between a lowend e-machine and a highend dell.
In order for linux or any other os to take share from windows, it has to overcome the hassle of learning a new system and losing all the software you've used for years. When me and the redhat ceo can't get windows out of our lives, it's hard to tell others to do so. Gaming is the problem with linux conversion.
Duh. They are trying to draw conclusions from it though. Had they said "More people are buying linux from us than windows pre-installed" then I'd be fine with it. Also, what a person buys may not be what they end up using. Perhaps an application will not run on suse or redhat and they end up with another distro or OS. Maybe the IT manager is fired and the new guy loves BSD or windows.
If I buy a new computer from dell, I'll probably buy one of the linux machines even though I will be running BSD instead of ubuntu. The hardware is easier to get working in BSD. The situation is different for servers as people are paying large sums of money for a free operating system. I understand the business reasons for buying redhat, but at the same time I find it a bit amusing.
If dell wants to track this, they should remove the NO OS option and replace it with a checkbox that says "I don't want to say" and a textbox labeled other. THe user could fill in Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, or whatever they intend to run. Counting NO OS options as linux is stupid for this reason. Heck, I could even install windows on the thing after getting it as "NO OS".
Careful. With gentoo you have to plant your own pot, beat your own wife, and steal your own wallet. I don't know if you can even do the dog thing with it.
I'm assuming you mean a machine that shipped with 10.3. Newer apple hardware requires newer OS X versions for drivers. My ibook can run 10.3.5 but my wife's can't.
I built my pc last september. I had to install 6-7 drivers including video, sound, chipset, etc for XP. I formatted and put vista on it in january (along with a new bsd install). I only needed to install a sound and video driver. It was less work for me to go to vista in that sense. I'm running x64 vista at that. On newer hardware, it's easier to deal with vista. It actually has support for some sata controllers built in. Imagine that.
Linux distros are probably the same as my windows experience in some cases. Many people still end up using binary video drivers and perhaps a wireless driver and/or firmware load. It depends on the distro and what deals they have with ATI and nvidia.
Apple already does this with the iPod. You can "flash" it to factory and reload your songs. I agree with that point. However, I don't think the gp's analogy was wrong. He shouldn't have used coffee perhaps. It isn't a related feature. Think of it this way, you are adding a feature that was not intended for the original device. An embedded device does not guarantee the same benefits as a PC.
Take any product x where it is one of dvd player, toaster, washer, flame thrower, easy bake oven and modify it with new functionality not sanctioned by the vendor. Then when they won't warranty it, file lawsuit. See the problem?
I think the real issue is that Apple and the media have called the iPhone a smartphone. When we think of smartphones, we think of pdas + phones with some multimedia capabilities. The iPhone is an ipod + phone with some pda capabilities. As apple changed the definition, we've yet to grasp this difference. A real PDA lets me load additional software. The iPhone is not that type of device. Apple fans wanted a new newton for modern day and they didn't get one. Apple haters are comparing the device to a windows smartphone which does completely different things. Would you expect a zune + phone to be a good pda? I wouldn't.
It depends on the area. We seem to benefit from PowerBoost here and I have a Comcast Workplace account at home. Last I knew the consumer level accounts were 5Mb/s whereas I have 8Mb/s + 1Mb/s upstream. I also have the largest package they offer and would buy more upstream if I could. Problem is with the design of the technology, when my server is hammered, my neighbors have difficulty with their connections. Business class accounts have priority. One of my neighbors got very angry with me about it. Most people don't want to pay $160 a month for Internet access.
Technically your statement is correct. However, PC-BSD and DesktopBSD fall very close into the concept of a distribution. They aren't stand alone operating systems, just FreeBSD + some extras. (KDE, package install stuff, etc)
Slashdot Mirror
Why do you assume I'm doing something wrong? How much RAM do you have? The only person who has told me that has a new Mac Pro with 3 GB of RAM. Even he tells me that he needs more for parallels.
As for speed, my wife uses a Mac Pro to play WoW. She got 60FPS with 10.4.9. She gets 20-30fps with Leopard 10.5.1. That is one application and is caused mostly by all the swapping it has to do now. I can't generalize, but it is the same hardware and your claim was that it's faster which it's clearly not in this instance.
As for the betas, I was testing Leopard server on a PowerMac G5 at work since August. Big deal. I administer labs full of Macs, 2 xserves and an xserve raid at work. 10.2 -> 10.4 shows a speed increase with each release. It's very obvious outside of slightly higher RAM requirements. This time you had a huge decrease in the number of Macs that can run it and it requires a lot of RAM. The minimum RAM doubled between 10.4 and 10.5. I sold my iBook on ebay because i had an 800mhz G4 which is too slow. If Leopard is so much faster, why can't all those G4 Macs run it? Next you'll tell me Vista is faster than XP.
