Ensure that the non-executable data gets stored in a place that will NOT accept anything executable.
Only let signed executables run. Signed == you md5 all compiled code to let it run.
mandatory code-signing for kernel extensions (so only certified kernel extensions can run), sandbox policies for Safari, Mail, and third-party applications (so these applications cannot do anything to the system), and some lower-level changes, such as hardware-enforced Non-eXecutable memory and address space layout randomization."
Look! Vista has all those! And there is no malware on Vista now right?
No, no. If you want to secure a system, do it right, like Microsoft in Singularity...
And if you want a secure system, use OpenBSD. With its meaningless market share forever, that one will never ever have malware written for it...
Not in splash screens, okay, but in-game sounds okay to me... What about nice Coca-Cola skins on the can distributors in FPS? It's actually prettier than some of the skins game devs do use (thinking of Half-Life 1 here, yeah it's old ugly and such, but I'm so not a gamer I can't remember anything else off the top of my head)
I happen to think it would be good. More immersive than "Caco Caloc" in green on black, at least:-)
Momentum doesn't apply to subatomic particles IIRC.
Micro black holes would emit Hawking Radiation and then disappear much too fast to do any sort of damage whatsoever, too. And that is completely evident! How would they accumulate enough mass to grow, as opposed to disappearing in a flash? Because of the large number of high-energy particles in the LHC?...
Fails to pass the Dragon Test : "if it sounds anything like 'there be dragons', it's obviously false". There aren't enough particles in the whole solar system to build a Black Hole! Thus, tiny BH-like things in some sort of cyclotron : Not dangerous. Oh, yeah, right, "maybe", but that's never gonna make a macro-effect like a Singularity happen.
Just like the Net didn't cause a historical Singularity. Remember the dragon test? If some effect is "too clean", I mean, induces a clear, radical change on a global scale, it won't happen. Got to account for inertia, and wrap your head around the fact that the earth is BIG. Like, HUGE. And complex like you can't begin to imagine. Measure, yes, we can. But *picture* the complexity? No, not with those limited brains of ours. So we believe in miracles like "The LHC could destroy Earth!" or "Some day we'll upload our minds in the Net and live forever!" Never going to happen. Or on a small, small scale. Most humans still live on dirt they can't even cultivate, and it's gonna stay that way for a long, long time. Inertia I tell you. Inertia makes it so that dragons and unicorns can't evolve on earth, that humans can't begin to understand that they're screwing themselves so bad they don't -but could- have lived in Utopia since the invention of the first massive-scale labor-saving device, and tiny scientific toys can't create massively destructive Black Holes.
Bah, thinking that anything humans can build would destroy the earth is just as stupid as anything by Roland Piquepaille.
You know, if it sounds like it could only happen in a SF book, then it is so. Destroy Earth with a device some Km long? Ridiculous. Even the zillions of megatons from Big Asteroids never did, and that's some orders of magnitude more energy than what's in the LHC. It's like saying that the Earth could shatter because a volcano erupts, because it releases times more energy than the last A-bomb.
Create a Black Hole, yeah, right, like we have so much matter on hand? Like, what's the number already, 2,000 times the mass of our sun? Or 2000^2000?
"Mad scientists in their lab create a black hole that could destroy Earth"... I couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to read a novel that includes such crap. Unless it's British humor like H2G2. But even then, such a scenario would feel cheap. Or it might be a parody of really crappy SF ideas.
If any editor is reading this... please... tell us something interesting about the LHC instead of "IT COUDL DISTROI EARHT!!!! KI11 US ALL!!!".
Yes. Like while Bethseda was developping Oblivion, they found out that drug-using NPCs would always kill the dealer to steal his stash, before the player could get to him. They didn't expect that.
In my opinion, the problem with strong AI research is that we are arbitrarily defining rules and expectations. For example, if we were to accurately model the physical world, all we'd have to do is set up a few evolutionary bots to learn about their environment, and give them a few billion generations.
Yup. Pattern-matching, and the ability to derive new patterns. Automatic data mining in the Real World with evolutionary bots? They would solve science in a few years, given enough computing power.
There used to be a belief that computers can only parse the obvious statement of any input. "automatized data mining"... that's functionally the same as human understanding.
However, just like we can't predict the paths that biological evolution will take, we have no guarantee that computer thinking will follow the same path that we will, (in fact, I would bet on it not following that path). Thus, 'Intelligence' in the simulated world would probably look nothing like we expect.
