MESSAGE
| DATE | 2005-06-20 |
| FROM | From: "Steve Milo"
|
| SUBJECT | Re: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Linux Desktop no More
|
Comparing Linux to Mac in any respect is like comparing Linux to windows. 'Apples and oranges' (or Apples, lemons and penguins for that matter), so to speak.
The only thing these three things have in common is they all run on PC's. Moving to Intel is the biggest mistake Apple has made since trying to isolate the system from the user. Ms will be eating Apples in a matter of months once this 'sudden move' is completed. Jobs will eventually reveal to the media that his relationship with ms is becoming closer, in reality this has been going on since gates 'bailed out' Jobs about two or three years ago. The only unique thing about Apple was that RISC processor, but the majority of the developers didnt know how to tap that potential. Which goes back to that first fatal decision Apple made when it first started.
Apple's engineers have got to be the most stupidest backwards minded socialist thinking, and their executive department has got to be the most paralized by analysis idiots since the soviet union.
Had they just bothered to add two more buttons to their mouse design they could have gained a 10% market share. Imagine reading on Apples website: "Apple introduces the three button mouse!" That may have caused a few guffaws but you know its the truth. Apples engineers have no balls, same with their executives. Apple was doing well with its hardware gimmickry, they should have continued with that. Instead Jobs blinked and collapsed under the pressure of Dell, ms, probably Sun.
How will this move affect Linux? For starters, and as I said before, this is a fatal move by Apple. With the RISC and the proven ability of the PowerPC to work well in a laptop with Open Firmware this may open up more market share for Linux companies.
Steve M
> Mactel: A Disaster for Linux?
>
>
>
> Tuesday, 14 June 2005
> Page 1 of 2
>
> By: Sal Cangeloso
>
> Since the announcement of the
> upcoming x86 Apple computers there
> has been nonstop conjecture about
> how this change will effect every
> facet of the computer industry.
> Rumors about on what systems the x86
> OS X, if it will be hardware locked,
> and the Macintosh Windows version
> have flooded the internet. One of
> the most interesting topics of
> conversation has been how this move
> will effect Linux.
>
> Though a hardware move like this may
> not seem to have any implications
> towards software issues, it is
> actually quite pertinent. From the
> news that is available now you can
> piece together that x86 Macs will be
> able to run Windows, though Apple
> will be limiting their OS X to only
> Apple systems. This is a smart move
> for Apple; though they can do little
> to stop Microsoft from adapting
> Windows to x86 Macs they recognize
> the fact that OS X has a very
> dedicated following and Apple's
> computers will only be a better
> product now that they will have the
> ability to dual boot with Windows.
> By keeping OS X off non-Apple
> computers their systems will just be
> that much more desirable as OS X is
> widely recognized to be a fine
> operating system.
>
> Many people have been outspoken
> about how Linux will be harmed by
> this situation. The predominant
> thinking is that Macs were never
> really a target for open source
> developers because anything written
> for them could only be applied to
> PowerPC-based computers, a very
> small segment of the market. This
> thought pattern goes on to believe
> that once the change to x86 is made
> developers will be more apt to
> target Apple computers and
> Linux will suffer from a lack of
> developer support. This brain-drain
> will ostensibly be caused by the
> increased profitability and lack of
> unflexible open source licensing
> requirements of non-Linux platforms.
>
> When reflecting on this situation
> the first thing that has to be taken
> into account is the limited size and
> application of the current Apple
> platform. The simply fact is that
> the amount of people using Apple's
> is quite small compared to those on
> Windows. What this means is that the
> effect of the move to x86 will only
> matter so much- most of the
> squabbling has been because of the
> idealogical associations that people
> have with Apple, such as it being
> the underdog and so forth. Over the
> long term is seems, though, that
> marketshare controlled by Apple will
> grow with the move to x86 because
> now the usability of Apple's will
> increase greatly.
>
>
> The belief that Apple's move to x86
> will harm Linux is flawed. Yes, it
> is true that Linux depends on
> developers and the open source
> community more so than other
> operating systems but there is no
> reason to believe that these users
> will shift their focus. The Mactel
> will be a very attractive platform,
> to consumers and developers alike,
> but the advantages of Linux that are
> apparent today will still be there
> when these systems are released.
> Linux will be able to operate on
> these new computers just as it can
> on current generation Macs so it
> will still be quite relevant and
> hardly forgotten, despite the
> ability to run OS X and Windows on
> the same system.
>
> The fact of the matter is that the
> mainstays of Linux are corporate,
> government, and server environments.
> These areas will be completely
> unaffected by the x86 Macs. The
> thought that dedicated developers
> will turn tail and hop onboard the
> x86 Mac bandwagon is unlikely since
> the comparative strengths of the
> Linux operating system will not be
> threatened, neither by the increased
> attractiveness of OS X or by the
> expansion of Windows to Macs. Linux
> will still be free to install,
> lightweight, and powerful, this will
> only the amplified by 2007 when this
> new platform is said to arrive.
>
> The segment in which Linux could be
> harmed is desktop computing. Here
> distrobutions like Linspire and
> Xandros have created Linux
> environments that are, on the
> surface, much more like Windows or
> OS X than ever before. There is some
> reason to believe that these will be
> seen as superfluous once there is an
> option to run OS X or Windows on the
> a x86 Mac. Though, looking into this
> situation a bit deeper, it can be
> recognized that the average Linux
> user is more computer literate than
> users of other opterating systems so
> this would imply that they are
> making the decision to use Linux
> based on intelligent and
> well-informed reasoning. Because of
> this it is not likely that they
> would all of a sudden see OS X as
> the best alternative to Windows and
> move to that.
>
> If anything, the increased
> competition will be good for
> everyone. Windows, which has been
> growing comparitively worse every
> year will have to respond to the
> head-to-head comparision with OS X,
> while Apple's operating system will
> either have to make efforts to
> increase compatibility and driver
> support or forced to be welcoming to
> a dual boot with Windows. Linux will
> no longer be the sole x86
> alternative to Windows, it will have
> to compete with OS X for this spot,
> though this will never be an
> apples-to-apples comparision because
> the the limits to where OS X can be
> installed.
>
> So the question remains, is Apple's
> move to x86 a disaster for Linux?
> No, of course not. Linux remains a
> diverse, highly scalable, and
> powerful operating system, the only
> one which has been able to hop the
> current gap between PowerPC and x86.
> It would be unrealistic to deny the
> attractiveness of an Apple computer
> which can run either OS X or Windows
> but with the rapid pace of current
> Linux development the thought that
> it would be overly harmed by the
> arrivals of the Mactels is a bit
> tough to swallow. Linux is quite
> reliant on the open source community
> but this is a dedicated group of
> individuals that have a great deal
> vested in Linux for them to step
> away simply because of a change in
> processor type is unlikely.
> Furthermore the involvement of large
> companies, like Red Hat and Novell,
> in Linux advancement means that even
> with a few less developers things
> will still be improving along with
> the pace of the industry.
>
>
>
>
>
|
|
