I guess your prediction may come true, if the other predictions (Apple taking over the x86 market by storm) succeed. Since, all the Windows PCs, will be running on Mac hardware:)
If they're going to be competing in the 'luxury' computer markets, they're going to have todo better jobs with the cases (just see Falcon Northwest as a example).
> No other PC box can dual boot two OS's practically out of the box. With all due respect, no PC box can boot ANY stable OS out of the box. PC manufacturers ONLY boot Windows, and poorly at that. Their job should be easier only having to write drivers and put the boxes together.
Let's see... With bootcamp, you update your firmware, you resize your Mac partition, you copy various files from your original windows xp (sorry, can't use your 'rescue disk').
Hm, now with say a Dell, insert Mandriva install DVD (As a example), tell the partioner to take some availible space away from NTFS, automate the rest of the partioning proccess, let Mandriva install. Which will also handle the bootloader etc. automatically (or you can optionally choose manual if you want).
Uh. I don't see how Macintels dual boot practically out of the box more than 'normal' x86 systems.
> Once consumers realize that Apple hardware can run Windows with more stability from well-written drivers, they will realize the value of owning a Mac.
Too bad there are a few drivers still lacking for windows on Macintels. So, in actual fact, there is unsupported hardware under windows. I don't see why people would buy a system they know isn't going to be supported fully.
> The day OS X ships alongside a Windows OS will be sooner rather than later. It's a calculated move on Apple's part to ship OS X Leopard 10.5 around the same timeframe as Vista/Longhorn. It's a sure bet that Leopard systems will run Windows out of the box whether through boot camp or virtualization.
Blah, it's going to be even more expensive then. I'll just get a Falcon Northwest system. They're more likely going to be cheaper (for the hardware you get), more powerful and better looking (custom case jobs -- yay).
> Lets face it, the only reason consumers are buying PC boxes is to run Windows.
I thought it was because they wanted a PC. Many people don't know they're using Windows.
> PC manufacturers didn't have to worry about Apple hardware before, but now that they boot Windows alongside OS X they're gonna start sweating.
Why in the world would anyone want to buy a Mac to run *only* Windows when there is much cheaper and better windows hardware out there?
> Microsoft is more than willing to take money from switchers, but don't realize that the end user will end up hating Windows since it's so much easier to compare the two OS's.
It doesn't matter if you hate windows, you still rely on it, that is the industry.
> Oh I look forward to the next 18 months.
You really think there is going to be a revolution?
> After all, if you're playing old games you're not buying as many new ones as you could, are you?
I'm actually not much of a gamer, I pretty much only have a interest in four games I own, which I don't play that often.
Note: I don't try to convince anyone to upgrade or such, I just help my aquaitences and friends whenever they have issues.
> You might be right that Windows has better legacy support for games, but I'm not sure it's really that important to the majority of people who buy games.
I spend a bit of time helping aquaitences, online friends with getting their games/programs working. You'd be suprised that some of my aquaitences (two actually) even today, don't want to switch from windows 98se (which crashes regulary) to windows XP, because last time they tried it (without my help), it didn't let them play *insert favorite game* out of the box.
> I'm sure the game publishers would rather it wasn't the case.
I agree, absolutely.
> After all, if you're playing old games you're not buying as many new ones as you could, are you?
I suppose not:)
> How many times did you post today??
Hm, this is going to be my 13th post. I tend to post on Slashdot when I can't sleep.
Admittedly, on my laptop I have my 'normal user' login name on exempt from having to enter a password as root. I wonder how many other *nix users do this on their workstations.
Please submit the lack of 'polish' issues into the KDE project's bugzillas as feature suggestions. I would really appriciate it if you do. This way developers will discover what you find lacking in KDE, and may implement it.
They may also remember this feature you asked for, and use it in future applications they develop.
It may benefit you in future if you decide to use KDE again, and will probably benefit everyone else too.
Although to be honest, the 'polish' I felt in KDE 3.5.1 was beyond Windows XP.
> I have older games that technically you can still play on Windows, but you absolutely require third party (often open source, maintained by enthusiasts) software to do it. Dosbox for instance.
I have *never* found a DOS application I couldn't run under windows natively. Of course it's not always straight forward, which is why I have in the past written various howtos on some of my favorite DOS applications and games.
