> On Sep 9, 2004, at 8:02 PM, Rob wrote:
>
> > > There have been rumors that Apple has an OS X that runs on Intel
> > CPUs.
> >
> > Not a rumor - http://www.opendarwin.org/
>
> Nah, I meant all of OS X -- including the GUI (more difficult because
> they would need to design vor more varied hardware options)
I first downloaded Darwin because I thought it came with the GUI -
when I found out it didn't I bought a Mac - so I think people would
buy it. I would've bought OSX for x86 instead of the G4 - so that one
sale would have sucked for apple (99 vs 1,200). For it to work I
think they need volume - whole companies moving their x86 boxes to OSX
> Darwin's good -- but if they are in for a penny they should be in for
> $$$
I hear you. My dad used to say, "are you in business to make a little
bit of money or a whole s**t load of money?"
> > >
> > > What would be the acceptance if Apple released OS X Tiger on Intel,
> > > Solaris, etc. Say 1Q 2005?
> >
> > I think the main reason more people don't run apples is they are
> > expensive.
>
> I wasn't talking about buying an Apple computer -- I was asking if they
> would buy OS X to run on their current hardware
I personally think that the OSX GUI is better than Gnome, KDE, Icewm,
fluxbox, etc; I also think that OSX has a better usability creditably
then Linux desktops. What I meant by the expensive thing is, in my
experience most developers who see the apple GUI comment something
along the lines of "that's awesome" with a purchasing twinkle in their
eye - then they grab the price tag and walk away - if it was on x86
then that last part would be gone.
So, yes I think people would buy it. Some would feel more comfortable
with an Apple backed x86 OS than say using a Red Hat desktop.
> > > Could Apple grab the Linux/Unix desktop?
> >
> > I don't think so only because Linux has more drivers for x86 hardware
> > then BSD (and therefore OSX)
>
> Can't they buy that capability?
>From who? Some Linux drivers are GPL which would be right out. They
would have to port some LGPL over from Linux (minimal perhaps), or
convince the vendors to port their windows versions over to BSD (or
OSX if that part is different enough). I guess they could have a
smaller set of supported hardware, but to be effective it would have
to run on a wide array of systems and hardware I think.
> > does; however, if they would lower their
> > prices on the Gs and ditch the "I am an artist therefore I use a Mac"
> > image, I think they have a good chance at a larger desktop share.
>
> Again, I was not asking about hardware, just the OS
Yeah sorry about that - but I love my G4 :-D. The desktop is the bomb
whatever the hardware (today its just not available in x86)
> Good -- I'll find a polka for K
She'll like that now that she is running her little iMac and is in
love with iTunes - you've created another monster :-o
> (Haven't looked at the new cfEclipse yet, but sounds good)
tis
> P.S. Can you talk about not being in the Blackstone beta too -- or you
> one of the blessed?
I am not in the blackstone beta - I think macromedia fears me cause I
don't know when to shut it ;)
Cheers
--
~The cfml plug-in for eclipse~
http://cfeclipse.tigris.org
~open source xslt IDE~
http://treebeard.sourceforge.net
~open source XML database~
http://ashpool.sourceforge.net
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
