Oh hellll no... it's one of the best business decisions Apple has made to date. Why? Because there is NO WAY Apple can compete in that market. You can rest assured that if Apple moved over to an x86 platform, Microsoft and Dell would start dumping their products at the lowest possible cost to eliminate Apple from the market entirely.

Apples cost more than x86 boxes because they're designed SO MUCH BETTER. Look at the G5. Not only does the case trump anything the PC has, but the mobo design is absolutely brilliant. Not only that, but everything works flawlessly from the box. What's shortsighted about that.

But the people I hear that argument from the most are people that WANT OSX, but don't want to spend more for a mac. That doesn't make sense. If you want a Lexus SC430, but aren't willing to spend more than a Celica, you aren't gonna get the Lexus. If you want the better, more stable and more luxurious product, then you should spend the money.

 

that still doesn't explain why you think the GPL a bad thing. yes, many software companies do not choose to release code under the GPL, and it makes sense - they can't afford to release their base products freely or they would have no revenue. HOWEVER, there are many companies that HAVE released code under the GPL and other open source licenses. sun microsystems, novell, cisco, IBM, SGI and others have all released code under the GPL, contributed code to linux, and contributed numerous other open source code - these are the only companies i know of off hand. novell just bought suse, a company who's primary product is a linux distribution (which by nature is free and covered by the GPL), for tens of millions of dollars. now why would anyone want to spend that kind of money on a company whose primary product is covered by this murderous GPL and generates no revenue?

furthermore, there is this thing called the OSDL (Open Source Development Labs), which is basically an organization that is dedicated to the advancement of linux (linux specifically, and thus linux under the GPL) in enterprise. it is funded by a long list of companies. its members include the ones listed above, and ALSO linus torvalds, dell, ericsson, fujitsu, HP, intel, hitachi, NEC, nokia, toshiba and more. most regular software companies like microsoft that rely strictly on a limited software base as their source of revenue will likely not use GPL licensed code with their products. and that's all well and good - like i said, the GPL isn't for everyone. but i'm sorry, the idea that big companies don't use the GPL is just wrong. the idea that the GPL is somehow a bad thing is complete bullshit.

 

I think with a couple more refinements and some extra programs and some tweaking, I could switch over to linux easy. I've been useing it for servers on and off for a few years now and feel confidant enough to almost make it my main computer.

However, I need things like Flash/Shockwave, WMV support. FireFox/Thunderbird has helped me move closer to linux by a lot. Flash works on linux, but it's not refined enough. There are some other minor things, but for the most part, Linux is ready.

 

:rofl:

 

[QUOTE=qtiger]Here's a better analogy. Imagine Honda made two identical cars, the Civic CX and the Civic DX. The DX has a better interior. The CX is free. Which is better?

CX maybe free (linux) but you damnn majority of the aftermarket stuff wouldn't fit in it... motor isn't swappable....you get no support from honda...you got to be your own mechanic....

BTW apple is never port its OS X to Intel...simply because Apple is a HARDWARE COMPANY! ... they make software to sell their hardware...

 

i love linux, for many reasons. one, the security and dependability as a server platform is absolutely amazing. two, on the desktop the ease of installation, even to a novice user is incredible. three, as a developer it has let me come so much further than windows has. the only people i hear bitching about linux are the gamers who have nothing better to do with their time than frag :happysad:

 

Answering your last question first, because Novell is desperate, their NOS (network operating system) has been made virtually useless by the strong networking features of Win2K and XP. Their server platform is outdated and frankly, complete trash. (This coming from a CNA.) They're spinning around the bowl and need something new. In addition, I'll correct you by stating that SuSE's primary product is services, not their OS.

As for the rest, note that all the companies that you stated have a stake in Linux (Sun, Novell, IBM), or felt that their contributions would make *nix compatible with their own equipment (Cisco). Again, benefit to the developer, not the user.


With a BSD base, Apple could port Mac OS X to x86 for very little. And then guess what... make it free. Bam, you undercut Microsoft, and you'll pick up a crapload of Linux users who only use Linux because they hate Microsoft. Once people are familiar with an Apple operating system, they'll be far more likely to purchase a Mac for their next system. In addition, software for the Mac will become much more widely available because software vendors will know that if they design for OS X that it will work on both PPC and x86. Right now many hold back from the PPC platform simply because the demand isn't there.

Have that base version free, give everyone a taste of it. Subsequent versions would be sold identically to their Mac equivalents... which are vastly less expensive than Microsoft's operating systems.

Horrible mistake on their part. IBM learned its lesson about being just hardware. They've moved to encompass software and knowledgeware. Apple should follow their lead.

 

It's already out there. It's called Darwin and you can get the x86 binaries for free.

And it would be vastly less expensive, if Microsoft didn't have enough capital to undercut ANYBODY. Apple's paid many, MANY analysts and economists a lot of money to help direct there business decisions. The one thing that Apple cannot afford to do is to make another mistake, and so I'm well sure the board of directors knows what they are doing.

Actually, Apple's move to a hardware and service company is what saved it, made it so Apple's now a debt free company, and put it back on the roadmap to sucess.

And correct me if I'm wrong, but IBM is still a hardware company. They learned their lesson in Hardware when they released OS/2 Warp

 

other way around, vato