There are also neat little tricks you can do on windows for certain DOS apps that like to mess up the system, use "start/seperated ", if I remember the command correctly, sandboxes them in their own enviroment. Quite useful:)
I haven't found any issues with old win3.11 applications either under windows. Heck, last year when I started macroeconomics, I had to buy various books, which had software that came free with it. Strangely enough, one of them was a application written for windows 3.11 (I discovered it when I looked into the taskmanager to see wow/ntvdm running).
To my knowledge, I can't run mac classic apps under Macintels and the emulation on PPCs was rather poor from having seen people who were using Photoshop for Mac classic (Why did they buy that? They should of got a native version, bleh) on MacOSX.
(Sorry about the delay in my post, first time Slashdot told me I posted too much in one day.)
Re:Anxiously awaiting the new towers...
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
If Microsoft starts enforcing things like xbox live, that will certainly do it.
Re:Apple is going to make a killing...
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
Under Linux, you can run IE6 under WINE, just see the application database to find information on how to set it up.
Re:Apple is going to make a killing...
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
> But the beauty of OS X is, you don't have to deal with all the hassles of Linux.
What hassles?
Re:Apple is going to make a killing...
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
Pfft, mailing lists? RSS is the future! Let us hammer his webserver with requests every hour!
Re:Apple is going to make a killing...
on
Going To Boot Camp
·
· Score: 1
> No one buys a Mac for the hardware.
I know two people in real life who did.
> No one is going to buy a Mac now to run Windows on it.
Why not? If you buy a Mac, you're garenteed quality hardware, that's good for gaming, your company/university (they have weird programmes that do this)/parents may wish to buy you a new computer, but may not be willing to buy you a 'gamer' machine. But if you buy a machine from apple for 'work' puposes, it can definately be used for some good gamer usage.
> They're going to buy a Mac because they've always wanted to try OS X
Or maybe they prefer the fact that Apple handles their waranties better than Dell, gateway etc.
> It is absurd to suggest that Apple is going to die now that people can run Windows on their Mac.
Agreed.
> Companies are not going to stop making OS X software just because Apples can run Windows
This maybe true, since companies want to maximize their profits. Since they already have a product developed, there is no point to stop updating it. But! Additionally, companies that never had Apple products, such as Valve, will now see no point in making one.
> if people wanted Windows, they would've bought a freaking Dell!
I know a few people that would rather buy a PPC Mac (which they've never used before), before getting a Dell.
> I don't understand why people think this means companies will stop porting applications to OS X
I am certain it won't stop companies from making ports, but when companies make a application that relies completely on one os, say Windows. It won't be worth the amount of work to completely rewrite major parts of the application, just so it can run under MacOSX. Especially when the hardware can run Windows.
> no one is going to tolerate dual-booting between OS X and Windows to use any major desktop application.
Gamers may, but they will probably do something like this: Windows for gaming, instant messaging, chat, e-mail. MacOSX for work, essays, instant messaging, chat, e-mail.
Probably spending most of their time under Windows, gaming. Since, after all, they are gamers.
> And now every time they reboot into OS X from Windows, or into Windows from OS X, the superiority of OS X will become clear.
You do know that Windows is booting faster here than MacOSX, right (although shutdowns take a bit too long compared to other OSes)?
> Even more so as time goes on, when the Windows installation becomes a spyware-infested, bloated piece of crap with fifteen different taskbar icons taking up 30MB of RAM each that starts to pause mysteriously after common tasks
Actually, one nice advantage about having MacOSX, is that I can easilly restore the windows partition if it ever gets too poopy using 'dd' and a harddrive image:)
> However, they're quickly going to get tired of dual booting. They're going to have to decide, OS X or XP? Apple is betting that a good portion of them are going to want to go with OS X.
However, gamers are going to choose Windows, because companies, like Valve (whichs has quite a bit of the PC gamers market), aren't supporting MacOSX, and now with the advent of dual-booting windows on Macintels, I don't think they'll even consider it.
If gamers can't play their games on MacOSX, they're not going to consider it.
They may perhaps use it only when writing essays, photo editing, movie editing etc. Which tends to be what MacOSX is known for.
Another factor: Apple is known for not caring much about backwards compatability, gamers may prefer Windows, because they know, there will be a way to play their old games on newer versions of Windows (heck, I can even play old DOS games like Frontier: Elite II still, which I do under windows xp, it even runs better than win9x runs it on the same hardware).
Slashdot Mirror
I guess your prediction may come true, if the other predictions (Apple taking over the x86 market by storm) succeed. Since, all the Windows PCs, will be running on Mac hardware :)
If they're going to be competing in the 'luxury' computer markets, they're going to have todo better jobs with the cases (just see Falcon Northwest as a example).