Ah, but we can predict the paths biological evolution will take. Introduce an external force, such as a hotter environment, and all of a sudden, organisms will adapt to the new factor. How's that for not predictable? It's so only with a sample size too small.
The problems here are questions of scale and our own understanding of physics....snip...
You can train a program to interact in the human world, like IRC bots, search engine algorithms, etc. The problem here is that the humans have billions of years of built in programming. I'm fairly confident that if a human were to sit on IRC talking to a well-coded bot for a few billion years, that bot would be able to carry on a pretty good conversation, but the amount of time that we currently give those systems in their 'learning phase' is miniscule compared to the size of our own.
No, no, no. Distribute the problem! What about one billion humans for a year? That's been done and it worked : there were such precious findings in behavioral sciences with Internet chatbots... like that humans will basically say one of 90,000 in every line of conversation. Thus, you can solve a good part of the Turing Test by brute force.
You're thinking science only exists in one lab with a small team of highly trained individuals. It can be done some other ways too, you know.
Well, I happen to think that intelligence does not even exist. I think that it's just "what we don't understand". Intelligence as we know it can be reduced to pattern-matching and stimulus-response, with a few data-crunching algorithms thrown in, of which some are built-in and much more are learned.
Take conversation, for example. Internet chatbots have almost solved that! They can reply to any of the approximately 90,000 typical sentences humans utter when they talk. Now with a little parsing outputted into a state machine, they could not only reply to one sentence, but follow a conversation consistently... and thus pass the Turing test better than many humans.
WTF? As long as you got the GNU toolchain, you can install ANYthing.... and pray to $DEITY that you never have to uninstall anything you put on your computer with./configure && make && make install, lol
Package managers are necessary. Even Windows has one. Yeah, I know, it's fucking broken, but is it really more so than, say, RPM or Portage? RPM Inferno with dependency Hell, and incompatible between distros and across versions, or emerge -u world, and cry whine weep when you have to watch hour upon hour of compiles until the point where portage will, does fail, each and every time, on at least one package.
What you describe is exactly the LFS way -./configure (set flags for the program being installed to locate appropriate locations to save and load information from), make install (let the installer put files where they need).
What's needed is for the devs to put their release source in a proper tarball that everyone can install - with./configure && make && make install - and let the distro maintainers set it up into their package manager. That's the Gentoo way, for one. And when it doesn't Just Work, it's always because either the devs or the package maintainer fucked up. And that can be prevented by testing.
On the other hand, having an easy-to-use and easy-on-developers Linux API available on Windows does the opposite -- software companies could develop for Linux and get apps that target both the Linux and Windows markets, thus targeting a bigger market than just Windows.
You're talking about Qt?
At the point in time you describe, it will be easy for Windows users to switch to Linux, and there will be incentive for them to do so since it is generally cheaper and they would have more apps available (all Linux apps plus Windows apps under Wine) -- that much I agree with. However, one could argue that developing for the Windows API would still be the bigger market, since developing for Windows would give you an application which would work on Windows or Linux-with-Wine. Until the size of the Windows-only customer base is smaller than the Linux-only-and-I-won't-or-can't-use-Wine customer base, there will still be incentive to develop for Windows. There may be other reasons to develop for Linux instead (ease of development, more plentiful developers, etc), but a bigger market is not one of them as long as you continue to account for Wine.
Except that Wine doesn't work. Or, if it does, then it's because you have a "paid-for (yeah, right)" Windows install somewhere on your hard drive (go try to run anything beyond Notepad with the wine dlls and weep while I rotflmao). Now go choose which windows, too - 2000, XP, Vista? Which will be most compatible with Wine?
How comes the wine team could never get it to work? Does CodeWeavers pay them to make a non-functioning package so that they can sell theirs? Wine never, ever ran anything I threw at it, but since I downloaded a torrent of CrossOver (like I'd pay for software, especially one they didn't even develop themselves), I can finally run games on my Hackintosh (which I bought because ponying up 1000 more euros just to have a GPU in my laptop sounds like "please, bend over and let Apple stick a ton of bricks up your ass". And because Linux won't run the Adobe suite and MS Office natively. And Windows is out forever - XP won't install without jumping through hoops and Vista needs four times more clicks to get anything done at all).
Now, about your analysis : you are right. Not that it's my opinion, it's obvious, evident fact.
X11 already provides desktop Linux with you need to run high performance graphics.
No.
Not when draging a transparent window freezes the system for seconds.
Not when X runs in ONE SINGLE THREAD.