You haven't used Leopard then. Leopard = Vista. Both require at least 1.5GB of RAM to run with useful applications. Both require fairly fast hardware. Vista and Leopard don't run on 5 year old laptops at all. Apple's tradition of making it faster isn't true here. There are countless bugs in Leopard. The firewall is actually worse than Microsoft's now. Software applications were broken on both platforms. I actually prefer vista to leopard. I've used Leopard on a 3 month old iMac, a Mac Pro bought in February, and iBook and a PowerMac G4. It's slow on all of these. The Mac Pro shipped with 1GB of RAM which is the problem on that unit.
Apple and Microsoft think a lot alike these days. My pre-order Leopard disk was damaged and after an hour on the phone with Apple, I was sent to the nearest Apple store who bitched me out for not having a receipt. Now consider that they only give you a packing slip with the shipment and my Mac would not boot to print it! I didn't notice it right away and skipped the disc check the first time. I realize that part is my fault but I didn't appreciate the terrible customer service from the Briarwood Apple store (Ann Arbor, MI).
At work we've decided not to upgrade to Leopard until Parallels actually works with it and we can buy more RAM. We have labs full of iMacs bought over the summer!
Lastly, the advantage with OS X in the past was the control over hardware. Do you really think OS X would run well on a beater Dell? I don't.
The failure with vista was the marketing. Microsoft can't come up with one reason to get people to upgrade. Perhaps if they only shipped x64 vista it might have been an incentive for some. It worked with Windows 95. Most people are running 32bit vista. I've been using it since January and it's not too bad for a new Windows release. You must feed it RAM, but that's true of Macs or some of the bigger Linux distros too.
Most of the places that take old computers require them to be 3-5 years old (or newer) with valid Windows licenses. That precludes Macs and systems that don't have a valid windows license. For instance, I had a Dell PowerEdge server I bought used for $50. I couldn't recycle it even though it was a 550 mhz xeon with 512MB RAM, 40 GB of storage (2 scsi disks), a cdrom and ati rage card. Granted by today's standards it was slow, but BSD and Linux ran great on it. It could have worked as a surfing machine for someone. Likewise, I have my mothers old Celeron 700mhz HP that I fixed up. It can run XP, but she doesn't have the restore CD for Windows ME. It can run Linux or BSD fine. The unit doesn't have enough RAM for me to use it for testing software so it just sits there.
I haven't been able to give machines away and most places charge to recycle. I don't want to pay $20 to get rid of my junk. It didn't sell on ebay either.
There was also the availability of the Saturn. I tried to buy one the first Christmas. Only Toys R Us carried them and they were sold out so quickly that I didn't even make it near the counter. After that I didn't see units. I've thought about buying one on Ebay just to see what it was like at this point. I've got a working genesis + cd + 32x, a second genesis (gen1) + cd (gen 2) + 32x that sometimes overheats, and a Dreamcast. To this day, I haven't found a console I like better. I'm sure part of it is memories, but I also loved the game library. The Wii comes close, it just needs a game library.
I hope to buy a PS3 if I can ever afford one. I ebay'd my xbox and I won't buy a 360 as they will just drop it like a rock again. (if it lasts that long) Microsoft has some nice titles for the 360, but I can't buy a new console every year. It's not how things work. I've got a working NES, SNES, N64, gba, the segas, and a wii here. If Nintendo and Sega could do it... I've always blamed sony for killing sega so I haven't bought any playstation to date.
There's an interesting point. Instead of giving every kid a laptop, why not setup a library for whole communities including laptops in these poor areas? Then everyone including children would benefit. It would be possible for older people to learn about the modern world too.
The other advantage is that you might be able to help more communities with it.
Even though I feel this way, I'd consider buying one of these if I had the money. I wish it was buy one get half. At $300, it's doable for me.
A really great phone that never comes out of beta. Google has to finish this product and I don't know if they have it in them. Then again, I'd argue the iPhone isn't done either. Safari certainly isn't.
I wouldn't say superior. Each game had a unique feel to it. Sim City 2000 was fun because it included my home town. Still, I personally like the Super NES version of the original. I spent hours playing that and it was much easier to navigate on. The scroll speed in some of the games varies greatly with the computer you're using. I found that some were too fast.
What if your time machine data is corrupted due to the bug?