> No other PC box can dual boot two OS's practically out of the box. With all due respect, no PC box can boot ANY stable OS out of the box. PC manufacturers ONLY boot Windows, and poorly at that. Their job should be easier only having to write drivers and put the boxes together.
Let's see... With bootcamp, you update your firmware, you resize your Mac partition, you copy various files from your original windows xp (sorry, can't use your 'rescue disk').
Hm, now with say a Dell, insert Mandriva install DVD (As a example), tell the partioner to take some availible space away from NTFS, automate the rest of the partioning proccess, let Mandriva install. Which will also handle the bootloader etc. automatically (or you can optionally choose manual if you want).
Uh. I don't see how Macintels dual boot practically out of the box more than 'normal' x86 systems.
> Once consumers realize that Apple hardware can run Windows with more stability from well-written drivers, they will realize the value of owning a Mac.
Too bad there are a few drivers still lacking for windows on Macintels. So, in actual fact, there is unsupported hardware under windows. I don't see why people would buy a system they know isn't going to be supported fully.
> The day OS X ships alongside a Windows OS will be sooner rather than later. It's a calculated move on Apple's part to ship OS X Leopard 10.5 around the same timeframe as Vista/Longhorn. It's a sure bet that Leopard systems will run Windows out of the box whether through boot camp or virtualization.
Blah, it's going to be even more expensive then. I'll just get a Falcon Northwest system. They're more likely going to be cheaper (for the hardware you get), more powerful and better looking (custom case jobs -- yay).
> Lets face it, the only reason consumers are buying PC boxes is to run Windows.
I thought it was because they wanted a PC. Many people don't know they're using Windows.
> PC manufacturers didn't have to worry about Apple hardware before, but now that they boot Windows alongside OS X they're gonna start sweating.
Why in the world would anyone want to buy a Mac to run *only* Windows when there is much cheaper and better windows hardware out there?
> Microsoft is more than willing to take money from switchers, but don't realize that the end user will end up hating Windows since it's so much easier to compare the two OS's.
It doesn't matter if you hate windows, you still rely on it, that is the industry.
> Oh I look forward to the next 18 months.
You really think there is going to be a revolution?
As another poster already mentioned, "opendarwin".
It's practically useless for any desktop or server use.
I predict it will have the name 'wine' in it.. like.. 'darwine' for instance!
> so why would they want to start going after hardware companies?
They see Apple's method as profitable.
> After all, if you're playing old games you're not buying as many new ones as you could, are you?
:)
I'm actually not much of a gamer, I pretty much only have a interest in four games I own, which I don't play that often.
Note: I don't try to convince anyone to upgrade or such, I just help my aquaitences and friends whenever they have issues.
> You might be right that Windows has better legacy support for games, but I'm not sure it's really that important to the majority of people who buy games.
I spend a bit of time helping aquaitences, online friends with getting their games/programs working. You'd be suprised that some of my aquaitences (two actually) even today, don't want to switch from windows 98se (which crashes regulary) to windows XP, because last time they tried it (without my help), it didn't let them play *insert favorite game* out of the box.
> I'm sure the game publishers would rather it wasn't the case.
I agree, absolutely.
> After all, if you're playing old games you're not buying as many new ones as you could, are you?
I suppose not
> How many times did you post today??
Hm, this is going to be my 13th post. I tend to post on Slashdot when I can't sleep.
Yes!
BSD has the ability to run ELF executables.
Why would I want to run a crappy program that runs only as root?
Admittedly, on my laptop I have my 'normal user' login name on exempt from having to enter a password as root. I wonder how many other *nix users do this on their workstations.
The Cylons^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Windows makes fools of us all.
Or you could compile your linux kernel without elf binary support (make sure to compile your apps in a.out).
Finally, a use for Gentoo!
Yes! Threaten them with the millenium bug, over and over!
Couldn't theft of service apply to a client is 'claiming' to be a server by connecting to a tire 1 server?
Filtering could mean less accurate time replies for legitimate servers.
How do you protect yourself against a DDoS?
Please submit the lack of 'polish' issues into the KDE project's bugzillas as feature suggestions. I would really appriciate it if you do. This way developers will discover what you find lacking in KDE, and may implement it.
They may also remember this feature you asked for, and use it in future applications they develop.
It may benefit you in future if you decide to use KDE again, and will probably benefit everyone else too.
Although to be honest, the 'polish' I felt in KDE 3.5.1 was beyond Windows XP.