Not when X crashes.
Not when X can't be compatible with the only two graphics chipsets on the world (ATI and nVidia, the rest is either complete crap - Intel - or forgotten, obsolete, and massively overpriced crap - Matrox).
Not when X crashes. (I have yet to see Aqua crash, ONCE.)
Not when X has one new line of code a year, never fixes bugs, releases years too late, etc. etc.
And I haven't even started on the politics/license stuff...
More that the dev team is understaffed and inherited a big mess o'code no one could even try to read, at the time they changed the name from XFre86 to X.Org. That piece of spaghetti was supposed to be a reference implementation, not supposed to be used. An now? Well, Linux and *BSD and all other Unices that use X.org have the worst GUI system in the world. Yeah, yeah, there are toolkits that take care of Just That (like lovely Qt and horrible GTK), but the foundation, the X server, is crap. Everybody knows that. It should have been rewritten from scratch a fucking long time ago.
Or maybe use something else entirely... Typing this on my Hackintosh, I know how good a Unix desktop can be.
Yes. Using Crossover, for example. Or one of the few games released by studios rich enough to pay for cross-platform devlopment.
What really kills Mac gaming is that they put Intel graphics cards in all their line except high-end. And now, iPhones? This is ridiculous. The iPhone is to have more graphics power than MacBooks? Now that's brutally ass-raping customers.
BitTorrent is designed to saturate your connection, in both directions.
You never used bittorrent or what? You know you can limit the upload speed to whatever suits you, right? As for saturating the download speed, the day I see a solid hour of download at 1 megabyte/sec, I swear I'll have a spontaneous orgasm.
Ridiculous. Those towers would work just as well if the normal SMS were free and they were entirely subsidized by "ringtones" and "dating" services, where the carrier takes 35% commission on all sales.
The towers need nearly zero maintenance as well. I know that. They have to be checked once every two or three years, and that's when the company wants them checked much more often than they have a chance to fail.
In a restaurant, you have to pay for the food, first. Then for the fixed costs, then the service. Those things are not multiplicable a zillion times at zero cost. Food is used only once, service is used only once. The profits are not enormous, they are obscene. There should be laws against large-scale organized price-fixing and abuse of position, don't you think?
I have never called any sort of tech support. I know that I know more about computers than any trained monkey with a checklist. So i can't say anything about Apple tech support, but I can tell you that every time I've had the slightest question on a Mac or on a Hackintosh, I headed to the insanelymac forums and found the answer there.
OSX is less troublesome? HELL YEAH. After spending four hours to make everything work (save the webcam and sleep modes) on this Hackintosh, I can tell it's much less troublesome than either uninstalling the ton of crap that came with the Vista that was factory-installed on it AND installing and configuring any Linux distro Just Right. Windows Vista needs more actions to do anything than Windows XP, and both of these impede your work with blaring "Computer Not Secured" "Updates To Install" "Please Install an AntiVirus" "The firewall is deactivated" "Norton Sensed An Activity" and the Nightmare : "Your mouse has moved. Cancel or Allow?" Linux, let's not talk about it... Remember the bug in Ubuntu 7.04 that prevents you from accessing NTFS drives no matter what you do, because of the security settings? Been there, done that. Ever installed a Gentoo? The first time I did that, I learned everything I'll ever need to know to become a sysop at any site with a thousand Linux boxen. Because I needed to learn it all just to successfully install the damn distro. It took me a week. Now I can install a Gentoo in three lines of bash, but... who wants to have to know that? Or even DO that? Geeks living in their parents' basements, and? And?
My point is, in Linux you have to know it all. in Windows, the environment distracts you all the time. In OSX, well, you may dislike the interface... but you've got a usable, integrated Desktop Unix that Just Works.
Eur 1800 Just for a working webcam? FUCK YOU, EXTORTIONIST PIECES OF SHIT! Like I haven't paid enough for that ssslllooowww MacMini G4 (Eur 500 at the time, worth 10 on flea market for equivalent perfs), then the over-overpriced MacBook (Eur 1400, worth 700 at Asus - again, for same perfs).
No, I've ponied up way too much more than enough at Apple stores to NEVER have ANY qualm whatsofuckingever to happily tell everyone I'd install OSX on their PC using my Kalyway install DVD if they'd just let me. Just like I nailed my original WinXPProSP2 CD to the wall the day I discovered slipstreamed installs with VLKs that pass WGA. (Also after said CD, installed and verified, killed itself with the slow-self-destruct-feature that's called Windows Update.)