I had the external drive used for time machine dive off the network because the port is very sensitive on my new seagate drive. A slight bump will do it. Sure it will recover eventually, but if something happened quickly after time machine would have synced, then poof.
It should be fixed as it's serious. Not every Mac users runs time machine. I'm the only person I know using it right now.
Yeah.. last I checked alaska and russia aren't that far apart... and guess what.. it's not the atlantic between them. Funny thing.. Canada is also right up there too...
I think I'd go through canada and not mexico if i was going to russia.
I don't think I could convict him on the evidence I've heard so far. He might be guilty, but I really don't know.
Right now you can buy a PS3 and an inexpensive HD DVD player for less than the cost of the combo players. (bestbuy pricing)
I've been tempted by the prices of HD DVD players, but then I looked at content. I don't like the movies out on HD DVD for the most part. I don't tend to buy a lot of Universal movies. Some people do, but I'm not one of them. Going through my collection, I have a lot of sony, warner bros. and paramount movies. There are some fox films as well. I mean what geek doesn't have star trek and star wars stuff. Spiderman is a sony film.. I like bond movies which are also MGM aka sony releases. So there are many fronts to this format war. From a technical standpoint, I like that I can actually buy a blue-ray burner. It's not in my price range yet, but at least it's an option. I use my DVD burner for backups of my iTunes library and other things. I could use the additional storage.
So there are many factors keeping me from picking either format.
1. Price.
HD DVD players are cheaper. The movies are about the same in both formats locally. The PS3 is the best value in blue ray and the 5 free movies for blue ray lower the downside on the $400. Of course, i don't like all the movies so at current prices that's worth 50-60 dollars off.
2. Movies
Both formats are missing movies I want to buy. Some things haven't been released on either format. Other things are only available on blue-ray that I like.
3. Who do you hate more?
Microsoft and Univresal/NBC/GE vs Sony and Disney. Wow. I don't know what to think. DRM or DRM.
4. Players
The best blue-ray players are PS3s. Why does sony keep making the PS3 the lowest priced player? It's very rare a player is below the lowest PS3 model. That is stupid. A game console + player should be more than a player.
I'm not a huge toshiba fan. Who else makes HD DVD players? I almost never see other products on shelves.
5. Naming
It's easier to explain that HD DVD is a movie format to friends. Blue-ray sounds like something a space cadet uses in a cheesy movie.
6. HDTV is not in homes
I'm the only one in my family to own an HDTV. It's only a 30 inch so I don't totally benefit and it's a CRT at that. I spent $550 for that and it was an open box item at best buy. My mother can't afford more than $100.
Like others, I've slowed down buying movies. DVD prices have gone up on new releases to force my hand, but I don't feel like adopting anything yet. It's $7 locally between an HD DVD and a DVD new release. Compare hidef prices for spiderman 3, transformers, and fantastic four. You'll see what i mean. I would have bought spider-man 3 the day it came out, except i think I might go blueray and want it then.
I just bought an external seagate 250GB USB drive on Friday. It was in the box. It was $85 including tax.
Sometimes you do get lucky at best buy.
Similarly, there are business advantages to the BSD license. Businesses can use the code in their applications without giving back modifications. They can choose to do so if it benefits them or they feel "good" about it. Your advantages were based on companies that want to open source the code to get free development done on their product. With the BSD license, they can use the code in a product, but most likely it won't be their exact product. There is an obvious business advantage to not giving away the keys to the castle.
In reality, the BSDL vs GPL debate will never end. There will always be people who prefer one to the other. We will never have a complete desktop operating system under one license that is open source (under any current definition). X11 isn't GPL. OpenSSH isn't GPL. gcc isn't BSDL. It is best to understand the differences between the licenses and try to adapt to the thinking that both will exist.
The worst thing we can do in the open source community is argue about these licenses. I've done it in the past just like everyone else. It's not helping any of us "convert" users to free software. (either definition)
Isn't there a licensing issue by transplanting to postgres. I was under the impression it was BSDL and MySQL is GPL. Obviously one could use general ideas and implement them again for postgres.
I'm hoping that MySQL 6 is faster on other operating systems than previous versions. The current design makes many assumptions based on Linux. MySQL is running on many operating systems now and shouldn't be so OS centric. You can get binaries for Windows, Mac OS, Solaris, and many of the BSDs. Some of the FreeBSD 7 benchmarks show a serious improvement with postgres, but terrible MySQL performance.
Before anyone is critical of my comments, remember that I use MySQL at work and home.