> I have older games that technically you can still play on Windows, but you absolutely require third party (often open source, maintained by enthusiasts) software to do it. Dosbox for instance.
/seperated ", if I remember the command correctly, sandboxes them in their own enviroment. Quite useful :)
I have *never* found a DOS application I couldn't run under windows natively. Of course it's not always straight forward, which is why I have in the past written various howtos on some of my favorite DOS applications and games.
There are also neat little tricks you can do on windows for certain DOS apps that like to mess up the system, use "start
I haven't found any issues with old win3.11 applications either under windows. Heck, last year when I started macroeconomics, I had to buy various books, which had software that came free with it. Strangely enough, one of them was a application written for windows 3.11 (I discovered it when I looked into the taskmanager to see wow/ntvdm running).
To my knowledge, I can't run mac classic apps under Macintels and the emulation on PPCs was rather poor from having seen people who were using Photoshop for Mac classic (Why did they buy that? They should of got a native version, bleh) on MacOSX.
(Sorry about the delay in my post, first time Slashdot told me I posted too much in one day.)
If Microsoft starts enforcing things like xbox live, that will certainly do it.
Under Linux, you can run IE6 under WINE, just see the application database to find information on how to set it up.
> But the beauty of OS X is, you don't have to deal with all the hassles of Linux.
What hassles?
Pfft, mailing lists? RSS is the future! Let us hammer his webserver with requests every hour!
> No one buys a Mac for the hardware.
:)
I know two people in real life who did.
> No one is going to buy a Mac now to run Windows on it.
Why not? If you buy a Mac, you're garenteed quality hardware, that's good for gaming, your company/university (they have weird programmes that do this)/parents may wish to buy you a new computer, but may not be willing to buy you a 'gamer' machine. But if you buy a machine from apple for 'work' puposes, it can definately be used for some good gamer usage.
> They're going to buy a Mac because they've always wanted to try OS X
Or maybe they prefer the fact that Apple handles their waranties better than Dell, gateway etc.
> It is absurd to suggest that Apple is going to die now that people can run Windows on their Mac.
Agreed.
> Companies are not going to stop making OS X software just because Apples can run Windows
This maybe true, since companies want to maximize their profits. Since they already have a product developed, there is no point to stop updating it. But! Additionally, companies that never had Apple products, such as Valve, will now see no point in making one.
> if people wanted Windows, they would've bought a freaking Dell!
I know a few people that would rather buy a PPC Mac (which they've never used before), before getting a Dell.
> I don't understand why people think this means companies will stop porting applications to OS X
I am certain it won't stop companies from making ports, but when companies make a application that relies completely on one os, say Windows. It won't be worth the amount of work to completely rewrite major parts of the application, just so it can run under MacOSX. Especially when the hardware can run Windows.
> no one is going to tolerate dual-booting between OS X and Windows to use any major desktop application.
Gamers may, but they will probably do something like this: Windows for gaming, instant messaging, chat, e-mail.
MacOSX for work, essays, instant messaging, chat, e-mail.
Probably spending most of their time under Windows, gaming. Since, after all, they are gamers.
> And now every time they reboot into OS X from Windows, or into Windows from OS X, the superiority of OS X will become clear.
You do know that Windows is booting faster here than MacOSX, right (although shutdowns take a bit too long compared to other OSes)?
> Even more so as time goes on, when the Windows installation becomes a spyware-infested, bloated piece of crap with fifteen different taskbar icons taking up 30MB of RAM each that starts to pause mysteriously after common tasks
Actually, one nice advantage about having MacOSX, is that I can easilly restore the windows partition if it ever gets too poopy using 'dd' and a harddrive image
> However, they're quickly going to get tired of dual booting. They're going to have to decide, OS X or XP? Apple is betting that a good portion of them are going to want to go with OS X.
However, gamers are going to choose Windows, because companies, like Valve (whichs has quite a bit of the PC gamers market), aren't supporting MacOSX, and now with the advent of dual-booting windows on Macintels, I don't think they'll even consider it.
If gamers can't play their games on MacOSX, they're not going to consider it.
They may perhaps use it only when writing essays, photo editing, movie editing etc. Which tends to be what MacOSX is known for.
Another factor: Apple is known for not caring much about backwards compatability, gamers may prefer Windows, because they know, there will be a way to play their old games on newer versions of Windows (heck, I can even play old DOS games like Frontier: Elite II still, which I do under windows xp, it even runs better than win9x runs it on the same hardware).