Apple hardware is NOT worth what it costs. Nowhere near. The higher the class the more exaggerated the price. How MUCH for a MacBook Air? Eur 1700 and it has no optical drive? BWAHAHAHAHA. Who ever bought one? Morons? And what about the MacPros? Eur 10,000 for an eight-core? I can make that for 4000 WITH a pair of 24" monitors AND a studio-class sound card AND wireless speakers. And better hard drives.
Slashdot Mirror
Ensure that the non-executable data gets stored in a place that will NOT accept anything executable.
Only let signed executables run. Signed == you md5 all compiled code to let it run.
Look! Vista has all those! And there is no malware on Vista now right?
No, no. If you want to secure a system, do it right, like Microsoft in Singularity...
And if you want a secure system, use OpenBSD. With its meaningless market share forever, that one will never ever have malware written for it...
Not in splash screens, okay, but in-game sounds okay to me... What about nice Coca-Cola skins on the can distributors in FPS? It's actually prettier than some of the skins game devs do use (thinking of Half-Life 1 here, yeah it's old ugly and such, but I'm so not a gamer I can't remember anything else off the top of my head)
I happen to think it would be good. More immersive than "Caco Caloc" in green on black, at least :-)
That's called a VLK-enabled unattended install.
Or a pirate version.
Momentum doesn't apply to subatomic particles IIRC.
Micro black holes would emit Hawking Radiation and then disappear much too fast to do any sort of damage whatsoever, too. And that is completely evident! How would they accumulate enough mass to grow, as opposed to disappearing in a flash? Because of the large number of high-energy particles in the LHC? ...
Fails to pass the Dragon Test : "if it sounds anything like 'there be dragons', it's obviously false". There aren't enough particles in the whole solar system to build a Black Hole! Thus, tiny BH-like things in some sort of cyclotron : Not dangerous. Oh, yeah, right, "maybe", but that's never gonna make a macro-effect like a Singularity happen.
Just like the Net didn't cause a historical Singularity. Remember the dragon test? If some effect is "too clean", I mean, induces a clear, radical change on a global scale, it won't happen. Got to account for inertia, and wrap your head around the fact that the earth is BIG. Like, HUGE. And complex like you can't begin to imagine. Measure, yes, we can. But *picture* the complexity? No, not with those limited brains of ours. So we believe in miracles like "The LHC could destroy Earth!" or "Some day we'll upload our minds in the Net and live forever!" Never going to happen. Or on a small, small scale. Most humans still live on dirt they can't even cultivate, and it's gonna stay that way for a long, long time. Inertia I tell you. Inertia makes it so that dragons and unicorns can't evolve on earth, that humans can't begin to understand that they're screwing themselves so bad they don't -but could- have lived in Utopia since the invention of the first massive-scale labor-saving device, and tiny scientific toys can't create massively destructive Black Holes.
Bah, thinking that anything humans can build would destroy the earth is just as stupid as anything by Roland Piquepaille.
You know, if it sounds like it could only happen in a SF book, then it is so. Destroy Earth with a device some Km long? Ridiculous. Even the zillions of megatons from Big Asteroids never did, and that's some orders of magnitude more energy than what's in the LHC. It's like saying that the Earth could shatter because a volcano erupts, because it releases times more energy than the last A-bomb.
Create a Black Hole, yeah, right, like we have so much matter on hand? Like, what's the number already, 2,000 times the mass of our sun? Or 2000^2000?
"Mad scientists in their lab create a black hole that could destroy Earth"... I couldn't suspend my disbelief enough to read a novel that includes such crap. Unless it's British humor like H2G2. But even then, such a scenario would feel cheap. Or it might be a parody of really crappy SF ideas.
If any editor is reading this... please... tell us something interesting about the LHC instead of "IT COUDL DISTROI EARHT!!!! KI11 US ALL!!!".
Yes. Like while Bethseda was developping Oblivion, they found out that drug-using NPCs would always kill the dealer to steal his stash, before the player could get to him. They didn't expect that.
Yup. Pattern-matching, and the ability to derive new patterns. Automatic data mining in the Real World with evolutionary bots? They would solve science in a few years, given enough computing power.
There used to be a belief that computers can only parse the obvious statement of any input. "automatized data mining"... that's functionally the same as human understanding.
Ah, but we can predict the paths biological evolution will take. Introduce an external force, such as a hotter environment, and all of a sudden, organisms will adapt to the new factor. How's that for not predictable? It's so only with a sample size too small.
