Operating Systems > macOS
Big OSX fan, but I'm without a mac
Faust:
sorry if that was too terse :(
Calum:
quote:Originally posted by Laukev7:
You might want to thank Apple for staying with PPC when Intel and AMD start integrating Palladium in their chips.
--- End quote ---
wise words.
however i won't be backing apple till they stop being mean bastards and open up their source code alike any decent company. their high performance success is the only thing keeping them from being microsoft in my opinion.
xyle_one:
quote:Originally posted by Calum:
wise words.
however i won't be backing apple till they stop being mean bastards and open up their source code alike any decent company. their high performance success is the only thing keeping them from being microsoft in my opinion.
--- End quote ---
i still have faith in apple. give them time.
bossesjoe:
quote:Originally posted by Faust:
must not post while in a bad mood - original (offensive) post deleted.
what i'm saying is that apple may make their own x86 chips without the palladium bit. or they could just subcontract to intel/amd so that a "specialized" (cheaper) chip maker made the chips, and specify that apple chips must not hold DRM. also i think the OS has to take advantage of the chip for it to work yeah, and i think apple is at least smart enough to avoid DRM.
[ May 28, 2003: Message edited by: Faust ]
--- End quote ---
Whoa I never got to read the orginal post, but..
I am a mac user too, I am posting on a mac, I love my mac, its better then any of my friends computers. However the one thing I don't like is that I don't have as much choice as my friends when it comes to hardware. I know that there are third party PPC computers, and with PPC970 I am sure that IBM's chip that "was not designed for the Macintosh but can run OSX" will help expand the selection. If Apple had been making x86 I don't think they would put in palladium. Sorry if it sounded like I am a mac basher.
Laukev7:
Calum, I think it's going too far to compare Apple with Microsoft. You are assuming that every company who publishes proprietary code are evil, as opposed to other "decent" companies (like SCO, for example ;) ) who open up their source, which, by the way, are not even the majority.
Apple happens to be in that minority. Their business model is even used as an example by Eric Raymond (sorry, I do not endorse Richard Stallman's ethical views). IBM is also quite decent, without opening all of their source.
Ethical business practices existed long before the open source / free software movement started, so it is completely illogical to blame a company on that basis. As Eric Raymond said, open source only makes sense if it benefits the company, and giving away the inferface of OS X would be corporate suicide.
I already said this, but I will repeat that Microsoft is an exceptionally treacherous company, unlike most other entreprises. It is not size or convictions that make a company good or evil. It is interesting to note that M$ was just as bad even when they were small (Bill Gates, for example, gave IBM QDOS, a rip-off of CP/M, the OS of one of his own friends).
I can't resist the pun, but let's stop comparing apples with oranges.
[ May 28, 2003: Message edited by: Laukev7 ]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version