thought different

[Michael Shigorin]

PreScriptum:
> Anyway, that's enough of a history lesson/ramble for today.
Ugh.  Sorry to have read that far too late.  Thanks though :-)

On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 09:31:40AM -0500, Eric Dunbar wrote:
> Mac OS X on an i86  may offer people the ability run Windows software,

Hey we're running that for years for our customers when it's more
reliable than chasing the original authors and getting the source
-- or at least specs -- from them.

Aren't you discovering America in your window, as people say
here?  Vaporware (like "will have indexing filesystem" or "will
run windows apps") just costs something for those with large,
wavy, and extremely naive ears. :)

> natively but also to be running <i>commercial</i> non-Windows
> software and OS.

*yaaawn*

> Coupled with Apple's unbeatable hardware

Just the same ol' $40 crap in those few years, I'm afraid.
But overpriced one.

(please note that I consider the moment to buy my DVD burner
while it was at $65 and not "a newer model" close to that deadly
$40 for plastic-only stuff Just In Time (tm) :)

> Apple may also be positioning to take on some of Linux.

I guess they've already done what they could by becoming "more
UNIX", judging by switches I observed last few years.

Otherwise, they're just an old, boring, proprietary vendor who
learns their lessons even more slowly than Microsoft.

> Apple could be in the position to offer "virus free, spy ware
> free WINDOWS-compatible computing".

We've got particularly troubled when a person at one of the
client's departments "just installed" some city map software demo 
off usual CD-ROM.  Seems the golden workstation will need some
more locking down that way, it's too compatible :-)

-- 
 ---- WBR, Michael Shigorin <mike at altlinux.ru>
  ------ Linux.Kiev http://www.linux.kiev.ua/