No, no, no. Distribute the problem! What about one billion humans for a year? That's been done and it worked : there were such precious findings in behavioral sciences with Internet chatbots... like that humans will basically say one of 90,000 in every line of conversation. Thus, you can solve a good part of the Turing Test by brute force.
You're thinking science only exists in one lab with a small team of highly trained individuals. It can be done some other ways too, you know.
Well, I happen to think that intelligence does not even exist. I think that it's just "what we don't understand". Intelligence as we know it can be reduced to pattern-matching and stimulus-response, with a few data-crunching algorithms thrown in, of which some are built-in and much more are learned.
Take conversation, for example. Internet chatbots have almost solved that! They can reply to any of the approximately 90,000 typical sentences humans utter when they talk. Now with a little parsing outputted into a state machine, they could not only reply to one sentence, but follow a conversation consistently... and thus pass the Turing test better than many humans.
Well, you can find some on the usual places for .torrents. With no DRM, of course.
WTF? As long as you got the GNU toolchain, you can install ANYthing. ... and pray to $DEITY that you never have to uninstall anything you put on your computer with ./configure && make && make install, lol
./configure (set flags for the program being installed to locate appropriate locations to save and load information from), make install (let the installer put files where they need).
./configure && make && make install - and let the distro maintainers set it up into their package manager. That's the Gentoo way, for one. And when it doesn't Just Work, it's always because either the devs or the package maintainer fucked up. And that can be prevented by testing.
Package managers are necessary. Even Windows has one. Yeah, I know, it's fucking broken, but is it really more so than, say, RPM or Portage? RPM Inferno with dependency Hell, and incompatible between distros and across versions, or emerge -u world, and cry whine weep when you have to watch hour upon hour of compiles until the point where portage will, does fail, each and every time, on at least one package.
What you describe is exactly the LFS way -
What's needed is for the devs to put their release source in a proper tarball that everyone can install - with
You're talking about Qt?
Except that Wine doesn't work. Or, if it does, then it's because you have a "paid-for (yeah, right)" Windows install somewhere on your hard drive (go try to run anything beyond Notepad with the wine dlls and weep while I rotflmao). Now go choose which windows, too - 2000, XP, Vista? Which will be most compatible with Wine?
How comes the wine team could never get it to work? Does CodeWeavers pay them to make a non-functioning package so that they can sell theirs? Wine never, ever ran anything I threw at it, but since I downloaded a torrent of CrossOver (like I'd pay for software, especially one they didn't even develop themselves), I can finally run games on my Hackintosh (which I bought because ponying up 1000 more euros just to have a GPU in my laptop sounds like "please, bend over and let Apple stick a ton of bricks up your ass". And because Linux won't run the Adobe suite and MS Office natively. And Windows is out forever - XP won't install without jumping through hoops and Vista needs four times more clicks to get anything done at all).
Now, about your analysis : you are right. Not that it's my opinion, it's obvious, evident fact.
All the flash of Leopard without Mac hardware? Hackintosh. What more than knowing it exists do you want, a link to the torrent?
No.
Not when draging a transparent window freezes the system for seconds.
Not when X runs in ONE SINGLE THREAD.
Not when X crashes.
Not when X can't be compatible with the only two graphics chipsets on the world (ATI and nVidia, the rest is either complete crap - Intel - or forgotten, obsolete, and massively overpriced crap - Matrox).
Not when X crashes. (I have yet to see Aqua crash, ONCE.)
Not when X has one new line of code a year, never fixes bugs, releases years too late, etc. etc.
And I haven't even started on the politics/license stuff...
Yeah, right.
More that the dev team is understaffed and inherited a big mess o'code no one could even try to read, at the time they changed the name from XFre86 to X.Org.
That piece of spaghetti was supposed to be a reference implementation, not supposed to be used. An now? Well, Linux and *BSD and all other Unices that use X.org have the worst GUI system in the world. Yeah, yeah, there are toolkits that take care of Just That (like lovely Qt and horrible GTK), but the foundation, the X server, is crap. Everybody knows that. It should have been rewritten from scratch a fucking long time ago.
Or maybe use something else entirely... Typing this on my Hackintosh, I know how good a Unix desktop can be.
Yes. Using Crossover, for example. Or one of the few games released by studios rich enough to pay for cross-platform devlopment.
What really kills Mac gaming is that they put Intel graphics cards in all their line except high-end. And now, iPhones? This is ridiculous. The iPhone is to have more graphics power than MacBooks? Now that's brutally ass-raping customers.
