[PLUG] Debian 3.1 (Sarge) Released

[Aaron Burt]

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 11:12:43PM -0700, Steven Susbauer wrote:
> Aaron Burt wrote:
> >I don't know about that.  
> >(a) Apple is initially rolling out a dev box that, while it's
> >P4-based, is supposedly not PC-compatible.  And they've proven over the
> >years that they can sell their own closed hardware at a profit.
> 
> According to Apple, people will be able to put Windows on their new Mac, 
> this is PC compatible. More likely, they stick some checks in OS X to 
> see if it really is a Mac...

Wow, if that's true, they're insane.  But then they've already
Osborne'd themselves.  Oh, well, out with a bang...

> >(b) I seriously doubt that they want to support the vagaries of
> >generic PC hardware.  $150 for a copy of OSX for the PC probably
> >wouldn't cover driver development, let alone support.
> 
> Most drivers are provided by manufacturers, 

Many *Windows* drivers, yes.  But look at the success we've had getting
manufacturers to write drivers for Linux (which IIRC has a larger
installed base than MacOS.)  And even MS had to start out writing
virtually all the drivers for Windows.

> >(c) With Wine, they'll be able to run major Windows apps seamlessly at
> >native speed, eliminating a major barrier to Switching.
> 
> Wine will hopefully get a boost, but I would hardly call it seamless.

Pretty dang close, especially if you use a version that's been
spiffied up, like Crossover Office.

> >(d) With closed hardware and Intel's on-CPU DRM, they'll be able to
> >roll out the locked-up you-don't-own-anything media terminal that
> >Hollywood desperately wants.  And Jobs desperately wants to sell^Wrent
> >movies and TV through iTunes.
> 
> AFAIK, Intel has said that there is NO DRM on their new chips, other 
> than that one rumor.

Huh.

> >I can go the new lab at PSU and watch people walk past the rows of
> >unused iMacs (with Office and IE) to wait in line for Winders PCs.
> >I don't know why they do it, but I doubt OSX for PCs would change that.
> 
> That's because iMacs suck... unless it's a newer one.

So?  All hardware sucks.  These are newish Luxo-lamp ones.

> >>I think they're pretending this is about changing chipsets and it's 
> >>really about taking down Microsoft.
> >
> >MS won't suffer, short-term.  They collect Windows Tax no matter what
> >OS the PC ends up running, and they make money on Office no matter
> >what OS it runs on.  Long-term, if Apple can make iTunes media-rental
> >work, they can make software-rental work too, which is MS' Nirvana.
> 
> Microsoft only gets money for PC's that ship with Windows,

Which is virtually all of them.  It's easier for OEMs to put Windows
on every unit than on 99% of them.  For high-volume OEMs, the price
difference is negligible.

> that's why you can get your windows money back if your PC company
> ships you Windows and you don't use it...

Ever successfully done that?

> OSS is much easier to port to the Mac than Windows, especially now. This 
> will be a huge benefit to Apple, and developers that might want to use 
> the Mac.

I don't see how, but hokay.