Flamebait from ZDNet: Desktop Linux is dead. Buy a Mac.

[hans007]

actually they had it installed on one at the student store at ucla when osx came out and it was freaking slow compared to the g4 powerbook next to it. Granted it was a 500mhz ibook with 128mb of ram, but it just wasnt nearly as responsive as the g4.


not tomention when osx came out, every magazine was saying g4 400 or higher was what you needed, and a g4 400 is like 20% faster than a g3 500 (which happens to run at 66bus as well making it even slower than the mhz number would indicate) . ok so maybe that was the initial release of osx and i think there is what os10.2 or something now, maybe its faster, but i do know that that g3-500 was slow.

 

[Netopia]

I dispise Apple/Mac....

That said, if/when they port OS X to i386 platform, Microsoft had better be scared. Porting it (since it IS FreeBSD) shouldn't be a big deal. It has all the stability and history of FreeBSD with a fantastic UI... I've used KDE, Gnome and currently Ximian, and there really isn't any comparison.

I've said for years that Microsoft would do well to make Microsoft Linux with a really nice installer and a hyper-souped up version of WINE. Tons of pseudo-geeks would load it just to be able to say "Yeah, I run Linux" and it would be compatible with other MicroSloth stuff.... guess Lindows beat 'em to it!

Joe

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< actually they had it installed on one at the student store at ucla when osx came out and it was freaking slow compared to the g4 powerbook next to it. Granted it was a 500mhz ibook with 128mb of ram, but it just wasnt nearly as responsive as the g4. not tomention when osx came out, every magazine was saying g4 400 or higher was what you needed, and a g4 400 is like 20% faster than a g3 500 (which happens to run at 66bus as well making it even slower than the mhz number would indicate) . ok so maybe that was the initial release of osx and i think there is what os10.2 or something now, maybe its faster, but i do know that that g3-500 was slow. >>



10.1 helped out a lot, but 10.0 ran just fine on my 500mhz ibook. Yes, it was a little slow, but I didnt buy an ibook for the power.



<< I dispise Apple/Mac.... >>



Thats a shame.



<< That said, if/when they port OS X to i386 platform, Microsoft had better be scared. Porting it (since it IS FreeBSD) shouldn't be a big deal. It has all the stability and history of FreeBSD with a fantastic UI... I've used KDE, Gnome and currently Ximian, and there really isn't any comparison. >>



Most of the userland is taken from FreeBSD I believe, but the kernel is still MACH.

 

[fivepesos]

in my opinion (value it as highly or lowly as you want), apple is holding themselves back. when i look to purchase a computer i dont look at the case design, the features (who can afford a dvd burner yet?), or nifty included software (iMovies is cool, but cmon, i dont expect to use it regularly). i look at maximum performance for least amount of money. imacs and ibooks are targeted too strongly at the average pc user crowd (heres a hint, anandtechers are much more competent than the average user). they focus way too much on appearance (LCD on the new imacs?!?! why would i want to pay extra for those?). i get along just fine with a nice sharp trinitron crt (sharper and clear than an lcd thank you). id love to buy a very simple base mac if it wasnt overloaded with all the superfluous crap (even if a lot of it is very nice and functional).

now i know a lot of you are gonna respond saying i hate macs or that i have no clue about what im talking about. while i admit i have little experience using any of the newer macs (stopped using my old mac when my parents bought their first pc, a fast 486), i always linger at the mac section of Frys electronics whenever i have time. i realy like OSX from my limited use, its realy fast and realy good looking while maintaining functionality. but then i look at the pricetag and realize that i cant afford one. not on a students income (or should i say lack of income), and im certainly not gonna take out a student loan just so i can buy a mac. ohh well, it should all be good when i graduate. i just wish they had a very basic stripped down model (how much are each firewire controller on the motherboard? what about the cost of each translucent case? biege is fine for me).

 

[hans007]

<< I dispise Apple/Mac....

That said, if/when they port OS X to i386 platform, Microsoft had better be scared. Porting it (since it IS FreeBSD) shouldn't be a big deal. It has all the stability and history of FreeBSD with a fantastic UI... I've used KDE, Gnome and currently Ximian, and there really isn't any comparison.

I've said for years that Microsoft would do well to make Microsoft Linux with a really nice installer and a hyper-souped up version of WINE. Tons of pseudo-geeks would load it just to be able to say "Yeah, I run Linux" and it would be compatible with other MicroSloth stuff.... guess Lindows beat 'em to it!

Joe >>



it wouldnt be hard to port freebsd or the interface, but the drivers would be tough they'd have to write a whole bunch of them. also , the guy who said people dont look at style. style is more of a consideration than power for most people. i mean most people if they can get average style and high power , or great style and average power will take the great style.


also they used to have stripped down plain macs. powercomputing, umax, motorola , etc made them and then apple killed their licenses because thsoe companies were more competitive than they were.

 

[n0cmonkey]

<< it wouldnt be hard to port freebsd or the interface, but the drivers would be tough they'd have to write a whole bunch of them. >>



FreeBSD has a PPC port. Its still unstable I think, but the ground work is there.





<< also they used to have stripped down plain macs. powercomputing, umax, motorola , etc made them and then apple killed their licenses because thsoe companies were more competitive than they were. >>



This was one of the stupidest things Apple ever did. Apple is a hardware company and letting others use their OS on slightly different hardware brought a new age of instability only rivaled by Windows 95

 

[DaHitman]

<< Desktop Linux is dead >>




How can something that IDC said grew at 107% last year be dead???