Who tour to get at least a little money to recoup the one million dollars they owe their labels before selling one copy, you mean?
Because you'd pay for Windows?
You never used bittorrent or what? You know you can limit the upload speed to whatever suits you, right? As for saturating the download speed, the day I see a solid hour of download at 1 megabyte/sec, I swear I'll have a spontaneous orgasm.
So what? It's true. Don't come saying you paid for all software and entertainment you use, liar.
Ridiculous. Those towers would work just as well if the normal SMS were free and they were entirely subsidized by "ringtones" and "dating" services, where the carrier takes 35% commission on all sales.
The towers need nearly zero maintenance as well. I know that. They have to be checked once every two or three years, and that's when the company wants them checked much more often than they have a chance to fail.
In a restaurant, you have to pay for the food, first. Then for the fixed costs, then the service. Those things are not multiplicable a zillion times at zero cost. Food is used only once, service is used only once. The profits are not enormous, they are obscene. There should be laws against large-scale organized price-fixing and abuse of position, don't you think?
Just to reply on two points :
I have never called any sort of tech support. I know that I know more about computers than any trained monkey with a checklist. So i can't say anything about Apple tech support, but I can tell you that every time I've had the slightest question on a Mac or on a Hackintosh, I headed to the insanelymac forums and found the answer there.
OSX is less troublesome? HELL YEAH. After spending four hours to make everything work (save the webcam and sleep modes) on this Hackintosh, I can tell it's much less troublesome than either uninstalling the ton of crap that came with the Vista that was factory-installed on it AND installing and configuring any Linux distro Just Right. Windows Vista needs more actions to do anything than Windows XP, and both of these impede your work with blaring "Computer Not Secured" "Updates To Install" "Please Install an AntiVirus" "The firewall is deactivated" "Norton Sensed An Activity" and the Nightmare : "Your mouse has moved. Cancel or Allow?"
Linux, let's not talk about it... Remember the bug in Ubuntu 7.04 that prevents you from accessing NTFS drives no matter what you do, because of the security settings? Been there, done that. Ever installed a Gentoo? The first time I did that, I learned everything I'll ever need to know to become a sysop at any site with a thousand Linux boxen. Because I needed to learn it all just to successfully install the damn distro. It took me a week. Now I can install a Gentoo in three lines of bash, but... who wants to have to know that? Or even DO that? Geeks living in their parents' basements, and? And?
My point is, in Linux you have to know it all. in Windows, the environment distracts you all the time. In OSX, well, you may dislike the interface... but you've got a usable, integrated Desktop Unix that Just Works.
And the Safari for Windows EULA forbids you TO INSTALL IT ON NON-APPLE HARDWARE.
The one they've been pushing bundled with an iTunes update.
EULAs don't mean shit and EVERYONE KNOWS IT. Even those who write them.
so STFU
Greetings! Using Kalyway since 10.4.8. Had no luck using ToH. Now running Kalyway 10.51 upgraded to 10.5.2.
(how was that off-topic, too?)
YFI - You can't install that one on a PC.
Try again?
Okay, I'll bite.
17" silent-ish HP laptop : Eur 1000
17" PowerBook : Eur 2800
Eur 1800 Just for a working webcam? FUCK YOU, EXTORTIONIST PIECES OF SHIT! Like I haven't paid enough for that ssslllooowww MacMini G4 (Eur 500 at the time, worth 10 on flea market for equivalent perfs), then the over-overpriced MacBook (Eur 1400, worth 700 at Asus - again, for same perfs).
No, I've ponied up way too much more than enough at Apple stores to NEVER have ANY qualm whatsofuckingever to happily tell everyone I'd install OSX on their PC using my Kalyway install DVD if they'd just let me.
Just like I nailed my original WinXPProSP2 CD to the wall the day I discovered slipstreamed installs with VLKs that pass WGA. (Also after said CD, installed and verified, killed itself with the slow-self-destruct-feature that's called Windows Update.)
Apple hardware is NOT worth what it costs. Nowhere near. The higher the class the more exaggerated the price. How MUCH for a MacBook Air? Eur 1700 and it has no optical drive? BWAHAHAHAHA. Who ever bought one? Morons? And what about the MacPros? Eur 10,000 for an eight-core? I can make that for 4000 WITH a pair of 24" monitors AND a studio-class sound card AND wireless speakers. And better hard drives.
And install MacOSX on it.