Consider that Microsoft had to convince people over several versions of windows to use it over DOS applications. At the same time, Apple and many other vendors lost ground. It is possible to have an OS switch, but it has to be fueled by cost and features.
Apple's have features, but also cost more. I've argued they don't in the past, but with the intel hardware it's getting harder to make that claim. I do think apple makes good hardware, but comparing what I can build versus a mini or even looking at macbooks... it's harder to say apple is that much more. Even if you make a case for better hardware, most PC users don't know it's good. They don't even know the difference between a lowend e-machine and a highend dell.
In order for linux or any other os to take share from windows, it has to overcome the hassle of learning a new system and losing all the software you've used for years. When me and the redhat ceo can't get windows out of our lives, it's hard to tell others to do so. Gaming is the problem with linux conversion.
Duh. They are trying to draw conclusions from it though. Had they said "More people are buying linux from us than windows pre-installed" then I'd be fine with it. Also, what a person buys may not be what they end up using. Perhaps an application will not run on suse or redhat and they end up with another distro or OS. Maybe the IT manager is fired and the new guy loves BSD or windows.
If I buy a new computer from dell, I'll probably buy one of the linux machines even though I will be running BSD instead of ubuntu. The hardware is easier to get working in BSD. The situation is different for servers as people are paying large sums of money for a free operating system. I understand the business reasons for buying redhat, but at the same time I find it a bit amusing.
If dell wants to track this, they should remove the NO OS option and replace it with a checkbox that says "I don't want to say" and a textbox labeled other. THe user could fill in Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, or whatever they intend to run. Counting NO OS options as linux is stupid for this reason. Heck, I could even install windows on the thing after getting it as "NO OS".
Careful. With gentoo you have to plant your own pot, beat your own wife, and steal your own wallet. I don't know if you can even do the dog thing with it.
How would the lines for that go?
Kirk: Spock what do you think?
Spock: I know kung fu!
You forgot the Enterprise E.
I'm assuming you mean a machine that shipped with 10.3. Newer apple hardware requires newer OS X versions for drivers. My ibook can run 10.3.5 but my wife's can't.
I built my pc last september. I had to install 6-7 drivers including video, sound, chipset, etc for XP. I formatted and put vista on it in january (along with a new bsd install). I only needed to install a sound and video driver. It was less work for me to go to vista in that sense. I'm running x64 vista at that. On newer hardware, it's easier to deal with vista. It actually has support for some sata controllers built in. Imagine that.
Linux distros are probably the same as my windows experience in some cases. Many people still end up using binary video drivers and perhaps a wireless driver and/or firmware load. It depends on the distro and what deals they have with ATI and nvidia.
But with Windows Vista, you can turn anyone into a hooker...
Apple already does this with the iPod. You can "flash" it to factory and reload your songs. I agree with that point. However, I don't think the gp's analogy was wrong. He shouldn't have used coffee perhaps. It isn't a related feature. Think of it this way, you are adding a feature that was not intended for the original device. An embedded device does not guarantee the same benefits as a PC.
Take any product x where it is one of dvd player, toaster, washer, flame thrower, easy bake oven and modify it with new functionality not sanctioned by the vendor. Then when they won't warranty it, file lawsuit. See the problem?
I think the real issue is that Apple and the media have called the iPhone a smartphone. When we think of smartphones, we think of pdas + phones with some multimedia capabilities. The iPhone is an ipod + phone with some pda capabilities. As apple changed the definition, we've yet to grasp this difference. A real PDA lets me load additional software. The iPhone is not that type of device. Apple fans wanted a new newton for modern day and they didn't get one. Apple haters are comparing the device to a windows smartphone which does completely different things. Would you expect a zune + phone to be a good pda? I wouldn't.
No, it will put apple out of business. Remember BeOS?
Seriously, if just making a windows alternative available on commodity hardware worked, Linux would be number 1 because it's free.
Most people creating alternatives for the desktop know they will never be number one. I'd be over joyed if I had 4% market share.
It depends on the area. We seem to benefit from PowerBoost here and I have a Comcast Workplace account at home. Last I knew the consumer level accounts were 5Mb/s whereas I have 8Mb/s + 1Mb/s upstream. I also have the largest package they offer and would buy more upstream if I could. Problem is with the design of the technology, when my server is hammered, my neighbors have difficulty with their connections. Business class accounts have priority. One of my neighbors got very angry with me about it. Most people don't want to pay $160 a month for Internet access.
Technically your statement is correct. However, PC-BSD and DesktopBSD fall very close into the concept of a distribution. They aren't stand alone operating systems, just FreeBSD + some extras. (KDE, package install stuff, etc)